A 'realistic' quasiDraka--the "Protracted Struggle" against the Apartheid juggernaut

[reddie]

Is it possible to get a "Protracted Struggle" between the superpowers of the USA and a Boer-run South Africa?

What I basically envision here is this: Apartheid (I'm using this as shorthand for a "white supremacy" ideology which ultimately develops from Dutch Calvinism--I think that if white supremacy thought was fated to develop in SA, it was going to somewhat resemble apartheid) is an expansionist ideology. Actually it isn't impossible for this to have developed: the Boers did tend to think of themselves as a new "chosen people" with ALL of Africa being "their Canaan" and the natives there being Biblically fated as "hewers of wood and drawers of water." Basically, this expansionism views the "darker races" (Africans, native Americans, and east Indians) as natural servants. It views whites opposed to this as vile, treacherous weaklings, sentimental fools, Communists, or sexual perverts (Immorality Acts, anyone?). It is not necessarily anti-Semitic (although organized Jewish opposition to its activities may bring this on), nor is it necessarily hostile to all non-Western cultures who do not oppose it--Ottomans, Persians, Syrians, Levantines, Vietnamese, Khmer, and northeast Asians are viewed somewhat respectfully, or at least not as "natural servants." Other Muslim groups might not be viewed so favorably, both because of their "Hamitic blood" and because they may be sitting on resources the SAfricans desire.

How far back would the POD have to be?

[stevep]

Originally Posted by reddie

Is it possible to get a "Protracted Struggle" between the superpowers of the USA and a Boer-run South Africa?

What I basically envision here is this: Apartheid (I'm using this as shorthand for a "white supremacy" ideology which ultimately develops from Dutch Calvinism--I think that if white supremacy thought was fated to develop in SA, it was going to somewhat resemble apartheid) is an expansionist ideology. Actually it isn't impossible for this to have developed: the Boers did tend to think of themselves as a new "chosen people" with ALL of Africa being "their Canaan" and the natives there being Biblically fated as "hewers of wood and drawers of water." Basically, this expansionism views the "darker races" (Africans, native Americans, and east Indians) as natural servants. It views whites opposed to this as vile, treacherous weaklings, sentimental fools, Communists, or sexual perverts (Immorality Acts, anyone?). It is not necessarily anti-Semitic (although organized Jewish opposition to its activities may bring this on), nor is it necessarily hostile to all non-Western cultures who do not oppose it--Ottomans, Persians, Syrians, Levantines, Vietnamese, Khmer, and northeast Asians are viewed somewhat respectfully, or at least not as "natural servants." Other Muslim groups might not be viewed so favorably, both because of their "Hamitic blood" and because they may be sitting on resources the SAfricans desire.

How far back would the POD have to be?

Reddie

I think the two biggest steps would be

a) Getting a SA superpower. You would need a much larger base of rulers and a lot of economic development. Although there are a lot of natural resources and some good agricultural lands to exploit them you would need a lot of effort and investment.

b) Such a state would probably be crushed earlier on by a European power, either because they desire the land and resources themselves or due to revulsion at their policies. You would definitely have to see Britain's development greatly changed as it would be very unhappy with a powerful state established on the Cape, threatening the links to India and the far east.

Steve

[reddie]

Originally Posted by stevep

Reddie

I think the two biggest steps would be

a) Getting a SA superpower. You would need a much larger base of rulers and a lot of economic development. Although there are a lot of natural resources and some good agricultural lands to exploit them you would need a lot of effort and investment.

b) Such a state would probably be crushed earlier on by a European power, either because they desire the land and resources themselves or due to revulsion at their policies. You would definitely have to see Britain's development greatly changed as it would be very unhappy with a powerful state established on the Cape, threatening the links to India and the far east.

Steve

Do you think the Boer War would be too late a POD?

Bumping up the white population with say, Confederate refugees might be useful. Two problems: 1) I'm not sure how interested "Rebs" would be in moving to Africa (while I've heard of the Brazilian colonization attempts {note to self: potential "nasty South American Empire" idea right there} I've never heard of any Southrons moving to Africa; and 2) the Boers would probably resent the Rebs as "soutpens" because they would not immediately assimilate into Boer culture. The solution might be to try to create a Southron buffer state, probably by offering the Rebs land the Boers themselves don't own, perhaps ultimately creating an "African Confederacy" of diverse but illiberal peoples.

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by reddie

Do you think the Boer War would be too late a POD?

I think so.

The Boers who moved inland during OTL's Great Trek were totally unaware of the value of the gold and diamonds they were sitting on. IIRC a British visitor noticed a Boer child playing with a diamond as though it were a toy and that's what got things going.

Have more Boers, earlier inland expansion (a consequence of more Boers), and an earlier exploitation of the gold and diamonds of the Witwatersrand and the Boers could do much better. They could be rich and numerous enough to defeat British attempts to seize control of the Cape.

A POD during the various European Wars of Religion could get more Calvinists (not necessary Dutch, but they could culturally merge) into South Africa. More Spanish success in the Low Countries, or a Guise victory in France (perhaps including an extended Marian period in England, so they can't flee there) could give South Africa a larger population base earlier.

[MerryPrankster]

The Dutch forming a confederation of some sorts with Confederate emigres would be interesting too, especially if we want to get it close enough to the Draka as possible without crossing into ludicrous territory.

Hmm...the Primitive Baptists of the US South are Calvinistic. They could fit in.

[MerryPrankster]

There might be a bit of hierarchy among the subjugated peoples, so the SAs could play "divide and rule."

In OTL South Africa, "Coloureds" (mixed-race and Asian peoples) occupied a middle class between the ruling whites and the black majority. According to some SA fiction I read, many Coloureds were hostile to the blacks, who they viewed as hooligans who would loot their shops.

In TTL, the SA government could incorporate some theories about "Aryans" and conclude that East Indians, since they're of partly Aryan extraction (the Indo-European conquerers of northern India) are somewhat higher on the food chain (this requires believing the Aryan conquerers were white, but that wouldn't be too hard).

[reddie]

Originally Posted by MerryPrankster

There might be a bit of hierarchy among the subjugated peoples, so the SAs could play "divide and rule."

In OTL South Africa, "Coloureds" (mixed-race and Asian peoples) occupied a middle class between the ruling whites and the black majority. According to some SA fiction I read, many Coloureds were hostile to the blacks, who they viewed as hooligans who would loot their shops.

In TTL, the SA government could incorporate some theories about "Aryans" and conclude that East Indians, since they're of partly Aryan extraction (the Indo-European conquerers of northern India) are somewhat higher on the food chain (this requires believing the Aryan conquerers were white, but that wouldn't be too hard).

Oh, yeah, I can definitely see the Coloureds occupying their middle ground in this fictional SA. This is the type of group that would probably excel in the military.

SA might adopt a particular designation for the "natural servants" of India, i.e. the lower castes, whom I suppose are already serving their "natural masters" the Brahmins and others. This would definitely pump up right-wing Hinduism and fascist thought in India, and interfere with efforts to ameliorate the effects of the caste system.

One thing--these "pseudoDraka" don't do slavery, per se. It's pure labor exploitation and civil rights curtailment, as under Apartheid, though it's probably worse in certain areas than others. The plantation system doesn't exist, unless the "Boers" take over areas where it's already established (such as banana plantations in west Africa)

[Marius]

Originally Posted by stevep

Reddie

I think the two biggest steps would be

a) Getting a SA superpower. You would need a much larger base of rulers and a lot of economic development. Although there are a lot of natural resources and some good agricultural lands to exploit them you would need a lot of effort and investment.

b) Such a state would probably be crushed earlier on by a European power, either because they desire the land and resources themselves or due to revulsion at their policies. You would definitely have to see Britain's development greatly changed as it would be very unhappy with a powerful state established on the Cape, threatening the links to India and the far east.

Steve

I disagree strongly with point B. A strong independent power threatened British, French and Spanish interests in North America but it was not crushed by the European powers, so I see no reason why this would be the case in South Africa. Furthermore, any powerful racist state would fit quite nicely in with the Westen world until the mid-20th century. White South Africa's racial views only fell out of step with the rest of the West's in the 1950s-1960s, with decolonisation and the civil rights movement in the USA gaining strength.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by Marius

I disagree strongly with point B. A strong independent power threatened British, French and Spanish interests in North America but it was not crushed by the European powers, so I see no reason why this would be the case in South Africa. Furthermore, any powerful racist state would fit quite nicely in with the Westen world until the mid-20th century. White South Africa's racial views only fell out of step with the rest of the West's in the 1950s-1960s, with decolonisation and the civil rights movement in the USA gaining strength.

Marius

The US was not crushed by European powers because, other than 1812 it didn't pick a fight with any of them nor greatly clash with any. Coupled with the prolonged French wars that kept Europe busy during the period of the young republic's initial weakness. Furthermore after 1815 the only country that would have been in a position to was Britain which for various reasons didn't want to.

A racist Boer state would have been smaller and weaker in the early states. Also its position on the sea-lanes to India would have made it very tempting to Britain. Furthermore with the move against slavery this would have provided both a reason for intervention and justification to much of public opinion. As such you would have had a combination of factors that would make British intervention highly likely.

This is the BIG flaw with the Draka universe. That no one, until too late, actually stands up to the rabid thugs despite their repeated excesses and continued expansion. [Sorry, the other big flaw, along with the fact that despite their social system they are virtually always at the forefront to technological development].

Steve

[MerryPrankster]

Our mega-Boers need a larger population base to survive their early, vulnerable stages.

Perhaps Charles II comes back with more grudges and consequently we have some English Puritans fleeing to South Africa to join their Boer co-religionists. The Puritans had a lot of pull with the Navy, so the Boers learn early on that sooner or later, the Brits will come knocking by sea.

Thus, the Boers have a somewhat larger population base AND the beginnings of a naval tradition. Plus if they trade with India by sea, they could serve as the middlemen between Britain and India and thus get in good with the Brits, thus avoiding war (for the prsent).

[MerryPrankster]

I'm bumping this up to the top.

I'm in Oxford right now and prob. won't get on as much. Here's a very rough sketch of a TL:

I think the POD would be more Spanish successes in the Low Countries. The butterflies from this might make Mary live longer (more of a will to live to see Catholicism triumphant and thus the cancer takes a little longer to kill her, or the cancer is butterflied away entirely) and also bolster the Catholic cause in France.

Since a Catholic England and Holland would be a bit too divergent for the TL (no US to have a Cold War with the mega-Boers), Mary has no children and Elizabeth takes over, while the Dutch and Henri IV are ultimately triumphant.

However, the damage is done. Without a European refuge (except Prussia and the Scandinavian nations, which are too far away or too dangerous to get to), a much larger number of Dutch, English, and French Calvinists set out southwards across the oceans. They go to the Cape of Good Hope, since it's as far away from Europe as you can get by going south (well, excluding Cape Horn) and there've been explorations of the area already.

Essentially we've got the settlement of a much larger number of soon-to-be-Afrikaners in the Cape a century ahead of schedule. By the time the Brits come sniffing around, our mega-Boers will be too strong to be worth the effort to conquer. Plus they'd be useful Protestant allies against the Spanish and the Catholic powers AND they could establish themselves as the middlemen in the India trade.

How long do you think it would take for our mega-Boers to discover the gold and diamonds of Witwatersrand which, like in the Draka universe, will be the initial engine that powers their growth as a Great Power?*

Also, for further in the future, might they attempt to use foreign Calvinists as allies, much like how the Communist states allied with (or took advantage of) leftist groups in the West or its colonies?

Thoughts?

*Also, according to the Wikipedia article, the reason the Draka advanced so much technologically is that they offered enormous sums, from the gold and diamonds, to inventors to work in the Domination. Their ability to hire technical help might offset the smaller free, educated population.

[Kidblast]

The problem I see with that is that the temperate region of Southern Africa is alot smaller than the temperate region of North America. North of the Limpopo River there is malaria and tsetse fly. Both were bad up until about 1900. The US had neither, and was able to expand much more rapidly.

Also much of Southern Africa is either desert or very arid. This could be an impediment to growth. The same proportion of America is not.

Therefore coupled with:

a) Tropical Disease

&

b) Desert and Arid Regions

I doubt South Africa could grow as fast as the US as it would have to overcome these disadvantages. Also the US is much closer to Europe, therefore helping with trade and immigration.

[MerryPrankster]

If the disease and bugs north of the Limpopo prove to be too much for the mega-Boers to handle this early in their growth, they could always try to grab Madagascar. They could cast this conquest as an anti-pirate campaign, since many pirates established little statelets in Madagascar.

Also, are the bugs and disease a problem in the coastal areas north of the Limpopo? The mega-Boers, as part of a general war against the Catholic states of Europe, could move against the Portuguese in present-day Angola and Mozambique.

Also, in OTL, there are some Boerish peoples in Namibia--they've mixed with Africans to produce a hybrid demographic called the Basters. If they can make a go of Namibia, our mega-Boers can too.

The Boers could expand up along the coast and largely stay out of the interior (except for punitive expeditions against troublesome tribes) for years until they figure out a solution to malaria and the tsetse fly (which, considering there's a wealthy, powerful state in South Africa, could come much earlier in TTL).

The mega-Boers could also establish a maritime empire, using SA as a home base and establishing colonies in Arabia and more hospitable regions of Africa (like Kenya), leap-frogging the bad zones entirely. A consequence of the butterflies could be a harsher Restoration that sends many English Calvinists (with naval connections) fleeing to South Africa. If they bring some ships and/or naval expertise with them, they could help with this.

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by reddie

The solution might be to try to create a Southron buffer state, probably by offering the Rebs land the Boers themselves don't own, perhaps ultimately creating an "African Confederacy" of diverse but illiberal peoples.

That'd be a good name for our mega-Boers. The Afrikaner Confederation or something to that effect.

A core Afrikaner Calvinist state in South Africa, Namibia, Madagascar, and possibly some maritime colonies, with the Confederate-descended settlements on the leading edge of landward expansion. After all, they'd arrive later, when the disease and insect issues are more likely to be solved.

[MerryPrankster]

With a viable refuge for Puritans in southern Africa, would that butterfly the Puritan settlement of New England out of existance?

Or could we simply have the Puritans settle New England much like OTL because they want to establish an ENGLISH Calvinist society? After all, the Pilgrims were quite safe in Holland, but saw their kids assimilating into the Dutch culture and decided to leave.

There might be contacts and such between them, which would affect the development of the 13 Colonies and the course of the Revolution.

[jolo]

For S-Africa to be strong enough to challenge a super power, a PoD would have to be *very* early if the rest is supposed to stay realistic.

As I just looked up, the Dutch claimed the area (or part of it) in 1652.

PoD: The next year, they decide to make it a really big colony, something like a second Netherlands. They begin sending their poor, their criminals, and other less desirable people there, together with adventurers, volunteers, missionaries, and so on. They also send a rather small group of professionals to jumpstart the economy there, some government officials to see for the creation of a working republic, and so on.

As IOTL, the Dutch find themselves in a war against the locals. Even easier than IOTL, they win, creating even more of a superiority believe than IOTL. Thanks to all the immigrants, they don't need to import slaves. Immigration becomes the rule, and after the Netherlands is pretty free of candidates for that journey, people from other European countries are invited there - Germans, French, British, Belgians, and so on. There are even communities catering to those people by making their language an official language (besides Dutch). While S-African population grows much more than IOTL, the British colonies grow considerably less.

By 1700, there are 100 000 Europeans there, by 1750 it's 500 000, by 1800 we have already 2 million there.

The area expands even quicker than IOTL into pretty much the same area as we know it.

There's one big difference: As there's enough labor available, the local population is not used as farm workers, it's sold to other countries, killed in wars, or driven away. Only few farms have slaves.

The according destabilization of surrounding areas is used for even more expansion.

By 1797, when Britain seized S-Africa IOTL, assuming not too many butterflies, the colony declares it's independence instead. It is already too big for the British to swallow, especially after the war against the US.

The racist policies, even worse than apartheid, continue. But by that time, the climate in the areas around the "2nd Dutch Republic" isn't really favorable for Europeans. An advance to the north is slowed down by disease, heat induced fatigue, and other problems. There's still high birth rates and lots of immigration to the country, though, and even more parts of it than IOTL are used for agriculture, mining, construction, and so on.

All the Africans fleeing from the Dutch create pretty much concern and opposition in the places not affected yet by Dutch colonization. Finding out that they are superior in the hot climate closer to equatorial regions boosts their self esteem a lot. Both together work similar to what communists and the US achieved after wwii IOTL. All the tribes being forcefully united into a much higher population density than IOTL also lead to a much faster development of black Africa. This early "black power" movement also makes it difficult for other Europeans to establish as many colonies in Africa as IOTL. More and more African controlled trading posts appear. The main trade is ressources for weapons, as the Africans see an urgent need to ward off colonialisation and conquest by Europeans, and quite a few traders don't mind. A century later (at about 1900), black Africa consists of pretty powerful nation states, with only few European outposts, but limited to hot climate. North Africa is pretty much the same as IOTL.

As the population of South Africa has grown to 50 million Europeans in 1900, it is among the world's major powers by then.

When a war erupts between a few of those countries and exhausts the whole area, South Africa uses the opportunity to expand again. The captured locals are put into concentration camps (similar to OTL, though on a scale similar to wwii Germany). The concentration camps help build up an ever mightier war machine, able to conquer more and more parts of black Africa. Modern machines and medicine help Europeans to successfully farm, mine, and so on in the conquered territories, despite the climate.

International outcry and threats to intervene force South Africa to stop the war eventually. The surviving black population is put into homelands. Deliberate destabilization makes sure the remaining black Africa stays weak and colonial powers have quite some trouble.

WWI (or a similar war at about that time) occupies the great powers enough to allow South Africa more expansion into black Africa. A pretext is found quickly - preferably the black African countries fighting each other due to belonging to different sides of the war, or one of them braking a neutrality, or the likes. South Africa conquers the whole central African area up to the northern parts of Africa which are usually at least partly Arabic, and often under strong European influence, if not control. Western Africa stays pretty much under European control similar to OTL. A few countries along the eastern coast are able to resist South Africa enough to survive until wwi is over and S-Africa has to stop the war if it doesn't want to be stopped by the Allies.

I'll suppose that fascism arrives after wwi similar to OTL. That South Africa, as a democracy with genocidal history, is rather neutral in this brewing conflict. And that it uses the opportunity to further her case - turning the one or other homeland into a big concentration camp, destabilizing black countries, supporting Arabs who do the same in the north, and so on.

All this should lead to an even tougher life for African descended people all over the world - loosing in their home turf should increase darwinism a lot, thus creating a "seperate and unequal" thinking in the US, for instance.

WWII happens similar to OTL, and S-Africa uses the opportunity to conquer the last black held territories. Operation Torch is used by S-Africa to declare war on the Vichy Republic and conquer French colonies in black Africa. There's protest but no immediate action.

Similar to OTL, news of the Holocaust - this time not only in Germany, but also in Africa - turns the Allies against such measures, despite having commited quite some crimes against indigenous peoples themselves. "Might makes right" becomes pretty unpopular, and S-Africa becomes a pariah state, similar to the SU. A cold war takes place between west, east, and south.

All the unrest and problems in Europe should mean quite a few immigrants for S-Africa - economic migrants in the 20s, persecuted minorities which are accepted in S-Africa in the 30s, people fleeing the war and the following poverty in the 40s, and people not willing to stay in Europe in the 50s.

By 1950, "white Africa" has a population of about 200 million people and is comparable in power to the US. Unlike the US, S-Africa keeps expanding her population base at full speed in an attempt to make sure they can compete with the West and the Soviets. Nuclear testing and other acts make sure the tension stays.

The 50s and 60s lead to a policy of putting the racism on a more scientific and neutral ground, partly because with few blacks in S-Africa, there's also diminishing racism. Intelligence tests deliberately "improved" to make sure whites do better than blacks are used to determine the status of a person - from mentally challenged over dull, normal, and good, to excellent. Similar to OTL modern societies, but much tougher - especially for the people not doing very good on those tests. Black homelands and concentration camps with surrounding territory are turned into native reservations, though with more limitations than the American pendant.

There's also a policy of bringing black countries and colonies under control without making that status official, moving white settlers there, and driving the local population more and more into reservations. Kind of like Palestine, but considerably tougher.

The 70s see some liberalisation - blacks and other "coloured" people can come to S-Africa as guest-workers or visitors, a few people begin to show remorse over some of the biggest crimes, and so on. Still, the number of blacks keeps shrinking in Africa, so that there are more African descendants in the Americas than in Africa. In moves similar to the killing of Vietnamese civilians by the US, quite a few incursions of S-Africa into black reservations and colonies take place whenever communist influence or the likes is assumed.

The fact that independence is a sure way of helping S-Africa to expand means that the few remaining black African colonies don't show much interest in independence. Africa stays a colonial place. Arab-African atrocities agains black-Africans help a lot to make the world concentrate on those conflicts.

The continuing struggle and an anti-political-correctness movement not completely unlike what happened in the US at the time lead once again to even tougher race relations in the 80s.

At the same time, the fall of the Soviet Union (not butterflied away - something would have happened anyways) leads to the west being able to concentrate fully on S-Africa. Some uprisings help to increase tension and give S-Africa a pretext to openly fight against black Africans again. Hunger, illnesses, and conflict add to reducing their numbers by the millions - similar to what happened with the Khmer Rouge. As S-Africa manages to make blacks fight against blacks, too, it's rather difficult for the west to deal with the situation.

In the 90s, with S-Africa having 500 million people and being superior to the US economically and in military spending, the activities of the country are extended into Arab-Africa and the Arabian peninsula. Islamic uprisings are quelled, borders are changed to S-African will, S-African investments in Arab lands are protected by S-African military, puppet regimes under S-African control are installed, and so on. All of Africa is pretty quickly under S-African control. White settlements pop up everywhere. Poor Arabs find themselves more and more in reservations similar to what many black Africans live in. More and more Arabs become poor.

As Arabs don't really have very tight friendship with Europe or the US at the time and the SU is falling apart, the West is pretty undecided. They make sure that free access to Arabian oil is granted and file lots of condemnations, but that's about it. They can't even agree on complete embargos.

9/11 or a similar event happens in Johannisburg or the likes, as the Arab countries concentrate their hatred on S-Africa. Unlike OTL, it doesn't lead to an international outcry against terrorism, as the act finds far more sympathy in the world. Only S-Africa turns even more radical due to this.

New borders are drawn whenever there's a conflict, to make white settlements become majorities in strategically useful places, and to let them join S-Africa by popular vote. Refugee camps, homelands for Arabs (some of them even pretty independent and wealthy) are created in the new territories, to draw Arabs from Arab countries in turmoil to S-Africa, so that it's easier to have white majorities there, too. Trying to fight that (like laws against whites buying Arab real estate) is heavily fought against by S-Africa.

Today, all of Africa is under S-African rule. Most homelands for Arabian and black Africans show sinking population numbers due to internal fighting, diseases, and so on (not without some S-African role in it). The few exceptions are used for propaganda to make believe that those people still have their chances. The Arabian peninsula is under military occupation, but formally independent. Israel, Jordania, Iraq, Iran, and everything north of those countries is part of the western hemisphere (except Russia and surroundings). The border between west and south is one of the best fortified in the world. Unlike OTL, military spending wasn't reduced in Europe in the 1980s. Therefore, the west is still stronger than S-Africa, if viewed together. Also, the growing might of China adds to things looking not too rosy for the pretty isolated S-Africa. Still it's a super power, it's economically pretty much on par with the West, and likely to stay. Racism is rampant all over the world, partly because of the example.

While there is no systematic genocide anymore since wwii ITTL (at least not in terms of Europeans deliberately killing civilians), black Africans and to a growing degree also Arabs are marginalized similar to Aborigines in Australia - but with much fewer efforts to change that.

I suppose it's difficult for young people who don't remember any of the South Africa apartheid news to imagine such a world. I also don't consider it a positive vision - it would be a completely useless loss in genetic diversity, among other things, like the human catastrophy.