The Free and Independent Republic of Australia

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

As per title, with what sort of PoD's can you reasonably use to get an independent Australian republic sometime in the 1800's? I'm not gonna be too strict here, but bonus points if you can somehow involve the Eureka rebellion and/or Ned Kelly for extra Aussieness. And what would be the likely consequences of this occurring (please don't get too caught up in the how like all my other threads end up)? One of my ideas ran somewhere along the lines of having even more migrants to Australia, including convicts, Irish, Americans, whatever, to have that many more possible dissidents and more diggers. So perhaps a consequence would be a stronger Eureka movement, that either fends off British attack and inspires a wave of "Australian" nationalism (never mind that most of the diggers are foreign) or is more brutally put down, inspiring a wave of Australian nationalism that likewise spreads across the continent. As a result, there are more and more uprisings that evolve into outright rebel movements pushing for freedom from the British Empire. And somehow they succeed and manage to unite all the Australian colonies. Is this plausible at all? If not, what would work better and how would things reasonably end up?

[SenatorChickpea]

A much simpler POD would be for an earlier federation that adopts a Republican model. There was a vocal movement amongst federationists for a Republic, and I believe Alfred Deakin was in favour of one.

If they can convince their opponents that a Republican Australia would still be a loyal ally of their "brothers" in the empire, it's quite doable.

You'd also need to discredit the model of governors-general- anyone know any potential scandals that might give the colonial governors a bad name?

[Atomicwalrus]

You might be able to discredit the model of governor general if instead of getting Macquarie as Governor General New South Wales get a second and maybe eventually a third one like Bligh. thereby butterflying away Macquaries reforms that broke the influence and power Army officers had

[Arachnid]

Well part of the problem is that I think it took until the 1860's for most people residing in Australia to be born in Australia. Up until then the majority of the population had been born overseas. Now obviously the large minority born in Ireland included a great many people* who didn't feel that much loyalty to the Crown and there were a small number of English Republican Chartists.
I actually think the way to do it is to have much less free settlement in Australia. If you can keep the convict/emancipist population as the clear majority and keep the exclusives in charge and nasty then you might well get a popular rebellion. But by Eureka you simply have far too many non-diggers born in Britain and regarding themselves as British who happen to be living somewhere else.



* Though born in Ireland=/=Fenian. Southern Unionists, Ulstermen and Anglo-Irish emigrated as well.

[wolf_brother]

- Larger Eureka, stronger Chartist influence both back in Britain & in Australia.

- Continued digger bushranger guerrila warfare fighting from desert holdouts for several decades. Many IOTL who became criminals (Ned Kelly & co.) become revolutionary leaders ITTL - many become radical martyrs.

- Princeland is granted a colony, further splitting up royalist holdouts on the Australian continent.

- Australian colonies never granted responsible government by London due to ongoing digger raids.

- Butterflies, butterflies..

- Federation of Australia falls apart.

- Australian labor uprisings of 1890, '91, and '92 finally spill over into full-scale uprising and revolution.

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

bump...

So going by that idea at least, what do you think results from Australian independence. Surely some things would be different? What would Australia's international relationships look like? Would they align themselves closely with the USA for example? And do other colonies take after their example and start protesting British rule more?

[Darth_Kiryan]

Originally Posted by SenatorChickpea

A much simpler POD would be for an earlier federation that adopts a Republican model. There was a vocal movement amongst federationists for a Republic, and I believe Alfred Deakin was in favour of one.

If they can convince their opponents that a Republican Australia would still be a loyal ally of their "brothers" in the empire, it's quite doable.

You'd also need to discredit the model of governors-general- anyone know any potential scandals that might give the colonial governors a bad name?

I'd certainly be more willing to go this route, if anything, make much more sense. Look to see if you can work with Sir Henry Parkes, he is generally considered to be the father of Australian self-government, and the main leader, if anything.

[MarshalBraginsky]

There is still the question of how to discredit the governor general's role in Australia though.

[Darth_Kiryan]

Originally Posted by MarshalBraginsky

There is still the question of how to discredit the governor general's role in Australia though.

Well, there were a lot of people who held republican ideals who did suggest that all governors and titles should be abolished. Perhaps if the situation becomes violent with repeated calls of Republicanism the reigning governor-general could be seen as incompetant and unable to perform his duties properly and be replaced.
The only bad thing which will come from this is that it may really become more violent after this depending on his successor. But the main thing that needs to be realised is that the distance between Britain and Australia is greater than that of Britain and America.....

[MarshalBraginsky]

So technically the Eureka Revolt would not work, and the Ned Kelly saga wouldn't become more political. What would the fate of New Zealand and some other Pacific colonies be if Australia became a Republic? They'd pose a huge challenge to British logistics if New Zealand stayed loyal.