Commonwealth EU

[Tyr]

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/2142/world29ek.png

Major parties:

Labour:

The labour party is the main communist party of the commonwealth and as such most of its policies are centred on helping the poor. It is strongly pro-federation seeing the commonwealth as the structure that helped to develop the poorer parts of the world and without it Africa would be an anarchic hell hole. It occasionally even goes as far as to push for far greater integration- the African Federations were largely labour’s doing.

Liberal:

The liberal party here is quite a Thatcherist party really. They believe in the power of the markets and leaving the people to fend for themselves. Their opinion of the commonwealth is somewhat divided, on the one hand it facilitates free trade, on the other it puts top first world nations like Britain on the same level as places like the North African Federation…

Conservatives:

The conservative party is not the power it once was. Due to the evolution (/devolution) of parties over the years the Liberals have took much of their former standing leaving them with nothing to hold onto but nationalism and as such they are anti-commonwealth; the only trouble with this is by their very nature of being pro independence nationalists those who normally would support them instead support their local independence groups.

Progressive:

The progressive party is a relatively new force in politics and it represents a somewhat less extreme left wing to labour. Its closest OTL analogue is the green party in that it is heavily pro-environmentalist however it also has a strong technologist drive- it is the main supporter behind the space programme for instance.
The progressives are a bunch of utopian dreamers- something which gains them many friends and enemies.

And some others:

Indian National Party:

As can be gathered from the name a party localised in India. It is relatively anti-Federation (not violently so- it just wants India to leave) instead favouring a single united Indian state.
Its other policies are mostly quite centrist with nothing too extreme.

All China Party:

A relatively powerful force in Cantonese politics the All China Party is not as you would expect from the name a anti-commonwealth pro independence party but instead a party which wishes for the bringing of the rest of China into the commonwealth fold.
It is relatively right wing and highly jingoistic with most of its supporters being those who want to bring China into the commonwealth so it can be developed into something resembling a decent place- and so stop the hordes of immigrants that constantly flow into Canton.

Negroe Association

Black African anti-white far right party. Anti-everything to do with the white’s pretty much they mainly only come into any degree of power during economic down turns in Africa.

Unification Party:

As a aside from all those doom and gloom ‘empower our nation’ types we have these who want quite the opposite- greater unification between the Commonwealth nations: the entire government structure destroyed and rebuilt as one big world covering example of the Westminster system.
Again they aren’t very powerful due to being seen as a one policy party.

Republicans:

Variably anti-commonwealth however always anti-monarchy. Another unpopular one seen as a one policy party however in their case it isn’t so- they do have quite a well thought out centre right manifesto. Nonetheless they only ever gain minor amounts of seats spread out around the world most critics suggesting that their candidates who do win only did so by their own effort and would be better off as independents.


There are 660 seats (was originally 1300 or so in my first draft following the general pattern of the EU though I found this way too much).
How many seats a nation has is mostly based off its population though for smaller nations there is a slight bit of boosting (not as much as the EU but a litle bit) and in this TL populations and the richness of nations have worked out somewhat different i.e. there is limited Antarctic colonization and Africa isn't all that bad in most places.

The idea for the TL this is in is very rough but pretty much the French manage to get Suez and then go on to get very close to the Ottomans whilst Britain moves away from them (due to the French being the enemy).
There was a limited war at some point during which the Levant was liberated and British Jews later decided Israel would be a good idea- Arabs aren't too bothered as they are mostly still under the heel of the rejuvinated Turks (all that oil money...).
China had the expected happen to it and it was mostly chopped up between European powers/collapsed into many minor nations- and Britain expanded beyond Hong Kong in the process.

Meh, I'm never going to do the TL as I'm too much of a perfectionist, just felt like doing this for some reason. The idea behind it is the commonwealth is a power but not unquestioned ruler of the world- there is still the US, the Russians, the French/Ottomans, etc...





Thoughts/moans/questions/whatever?

[Hendryk]

If Newfoundland is represented separately from Canada, shouldn't Quebec have the same status? Plus that would help defuse any tensions between the Anglophones and Francophones, or vice versa.

BTW I take it that Canton is actually the whole province of Guangdong. But is Antarctica really all of the continent, or just the British slice of it?

[LacheyS]

Such a shame you aren't going to do a timeline. It is a tantalising idea.

[Martel]

If Newfoundland is represented separately from Canada, shouldn't Quebec have the same status? Plus that would help defuse any tensions between the Anglophones and Francophones, or vice versa.

Newfoundland was not part of the original Canadian Confederacy, but Quebec was. In fact Newfoundland (and Labrador) was separate from Canada until OTL 1949.

OK, so how did this come about. What's the PoD?

[Hendryk]

A technical question: why do many of the flags have OTL's Union Jack (with the cross of St. Patrick) in their top left corner? Shouldn't they have a Union Jack minus the cross of St. Patrick, since Ireland is a separate country from Britain? And for that matter, wouldn't the Irish prefer to use the Celtic harp as a symbol, to avoid fueling sectarian tensions between Catholics and Protestants? (unless, of course, the POD predates the settlement of Protestants in Ireland).

Newfoundland was not part of the original Canadian Confederacy, but Quebec was.
So it was, but in TTL the British could just as easily have separated Upper and Lower Canada to make the whole thing more manageable. I notice, for example, that there is no unifed India.

[Max Sinister]

I wonder whether the Israelis would've accepted a flag with the cross on it.

[Hendryk]

I wonder whether the Israelis would've accepted a flag with the cross on it.
Well, if the Muslims can, why couldn't the Israelis?

[Tyr]

I had thought of the union jack in the top corners being inclusive of Ireland but the actual union jack not including Ireland however I figured the union jack is the implication of British settlement/civilizing influence in those lands- so it includes the Irish as well as Scots and Brits. Its the flag of all the British people- changing it on the flag of Australia and all is discounting the Irish contribution.

Quebec/Canada- without being part of Canada I'd imagine the Quebecois would want independance from this structure (as a few other areas did here like a Boerish nation and parts of India). I was originally thinking of having a POD with Britain deciding it wants Oregon and having a seperate nation over in the west but I stopped that as if that happened there would be nothing to stop Quebec going off alone- nothing against this in theory I just don't like the way it splits English Canada in two.

Israelis and cross flag- meh, the actual meaning behind flags with crosses means pretty much FA in all cases and most people of different religions are perfectly happy to let them be: you don't see the PC crowd moaning about the flag after all...

Canton- Is a bit more then Guangdong and includes Taiwan.

Antarctica- It is the whole continent in theory (+ the Falklands and other southerly islands- where most of its population actually is).
Not much on most of it though, its those damn progressives wanting to push forward the frontiers of civilization (as I wanted written on their flag but couldn't find the latin word for civilization so had to put freedom...).

My problem with doing a TL is as I said I'm too much of a perfectionist and though I think I could do Britain and to a lesser extent the empire pretty well for knock on effects in Europe and all I'd be pretty lost.

[Wendell]

Are the various protectorates outside o the Commonwealth, or just not in Parliament? Is Singapore part of the Malay States?

[Constantinople]

What year is it? Is the commonwealth essentially one supernation with stong internal divides?

[Diamond]

What is 'Pacific'? Is it a catch-all territory including Hawaii, perhaps Guam, etc?

[Tyr]

Are the various protectorates outside o the Commonwealth, or just not in Parliament? Is Singapore part of the Malay States?
Singapore- Yes its part of Malaya.
Protectorates- I figure they have a assosiate/obersver membership type deal where they have a seat or two on the parliament but don't take part except when invited.

What year is it? Is the commonwealth essentially one supernation with stong internal divides?

Modern day.
Well...Its somewhere between the EU and the USA for how much of a nation it is. Tending towards the EU.

What is 'Pacific'? Is it a catch-all territory including Hawaii, perhaps Guam, etc?
It'd really be called the pacific federation or something of the like and is a loose coalition of the various British pacific islands like Fiji, Tonga, etc....
Guam isn't British and Hawaii is just a ally/protectorate.

[Wendell]

Why would Israel be branded with a Union Jack when Levant is not?:confused:

[HueyLong]

Instead of Britain. why not Wales, Scotland and England? After all, Ireland is separate.....

[Wendell]

Instead of Britain. why not Wales, Scotland and England? After all, Ireland is separate.....
Well, all of these entities on the list would be internally divided also.

[HueyLong]

Yeah, but I think the Nationalists in each would get a bit more influence.

If everyone else gets Commonwealth devolution, why don't we?

[Wendell]

Yeah, but I think the Nationalists in each would get a bit more influence.

If everyone else gets Commonwealth devolution, why don't we?
Good question. But, if you devolve them, then who's next?

[HueyLong]

Well, that would be bringing it down to "nations".

India appears to be bringing it down to administrative divisions. So, at least Scotland would be possible.

Although, I guess London wants to keep a bit more seats than it would as part of England.

[Wendell]

Well, that would be bringing it down to "nations".

India appears to be bringing it down to administrative divisions. So, at least Scotland would be possible.

Although, I guess London wants to keep a bit more seats than it would as part of England.
India wasn't really united in much of its history.

[HueyLong]

Yeah, but depending on the POD, it probably has nationalism gripping it.

[Wendell]

Yeah, but depending on the POD, it probably has nationalism gripping it.
Unless each ethnic/religious group wants its own state.

[HueyLong]

Not unless Britain completely changes their style of rule there.

Labor projects, railroads, trade from the British, these spurred India into nationalism.

Unless some other power helps to pull an Africa in India, India is united.

[Wendell]

Not unless Britain completely changes their style of rule there.

Labor projects, railroads, trade from the British, these spurred India into nationalism.

Unless some other power helps to pull an Africa in India, India is united.
United as petty princely states and royal provinces, territories, and agencies.

[Tyr]

Instead of Britain. why not Wales, Scotland and England? After all, Ireland is separate.....
Welsh nationalism in any significant form is really new. Wales is traditionally part of England, not treat all that seperatly in most respects.
Scotish nationalism- well it has always existed to some degree though only recently became somewhat significant and still even today it is very much a minority view point.

United as petty princely states and royal provinces, territories, and agencies.

Pretty much.
Sure its theoreticly one place but in reality the people are about as different to each other as the Europeans are and the idea of a united India is almost as silly as that of a united Europe.

Why would Israel be branded with a Union Jack when Levant is not?
They didn't want it to be.

[Verence]

But is Antarctica really all of the continent, or just the British slice of it? Maybe it's consist of the combined population of trade posts and military bases

[Wendell]

They didn't want it to be.
And the Jews did?:confused:

[Tyr]

And the Jews did?:confused:
Why wouldn't they?
The main people behind the idea were British jews, Britain is quite a 'Jewish' nation and it pre-empts any possible Arabic anger- Israel is quite clearly a major part of the commonwealth.

Its not a case of a flat choice of British flag or not, its like OTL where they can decide to change it if they want but for most it just isn't a issue.

Also contributing is the Levant being seen as a free arab state away from Turkish occupation, something that its keen to promote about itself (what with it being mostly true...).

[Constantinople]

Is the Empire essentially run by the chinese indians and africans?
Map?;)

[Sir Isaac Brock]

Is there one Army or many? One navy?

Is English the sole official language? Who writes the school text books, the "federal" government or the locals?

Is there freedom of movement between Commwealth nations? Can an Indian move to Australia or a African to England without the need for special visas?

What is the status of the Established Church? And the Monarchy? Are thier governors general in all the C nations? Do they report to the central parliament, or to the Monarch, or to the local government? Does Britain also have a seperate local parliament from the federal one?

[Tyr]

Is the Empire essentially run by the chinese indians and africans?
Sort of. Bare in mind that the ethnically British nations are all split apart from each other, even discounting non-ethnically British people in them they do add up to having more then anyone else.

Map?
It started as a map but meh I couldn't think of how best to go about things- just what are rational lines for African colonization? What to do with the rest of China- how many independant states/bits that are parts of empires?
If I ever do the TL or get really bored I may do one.

..
Going into some obscure bits there...Why are you asking about the schools?

]Is there one Army or many? One navy?

Yup. United military

Is English the sole official language?
No. Local languages are also official.
Who writes the school text books, the "federal" government or the locals?
Private companies as per OTL.
The curriculum would be federally set- but then most nations in the world today do end up with the same subjects.

Is there freedom of movement between Commwealth nations? Can an Indian move to Australia or a African to England without the need for special visas?
I'd like to say yes but under the age of massed movement allowed today I'm unsure. The parts that are developing IOTL are much richer here but still I would think most will not be on a par with Britain or Canada...


What is the status of the Established Church?
What do you mean?
The queen is the head of the Anglican church but everyone in Britain doesn't have to be a Anglican, it'd be the same here.

And the Monarchy? Are thier governors general in all the C nations?
Yes.

Do they report to the central parliament, or to the Monarch, or to the local government?
They rubber stamp whatever the local government tells them to.

Does Britain also have a seperate local parliament from the federal one?
Yes, as do the others- often with differing structures. i.e. the west indies are a somewhat federal nation in themselves.

The situation of the commonwealth is its where the pro EU people want the EU to be a few decades down the line- not quite as united as the US but some way beyond where the EU is now.

[Sir Isaac Brock]

Going into some obscure bits there...Why are you asking about the schools?
Because it was such a divisive issue in Canadian history. The whole issue of who should control the schools: the provinces, the federal government, the local school boards, the churches, etc.

Yup. United military
So do Indian troops fight in African and Chinese border clashes? Canadian troops fighting against France?

No. Local languages are also official.
Do they have equal status in the legislatures, courts, and classrooms?

Private companies as per OTL.
Where and when was that?! Certainly not in post-1867 Canada.

The curriculum would be federally set- but then most nations in the world today do end up with the same subjects.
I'm not too worried about the sciences. It's language, history, civics, and language I'm curious about.

I'd like to say yes but under the age of massed movement allowed today I'm unsure. The parts that are developing IOTL are much richer here but still I would think most will not be on a par with Britain or Canada...
So that means the federal government will intervene against any possible "White Australia" or similar policies?

What do you mean?
Well until the Catholic Emancipation, a person's religious status had a lot do to with their social and legal status. And a Catholic still can't be Sovereign. Your empire seems to be giving equal voting status to many non-Christians, which would be quite a departure. How has the Anglican elite reacted to this dilution of power?

The queen is the head of the Anglican church but everyone in Britain doesn't have to be a Anglican, it'd be the same here.
Is there any state involvement in religious education or vice versa?

They rubber stamp whatever the local government tells them to.
OTL before the Statute of Westminster, the Imperial Parliament in London appointed the GGs in the dominions. Sometimes they disagreed with the local government and would refuse to give Royal Assent to bills (very rare, but it happened). It was only after the especially unpopular "King-Byng Affair" in the 1920s in Canada, that the dominion governments started appointing their own GGs.

Yes, as do the others- often with differing structures. i.e. the west indies are a somewhat federal nation in themselves.
Interesting. So do the sub-national governments have any contact with the Imperial Parliament, or do they only deal through the national level?

The situation of the commonwealth is its where the pro EU people want the EU to be a few decades down the line- not quite as united as the US but some way beyond where the EU is now.
Sounds complicated.

[Tyr]

Just realisd there was a reply here when looking back over my old threads. Sorry for bumping up a old one but politeness demands...

So do Indian troops fight in African and Chinese border clashes? Canadian troops fighting against France?
If there was a war there. Common sense would mostly apply and soldiers would mostly stick to wherever it was their regiment is based with occasional training exercises in other places.


Do they have equal status in the legislatures, courts, and classrooms?

Classrooms- yes. It just makes sense to teach the Cantonese kids in Cantonese.
Official government stuff/courts- probally not. It makes sense there to have a common language and it is in English law so...

Where and when was that?! Certainly not in post-1867 Canada.

Britain.

I'm not too worried about the sciences. It's language, history, civics, and language I'm curious about.

eh? How so? (even though its a were now...)

So that means the federal government will intervene against any possible "White Australia" or similar policies?

That would go against free trade and free movement of people so I'd imagine so.

Well until the Catholic Emancipation, a person's religious status had a lot do to with their social and legal status. And a Catholic still can't be Sovereign. Your empire seems to be giving equal voting status to many non-Christians, which would be quite a departure. How has the Anglican elite reacted to this dilution of power?

err...The way they did IOTL- they were the ones who made it happen as its the right thing to do.

Is there any state involvement in religious education or vice versa?

Well I'd imagine thats like OTL. There are catholic/muslim/whatever schools but the state does make sure they don't go totally away from standard education.

Interesting. So do the sub-national governments have any contact with the Imperial Parliament, or do they only deal through the national level?
Don't get what you mean.

Sounds complicated.
All decent governments are.

[Nekromans]

Hey! I run the racket on Nekromansery!

[Sir Isaac Brock]

Just realisd there was a reply here when looking back over my old threads. Sorry for bumping up a old one but politeness demands...
Thanks. I will respond in kind.

If there was a war there. Common sense would mostly apply and soldiers would mostly stick to wherever it was their regiment is based with occasional training exercises in other places.
I brought it up because I think there would be big problems trying to get certain parts of the Commonwealth to fight certain friendly ousiders. For example Muslim Indians against other Muslim states, or French Canadians against France.

Classrooms- yes. It just makes sense to teach the Cantonese kids in Cantonese.
Official government stuff/courts- probally not. It makes sense there to have a common language and it is in English law so...
Question is, who sets the policy? In Canada historically we've had lots of fights over whether the federal government or the provinces are the better venue for language policy. For example all my breakfast cereals have French on them, but I can't erect a public sign in Quebec unless the French is larger than any other lanuage. French is an official language of debate in the Alberta provincial legislature, but almost no government services are provided in French. It gets even more complicated when you have massive population flows (which you haven't discouraged) creating new minority languages.

BTW do all areas have English civil law? OTL Scotland and Quebec do not.


Well I'd imagine thats like OTL. There are catholic/muslim/whatever schools but the state does make sure they don't go totally away from standard education.
OTL in Canada, the Catholics demanded and won a seperate tax-funded system that runs parallel to the public system. This is quite different from the privately-funded relgious schools that we also have. That's what I mean. Will other groups win these kinds of exceptions? With Canadian Catholics still ITTL? If not I expect more religious strife in Canada than OTL?

[Tyr]

I brought it up because I think there would be big problems trying to get certain parts of the Commonwealth to fight certain friendly ousiders. For example Muslim Indians against other Muslim states, or French Canadians against France.
How?
It wasn't a problem IOTL. Throughout much of their history even before Britain arrived Pakistanis have been killing afghans/various tribesmen (who are also muslim).
The kind of person who joins the army isn't likely to be the kind of person who has such qualms.

Question is, who sets the policy? In Canada historically we've had lots of fights over whether the federal government or the provinces are the better venue for language policy. For example all my breakfast cereals have French on them, but I can't erect a public sign in Quebec unless the French is larger than any other lanuage. French is an official language of debate in the Alberta provincial legislature, but almost no government services are provided in French. It gets even more complicated when you have massive population flows (which you haven't discouraged) creating new minority languages.
It'd be a mixture I'd assume. Over in the US I believe its mostly state set however there are strong federal guide lines (almost guessing there, not entirely sure)

BTW do all areas have English civil law? OTL Scotland and Quebec do not.

True. Those would be exceptions here too I'd assume.
Scotland for certain.
Quebec....Probally.



OTL in Canada, the Catholics demanded and won a seperate tax-funded system that runs parallel to the public system. This is quite different from the privately-funded relgious schools that we also have. That's what I mean. Will other groups win these kinds of exceptions? With Canadian Catholics still ITTL? If not I expect more religious strife in Canada than OTL?
We're the same I think.
There are some public schools that are catholic however for most catholic schools anyone can go there.

[Sir Isaac Brock]

How?
It wasn't a problem IOTL.
Actually, there were angry marches on the streets of Montreal during the Great War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_Crisis_of_1917), and was a war against Germany, I can't imagine what it would have been like it if had been France. (French Canada was also solidly against the Boer War too.)

Throughout much of their history even before Britain arrived Pakistanis have been killing afghans/various tribesmen (who are also muslim).
Fair enough, just trying to bring up the idea that Imperial loyalties will always have to compete with more local concerns.

The kind of person who joins the army isn't likely to be the kind of person who has such qualms.
But don't forget about conscription!

It'd be a mixture I'd assume. Over in the US I believe its mostly state set however there are strong federal guide lines (almost guessing there, not entirely sure)
States are allowed to set their own languages, however most have not (an exception in New Mexico which is officially bilingual [English and Spanish]. The US also does not have an official national language, however in all 50 states and at the federal level English is the overwhemling majority. I don't think the US is a good model to use for your much more diverse Commonwealth.