french commonwealth?

[Bismarck1]

what if France in the late 1800s and early 1900s created a french commonwealth simmilar to the british were the gave some of their colonies like vietnam and other colonies domion states? what were the chances of France doing something like this? How would history be if France something like this.

[The Ubbergeek]

Something like a tighter and stouter Francophonie?

[Thande]

I think it would be kind of contrary to French colonial policy, which was (and remains) treating overseas colonies as an integral part of France, quite different to the British approach. Of course you could still have the same positive effects as a commonwealth, but it would consist of French colonies electing representatives to send to Paris, rather than local parliaments.

Arguably the French would have less to lose by creating such a system than the British have in all the scenarios in which the idea is explored, because (unlike the British with India) I don't think all the natives in the French colonies would outnumber the French in France and so there wouldn't be a problem with universal suffrage on that front. (I could be wrong there though).

The Francophone strikes me as too much of a purely political construct to serve as a commonwealth.

[EvolvedSaurian]

Arguably the French would have less to lose by creating such a system than the British have in all the scenarios in which the idea is explored, because (unlike the British with India) I don't think all the natives in the French colonies would outnumber the French in France and so there wouldn't be a problem with universal suffrage on that front. (I could be wrong there though).

What about Indochina? That has far more people than France, 100 million to 60 million.

[Thande]

What about Indochina? That has far more people than France, 100 million to 60 million.

Ehh, that's why I said I might be wrong ;) Was the disparity that high in 1900 though?

I suppose the French might introduce tests in things like literacy (in French, presumably) to qualify natives for citizenship, thus reducing the numbers of potential voters.

Even that would probably require a seismic shift in attitudes.

[le.Singe]

Why would they do it though? I mean the French...

[The Ubbergeek]

What do you imply? That our cousins are arrogant?

[Thande]

What do you imply? That our cousins are arrogant?
Not especially. I mean it would take a seismic shift in GENERAL EUROPEAN attitudes. I can't see the the British granting universal suffrage in India or the African colonies either, or the Dutch in Indonesia, or the Germans... etc. etc.

[The Ubbergeek]

I was speakling to le singe (interestingly, in french, his nick means 'the monkey'...), buddy....

[Thande]

Why would they do it though? I mean the French...
I can think of two reasons.

1) After for example the 1870 crisis, a radical republican government takes power that implements the Rights of Man in a practical way to everyone under French rule regardless of their white or other origin.

2) Someone else, like Britain for example, does it and is has obviously positive effects, and so other European colonial powers including France copy it.

[Tyr]

It was nothing to do with attitudes, it was simple logic.
It would be a absolute nightmare to try and incorporate MPs from India in the British parliament with them representing somewhere half way around the world. Especially pre telegraph.

[Thande]

I was speakling to le singe (interestingly, in french, his nick means 'the monkey'...), buddy....
Well it strikes me that there's no abstract positive reason for doing it either (maybe to quell any native rebellions, but in that era there were few objections to harsh crackdowns for that), which is why I suggested an ideological reason for doing it.

[Thande]

It was nothing to do with attitudes, it was simple logic.
It would be a absolute nightmare to try and incorporate MPs from India in the British parliament with them representing somewhere half way around the world. Especially pre telegraph.
Having examined the example of French Guiana in (much later) OTL, it seems that they both send representatives to the National Assembly in Paris AND have their own local elected legislative bodies.

[EvolvedSaurian]

Ehh, that's why I said I might be wrong ;) Was the disparity that high in 1900 though?

Probably, I mean, who's going to emigrate to Indochina? :)

I suppose the French might introduce tests in things like literacy (in French, presumably) to qualify natives for citizenship, thus reducing the numbers of potential voters.

Probably, but that leads to some.... unfortunate comparisons. :(

Even that would probably require a seismic shift in attitudes.

Maybe...

[Fellatio Nelson]

I was speakling to le singe (interestingly, in french, his nick means 'the monkey'...), buddy....

Apparently, French soldiers during WW1 called their tinned meat ration "Monkey Meat", because a lot of it came from Madagascar and they thought it was made from monkeys.

Now that's good eating.

[Tyr]

Probably, I mean, who's going to emigrate to Indochina? :)

Immigration doesn't matter.
It'd be more to do with more jungle clearance and better health- in a tropical climate such as that medicine could have huge effects on population.
Since France has been a 1st world nation for over 100 years and Indochina is still developing I think that the difference could well be quite a bit smaller- probally France as the larger though maybe not by too much.

[birdy]

Probably, I mean, who's going to emigrate to Indochina? :)





Well all those ethnic Chinese can't be wrong:p

[birdy]

I was speakling to le singe (interestingly, in french, his nick means 'the monkey'...), buddy....

I dont think there's any need to be like that-

As Thande said and Singe(whatisname) said, its like asking why would Britain give its colonies representation in Parliament or the US overturn segregation at that time.