different first world nations

construct a scenario where the Southern Hemispheric countries such as Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, and South Africa, which in real history experienced varying degree of economic and political decline relative to comparable countries of settlement elsewhere in the world (Canada, France, Australia, New Zealand), did not experience that decline, but instead remained -- or became -- rich First World democracies.

Hmm...well, it all depends on them using their exports to setup local industries and education systems with what was vast mineral wealth in Chile and South Africa and vast cash crop and agricultural export in Argentina and Brazil. In Brazil, the POD would have to include a decline in influence of the planters so that the common man would benefit from Brazil's exports feeding Europe. The same for Argentina while Chile was on a good path to development but in my opinion never really forsake an export economy tied to one resources (whether it be nitrates or today copper which is in high demand from China). South Africa is tought because how would one distribute the mineral wealth from the diamond mines? Interesting though. What do others have to say?

we need a different american foreign business political policy. instead of sucking the life out of nations, we build them up instead, or ALLOW them to build themselves up. perhaps a socialist america spreads revolutions throughout the world muaahahahaha

or a way more isolationist USA. This USA could be very protectionist.

South Africa without apartheid. The apartheid system was essentially designed to impoverish blacks so they would work for low wages. POD could be in 1948, or perhaps we can get rid of the racist element within Afrikaner culture earlier (the Afrikaner church was once racially integrated).

Argentina's economic prosperity largely depended on Britain's pre-eminence of the world--it was their chief supplier of beef and some other agricultural goods. Slow down Britain's decline a bit so Argentina has time to diversify. Or perhaps get rid of the Perons--their policies did a lot of damage.

invest more in education,technology, and more social and economic freedom and justice

One very interesting POD could be the 1962 absence of the International Nuclear Arms Nonproliferation Treaty. At the time Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, and South Africa were developing nuclear weapons. One possible reason could be an earlier withdrawal of France from NATO. Try to imagine sometime (c.1954), the United States begins a withdrawal from Western Europe after the Korean War, in an effort to "Finlandize" the reunification of Germany and Korea. Fearing government influence by socialists and communists, the government decides to invest in teh nations and its nuclear forces.

Britain had major interests in South America at the turn of the last century (its why football is so popular there). So keeping a stronger Britain would be the way to go. Maybe get rid of WW1 somehow? Or turn Britain against the French?

Well it seems to me if we get rid of the military dictatorships and the corrupt governments these countries suffered through then they will be much better off. Perhaps the Empire of Brazil survives. Stronger democracies I believe would help the most.

To add another country on the list, if we have Bolivar concentrate more on keep Gran Colombia as a budding unified nation, instead of conquering upper and lower Peru, Colombia could be added to this list.

You want to make the South American countries turned into first world nations. Change who conquers them to Maybe Britain. It has to do with how the british merchant class had some power and was a nation of Traders. The Spaniards were more slave based then merchant based that is why most nations conquered by britain and with large settlements of British and Dutch do well. Neither of them look down at merchants the Spanish of that time do so it infects the natives the people they rule and so changes how they think and act. Sorry about how I got the Idea Across.

cow defender said:

we need a different american foreign business political policy. instead of sucking the life out of nations, we build them up instead, or ALLOW them to build themselves up.

Click to expand...

If only we had a smiley for insanity.

Imperial Paraguay

The dictator of Paraguay is replaced by somebody with brains. When the Poles restrict Jewish entrance into colleges to 1% versus a 20% share of the population, the new guy in Paraguay says, 'Over Here!'. Then the Russian civil war is over and he gets more people bugging out. Then Hitler takes over in Germany and he gets even more. This continues till Paragauy is half Jewish, and it's only half because of all the immigrants from Bolivia, Perus, Argentina, etc, trying to get in on the boom.
Paraguay has some nice hydroelectric potential, some good farming potential, and is surrounded by countries with other resources. Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Peru, even Uruguay has something.
Later, the cold war hots up and the only surviving decent university is in Asuncion.

time to see if otherss will enjoy this

If the rubber market doesn't collapse in early 20th century Brazil will keep booming. 1st PoD could be the rubber plantations in Malaysia never materialising - we could say the locals are a tad more uncooperative.

But in order to have the Brazilian rubber economy consolidate into something more substantial, I think we need another PoD. Could be political unstable conditions in North America (unsettled Civil war?) redirecting millions of immigrants with an enterprising culture where hard work is seen as a value in itself. Argentina, Chile, South Africa etc. could benefit from the same factor.

Argentina and Chile never collapsed like Brazil, and before WWII Argentina actually was among the richest countries pr. capita had their navy on the top 10 list of the world (no. 8?). More stable political development after WWII would do a lot for both Argentina and Chile. South Africa would need a PoD before the Zulus and other African tribes populated the area in 18th-19th century. What about the Napoleonic wars never starting? That would mean a large population surplus, not at least in France, that will look for new places to live.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Probably a possible key to a democratic and rich Brazil could be a civil war, separating the South (temperate and more populate) from the North. It could be a "great Uruguay", large enough to be stable.
Argentina is something I am unable to justify. By all means, should be prosperous and democratic (democracy is much easier for the affluent people than for the poor ones). At the end of WW2, it was flush with cash, its population was increased by Italian and German migration (and a good percentage of this migrant wave was made of professionals), does not have a racial problem (see Brazil, or South Africa). I cannot believe that Peron and Peronism were so efficient to burn all these pluses, and destabilize Argentina forever!
Chile has a smaller population basis, with an economy too dependent on minerals. In a way, the best possible world for Chileans and Argentinians would be to join together (which is almost impossible!)
South Africa is much more complicated, and pays the consequences of the different migration waves (plus the myth of the garrison state). Maybe a quicker English victory in the Boer war, or an earlier industrialization of the country.

Redbeard said:

If the rubber market doesn't collapse in early 20th century Brazil will keep booming. 1st PoD could be the rubber plantations in Malaysia never materialising - we could say the locals are a tad more uncooperative.

Click to expand...

I recently found out that one of the reasons the British started rubber plantations in Malaysia was the fact the Brazilians had the nasty practice of putting lot of things like rocks and sticks into the packages(rubber was sold on a weight basis). IMO, preventing this won't avoid the Malaysian plantations(going to the jungle to find rubber trees and collect their sap isn't a very efficient way of doing business, because those trees are quite spread out), but a Brazilian(or an American, like Ford did during WWII) could start a rubber plantation in the Amazon and have others follow on his example. This alone won't be enough, but it could be a start, especially if we can get some industry going with the profits earned. Here is where I despair; the Brazilian planter class was notoriously short-sighted, and I don't think they would do it. OTOH, immigrants may do it, as they did with much of the early industrialization of the country. Thing is; how do they get the capital?

*b u m p*

tiem to bump this

Have them develop enough socially, economically and industrially that they can develop a consumer class that is wealthy enough to buy manufactured goods that the country produces itself. If they reach this state, they can free themself of the fickle whims of world comodities market (where a single fall in global demand could undue decades worth of progress)

Except for the bad leadership, I've always thought of Chile as an exceptional example of a southern hemisphere country. They don't specialize in cereal crops, but they're a huge reason why the US has marginally exotic veggies in wintertime. While thats not enough to base an economy on, they do have the above mentioned mineral deposits. I guess I'm just saying that they seem to be, argueably, the most squared away South American country, other than the constant juntas:l

All it took was Pinochet to keep them that way...