AHC: Anglophonic anti-Draka
- Thread starter KN1
- Start date
Will Kürlich Kerl
Banned
You need Great Britain to take more interest in Africa, and especially South Africa, much earlier than OTL. Have Great Britain create a number of colonies on the coast of South Africa, and then have them rebel instead of the ones in North America. Then, have this new "United States of Africa" take OTL's USA government and constitution. Imperialists in the ATL USA will eventually bring the border to the equator.
A little idea I had.
Due to greater successes on the part of the Spanish in North America, England establishes a colony in South Africa prior to the English Civil War; when this war ends in a Cromwellian victory, liberals, intellectuals, and religious minorities/moderates flee to this southern colony. The Protectorate survives, whilst those opposed to Cromwells dictatorial rule continue to flee to South Africa. History happens, and the nation slowly expands northward over the century, assimilating all it comes across.
Or something. Basically, a United States in south Africa is what I'm looking for.
Due to greater successes on the part of the Spanish in North America, England establishes a colony in South Africa prior to the English Civil War; when this war ends in a Cromwellian victory, liberals, intellectuals, and religious minorities/moderates flee to this southern colony. The Protectorate survives, whilst those opposed to Cromwells dictatorial rule continue to flee to South Africa. History happens, and the nation slowly expands northward over the century, assimilating all it comes across.
Or something. Basically, a United States in south Africa is what I'm looking for.
Faeelin
Banned
Why?
Britain takes the Cape Colony in the Revolution, settles its loyalist blacks there instead of Sierra Leone.
In 1919, the Dominion of the Draka walks out of the Paris Peace Conference because no one else will support racial equality.
Did you miss the bit in the opening post about "a history of racial tolerance"?
Well, compared to the "conventional" Draka, the United States has a history of racial tolerance......
Well, obviously, its not going to be a multicultural utopia at the outset. It just needs to get there eventually.
Liberals and intellectuals? That *was* the Cromwell folks for the most part, to the very limited degree that one can speak of a left and a right in the English Civil War.
South Africa is a very unlikely place for folks to flee to, when Holland and France are a day or two's sailing away.
Liberals and intellectuals opposed to Cromwell, I ought to have said.
I imagined that South Africa would be a more attractive prospect as, due to the fact that Cromwell's rule is being cemented as opposed to the historical decline, there would be folks who'd want to be as far away as possible. Then there's the job opportunites and whatnot.
America was a pretty far away place, too, but people still fled there for a multitude of reasons.
(I'm just spitballing here).
How does this result in racial tolerance?
OTL the loyalists blacks who left Nova Scotia to settle Sierra Leone did it because they were forced to live in a segregated society in Nova Scotia and were subject to extreme discrimination from the whites there. So, the only way this is likely to work is if there is no sizable white population in Cape Colony, which is at odds with the racial tolerance criteria.
For this to work, one needs two things to bear in mind IMO;
1) A reason why anybody would settle in Southern Africa as opposed to North America, which is much closer and much more climatically tolerable to Northern Europeans. I'm not saying it's ASB or anything (Southern Africa is largely close to Texas in terms of climate, which is hardly a malarial deathtrap for the most part), just that you need to leave England/Britain without an alternative to settlement; do that, and you should have the numbers of settlers you need. And two,
2) Find out WHY the Europeans (Brits, in this case) were so inimicable to the idea of coexisting or intermingling with blacks, research the causes thereof (nobody's born racist, after all), and undermine them at an early enough stage. The issue with this is the possible butterflies that might arise, which might shoot the OP in the foot, but even little improvements here and there should work.
1) A reason why anybody would settle in Southern Africa as opposed to North America, which is much closer and much more climatically tolerable to Northern Europeans. I'm not saying it's ASB or anything (Southern Africa is largely close to Texas in terms of climate, which is hardly a malarial deathtrap for the most part), just that you need to leave England/Britain without an alternative to settlement; do that, and you should have the numbers of settlers you need. And two,
2) Find out WHY the Europeans (Brits, in this case) were so inimicable to the idea of coexisting or intermingling with blacks, research the causes thereof (nobody's born racist, after all), and undermine them at an early enough stage. The issue with this is the possible butterflies that might arise, which might shoot the OP in the foot, but even little improvements here and there should work.
I'm not sure if this would be too much of a butterfly, but would it be feasible for European empires to more closely model their colonial policies on the Romans' -- i.e., instead of keeping the natives at arm's length, try and convert them to your culture and integrate them into your society to make them more loyal? This would leave plenty of scope for cultural intolerance, of course, but it would probably ease up racial intolerance a fair bit.
That was the French system: Surely you don't expect Britain to emulate the French!
That was the French system: Surely you don't expect Britain to emulate the French!
Well, the answer is simple, then; reverse the systems at the start of the colonization period
. Hey, I said it was "simple", not "easy".Not pre-1900, but I recall a mini-TL based on (Southern) Rhodesia voting to join the Union of South Africa, and then the Anglo-Africans and liberal Afrikaners (and Coloureds and Indians in the Cape) vote to open up immigration, which helps to keep the white population from feeling quite so outnumbered and then goes on to 'inherit' at least Zambia, Malawi, Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland.
http://www.changingthetimes.net/samples/coldwar/rhodesia_joins_the_union_of_sout.htm
Ah, I think that was it.
Along with that though, I'd add that this South Africa might provide a decent refuge for Jews escaping antisemitism in Europe, plus post-war refugees.
http://www.changingthetimes.net/samples/coldwar/rhodesia_joins_the_union_of_sout.htm
Ah, I think that was it.
Along with that though, I'd add that this South Africa might provide a decent refuge for Jews escaping antisemitism in Europe, plus post-war refugees.
I don't completely agree with this. We are all born allophobic to a degree: we favor people who look like us, and dislike people different to ourselves. Specially towards individuals of our same sex (it could be argued that the opposite could be true, that we could feel more inclined to amiability towards individuals of different sex when their phenotype is different than our own).
Socialization can enhance or diminish this. And when it enhances it, it can do so in different ways, one of them being racism. But without our innate tendency to dislike what is different from ourselves, it wouldn't be as strong, i think.
Have a bigger and earlier Union of South Africa, probably with property franchise, so only rich blacks can vote, initially, (actually that bit's otl). Have English used as the language of education, as common ground for all peoples in the Union, Khoisan, Anglo, multiple Bantus, Indian, Chinese, mixed race.
This might work better if there's a bigger 'asian' population, perhaps.
Maybe the Boer heavy republics arent included initially.
Then, gradually the Union expands to Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Kenya, Uganda.
The Boers are now a distinct minority, even of voters, and English is really the only language available for the parliament.
As wealth grows, and the property qualifications slowly drop, more and more of the voters and, lagging that, MPs are of colour (black, asian, mixed).
Whites still have disproportionate status, but as coloured businesses grow and education spreads, it becomes clear that an educated wealthy black is 'better' than 'poor white trash', or local equivalent.
Note the OP asked for racial tolerance, not equality.
This might work better if there's a bigger 'asian' population, perhaps.
Maybe the Boer heavy republics arent included initially.
Then, gradually the Union expands to Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Kenya, Uganda.
The Boers are now a distinct minority, even of voters, and English is really the only language available for the parliament.
As wealth grows, and the property qualifications slowly drop, more and more of the voters and, lagging that, MPs are of colour (black, asian, mixed).
Whites still have disproportionate status, but as coloured businesses grow and education spreads, it becomes clear that an educated wealthy black is 'better' than 'poor white trash', or local equivalent.
Note the OP asked for racial tolerance, not equality.
Yeah, to add on jotabe said, there have been studies with babies showing that we actually are born racist, if you want to call it that. (Basically, the studies show that once babies reach 3 months, an age where they can discriminate between what their care-givers look like and other types of people, they have a harder time recognizing and reading facial expressions of people of other races.)
I agree that empathizing with out-groups has to be learned, rather than being innate.