AHC: True Balkanization

One of my pet peeves regarding this site is the liberal usage of the term "balkanized" to mean any situation where a state fragments into multiple successors. The reason OTL Yugoslavia was so notable is because its fragmentation was intertwined by the incredible diversity of the region in religion, ways of life, modernization, history, and even alphabets used to portray the same language.

Thus, the challenge is to have the above scenario happen to an OTL nation (no combining countries and having them fall apart later) which in OTL isn't as diverse or fragmented as the western Balkans are. In other words, the POD would be whatever caused a gradual shift from national uniformity to several nationalities within a single state, to the point that that state is no longer viable.
 

Rex Mundi

Banned
I think "incredible diversity" is pushing it. To the outside observer, there isn't much visible difference between the various nationalities that constituted Yugoslavia. I would say that there are countries far more diverse linguistically and culturally - China, India, Nigeria, even the U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. of the time.
 
An even bloodied series of European religious wars causes the final disintegration of the HRE. Hence any sense of Germany as a group identity dissipates, helped in large part by outside powers France, Poland, and Sweden.

Instead, Germans view themselves as Austrians, Bavarians, Saxons, and Prussians. Intense rivalries develop, based largely but not entirely around their rival religious identities. These rivalries are exploited by larger powers in their bid to dominate Europe.
 
Historically, the term was used for the gradual dissolution of the (European part of the) Ottoman Empire, than for the faster breakups of the Austrian-Hungarian and the Russian Empires.

So in order to have a valid parallel, you should pick a multinational empire with much less ruling nations (one or two) than subject nations.

The German Empire could work if there was no national German sentiment but a much stronger Prussian overlordship that barred Saxons, Bavarians, Württembergers and perhaps even Rhinelanders and Westphalians from important positions. Only east-Elbian Junkers are fit for ruling. Instead of catholic and socialist opposition parties, you have mostly regional parties who work sometimes together, but just to obstruct the government.

Even more difficult to realize would be an Italy that was run as a Hyper-Piemont from Torino. Before dissembling again into the traditional states.

More obvious candidated are China and India.
 
An even bloodied series of European religious wars causes the final disintegration of the HRE. Hence any sense of Germany as a group identity dissipates, helped in large part by outside powers France, Poland, and Sweden.

Instead, Germans view themselves as Austrians, Bavarians, Saxons, and Prussians. Intense rivalries develop, based largely but not entirely around their rival religious identities. These rivalries are exploited by larger powers in their bid to dominate Europe.

Maybe this was more probable than what we get IOTL.
 
Roman Britain, breaking up into the Celtic fringe (Wales, Cornwall), the several Saxon kingdoms, the Anglians, the Mercians, and the "Danish" kingdoms.

The result of repeated invasions and settlements .

Similarly, Amerindian North America, breaking up into French, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, British nations (and remaining Amerindian "states" )
 
Top