DBWI: independent Portugal

The results of the last portuguese referendum for independence arrived yesterday, and i am happy to see that most (65% ,to be more specific) of my compatriots from the other side of the Atlantic don't want to leave the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, Isabelia* and Algarves (informally known as Lusitanic Empire or Lusitania for short). Although i am against separatism in the in our united kingdom (we already lost Dahomey, Guiné-Bissau, Macau and the indian cities), but the possibilities of a independent Portugal are intriguing. So which occasion would be better for Portugal to separate from the Empire? Would this Portugal be more developed or less? ( the nordic-like utopia described by many separatist groups sems ASB for me)

OOC: *Isabelia: fusion of Angola and Mozambique resulted from the Pink Map. Named after the princess, latter empress Isabel in TTL
 
Last edited:
Maybe if the Prince of Beira (OOC: Pedro I of Brazil) hadn't died shortly after being named Regent of Brazil, he would have gone with the hairbrained scheme of being Emperor of an independent Brazil and sending Princess Maria (OTL's Duchess of Modena) to rule Portugal and the future Pedro IV to rule Brazil. The liberal prince Pedro would be way more sympathetic to the Brazilian independence movement than his eventual successor and brother Miguel, who was focused on keeping Brazilians loyal to the crown.

Plus a Pedro IV not raised by his pro-absolutism aunts and grandfather might have a totally different style of ruling vs our Pedro.
 
There was an independence movement in Brazil that grew stronger when Brazil was temporarily degraded back to colonial status and died down when Pedro IV, who was born in Brazil, created or re-created the United Kingdom and restored its equal status.

This is relevant because the significance of the 1822 crisis being resolved differently, with Joao VI returning to Portugal and his son Pedro proclaiming Brazil as independent with himself as the monarch, depends on whether Brazil survives as a single independent country, or if it breaks up into several countries like the Spanish colonies. Geopolitically, if Brazil is a single large independent country, there may not be that much difference since Brazil dominates the United Lusitanian kingdom, especially after Lusitania was built in Permanbuco and the capital moved there, and Portugal by itself would be a minor country.

Internally, there is also the question of whether the branches of the Braganzas survive separately as monarchs of Brazil and Portugal, or if either or both become probably unstable republics.
 
Maybe if the Prince of Beira (OOC: Pedro I of Brazil) hadn't died shortly after being named Regent of Brazil, he would have gone with the hairbrained scheme of being Emperor of an independent Brazil and sending Princess Maria (OTL's Duchess of Modena) to rule Portugal and the future Pedro IV to rule Brazil. The liberal prince Pedro would be way more sympathetic to the Brazilian independence movement than his eventual successor and brother Miguel, who was focused on keeping Brazilians loyal to the crown.

Plus a Pedro IV not raised by his pro-absolutism aunts and grandfather might have a totally different style of ruling vs our Pedro.

Interesting. Even so, this possibility would result more in a "independent Brazil", while Portugal would retain its empire. As the premise said, i was thinking more in a situation where Portugal would leave the empire, like what they tried in the Second Porto Revolution, that happened after Miguel established himself as Pedro's regent. Some radical factions of the liberals wanted to declare Portugal a independent republic mirroring the american ones. They were crushed very badly by the Holy Alliance.
 
Isabelia? I protest that name.

You arent alone. There will be a
plebiscite in February for the change of name of the kingdom for Zambezia, being supported by left-wing parties. Meanwhile, the old Conservative Party is defending the name arguing that Queen Isabel I was one of the best monarchs of the empire's history, performing liberal reforms meanwhile keeping a good relationship with the catholic church and suppressing the republicans. Its foreseen that the west coast of Isabelia, being more culturally lusified, will vote for keep the name and the east coast will vote for change.
 
Interesting. Even so, this possibility would result more in a "independent Brazil", while Portugal would retain its empire. As the premise said, i was thinking more in a situation where Portugal would leave the empire, like what they tried in the Second Porto Revolution, that happened after Miguel established himself as Pedro's regent. Some radical factions of the liberals wanted to declare Portugal a independent republic mirroring the american ones. They were crushed very badly by the Holy Alliance.

It's certainly possible. However, that rebellion was quashed when the royal family rallied and suggested Miguel could be a de-facto King in Brazil while Infanta Isabel Maria became Pedro's regent in Lisbon. Obviously, Aunt Isabel had quite an effect on the young King, given the King named the future Isabel I after her. It was only the extreme anti-royalist factions who tried to revolt long after popular support faded that had to meet their maker via the Holy Alliance

Brazil was uber loyal to the Braganzas, so if Miguel didn't compromise with being regent in Rio de Janiero over Lisbon, it's likely the whole Royal family ends up there, and a break between Brazil and Portugal occurs. As for the other colonies, who knows. In my opinion, a young King and monarchism are more conducive to empire than random politicians trying to jive up public sentiment.
 
Maybe if there were more interference between the USA and Britain

I could definitely see the United States interfering more in Lusitanian affairs, but Britain? The United Kingdom benefits so much from having a strong ally in the south Atlantic, its pretty much the entire reason they can travel from their ports in the home islands to their important colonies in India, Indochina, and the Persian Gulf, especially since the Sinai canal was built so late in the Empire's history. Stopping at ports in Portugal and Brazil was the only real effective way to travel around the Cape of Good Hope, though I could definitely see American support for rebels in Portugal as a way for the upstart nation to block British travel. It's not like that would be the only time the Americans interfered and supported rebels in other countries.
 
I doubt that Portugal alone will amount to much- iirc it was a net drain on Brazil's resources up until the turn of the century when the industrialization finally took off. That said...
either or both become probably unstable republics.
This stinks of Lusitanian imperial propaganda. The Lisbonists* are idiots, that I'll grant you. But there's no indication that the Iberianist ideals would fail, and similar ideals have worked pretty damn well in Germany, Scandinavia, Peru-Bolivia, Italy and the even the USA- regional federation based nation's are just as stable if not more stable than colonialist empires tied together by a crown.

*Lisbonists are the movement for an independent Portugal, Iberianists support the unification of Portugal with Spain under the Spanish republic.
 
I could definitely see the United States interfering more in Lusitanian affairs, but Britain? The United Kingdom benefits so much from having a strong ally in the south Atlantic, its pretty much the entire reason they can travel from their ports in the home islands to their important colonies in India, Indochina, and the Persian Gulf, especially since the Sinai canal was built so late in the Empire's history. Stopping at ports in Portugal and Brazil was the only real effective way to travel around the Cape of Good Hope, though I could definitely see American support for rebels in Portugal as a way for the upstart nation to block British travel. It's not like that would be the only time the Americans interfered and supported rebels in other countries.

Maybe not in the recent times, but in the past the british tried to stab the Lusitanic Empire in the back. During the XIX century, the British empire attacked many trade ships, pressing my country to abolish slave trade, and we did it - in 1870*, but in our own terms. Also, they tried to take the current central region of Isabelia during the Berlin Conference, wanting to fullfill the "Cape to Cairo" dream, but the fact that the empire had made a colonization policy in the region, inviting freed slaves and poor people from Brazil to settle in Africa made our claims stronger.
However, after WWII, the majority of the european powers began to lose control over their colonies, because ttheir european territories were devasted and they, different from Lusitania, failed to integrate their possessions with the homeland (the USA and USSR were helping the separatist groups, too). So now the Britsh Empire is dependent on us to keep the possessions they still have (their lost of all the almost all their territories in Africa shows this).

*OOC: in TTL, the abolition of slavery in the Lusitanic Empire was very similar to OTL abolition in Brazil (progressive laws that restricted slavery bit by bit), but began earlier, during the regency of Dom Miguel, and so ended earlier.

I doubt that Portugal alone will amount to much- iirc it was a net drain on Brazil's resources up until the turn of the century when the industrialization finally took off. That said...

This stinks of Lusitanian imperial propaganda. The Lisbonists* are idiots, that I'll grant you. But there's no indication that the Iberianist ideals would fail, and similar ideals have worked pretty damn well in Germany, Scandinavia, Peru-Bolivia, Italy and the even the USA- regional federation based nation's are just as stable if not more stable than colonialist empires tied together by a crown.

*Lisbonists are the movement for an independent Portugal, Iberianists support the unification of Portugal with Spain under the Spanish republic.

It's normal to foreigners not to know the real dynamic of the Lusitanic Empire. Our territories are not "colonies", but kingdons integrated to the union - as the official name "United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, Isabelia and Algarves" says. The only exception is Timor, which is a Princedom and don't appear in the name because of it.
 
Top