AHC : Caribbean Union

GdwnsnHo

Banned
I've always found the idea of seeing a single Caribbean State, or one that dominates the majority of the Caribbean.

So the challenge is to make one single Caribbean State AFTER European colonialism has claimed the entire region.
 
On what national basis? The Caribbean is too diverse culturally to be a single polity and doesn't make geographic sense as a country.
 
If Great Britain had attempted to form a "local Parliament" of multiple Lesser Antilles islands early enough, giving them a say in local government via this new avenue, perhaps something might have occured. Customs unions, mutual emigrations, etc, etc, would have solidified this relationship.

However, Britain largely held off on allowing significant "inclusive" local government until near the end of colonialism, preferring Royal Governors, maybe advised by local elites tied only to the mother country. As such, the newly enfranchised black majorities, and to a lesser extent the white ruling minorities, did not have any "common destiny" with the other Caribbean islands and therefore preferred to go their own way. Antigua did not consider St. Lucia or Jamaica any more their political peer than Thailand.

A parallel may be drawn to the 13 colonies of the United States. Until the 7 Years War, there was no sense of common destiny. If Britain had encouraged the formation of a "joint Parliament" to focus on Continental issues (trade, customs union, cooperation against Indians, a small central army), the problems of forming the union would be much reduced.

Of course, if Britain had allowed a "joint Parliament", there would have been no revolution in the first place.
 
If Great Britain had attempted to form a "local Parliament" of multiple Lesser Antilles islands early enough, giving them a say in local government via this new avenue, perhaps something might have occured. Customs unions, mutual emigrations, etc, etc, would have solidified this relationship.

However, Britain largely held off on allowing significant "inclusive" local government until near the end of colonialism, preferring Royal Governors, maybe advised by local elites tied only to the mother country. As such, the newly enfranchised black majorities, and to a lesser extent the white ruling minorities, did not have any "common destiny" with the other Caribbean islands and therefore preferred to go their own way. Antigua did not consider St. Lucia or Jamaica any more their political peer than Thailand.

A parallel may be drawn to the 13 colonies of the United States. Until the 7 Years War, there was no sense of common destiny. If Britain had encouraged the formation of a "joint Parliament" to focus on Continental issues (trade, customs union, cooperation against Indians, a small central army), the problems of forming the union would be much reduced.

Of course, if Britain had allowed a "joint Parliament", there would have been no revolution in the first place.

British tried that in 1958, lasted until 1963. The West Indies Federation.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
On what national basis? The Caribbean is too diverse culturally to be a single polity and doesn't make geographic sense as a country.

National basis - none, hence a challenge.

Cultural differences, part of the challenge, finding and creating a homogenous culture is probably required, but an overriding concept of Caribbean could also work alongside 'Jamaican' or 'Cuban'.

A collection of islands, doesn't make sense as a country? Why? They all have similar geopolitical issues, defence strategies, and external trade routes - that would make sense to me.


Trolls gotta troll? Regardless, I wouldn't say that is a Caribbean state, it is a Southern Empire. It has to be centred, and created for the Caribbean peoples.

British tried that in 1958, lasted until 1963. The West Indies Federation.

Much more what I was expecting.

If Great Britain had attempted to form a "local Parliament" of multiple Lesser Antilles islands early enough, giving them a say in local government via this new avenue, perhaps something might have occured. Customs unions, mutual emigrations, etc, etc, would have solidified this relationship.

However, Britain largely held off on allowing significant "inclusive" local government until near the end of colonialism, preferring Royal Governors, maybe advised by local elites tied only to the mother country. As such, the newly enfranchised black majorities, and to a lesser extent the white ruling minorities, did not have any "common destiny" with the other Caribbean islands and therefore preferred to go their own way. Antigua did not consider St. Lucia or Jamaica any more their political peer than Thailand.

A parallel may be drawn to the 13 colonies of the United States. Until the 7 Years War, there was no sense of common destiny. If Britain had encouraged the formation of a "joint Parliament" to focus on Continental issues (trade, customs union, cooperation against Indians, a small central army), the problems of forming the union would be much reduced.

Of course, if Britain had allowed a "joint Parliament", there would have been no revolution in the first place.

This is all true, and reading into the West Indies Federation, it was that weakness in Federal Government that prevented any form of cohesion.

If the Federal Government was much stronger, and the British instituted a system much earlier, then this could work - if it existed before Bermuda, Guyana, etc really could stand up and say they wouldn't want to join - The Federal system would be within a Dominion I'd imagine, and the Federal system would have to be strong.

Thanks all :)
 
Top