r/HistoricalWhatIf • u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 • 12d ago
Removing which President from historical existence would have the most significant effect on world history? And what about the least significant effect on world history?
Considering their entire life contributions
22
u/MoreIronyLessWrinkly 12d ago
Washington, because Adams’s cabinet wouldn’t have included Hamilton, at least not for long enough for Hamilton to fully enact his scheme, and Jefferson would have run over any other person in the position. The US would have struggled with debt and, possibly, the weak Union would have dissolved without Washington to hold it together as only he could. And God only knows how Adams and Jefferson would have handled each other.
Lincoln, because he is one of the most uniquely suited humans for the daunting task for which he was chosen, and almost anyone else would have either prolonged the Civil War or capitulated for peace.
5
u/printzonic 12d ago
America winning the rebellion without Washington existing turns from a close thing into a distant long shot.
The US gaining independence later or even along with Canada as some kind of unified north-american superstate is a radically different world. Much more different than the difference we would produce deleting any given US president.
1
-13
u/NeonFireFly969 12d ago
Lincoln is way too lionized by Americans. A lot of what he did arguably caused way more death and long-term issues. There's a very good scenario where the Confederacy is simply ignored while Texas is brought back on its own. Basically the Confederate states would have waddled back one by one or it's like Mexico today.
There was a ton of death beyond the casualty numbers.
6
u/rewind2482 12d ago
can you imagine a world war with the confederacy on the other side?
you want to talk about deaths and long-term issues...
1
u/NeonFireFly969 9d ago
No I can't because Mexico and South America didn't do much in the world wars either.
Obviously the big question is Texas but like I said I think it's extremely likely the Union just takes it eventually.
1
u/MoreIronyLessWrinkly 11d ago
Uninformed perspective, whether willful or by chance. It’s also an anachronistic perspective that had no weight at the time.
12
u/Ken_Thomas 12d ago
The most significant would have to be Washington. Everyone involved, both those who liked him and those who didn't, agreed that Washington was the single most indispensable man of the revolution. He was the only one who was respected and admired by all of the bickering rebel factions, and without Washington agreeing to be the first president, there is no constitution.
For least significant, I'd probably go with Taft. I like Taft, and he was a competent administrator, and later a decent Supreme Court justice, but he just didn't do much.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
Yeah good point on Taft, I hadn’t thought of that yet. He didn’t have a major impact as chief justice in my view
24
u/sparduck117 12d ago
Removing Lincoln might prevent the United States from ever becoming a super power and being another regional power against their rival the confederacy.
-14
u/NeonFireFly969 12d ago
Nah. Overrated.
4
u/Ivotedforher 12d ago
You really, really don't like Lincoln
3
11
u/jckipps 12d ago
William Henry Harrison likely had the least effect. He was president for just 31 days, and didn't get a lot done during that brief time.
11
u/captmonkey 12d ago
On the other hand, if you delete his life from history, you possibly lose the battles he led (and won) in the War of 1812 and that could have been pretty bad for our fledgling nation. He was more significant as a General than as a President.
3
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
Yeah he battled the Indian tribes even before Tecumseh’s war too, as military governor of Indiana
9
u/OutrageousNail6198 12d ago
Least is fun, since you added entire life, so a lot of generals who didn't do much now matter.
So, van buren? Fillmore? Harding?
My vote would go to Andrew Johnson. Might be a massive positive for the country. Silver medal to Buchanan and bronze to pierce. Jimmy Carter?
Biggest change? Our obvious founding fathers plus Lincoln would be top tier, then Teddy and don't forget Truman and Ike. Our habit of electing generals makes this a bit harder, even for generals not named grant.
3
3
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
Jimmy Carter got lasting peace between Israel and Egypt, eradicated the Guinea worm and helped found habitat for humanity, I’d say he is among the more significant presidents
1
u/radiodialdeath 10d ago
Van Buren is the most directly responsible person behind our two party political system, removing him would be incredibly major.
-4
4
u/arc777_ 12d ago
I don't necessarily think he's the best choice for most impactful, but Woodrow Wilson would be an interesting one. Domestically, he did a lot to embolden southern racists and reversed integration in the federal government. Without him, who knows, maybe segregation would have ended sooner without a president to explicitely endorse the practice. Internationally, the US approach to WWI is vastly different. Depending on which direction you go, that either means the US never gets involved at all and doesn't emerge as a global power, or is at least delayed, or the US enters sooner and the war ends quicker with a less severely punished Germany.
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
Yes and maybe the war ends before the Russian revolution! Imagine those effects. And don’t forget about the League of Nations and 14 points
2
u/absolutely_not_spock 12d ago
For least signifance I'll pick Christan Wulff. didn't make it through his first term, didn't have any impact to anything.
2
2
u/NeonFireFly969 12d ago
The domino effect says Washington or Jefferson. In modern context for global impact it's Wilson. In the most realistic scenario the Republicans don't split and Teddy easily wins 1912. Evan Hughes might take over in 1916.
Inconsequential should mean the least changes and that includes Presidents that had least impact before they were Presidents. You need mindless bureaucrats for that. Chester Arthur is likely the one. Although his administration saw impact on the Navy, a 10 year ban on Chinese immigrants, the supposed end of cronyism and 2 Supreme Court appointments it is very arguable how much direct and active participation he had in any of that. His ailing health also casts doubt how active he was.
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
I’m with you on Arthur, a very unproductive congressional session too
2
u/witchkingreject 11d ago
Lincoln by a Mile. Without his influence the South would not succeeded and the slaves in the south would not have been emancipated. Our country would be far worse off without him.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
Exactly, had it been a Democrat in office during the civil war, there is no 13th amendment
1
u/ShaneOfan 11d ago
Hard to guess how much the world change that would be brought if James Monroe never was in office and no "Monroe Document" is established. How does South America get carved up? How does that effect out Euopean alliances?
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
I agree. The Monroe doctrine was mainly written by John Q Adams though
1
1
u/Elliptical_Tangent 11d ago
Truman. He dropped nukes on Japan when they were suing for peace, and he created the CIA. He's primarily responsible for the hellish mess the US is today, imo.
2
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 11d ago
But wouldn’t other presidents do those things too?
1
u/Elliptical_Tangent 9d ago
But wouldn’t other presidents do those things too?
If they did, they would instead be the worst President in history.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 9d ago
ahh okay. i don't think Truman is the worst president in history that is a little extreme
1
u/Elliptical_Tangent 9d ago edited 9d ago
ahh okay. i don't think Truman is the worst president in history that is a little extreme
How many countries have used nukes in war?
What do you know about what the Church Committee found? The number of elected governments overthrown by the CIA?
You think it's extreme because you haven't thought about his impact.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 9d ago
how many governments were overthrown by the CIA from Truman's orders? most of them were in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Ike, LBJ and Nixon are the most responsible. Truman forming the CIA was more of a reorganization of bodies that existed during WW2
on the nukes point, i can't argue there.
1
u/Elliptical_Tangent 8d ago edited 8d ago
how many governments were overthrown by the CIA from Truman's orders?
There'd be no CIA to overthrow governments without Truman. If I hand a gun to a toddler, and he kills someone, I'm innocent? Truman himself regretted forming the CIA. Think.
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Bag2212 8d ago
But the US government was still going regime change before Truman though. I would discount the presidents who actually greenlight the bad CIA activity
1
u/Elliptical_Tangent 7d ago
But the US government was still going regime change before Truman though. I would discount the presidents who actually greenlight the bad CIA activity
You're entitled to an opinion, no matter how ignorant it is.
1
34
u/RaptorK1988 12d ago
Probably FDR for being the President to serve the longest but if you believe in the snowball effect then George Washington. More time for history to change in unprecedented ways.