WI: A colonial power was shrewd and they.....

[EMT]

decided to attempt to industrialize their colonies? Spain always kept industry away from the Americas, the British beat back India's economy with cheap material goods, the Congo was used as a resource extraction zone, and China was split into zones of influence that made China's economy weaker. What if, per say, the British attempted to industrialize Egypt, or India, or really any of their colonies, for one reason or another? The French in Algeria? Italy in Libya? Italy in Tunis?(After all, to have this take effect, we need some PODs). What events could lead to the industrialization of a colony by their colonial power? Depending how far back you go, it could be Peru, or it could be Mexico, it could be North Africa, other parts of Africa, or really any colony, or say, protectorates even. My immediate thoughts:

1. An immediate threat to a colony. More colonial tensions, more antagonism, and more need to be efficient seem to be the best chances for a colony to industrialize, with the mother country being preoccupied about being able to provide the manpower and tools they would need to defend said colony.

2. Colonies where seen as more than colonies, but as an integral part of the nation. I've read a certain thread where Spain federalizes Cuba and Puerto Rico as direct provinces of Spain. How likely could this be, with varying PODs, that means the state is forced to industrialize or face revolution?

3. No WWI, nationalism still booms, and colonies threaten their mother countries to invest industrialization on them or face revolt. I have no clue how possible that is, but it is an option, I think.

What are people's thoughts? We all know Canada, Australia, and somewhat South Africa, where industrialized, but more based on the fact that they had majority white populations and could be much more loyal. I think more respect for a colonist's rights would be required, in my opinion.

Some British genius invents capitalism early?

[mowque]

India got some aid in OTL along these lines.

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

This is something I've been using for a timeline I'm doing for my history teacher. It's ASB, but cool nonetheless (my timeline, not the industrialisation idea).

Basically the industrialisation of the British colonies led to much more stable countries after decolonisation (which happened later). Especially in Africa, where ex-British countries were thriving compared to other colonies.

But it could go either way, like you said. I mean, you'll always have traditionalists, like in India, China or Africa, who hate the idea of becoming 'western'.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Originally Posted by Silverwolf

decided to attempt to industrialize their colonies? Spain always kept industry away from the Americas, the British beat back India's economy with cheap material goods, the Congo was used as a resource extraction zone, and China was split into zones of influence that made China's economy weaker. What if, per say, the British attempted to industrialize Egypt, or India, or really any of their colonies, for one reason or another? The French in Algeria? Italy in Libya? Italy in Tunis?(After all, to have this take effect, we need some PODs). What events could lead to the industrialization of a colony by their colonial power? Depending how far back you go, it could be Peru, or it could be Mexico, it could be North Africa, other parts of Africa, or really any colony, or say, protectorates even. My immediate thoughts:

1. An immediate threat to a colony. More colonial tensions, more antagonism, and more need to be efficient seem to be the best chances for a colony to industrialize, with the mother country being preoccupied about being able to provide the manpower and tools they would need to defend said colony.

[shameless self promotion]Haven't got there in the TL yet, but check my sig.... [/shameless self promotion]

[Thande]

The problem with industrialising colonies is that destroys the trade system that upholds the empire and makes the mother country prosperous. If the raw materials produced by the colony can be processed in a factory built right next door, how does the mother country profit?

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Silverwolf

decided to attempt to industrialize their colonies? Spain always kept industry away from the Americas, the British beat back India's economy with cheap material goods, the Congo was used as a resource extraction zone, and China was split into zones of influence that made China's economy weaker. What if, per say, the British attempted to industrialize Egypt, or India, or really any of their colonies, for one reason or another? The French in Algeria? Italy in Libya? Italy in Tunis?(After all, to have this take effect, we need some PODs). What events could lead to the industrialization of a colony by their colonial power? Depending how far back you go, it could be Peru, or it could be Mexico, it could be North Africa, other parts of Africa, or really any colony, or say, protectorates even. My immediate thoughts:

1. An immediate threat to a colony. More colonial tensions, more antagonism, and more need to be efficient seem to be the best chances for a colony to industrialize, with the mother country being preoccupied about being able to provide the manpower and tools they would need to defend said colony.

2. Colonies where seen as more than colonies, but as an integral part of the nation. I've read a certain thread where Spain federalizes Cuba and Puerto Rico as direct provinces of Spain. How likely could this be, with varying PODs, that means the state is forced to industrialize or face revolution?

3. No WWI, nationalism still booms, and colonies threaten their mother countries to invest industrialization on them or face revolt. I have no clue how possible that is, but it is an option, I think.

What are people's thoughts? We all know Canada, Australia, and somewhat South Africa, where industrialized, but more based on the fact that they had majority white populations and could be much more loyal. I think more respect for a colonist's rights would be required, in my opinion.

So you think Britain should have industrialized a hostile country with ten times its number of people? Why, so the Raj could be overthrown and Britain conquered by India? That doesn't really make sense. If you spell "shrewd" s-u-i-c-i-d-a-l, then I agree. (Snarkiness due to overexposure to parents, not anything you said.)

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Emperor-of-New-Zealand

This is something I've been using for a timeline I'm doing for my history teacher. It's ASB, but cool nonetheless (my timeline, not the industrialisation idea).

Basically the industrialisation of the British colonies led to much more stable countries after decolonisation (which happened later). Especially in Africa, where ex-British countries were thriving compared to other colonies.

But it could go either way, like you said. I mean, you'll always have traditionalists, like in India, China or Africa, who hate the idea of becoming 'western'.

Actually the opposite is the case. Attempts to industrialize destabilized African countries, which should have focused on improving their agricultural sectors.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Abdul Hadi Pasha

So you think Britain should have industrialized a hostile country with ten times its number of people? Why, so the Raj could be overthrown and Britain conquered by India?

That's not really the problem: the people with the industry would most probably not be the same people trying to overthrow the Raj. The problem would be that the whole purpose of the Indian colony was to generate wealth for Britain by being a source of raw materials and a sink for manufactured goods, which is sort of short-circuited if you let it industrialise.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Thande

That's not really the problem: the people with the industry would most probably not be the same people trying to overthrow the Raj. The problem would be that the whole purpose of the Indian colony was to generate wealth for Britain by being a source of raw materials and a sink for manufactured goods, which is sort of short-circuited if you let it industrialise.

Why wouldn't they? Industrialization would create an educated middle class that would be hostile to British rule.

I agree that it's contrary to the whole point of having an empire - generally not a good idea to create an industrial power that can horrendously out-compete you.

[EvolvedSaurian]

How about a partial industrialization, with some colonies producing component parts for more complicated goods to be completed in the mother country? This is an idea I'm sort of toying with for the future of my TL.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by EvolvedSaurian

How about a partial industrialization, with some colonies producing component parts for more complicated goods to be completed in the mother country? This is an idea I'm sort of toying with for the future of my TL.

If you can produce component parts, you can produce the whole thing.

I'll do something unexpected again and give you an Ottoman parallel: The Ottoman textile industry was devastated by the introduction of cheap British textiles. But it quickly recovered. Why? Partly due to quality issues, but mostly because local producers discovered they could import cheap British yarn and then compete with British manufactures. If say, Indians, are producing components, why could they not then branch out themselves and built the finished product, and undermine British companies with their cheaper labor?

[EvolvedSaurian]

Originally Posted by Abdul Hadi Pasha

If you can produce component parts, you can produce the whole thing.

I'll do something unexpected again and give you an Ottoman parallel: The Ottoman textile industry was devastated by the introduction of cheap British textiles. But it quickly recovered. Why? Partly due to quality issues, but mostly because local producers discovered they could import cheap British yarn and then compete with British manufactures. If say, Indians, are producing components, why could they not then branch out themselves and built the finished product, and undermine British companies with their cheaper labor?

Aye, that's what I'd figured as well. Gonna have to find some other way to make the Raj live forever then.

[Iori]

Originally Posted by Abdul Hadi Pasha

If you can produce component parts, you can produce the whole thing.

I'll do something unexpected again and give you an Ottoman parallel: The Ottoman textile industry was devastated by the introduction of cheap British textiles. But it quickly recovered. Why? Partly due to quality issues, but mostly because local producers discovered they could import cheap British yarn and then compete with British manufactures. If say, Indians, are producing components, why could they not then branch out themselves and built the finished product, and undermine British companies with their cheaper labor?

What if you limit the knowledge though, not allow anyone (in the colonies) to know how to build the final product or even what else is needed for it in the colonies with the only ones who do know how working in companies in the motherland?

[SilverPhantom2]

Originally Posted by Abdul Hadi Pasha

So you think Britain should have industrialized a hostile country with ten times its number of people? Why, so the Raj could be overthrown and Britain conquered by India? That doesn't really make sense. If you spell "shrewd" s-u-i-c-i-d-a-l, then I agree. (Snarkiness due to overexposure to parents, not anything you said.)

On the upside, that would make an AWESOME timeline.

[MNP]

The only way the industrialization works as I see it, is if either:

1. A step behind. i.e. Colony A industrializes while Mother Country A is moving on to the information revolution

2. Unity. Colony A sees itself as a on a path to becoming a part of Mother Country A.

The French, might, MIGHT have been able to do this with Algeria had Napoleon III's land management plans been carried out combined with something that makes the Muslims more willing to become French citizens--but wiki says that involved becoming apostate (by following French laws that apparently went against Sharia?) that is more difficult than it appears. Maybe something like the Ottoman Millet system combined with gradual pressures for Francization? Maybe find religious scholars to try and see what can actually be harmonized with French law and see if small adjustments can be made either way to try to have at least some laws that can apply to both Muslims and French.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by Iori

What if you limit the knowledge though, not allow anyone (in the colonies) to know how to build the final product or even what else is needed for it in the colonies with the only ones who do know how working in companies in the motherland?

They're not robots that you can program. What are you going to do? Teach them how to make auto parts but not how to build an auto? If they have the skills and education to build the parts, they also have the skills and education to build a car.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by EvolvedSaurian

Aye, that's what I'd figured as well. Gonna have to find some other way to make the Raj live forever then.

Why do you want to make the Raj last forever? Do you really think a handful of Europeans can control several hundred million people indefinitely?

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Originally Posted by MNPundit

The only way the industrialization works as I see it, is if either:

1. A step behind. i.e. Colony A industrializes while Mother Country A is moving on to the information revolution

2. Unity. Colony A sees itself as a on a path to becoming a part of Mother Country A.

The French, might, MIGHT have been able to do this with Algeria had Napoleon III's land management plans been carried out combined with something that makes the Muslims more willing to become French citizens--but wiki says that involved becoming apostate (by following French laws that apparently went against Sharia?) that is more difficult than it appears. Maybe something like the Ottoman Millet system combined with gradual pressures for Francization? Maybe find religious scholars to try and see what can actually be harmonized with French law and see if small adjustments can be made either way to try to have at least some laws that can apply to both Muslims and French.

There is just no way that Algeria would ever have considered itself part of the metropole. The Ottomans never completely solved the problem of religious diversity, but took it as far as possible by making everyone totally equal legally. In the case of Algeria, that would mean the Muslim population would have free right of circulation in France. Not going to happen, full stop. At least in the Ottoman Empire, anyone could be a parliamentarian or a minister. Can you imagine France in the 19th c with Algerian ministers?

[minifidel]

Originally Posted by Abdul Hadi Pasha

There is just no way that Algeria would ever have considered itself part of the metropole. The Ottomans never completely solved the problem of religious diversity, but took it as far as possible by making everyone totally equal legally. In the case of Algeria, that would mean the Muslim population would have free right of circulation in France. Not going to happen, full stop. At least in the Ottoman Empire, anyone could be a parliamentarian or a minister. Can you imagine France in the 19th c with Algerian ministers?

To be fair, I think that an Algerian could have become a minister if they were sufficiently secular. The greatest racism towards Algerians and muslims wasn't from the government, or even the French in particular, it was the Italian and Spanish immigrants who would have ended up losing if the locals gained more rights.