The Egyptians identify with Arabs (it was a hotbed of Pan Arabism back when that was a thing).
The Malaysians (or the Malays at least), have the "more Malay than you" when interacting with Indonesian Malays.
British annex the Pearl River Delta in the First Opium War
- Thread starter walmart
- Start date
The Malaysians (or the Malays at least), have the "more Malay than you" when interacting with Indonesian Malays.
But in both cases,regional identities trumped their perceived common cultural identity.
Would you say that Occitania could and other languages could be used to divide France into separate nations , post 1900? And with support by a foreign power that's occupying France?
No, common cultural and regional identities merged to create cultural posturing.
And this would make a good analogy for Cantonese nationalists saying they are Sinicized descendants of the Baiyue or Zhuang people who happen to speak a Sinitic language instead of being Chinese.
Umm, the Taiwan example hasn't exactly taken off.
And the Baiyue identity being a upper class thing will increase Chinese nationalism among everyone else, unless the Pearl River Colony somehow achieves late 20th century Scandinavian levels of income equality.
Admiral Fischer
Banned
Might be hard to understand with hindsight, but during the Cultural Revolution Hong Kong was a hotbed of Maoist student activism and pro-unification nationalism. Which was suppressed down by the colonial authority, but the whole delta I doubt the British could handle such a crisis properly without bloods on their hands. This, of course is without considering the butterfly effect.
If the Pearl River Delta region is enjoying a prosperous economy and reasonable personal rights while people from the mainland are living like hicks under a totalitarian regime, then people ain't gonna see them as equals either--which is exactly how your average Hong Konger sees mainlanders before and after 1997.
One of the main reasons as to why the British were able to suppress the revolt had to do with the fact that the Maoists did not have the support of the local population. Most of HK's population was decidedly against them, due to the violence, as well as the fact that many were knew what kind of regime Mao was running and that they fled to HK specifically to avoid PRC rule.
The British were also able to buy off the population after 1967, which Beijing hasn't tried for a variety of reasons (it would piss off the tycoons and other special interests) to date.
They were able to do that because they ensured that people ain’t starving—like the folks across the border.People aren’t fools.
Umm, people were starving, at least enough to riot. If the British hadn't provided all that public housing and other social goods after 1967, there would more explosions.
Another reason why the revolt ended was because Beijing told the rebels to cut it out.
No.The revolt already lost popular support before Beijing told them to stop.People in HK weren’t well off,but they were by no means starving like the people across the border.They were also kept in touch by the situation across the border by a steady flow of refugees who braved many risks to flee there.If HK was already starving,then why would mainlanders flee there?
The revolt could have at least maintained IRA levels of activity with Beijing's support.
People in Hong Kong were less malnourished that people on the Mainland, but that doesn't mean they'll be anymore grateful to be wage slaves to the oligarchs and industrialists.
Please. Take your PRC hate somewhere else. There's no reason to for it to even still exist should this event as stated in the OP ovc
Even today, 1 in 5 people in Hong Kong live below the poverty line.
Real world examples are bound to be used if we are talking about AH. I apologize if I seemed to have offended you in anyway.
As for the other part--being below poverty line =/= starvation to the levels of the mainland. And to be honest,a lot of societies in the west also have double digit percentage of population living under poverty line.
And to be honest in most situations where people separated for a long time due to intervention of a colonial power,few of them end up reuniting. People simply develop separate identities.Even Goa, which is a cited example of this happening occurred after military intervention. And even then, I wasn't totally against the idea. I specifically mentioned it strongly depends upon what happens within the mainland itself,and that reunification is likely possible if the mainland regime is democratic. Pelranius was the one who suggested that people are likely gonna throw in with a totalitarian regime regardless because of 'Chinese nationalism',and that people are incapable of developing local identities--which places like Taiwan clearly are doing.
Last edited:
Still, it's upsetting me that these types of threads are popping up, and in my mind, it's in no doubt do to recent events, and yet, people seem to only come up with dismembering China and/or prolonging British rule as a solution , and it's really weird. If people are wanting to get dream revenge on the PRC, why not just prevent it from existing? It's as if people would think that China is better off splintered to pieces, and it upsets since that trope is so common around here, and I can't stand that. I don't even think Russia gets such rubbish treatment in AH. I mean sure, it gets horrible treatment in Nazi timelines, but these are the exception. With China, it seems they mostly end up worse than OTL by default in most timelines.
And my comment about the poverty, was meant to support the one about people not liking having to live under oligarch industrialists, who, as I seem to understand, are basically paying themselves super high wages, while freezing that of their workers. Like, something out of gilded age U.S.
Well I agree. Lots of threads are indeed balkanizing China,but at the same time a fair degree of cynicism also needs to be maintained, and that it is fairly unlikely that people are just gonna throw in and welcome the mainland regardless of how it's doing. It strongly depends on how well the mainland is doing, and I do agree that Pearl River Delta will end up joining China if it's performing well. However,people are not gonna do that if there are massive differences in both economy and political system. Surveys in SK for example indicates that around 70% young South Koreans are against immediate reunification even if it's under South Korean leadership.
The thing with Russia is that it did in fact end up balkanizing in OTL,and that there wasn't any clear opportunity where it could be balkanized further unless you go back much earlier like getting Sweden win the Great Northern War and then take a big chunk of it or an actual Nazi victory.
Last edited:
You're assuming the Pearl River Delta colony would be democratic or remain so. Taiwan's developed a degree of cultural separateness because of isolation, something which this Pearl River Delta colony is unlikely to do for economic reasons, if nothing else.
Umm, Goa pretty much is Indian.