In His Own Right, Part V

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by M.Passit

I thought that the Japanese post WWI antagonism toward the U.S.S.R. was the product of the unfinished Russo-Japanese War and the image of the Communist Russia toward them. It is the security reason that Japan must not allow the Communist to surround them. Not to mention that the communist just slaughtered the Tsar and his family, not a good thing to improve your image to the Japanese.

Also, with Socialism have a better impression in TTL and the outward looking Japan, I think it may make the left in Japan have more room to grow. They will resist against the idea of going to war with Russia. Not to mention Korea, who, understadably, will resist it tooth and nail because they will probably the one who will take the brunt of weight of the land war and the damage it will surly cause to them. So, thinking about it, the new emperor might want to go war with Russia, but it may risk splitting the Empire and produce political chaos. Then there also the Zaibutsu who might not like the war to interrupt their economic race against Britain in China. What I say is that Yashihito might want war, but many interest groups may also be able to stop it.

Did U.K. still have the alliance deal with Japan and Russia?

Also, how much effect the Kanto Earthquake to Japan's economy. They might have to pull some(o.k. much) investment back from some place to rebuild the region.

I just need to clarify: I was not saying that the USSR and Japan were headed towards war. I see nothing to indicate that they will do so, but I was just not prepared to rule it out because I am not totally certain of every element of the future of TTL.

The alliance between the UK and Japan, as you would be aware, turned into a Anglo-Japanese-Russian treaty in 1911 with the partition of western China. By 1917, Japanese representatives had joined British and Russian delegates on the Socintern. In retrospect, I think that the deal would have ended in 1921 when Britain committed itself to the primary terms of the Strasbourg Treaty. As mentioned elsewhere, Russia joined the ST in 1923.

However, Japan has retained good relations with both countries, particularly with the greater British Empire. Actually, I might do a post on that.

[LacheyS]

The Great Kanto was an earthquake that shook the cities of Tokyo and Yokohama into ruin. However, the costs of the quake to Japan would undoubtedly have been greater if it had not been for a massive shake-up in the economic affairs of the Empire that began in 1922.

At the beginnning of the 1920's, the British dominions of Australia (under Matthew Charlton) and the Philippines (under Manuel Quezon) marked ten years of a remarkably successful economic relationship. Australian business, restricted like other Western nations by the global trade rules, had decided to embark on adventurism abroad and the flow of cash from Melbourne to Manila was enormous. By late 1921, however, it became clear that the Philippines market was saturated and wages were becoming too high to continue being competitive. And so Australia and the Philippines agreed to cooperate to find a new investment market.

The British were quite keen to see the two countries invest in India. However, Quezon and Charlton were aware that their respective investment budgets would disappear in India. Britain, Canada and Egypt already held the lion's share of that economy. In addition, the Australian Labor Party was becoming increasingly unimpressed with the British and their refusal to grant Australia full custodianship over the Pacific region. In the end, they decided that they would openly avoid the Imperial Grants Council and direct their investment into Japan, much to the disappointment of Prime Minister MacDonald.

In modern terms, the Japanese economy of 1922 was approaching 100 million bancs, about two and a half times the size of the Australian economy and about double the size of the Philippines. However, per capita income remained relatively low, approximately 35-40% of wages in the other two economies. Due to the large amounts of trade undertaken between Japan and her two southern neighbours, with accumulation of raw materials to supplement those already being derived steadily from the Joseon peninsula, it made geopolitical and economic sense for the three countries to strike up a partnership.

At the end of 1921, Australian investment controlled 7.3% of the Japanese market. By the end of 1924, Australia and the Philippines controlled one quarter of all business operations in the Japanese Empire. During that same three-year period, per capita income rose by 41% and the size of the economy increased by nearly 49%. It enabled the central government in Tokyo, and then in Hanseong, to continue increasing expenditure with record foreign account inflows and ever-expanding revenue projections. It funded a speedy reconstruction effort in the earthquake zone. In 1925, the Philippines would overtake Britain and Australia to become the largest economic partner to Japan, with 16.9% of all trade into that zone.

By 1936, when Japan emerged more powerful than either the Australians or Philippinos had suspected was possible, many company head offices moved from Canberra and Manila to the world's third largest city, Tokyoedo, the new New York, the heights of the Imperial City, so good it had to be named twice. The only things that kept the Australians and Philippinos from complaining about this situation was the strength of an imperial economy unconcerned about war; their share portfolios were very, very healthy.

[G.Bone]

, Tokyoedo, the new New York, the heights of the Imperial City, so good it had to be named twice. The only things that kept the Australians and Philippinos from complaining about this situation was the strength of an imperial economy unconcerned about war; their share portfolios were very, very healthy.
__________________

...and this is in Korea?

[M.Passit]

Tokyoedo=???? Tokyo?

What do you mean that it has to be named twice? Do you mean they move the capital back to Tokyo?

How's the situation in Formosa? more Japanese immigrants?

[Electric Monk]

Neo Tokyo? Please? Can we stick it on Cheju-do Island[1]? I can't actually see them moving the capital permanently to Korea, although how about a South African style split capital?

Although I proposed the whole Korean/Japanese empire way back when in this TL I've come to the realization that a lot of the cool things about Japan nowadays is going to be missing. The permanently futureshocked sense of place, where they are maybe the only people on the planet comfortable living in our/their/everyones future… Hm. Ah well.


Oh right, I still love this timeline a lot and am glad you're continuing it.


[1] Jeju-do / Quelpart / Saishu / Etc…

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by Electric Monk

Neo Tokyo? Please? Can we stick it on Cheju-do Island[1]? I can't actually see them moving the capital permanently to Korea, although how about a South African style split capital?

Although I proposed the whole Korean/Japanese empire way back when in this TL I've come to the realization that a lot of the cool things about Japan nowadays is going to be missing. The permanently futureshocked sense of place, where they are maybe the only people on the planet comfortable living in our/their/everyones future… Hm. Ah well.


Oh right, I still love this timeline a lot and am glad you're continuing it.


[1] Jeju-do / Quelpart / Saishu / Etc…

OK, I can see that I caused confusion for everyone....sorry I haven't been online to address it...the computer has been down for a few days.

Tokyo-edo (Tokyo is the new name of Tokyo/Edo was the old name) was my original intent. I do love the idea; I am concerned about the potential for volcanic eruption. However, I am quite keen to do it, so let's pretend that parts of my previous post do not exist and state that the new capital will be located on Chejudo. As to a name, I am not keen on New Tokyo. Is everyone OK with the Imperial Capital of Saishu?

That way, we'll have administration at Hanseong, the institutions at Saishu and the Emperor in Kyoto.....what do you think?

[LacheyS]

He wasn't the first and he surely wouldn't be the last: a Prime Minister rejected by his party and elevated to the House of Lords. Sir Ramsay MacDonald, soon to be Earl of Hereford, packed up his office at 10 Downing Street on 9 January, 1924. He had been in the job for five years, too long for the ambitious Arthur Henderson who would be replacing him in short order. Sir Ramsay would be taking on the job of Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the Government in the Lords.

The speeches around the Commons on his final day were greatly generous. This is especially so when you consider that the previous day in Question Time, he had called on the nation to remember that "all Tories are terrorists" and repeated the details of the late Andrew Bonar Law, one time Tory leader, reinforcing the general aura of corruption that continued to surround the Conservative Party. Austen Chamberlain had finally made way in 1922, providing a new leader, Stanley Baldwin, who had not managed to make significant headway electorally. The only thing keeping them in the running was the inadequate performance of the Deputy Prime Minister and Liberal leader, David Lloyd George, who couldn't keep his party in order.

The Prime Minister was expected to be granted the title of Earl of Airth and to remain a member of the Government as Lord Privy Seal, a significant climb for the illegitimate son of farm labourer. He was, however, giving up another title - Deputy Chairman of the Socintern. That honour would now be passed to Jacques Peirotes, the President of Alsace. In his final address as Prime Minister, MacDonald predicted a bright future for the Labour Party in the upcoming general election and a bright future for Britain.

[M.Passit]

Originally Posted by LacheyS

That way, we'll have administration at Hanseong, the institutions at Saishu and the Emperor in Kyoto.....what do you think?

No problemo! But what are we gonna do with Taipei?

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by M.Passit

No problemo! But what are we gonna do with Taipei?

I don't know.....maybe the financial capital?

[LacheyS]

The signs had been ominous for months and in December, 1923, the Finance Minister, Francisco Urbina Jado, had resigned, warning of a plot by young officers within the military corps to stage a coup d'etat. For weeks, there had been rising tensions between the Ecuadorian military, now believed to have been backed by the government in Brazil, and the President of Ecuador, Gonzalo Segundo Cordova y Rivera. The aging and sickly Cordova was regarded by the army as a pawn of banking and agricultural interests.

The rhetoric by the military leadership was increasingly strident as the world entered 1924 and Cordova attempted to find some middle ground. However, at the start of January, it appeared that nothing could prevent the increasing dangers, encouraging President Pedro Nel Ospina of Colombia to offer his assistance to his Bolivarian Pact ally. US President Joshua Alexander also offered his assistance. In the White House notes of that conversation, Cordova told Alexander to "sleep soundly" and that a coup d'etat was not likely to succeed.

On 4 January, President Cordova took a trip to Guayaquil, the largest city in Ecuador and its major port. Five days later, representatives of the military arrived and placed the President under house arrest. The Supreme Military Junta went on radio and announced a state of emergency from Quito. Demonstrators began to gather in Guayaquil in support of the President and President Cordova was rescued from his home. Taken to the central municipal square, he called on the military and police present to show loyalty to the Constitution. From 10 January, it appeared as though the Ecuadorian people were headed towards a civil war.

On 11 January, the Supreme Military Junta issued an order for the capture, dead or alive, of President Cordova and began to reorganise for an assault on the "rebel outpost" of Guayaquil. The President of Colombia also issued an order, mobilising his forces to "defend the legitimate and constitutional government of Ecuador". The US President imposed sanctions and stated that it would cease all trade with Quito unless the military stood down and re-installed Cordova.

However, the standoff could not be resolved and, on 20 January, as President Cordova fled by boat to Colombia, the Colombian army commenced an invasion of its southern neighbour. Acting "in defence of Ecuadorian sovereignty", the governments of Brazil, Peru and Bolivia immediately began to channel as much financial assistance as they were able into the coffers of the Ecuadorian military.

[LacheyS]

I have the coolest readers and one of them has done you all a map.

I present the world at the end of 1923 for your viewing pleasure.

[M.Passit]

Oh! Oh! What do we want?!?

WAR!!!!!! (A nice war for a christmas present perhaps?)

[LacheyS]

I am back. And I have lots of new twists and bits to add to this little adventure. My Internet has been down for most of the last ten days, so I have been going slowly crazy, but at last, it seems that ASIO has completed its investigation because the Telstra Corporation has seen fit to restore to me my services.

Well, as we leave behind this dimension and step through the doorway of In His Own Right, we put aside the conflict between Ecuadorian rebels and the Government of Colombia and fly north-west across the Pacific until we reach....

[WhatIsAUserName]

Yay . . . We can finally see what the world looks like. But the colonization of Africa looks a tad bit . . . messy with the borders everywhere looking a bit . . . unrealistic. And what's the bit with China and the orange in South America? Is that Somalia on the Horn of Africa?

[Glen]

Originally Posted by LacheyS

After years of working for politicians, I have learned that you can always turn a "No" into a "Yes", but never can you turn a "Yes" into a "No". I was feeling fairly dried out creatively a few weeks ago. However, I have found a new motivation as I fiddled to look at the various alternatives of where this story "might have gone". When I took the pressure off myself, the writer's block was cured. Just call me Dame Nellie Melba.

The end of the age of empires does symbol decolonisation; however, the process of decolonisation will not be the result of home movement. Having been free of war, the Empires have a much greater say in the process of decolonisation - meaning that it is an organised process rather than a sudden and chaotic mess. Not sure that the process will be done by the end of this episode, or whether it will spill out into other ones.

Glad you're back at it. BTW, what do you do for politicians?

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by WhatIsAUserName

Yay . . . We can finally see what the world looks like. But the colonization of Africa looks a tad bit . . . messy with the borders everywhere looking a bit . . . unrealistic. And what's the bit with China and the orange in South America? Is that Somalia on the Horn of Africa?

The borders of Africa were those that were the result of a conference between the major powers in 1913. It was an attempt to keep different nation groups together rather than separated by geopolitical colonial boundaries.

China was subjected to a threat in 1912 and bought off Britain and Russia by handing over parts of their territory. They invaded Mongolia (the northern bit) later on with Japanese assistance.

The orange in South America are those who are aligned with Brazil against the Bolivarian Pact.

That is the Empire of Ethiopia on the Horn of Africa.

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by Glen

Glad you're back at it. BTW, what do you do for politicians?

Glen,

I was a general flunky (speech writing, press relations, policy advice, research and managing the electorate office when the Member of Parliament was not present). I had to travel a far bit between Sydney (the location of the district for which the member had been elected) and Canberra (where Parliament House is located), which earnt me a lot of speeding tickets and racked up the kilometres.

I am currently involved in discussions with both political sides. Because I am a bit of a centrist in real life (though I lean toward the left in my fantasies), both parties think I would be a good potential candidate for the House of Representatives. I am just trying to work out whether I can put up with party restrictions and, if so, which is the least unpalatable. Much as I would like to lead a movement all my own, the political nonchalance of the Australian electorate means that I would have to motivate them first (and that is too hard a job).

[LacheyS]

Khabarovsk sat at the confluence of the Ussuri and Amur Rivers, a cosmopolitan international centre of culture and art, overrun by Japanese, Chinese and Russian people and influences. In late January 1924, it was the host of a peace conference between Premier Sun Yat-sen of China and Chancellor Alexander Shlyapnikov of the USSR.

The conference had come about as a result of an initiative by members of the Chinese government. When Premier Sun stirring up nationalistic sentiment by claiming Russia was a threat, other members of the Government disagreed and pushed the Premier to address the matter with the International Court of Justice. The Court had delayed ruling on the decision, ordering both parties to attend this conference in the hope of determining their own peace and reconciliation rather than being forced into a settlement. However, Premier Sun was only marginally interested in the outcome compared to the theatre of the occasion. He was not enthused about the idea that Russia should no longer be used as the "fear factor". At least fear gave him a bargaining chip when playing off enemies internal to his own coalition government. However, Sun's hand was looking increasingly difficult and he had no choice but to talk to Russia.

Russia's Chancellor came to the meeting with a different attitude. After just three years in office, there were already allegations emerging from the Kremlin that Shlyapnikov was taking bribes from crime bosses and business leaders. His interest in a deal with China was that he wanted to end the Open Door Policy and have China and Russia as strategic partners. This way, his friendly Russian powerbrokers could expand across the Sinicised world without any limitation or in violation of any treaty. Essentially, the arrangement was that China would get back disputed lands, but that Russia would appoint advisors to the Chinese Government and the Russian Ambassador would sit on Emperor Zaifeng's Imperial State Council.

Understandably, not everybody was pleased by this arrangement. The Cascadian President, Maynard Shipley, was particularly unimpressed about any expansion of Russia's power in the Pacific. His message to Premier Sun was that he would gladly provide whatever assistance he could spare to defend China's autonomy. (It is significant to note that this is prior to 1928, when Cascadian fortunes reached a new high.) In Saishu, the Japanese Prime Minister, Baron Kato Takaaki, and the Opposition Leader, Shusui Kotoku, issued a joint statement that they opposed any Russian advisors in China.

Inside China itself, the deal also had its vocal opponents. The loudest of these was Wang Yongjiang. A junior mandarin, he had assisted in the organisation of opposition to the Wuchang Mutiny and had earned the respect of the Emperor. In 1917, he had been appointed to oversee the Emperor's personal estates in Manchuria. It was here he came into his element.

He had made the Emperor a fortune, and it is a fortune that the Chinese royal family have been building on ever since. In modern terms, the conservative estimate is that Wang, during his first seven years as Governor, made the Emperor over 100 million banc. He had transformed Manchuria from a weak frontier region to an economic powerhouse and he had royal consent to continue the process. Compared to the administration of Sun Yat-sen, he was spectacularly successful and, as a result, this gave him a loud voice in the Chinese countryside.

Wang angrily denounced the deal and refused to allow Russians into Manchuria proper. In February, 1924, during discussions with the Emperor Zaifeng, he received the title of Governor General of Manchuria, confirming not only that he would remain one of the political elite, but giving him command over the Imperial Guard, the elite of China's armed forces and numbering in the tens of thousands. Inevitably, he would not be able to convince himself from using that new power and it was perhaps naive to think he would even try to do so. Many suspected that the Emperor was unhappy with the National Socialist coalition; he had just given his favourite the instrument by which they could be removed.

[Electric Monk]

Originally Posted by LacheyS

Glen,

I was a general flunky (speech writing, press relations, policy advice, research and managing the electorate office when the Member of Parliament was not present). I had to travel a far bit between Sydney (the location of the district for which the member had been elected) and Canberra (where Parliament House is located), which earnt me a lot of speeding tickets and racked up the kilometres.

I am currently involved in discussions with both political sides. Because I am a bit of a centrist in real life (though I lean toward the left in my fantasies), both parties think I would be a good potential candidate for the House of Representatives. I am just trying to work out whether I can put up with party restrictions and, if so, which is the least unpalatable. Much as I would like to lead a movement all my own, the political nonchalance of the Australian electorate means that I would have to motivate them first (and that is too hard a job).

Who do you think is going to win, Labor or the Coalition (or perhaps better put, Kevin Rudd or PM Howard)?

Rudd certainly seems to have put Labor over the top in votes and preferences and seems much more likely to be seen as a Howard replacement than the previous string of Labor leaders. But of course it might purely be the leadership change bounce.


I'm a classical liberal myself so, with the exception of the free-market wing of the Liberal Democrats in the UK, I don't have a political home in the English speaking world (and no, classical liberal != conservative).

My advice would go to whatever party you think has the main issues down better. The party restrictions and your power as a backbencher is rather limited regardless, so you might as well be a little bit more ideology comfortable.



postscript
Any interesting books about Australian election campaigns out there? If one is familar with Canada something either along the lines of Graham Fraser's Making of a Prime Minister, 1988 or better yet John Duffy's Fights of our Lives. i.e. either a detailed look at a modern election campaign, or a study of the major election campaigns from the beginning. Amazon gives me only A Win and a Prayer: Scenes from the 2004 Australian Election which seems interesting, but limited.

I ask because I like studying election campaigns, and hope to run one someday, so I try to read as much as I can about them. Anyway, I've wandered deep off-topic so I'll wrap this up

[LacheyS]

Originally Posted by Electric Monk

I ask because I like studying election campaigns, and hope to run one someday, so I try to read as much as I can about them. Anyway, I've wandered deep off-topic so I'll wrap this up

Still too early to tell, IMO, about the outcome of next year's general election. There are 23 seats out there that, on my perception, are winnable by the ALP if they can get their act together and that includes Bennelong, the district held by Prime Minister Howard. Strangely, there is only one National Party seat among them - Page - which is on the NSW/Queensland border (the rest are Liberal Party held).

If you are familiar with Labor leaders to date, then you will know my former employer, Mark Latham, Member for Werriwa. It was with him from 2000 to 2003.

My decision will be based upon which party can best adequately reflect the needs of the electorate. I am thinking that it will be the ALP, but I dread the factional interplay. The thing about politics I hate the most is the decimation of good ideas because the other team suggested it first. As to a manual on campaigning, I wish I had one. I am currently running my third campaign and still have no idea what I am doing, despite the fact that I have won both.