A More Powerful Land Down Under

[Tekomandor]

This is a TL I'd like to write, but first I'll need some help with details, POD etc. First I'd like to ask a question - if the entire TL takes place post-1900 save for one bit taking place before recorded hsitory is this still the right subforum? The POD I was thinking of is that their are more favourable conditions for a higher population in Australia and that while there were some minor differences in between the OTL and this TL things stayed mostly the same until we hit 1901 and New Zealand joins at Federation.

My questions are below:

• What would it take for New Zealand to join at Federation?
• What would an appropriate population be for the turn of the century, given that Australia is more fertile, has more water and perhaps has a more open immigration policiy?
• What can you see happening with this POD - and what would you like to see in the TL

EDIT: Their is now a TL, it starts on page two. But here's an updates-only thread, if you're into that.

 

[Dahveed323]

This is a TL I'd like to write, but first I'll need some help with details, POD etc. First I'd like to ask a question - if the entire TL takes place post-1900 save for one bit taking place before recorded hsitory is this still the right subforum? The POD I was thinking of is that their are more favourable conditions for a higher population in Australia and that while there were some minor differences in between the OTL and this TL things stayed mostly the same until we hit 1901 and New Zealand joins at Federation.

My questions are below:

• What would it take for New Zealand to join at Federation?
• What would an appropriate population be for the turn of the century, given that Australia is more fertile, has more water and perhaps has a more open immigration policiy?
• What can you see happening with this POD - and what would you like to see in the TL

This would require a pre-historic POD. The current conditions in Australia cannot sustainably support the population levels it currently has without some significant breaktrhoughs in technology - the whole herding and agricultural base is working on borrowed time as it is.

 

[Tekomandor]

This would require a pre-historic POD. The current conditions in Australia cannot sustainably support the population levels it currently has without some significant breaktrhoughs in technology - the whole herding and agricultural base is working on borrowed time as it is.

Yes, that was the point I was driving towards.

 

[Dahveed323]

Yes, that was the point I was driving towards.

Well, then this should be in ASB since coming up with something that fundamentally alters the cosmic and geologic development of earth falls into that realm ...

 

[Tekomandor]

Well, then this should be in ASB since coming up with something that fundamentally alters the cosmic and geologic development of earth falls into that realm ...

My understanding that ASB was for outright magic, not 'some things happened differently a long time ago'. I've seen this scenario raised in threads on this subforum before though, so that's why I put it here. I mean; I can't see the "cosmic" implications of this - nothing much really would change substantially pre-1900.

 

[katchen]

I've wondered the same thing since I moved down under in 1991 and after I moved back to the US in 1998 when I finished my PH.D. at Sydney Uni. And the conclusion I have come to is that Australia can support far more people than Aussies think it can or wish it to. And Aussies are very good at confusing the two.
And this is a real problem, because as we see doing AH, no international order lasts forever and peoples and nations that depend on the kindness of strangers eventually go under. At the end of the day, Australia needs a much larger population to defend a territory of it's size and resources--to afford the weapons systems to defend that territory. As it turned out, the British Empire had a use by date and the United States as a superpower has a use-by date too. So it is fortunate indeed that Australia has developed wave action desalinization (google it) that makes it possible to provide fresh water to all Australian capital cities using the renewable energy of the ocean waves, saving water on land for irrigation of crops. And down the line, desalinization water cheap enough for irrigation as well.
To the problem at hand that you have given us:
The best way to get a larger population is an earlier point of first settlement. This means more generations and more time for natural increase in population.
It is generally agreed that in 1699, Captain Dampier, in his ship "Swan", made a wrong turn. Sailing east from Mauritius, he intersected the Australian coast near what is now Geraldton. Looking for water, he turned left and found only desert coast until he reached the Fitzroy estuary in the tropics. Not much to recommend settlement there!
Had Dampier turned right, he would have discovered the Swan estuary straightaway, filled his water barrels and continued on around Cape Leewin, finding seals to be slaughered for their skins at the Recherche Archipelago, then around the cliffs of the Great Australian Bight, the bays of South Australia, then, assuming he avoided being shipwrecked on the Coorong by strong westerly winds, possibly discovered Port Phillip Bay before the coast veered to the North. Then he could either turn north to chart the east coast of Australia and a likely route to China that avoids the Dutch held straits or circumnavigate via the Straits of Magellan. Most likely, he circumnavigates Australia, hopefully surviving Endeavor Strait and makes it safe home, reporting on a good land for a way station to China. A colony is then sent, perhaps in the 1710s/ Perhaps James Oglethorpe's Georgia as late as 1730. They quickly learn to grow opium for the Chinese market and by 1760 maybe, discover gold. It grows from there.

 

[MattII]

Maybe in the Great Depression the Government tries to revitalise the economy by funding public works such as gauge conversion programs to bring the rail network up to standard. Also, Britain decides that it would be cheaper to build up industry in Australia to support ever more advanced forces in the Far East rather than constantly having to ship everything out from Britain, plus it gives the region strategic depth.

 

[Tekomandor]

Maybe in the Great Depression the Government tries to revitalise the economy by funding public works such as gauge conversion programs to bring the rail network up to standard. Also, Britain decides that it would be cheaper to build up industry in Australia to support ever more advanced forces in the Far East rather than constantly having to ship everything out from Britain, plus it gives the region strategic depth.

I've wondered the same thing since I moved down under in 1991 and after I moved back to the US in 1998 when I finished my PH.D. at Sydney Uni. And the conclusion I have come to is that Australia can support far more people than Aussies think it can or wish it to. And Aussies are very good at confusing the two.
And this is a real problem, because as we see doing AH, no international order lasts forever and peoples and nations that depend on the kindness of strangers eventually go under. At the end of the day, Australia needs a much larger population to defend a territory of it's size and resources--to afford the weapons systems to defend that territory. As it turned out, the British Empire had a use by date and the United States as a superpower has a use-by date too. So it is fortunate indeed that Australia has developed wave action desalinization (google it) that makes it possible to provide fresh water to all Australian capital cities using the renewable energy of the ocean waves, saving water on land for irrigation of crops. And down the line, desalinization water cheap enough for irrigation as well.
To the problem at hand that you have given us:
The best way to get a larger population is an earlier point of first settlement. This means more generations and more time for natural increase in population.
It is generally agreed that in 1699, Captain Dampier, in his ship "Swan", made a wrong turn. Sailing east from Mauritius, he intersected the Australian coast near what is now Geraldton. Looking for water, he turned left and found only desert coast until he reached the Fitzroy estuary in the tropics. Not much to recommend settlement there!
Had Dampier turned right, he would have discovered the Swan estuary straightaway, filled his water barrels and continued on around Cape Leewin, finding seals to be slaughered for their skins at the Recherche Archipelago, then around the cliffs of the Great Australian Bight, the bays of South Australia, then, assuming he avoided being shipwrecked on the Coorong by strong westerly winds, possibly discovered Port Phillip Bay before the coast veered to the North. Then he could either turn north to chart the east coast of Australia and a likely route to China that avoids the Dutch held straits or circumnavigate via the Straits of Magellan. Most likely, he circumnavigates Australia, hopefully surviving Endeavor Strait and makes it safe home, reporting on a good land for a way station to China. A colony is then sent, perhaps in the 1710s/ Perhaps James Oglethorpe's Georgia as late as 1730. They quickly learn to grow opium for the Chinese market and by 1760 maybe, discover gold. It grows from there.

These are both good ideas - though pre-1900 would likely be one big post to start the timeline, since things would progress pretty much similarly to OTL with little but cosmetic differences (in the larger scheme of things) until the 20th century.

 

[MattII]

Thanks. Is this just a WI, or are you planning to do a timeline or even full story?

Just thought of another reason, to keep the US from wooing them too much with promises of developmental aid.

 

[Tekomandor]

Thanks. Is this just a WI, or are you planning to do a timeline or even full story?

Just thought of another reason, to keep the US from wooing them too much with promises of developmental aid.

I'm starting with these questions to help me start a TL, which will probably contain some short-stories about significant events. It's a style I like - allowing both the character development of a traditional prose story and the setting depth of a timeline.

 

[Jazz_Singing_Apple]

• What would it take for New Zealand to join at Federation?

Richard Seddon wanted New Zealand to become 'Britain of the South' so if the Australians decided to help New Zealand, or perhaps more appropriately, help Seddon realise these plans then I could see New Zealand agreeing to join in Federation. But they would need to agree to retain their Britishness. I could see an Australasian Federation initiating a large British immigration policy, to the exclusion of anyone else.

A policy of "We Want British Only!" "We Are British Only" for example.

An Australasian Federation would quickly become very nationalistic and expansionist. Think a mixture of the Third Reich and Apartheid South Africa down under. Large families would be encouraged, social housing, possibly forms of welfare. I could see an Australasian Federation going into British New Guinea, perhaps even taking over the whole island.

How would Britain react to all this? Would she wish to halt the Australasian Federations expansionism or would she encourage it? Would the Australasian Federation remain within the Empire or would she leave?

I could see South Africa and the Australasian Federation forming stronger ties in regards to Britain 'interfering" too much regarding the "Native Question".

Potentially a Australasian Federation could control large areas in the pacific, even creeping into Asia.

 

[general]

Well IRL, Britain acted several times in the 1880/90's IIRC to stop Australian (okay, mainly Qld) expansionism, so I suspect this "Australasia" of being even more of a loose cannon.

 

[Julius Vogel]

I'm not so sure that this Australia would be nationalistic in the sense we usually talk about it, as for one, Australasian British for a long time were in part diverted into the wider British project, as opposed to say an Afrikaner style nationalism where the people and nation were a small and exclusive group.

 

[Tekomandor]

Australia will probably remain in the Empire - IIRC Australia was pretty pro-British at the turn of the century.

 

[Atomicwalrus]

This would require a pre-historic POD. The current conditions in Australia cannot sustainably support the population levels it currently has without some significant breaktrhoughs in technology - the whole herding and agricultural base is working on borrowed time as it is.

This is a pet peeve for me on this site, the amount of people who say stuff like this without understanding the real situation. Australia is a net food exporter it can easily sustain its current population without any food imports and water is hardly as pressing an issue as stereotypically represented. Yes Australia has a lot of desert it also has a lot of nice and habitable land of which a lot of it remains relatively uninhabited.

 

[Julius Vogel]

I've wondered the same thing since I moved down under in 1991 and after I moved back to the US in 1998 when I finished my PH.D. at Sydney Uni. And the conclusion I have come to is that Australia can support far more people than Aussies think it can or wish it to. And Aussies are very good at confusing the two.
And this is a real problem, because as we see doing AH, no international order lasts forever and peoples and nations that depend on the kindness of strangers eventually go under. At the end of the day, Australia needs a much larger population to defend a territory of it's size and resources--to afford the weapons systems to defend that territory. As it turned out, the British Empire had a use by date and the United States as a superpower has a use-by date too. So it is fortunate indeed that Australia has developed wave action desalinization (google it) that makes it possible to provide fresh water to all Australian capital cities using the renewable energy of the ocean waves, saving water on land for irrigation of crops. And down the line, desalinization water cheap enough for irrigation as well.
To the problem at hand that you have given us:
The best way to get a larger population is an earlier point of first settlement. This means more generations and more time for natural increase in population.
It is generally agreed that in 1699, Captain Dampier, in his ship "Swan", made a wrong turn. Sailing east from Mauritius, he intersected the Australian coast near what is now Geraldton. Looking for water, he turned left and found only desert coast until he reached the Fitzroy estuary in the tropics. Not much to recommend settlement there!
Had Dampier turned right, he would have discovered the Swan estuary straightaway, filled his water barrels and continued on around Cape Leewin, finding seals to be slaughered for their skins at the Recherche Archipelago, then around the cliffs of the Great Australian Bight, the bays of South Australia, then, assuming he avoided being shipwrecked on the Coorong by strong westerly winds, possibly discovered Port Phillip Bay before the coast veered to the North. Then he could either turn north to chart the east coast of Australia and a likely route to China that avoids the Dutch held straits or circumnavigate via the Straits of Magellan. Most likely, he circumnavigates Australia, hopefully surviving Endeavor Strait and makes it safe home, reporting on a good land for a way station to China. A colony is then sent, perhaps in the 1710s/ Perhaps James Oglethorpe's Georgia as late as 1730. They quickly learn to grow opium for the Chinese market and by 1760 maybe, discover gold. It grows from there.

Interesting to hear about Dampier, thank you.

Would love to see how that would end up

 

[Julius Vogel]

Australia will probably remain in the Empire - IIRC Australia was pretty pro-British at the turn of the century.

Sure, my point was more that I would think it unlikely that we could see an early vicious expansionist Australian nationalism alongside the slightly nasty British Race patriotism that existed at the time. We may be talking at cross purposes here!

 

[AComatoseIbex]

Last I checked Australia is dependent on a giant artesian well beneath it in areas where rainfall isn't sufficient to support the population - which is most of it barring the tropical north and Tasmania.

So to support a larger population you would need to alter the climate; and to do that favourably you would need to slow Australia's drift northwards following it being detached from Antarctica, so that when the first explorers find it, it is 15-20 degrees further south than OTL.

That puts large swathes of it in the path of the Roaring Forties and Furious Fifties storm bearing winds, hence increasing rainfall a LOT, hence eliminating the net water deficit experienced by many parts.

 

[Simreeve]

Last I checked Australia is dependent on a giant artesian well beneath it in areas where rainfall isn't sufficient to support the population - which is most of it barring the tropical north and Tasmania.

So to support a larger population you would need to alter the climate; and to do that favourably you would need to slow Australia's drift northwards following it being detached from Antarctica, so that when the first explorers find it, it is 15-20 degrees further south than OTL.

That puts large swathes of it in the path of the Roaring Forties and Furious Fifties storm bearing winds, hence increasing rainfall a LOT, hence eliminating the net water deficit experienced by many parts.

But, even then, still leaving large areas of it with only poor-quality soil due to the length of time for which the lands involved have been exposed to weathering & leaching...

 

[AComatoseIbex]

But, even then, still leaving large areas of it with only poor-quality soil due to the length of time for which the lands involved have been exposed to weathering & leaching...

Granted - though as far as I'm aware climate is a bigger barrier than soil quality to the expansion of Australian crop farming. I'm no expert, mind.