Blue Skies in Camelot: An Alternate 60's and Beyond

It's just dawned on me that
1. Would GWB be in the National Guard if there was no Vietnam War to avoid?

2. What happens to the draft with no Vietnam ITTL?

I could be wrong about this, but I believe Bush was commissioned into the Guard, not drafted. I can imagine his father sending him there to help iron out some of his rebellious streak.

No Vietnam means no draft as of yet. :) But a future war could always change that.
 
I could be wrong about this, but I believe Bush was commissioned into the Guard, not drafted. I can imagine his father sending him there to help iron out some of his rebellious streak.

No Vietnam means no draft as of yet. :) But a future war could always change that.

I thought that he joined the Guard as a way to escape the draft, but I could be wrong.
 
Right, so on Page 16 of his autobiography, "Decision Points," he talks about walking by an Air Force recruiters office during his senior year at Yale. He went back to Texas and told his dad about his interest. 41 referred him to a man named Sid Alger who told 43 that the Texas Air National Guard had flying spots available. Bush stated he wanted to serve, so it's still plausible that he joins the guard with or without Vietnam. I'd like to think maybe in this timeline, during a future war, Bush becomes a fighter ace of some sort, that'd be pretty cool.
 
Whether or not GWB joined the Guard to escape the draft, he should at least have showed up! Al Gore, OTOH, actually fought in Vietnam as an infantryman.
 
Whether or not GWB joined the Guard to escape the draft, he should at least have showed up! Al Gore, OTOH, actually fought in Vietnam as an infantryman.
Gore was actually an Army journalist and was actually sent to Vietnam after his father was defeated. Many people believe Nixon was responsible so Gore Sr. wouldn't get sympathy votes.
 

BP Booker

Banned
If MLK survives, a Gore-Clinton MLK endorsed ticket in 96 after 12 years of Bush and Rodham will be pretty powerful.

MLK never endorsed any poltical party while he was alive (if you dont count telling people not to vote for Goldwater as a tacit endorsment of LBJ), althou he voted Democratic, and interestingly enough, he wrotte in a letter that he would have endorsed Kennedy publicly for a second term. If both Democrats and Republicans remain in favour of Civil Rights, I think he would have still favour the Democrats because their economic policy would have fit better with him.

It would be amazing if Americas first black president is elected in his lifetime (Who could that be? John Lewis? Ron Dellum?)
 
MLK never endorsed any poltical party while he was alive (if you dont count telling people not to vote for Goldwater as a tacit endorsment of LBJ), althou he voted Democratic, and interestingly enough, he wrotte in a letter that he would have endorsed Kennedy publicly for a second term. If both Democrats and Republicans remain in favour of Civil Rights, I think he would have still favour the Democrats because their economic policy would have fit better with him.

It would be amazing if Americas first black president is elected in his lifetime (Who could that be? John Lewis? Ron Dellum?)

That would be very hard to get. Unless there is a dramatic societal shift earlier on ITTL, then I don't see it being possible. If Tom Bradley could not win in 80's California, then winning nationwide is extremely hard to do. Unless MLK Jr. lives to the 2000's and then it is definitely possible. But in the 80's? Unless there is a plausible reason for societal change in attitudes, I don't see it happening.

What would be nice is seeing the victory of biracial coalitions with socially conservative but racially liberal governors in the South that can bring the whites and blacks together.
 
Right, so I just finished reading this TL and I have to say that it’s excellent! I love the blending of pop culture and politics—in this era you really can’t have one without the other.

As a musician I’m really, really curious how popular music is going to evolve. Right off the bat you’ve got Elvis having a much more significant role in the evolution of the music of the 60s, in particular coming into direct contact with the Beatles and Hendrix. This has massive ramifications for all three parties’ music.

The Beatles, I would guess, may have remained a bit truer to the blues end of rock ITTL from time spent with Elvis. Did they stop touring in 1966 as IOTL? If they didn’t that has gigantic effects on who they meet or potentially perform with in the future. An interesting change there is that it would butterfly away their videos that they made to promote their music in lieu of live performances; these directly inspired the entire concept of music videos as we know them IOTL.

The two big questions for the Beatles moving forward is whether Brian Epstein dies and whether they still travel to India to study transcendental meditation. The former seems likely to not happen, meaning that band cohesion stays greater. The latter actually probably still happens but hopefully is less difficult and contentious than IOTL.

If Jimi doesn’t die he’ll be one of the titans of rock for the next decade if not longer. He’s been propelled to stardom earlier here and in a different manner to OTL, but not so different as to drastically change his musical trajectory (although he may be a little less psychedelic TTL). I could absolutely see him teaming up with the Yardbirds (maybe never renamed to Led Zeppelin ITTL as that came from a specific conversation with Keith Moon that could be butterflied) in the future.

You’ve put Elvis in the very interesting position of living in San Francisco but not having all that much to do with the thriving counterculture going on just a few neighborhoods away. How does he feel about psychedelic rock? How do the prominent psychedelic rockers (you’ve mentioned the Grateful Dead, for instance) feel about him? I’m looking forward to him becoming an elder statesman of rock now that his personal situation is vastly improved (happily married and on the road to recovery).

On the broader scale, the single biggest impact on rock and pop is going to be the absence of the Vietnam War. Songs like “Fortunate Son,” “War,” “Alice’s Restaurant” and many more will never be written or popularized without the widespread anti-war sentiment. This may also slow the movement away from psychedelic or other experimental brands of rock, as protest music was often more aggressive and hard-hitting compared to these sub genres.

The other major change, at least to me, would seem to be the legitimization of rock as a “culturally important” type of music. Elvis’ and Cash’s visits to the White House in particular feel like a watershed moment for rock to become more esteemed than OTL—for better or worse. This will also be impacted by the lack of Vietnam preventing reactionaries from so readily painting rock fans with the “crazy radicals” brush (although we’ve already seen this happen some ITTL).

On the bright side, it means that grand musical projects like what the Beatles did on their later albums may be more widespread ITTL. One particular concept that might make a wider appearance could be the rock opera like The Who’s “Tommy” and Green Day’s “American Idiot.” I’d love to see the Beatles write a rock opera ITTL!

On the bad side, it means that the disaffected teenagers a few years down the line might view rock as the establishment and abandon it entirely. That would butterfly things like punk rock completely—although it’s way too early to speculate on that.

Anyway, I’m excited to see where this goes!
 
Right, so I just finished reading this TL and I have to say that it’s excellent! I love the blending of pop culture and politics—in this era you really can’t have one without the other.

As a musician I’m really, really curious how popular music is going to evolve. Right off the bat you’ve got Elvis having a much more significant role in the evolution of the music of the 60s, in particular coming into direct contact with the Beatles and Hendrix. This has massive ramifications for all three parties’ music.

The Beatles, I would guess, may have remained a bit truer to the blues end of rock ITTL from time spent with Elvis. Did they stop touring in 1966 as IOTL? If they didn’t that has gigantic effects on who they meet or potentially perform with in the future. An interesting change there is that it would butterfly away their videos that they made to promote their music in lieu of live performances; these directly inspired the entire concept of music videos as we know them IOTL.

The two big questions for the Beatles moving forward is whether Brian Epstein dies and whether they still travel to India to study transcendental meditation. The former seems likely to not happen, meaning that band cohesion stays greater. The latter actually probably still happens but hopefully is less difficult and contentious than IOTL.

If Jimi doesn’t die he’ll be one of the titans of rock for the next decade if not longer. He’s been propelled to stardom earlier here and in a different manner to OTL, but not so different as to drastically change his musical trajectory (although he may be a little less psychedelic TTL). I could absolutely see him teaming up with the Yardbirds (maybe never renamed to Led Zeppelin ITTL as that came from a specific conversation with Keith Moon that could be butterflied) in the future.

You’ve put Elvis in the very interesting position of living in San Francisco but not having all that much to do with the thriving counterculture going on just a few neighborhoods away. How does he feel about psychedelic rock? How do the prominent psychedelic rockers (you’ve mentioned the Grateful Dead, for instance) feel about him? I’m looking forward to him becoming an elder statesman of rock now that his personal situation is vastly improved (happily married and on the road to recovery).

On the broader scale, the single biggest impact on rock and pop is going to be the absence of the Vietnam War. Songs like “Fortunate Son,” “War,” “Alice’s Restaurant” and many more will never be written or popularized without the widespread anti-war sentiment. This may also slow the movement away from psychedelic or other experimental brands of rock, as protest music was often more aggressive and hard-hitting compared to these sub genres.

The other major change, at least to me, would seem to be the legitimization of rock as a “culturally important” type of music. Elvis’ and Cash’s visits to the White House in particular feel like a watershed moment for rock to become more esteemed than OTL—for better or worse. This will also be impacted by the lack of Vietnam preventing reactionaries from so readily painting rock fans with the “crazy radicals” brush (although we’ve already seen this happen some ITTL).

On the bright side, it means that grand musical projects like what the Beatles did on their later albums may be more widespread ITTL. One particular concept that might make a wider appearance could be the rock opera like The Who’s “Tommy” and Green Day’s “American Idiot.” I’d love to see the Beatles write a rock opera ITTL!

On the bad side, it means that the disaffected teenagers a few years down the line might view rock as the establishment and abandon it entirely. That would butterfly things like punk rock completely—although it’s way too early to speculate on that.

Anyway, I’m excited to see where this goes!

Thank you so much, Cmakk1012! Welcome aboard and I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the TL. You bring up a lot of interesting points about how Rock could develop ITTL due to differences for Elvis, The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, and of course no Vietnam War. Your idea of the Beatles writing and recording a Rock Opera has Especially stood out in my mind! If memory serves, I believe I once read somewhere that George Martin, the band's producer, always wanted John and Paul to write more complex music as it was.
 
I could be wrong about this, but I believe Bush was commissioned into the Guard, not drafted. I can imagine his father sending him there to help iron out some of his rebellious streak.

No Vietnam means no draft as of yet. :) But a future war could always change that.
The draft was happening since just before the Americans entered WW2. With no Vietnam you may see it last till the late 70s or early 80s but it will still end.
 
The draft was happening since just before the Americans entered WW2. With no Vietnam you may see it last till the late 70s or early 80s but it will still end.

Not necessarily. France still has the draft and although its population is not as large as the USA's, it still has the 2nd highest population in Europe.

Edit: After looking into it a bit, I just found out that France abolished conscription in 2001.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily. France still has the draft and although its population is not as large as the USA's, it still has the 2nd highest population in Europe.

Edit: After looking into it a bit, I just found out that France abolished conscription in 2001.
True. Vietnam was a huge shock to the military in regards to reluctant draftees and overall professionalism. The military wanted a volunteer military to raise standards so the draft died. Without it you may have the draft continue due to the the limited casualties due to the reduction of forces and pull out and the majority of those volunteers.
 
Just want to give you guys a brief idea of what the next several updates will cover, a bit of a preview, I suppose.

Tomorrow - British-Rhodesian War (Part I)
Monday - British-Rhodesian War (Part II)
Next Friday - Other Foreign Affairs (Canada, Soviet Union, Cuba)
Monday After - Pop Culture 1967

You guys good with these? :) After these, we'll be diving pretty hard into 1968 in America. A tumultuous year for the Kennedy Administration and a heated, close election will ensue. Fasten your seat belts, folks.
 
Top