Anti-West Newfoundland?

(I know I did a DBWI about a similar subject, but it kind of failed epically, so here goes...)

Let's say Newfoundland chooses responsible gov't in 1949? The country stays dirt poor, and maybe republican/left-wing movements prop up all over, including Pro-Soviet far-left movements. The Newfoundland Communist Party wins in let's say, the late 50's. Would the US just let this happen? Or would they initiate a Chile-style coup? After 1991, which side do the Newfies take?
 
It's almost impossible for any country between 1947-1972 to stay dirt poor. It's a huge economic boom during those years, and even countries with very poor leadership did well. Since Newfoundland has an educated workforce, speaks English, and is well placed to three members of the G7, it is going to do quite well economically.

If for whatever reason it isn't, Newfoundland will either decide to 1) join Canada, or 2) enter some kind of economic relationship with the United States. I think it was understood that if responsible government passed in 1949 that some kind of economic union with the USA was going to happen.

The chances of a Communists taking control in Newfoundland is ludicrous. You would need such a large POD to accommodate that, that no one would recognize that world.
 

Thande

Donor
It's almost impossible for any country between 1947-1972 to stay dirt poor.

Ireland, anyone?

I remember Decades of Darkness doing this (albeit not in exactly the same way, of course: Newfoundland was forced to choose independence due to a peace treaty that removed all direct British control from continental North America) and pretty much what's outlined in the OP happened.
 
Ireland, anyone?

I remember Decades of Darkness doing this (albeit not in exactly the same way, of course: Newfoundland was forced to choose independence due to a peace treaty that removed all direct British control from continental North America) and pretty much what's outlined in the OP happened.

Part of the reason why I think this could have happened IOTL. It wasn't that far-fetched, really.
 

Cook

Banned
The Newfoundland Communist Party wins in let's say, the late 50's.
Given that the Communist Party of Canada has only ever had a single member in the Canadian Parliament, (Tim Buck in the 1945 election) having them win a majority in Newfoundland would require an extraordinary change.
 
Given that the Communist Party of Canada has only ever had a single member in the Canadian Parliament, (Tim Buck in the 1945 election) having them win a majority in Newfoundland would require an extraordinary change.

The communist thing will be hard, but some anti-west government may come up due to a much earlier environmentalist movement and subsequent issues on environmentalism and fishing rights?

An independent New Foundland would, IMHO, follow similar policies as Iceland or Norway with respect to fishing and whaling. It's not that far fetched to cook those issues up.
 
Ireland, anyone?

Which just goes to show how bad the policies of Eamon de Valera was. When Sean Lemass became Taoiseach and reversed De Valera's policies, Ireland entered a boom. De Valera caused Ireland to miss out on about 15 years of economic growth.

Now, maybe the Newfoundland policiticians were going to be just as stupid, but what we know doesn't suggest the alternative to union with Canada was protectionist quasi-autarchy and nationalization. Instead, the alternative to union with Canada was opening up their economy to the US and being economically integrated there.
 
(I know I did a DBWI about a similar subject, but it kind of failed epically, so here goes...)

Let's say Newfoundland chooses responsible gov't in 1949? The country stays dirt poor, and maybe republican/left-wing movements prop up all over, including Pro-Soviet far-left movements. The Newfoundland Communist Party wins in let's say, the late 50's. Would the US just let this happen? Or would they initiate a Chile-style coup? After 1991, which side do the Newfies take?


I would say that your situation is ASB. I live in Newfoundland and there has been, at best, a minimal social justice movement. In early to mid 20th century Newfoundland, Newfoundland was a house that was divided among protestant and catholic lines. If you look at the 1949 referendum, areas with a high Catholic population voted for responsible government while areas with a high protestant population voted for confederation.

The most significant flaw in your timeline is that Newfoundland has never had much of a left-wing or social justice movement. William Coaker led the only major social justice movement before the 1980s in the 1910s with the Fishermen's Protective Union. With regard to left-wing politics, the New Democratic Party in Newfoundland only managed to elect a federal member in the late 1970s and the provincial party has always been a third party only winning its first seat in 1985, in Labrador, not winning more than one seat until 1997 and never being either the governing party or the official opposition. To allow for your scenario to happen, you would need to have a massive set of POD's from around 1910 or an invasion of the ASB's.

The communist thing will be hard, but some anti-west government may come up due to a much earlier environmentalist movement and subsequent issues on environmentalism and fishing rights?

The environmentalist movement has been despised since the start in Newfoundland due to its associations with the anti-sealing movement. You would have to make sure the Sea Shepherd Society never focuses on attacking the seal hunt or the fur trade to allow any environmentalist movement to become popular in Newfoundland.
 
Not really the case until recently.

As far as I know, Newfies were literate, had trade skills, and had access to higher education. Highly educated enough for me. We're not talking about Haiti, Mexico, or even Spain at the time. If you want to compare to graduates from Caltech or MIT, I guess the answer would be no, but that's a ridiculous standard for the general population.

Besides, Newfoundland is only now just getting any form of money in the offshore oil. Up until then, even as a part of Canada, we HAVE been dirt poor!

Newfoundland has the same economic advantages and disadvantages of New England. If Maine is prosperous enough, so would be Newfoundland. "Dirt poor" is relative. Despite being "dirt poor", I would suspect Newfoundland still had primary education for everyone, consistent access to medical services, a phone system that worked, plenty of food for everyone, roads and bridges, radio and television, electricity, and all the other creature comforts of the West. Berverly Hills? Of course not, but still higher than Haiti, Mexico, and Spain of the time.

There is no reason to believe that if Newfoundland rejected Canada it would be any worse off than it was IOTL. Certainly not to the point where Communists are seizing power.
 
As far as I know, Newfies were literate, had trade skills, and had access to higher education. Highly educated enough for me. We're not talking about Haiti, Mexico, or even Spain at the time. If you want to compare to graduates from Caltech or MIT, I guess the answer would be no, but that's a ridiculous standard for the general population.

Before confederation and for the first 10/15 years I would say Newfoundland had a severe problem with education. Due to the isolation of many of the small outport towns, it was impossible to send children to large school centers and as a result many rural outport communities had a very poor quality of education often being taught by a Protestant or Catholic priest who could be barely literate themselves. It was not until Smallwood became premier that he focused on bringing education standards up to Canadian standards which forced the churches who ran the school boards to improve standards. At the same time, Smallwood focused on providing free post-secondary education at Memorial University (Newfoundland's only university) which allowed for many baby boomers to get a post-secondary education at a very limited cost.
 
Before confederation and for the first 10/15 years I would say Newfoundland had a severe problem with education. Due to the isolation of many of the small outport towns, it was impossible to send children to large school centers and as a result many rural outport communities had a very poor quality of education often being taught by a Protestant or Catholic priest who could be barely literate themselves. It was not until Smallwood became premier that he focused on bringing education standards up to Canadian standards which forced the churches who ran the school boards to improve standards. At the same time, Smallwood focused on providing free post-secondary education at Memorial University (Newfoundland's only university) which allowed for many baby boomers to get a post-secondary education at a very limited cost.

And is there any reason to believe that this wouldn't happen if Newfoundland didn't join Canada? Smallwood could even still become leader of Newfoundland in a scenario where it stayed out of Canada. Newfoundland might not get transfer payments from Ottawa, but it could still get payments by the US for use of military bases, loans from the World Bank for such improvements, and increased revenue from US investment in Newfoundland.

Lots of parts of English speaking countries have been more poor and less educated than the rest. None of them have ever become a Stalinist dictatorship.
 
Top