DBWI: Is Tamil colonialism a decisive factor in the creation of a unified Europe?

If you want me to name the single most decisive factor in modern human history, I would say it is Indian Colonialism.

The Indian nations had different colonial policies in the past centuries, resulting in a very different situations in the liberated colonies after decolonization.

In the case of Europe, I would argue that it's the unitary colonial government created by the Tamils which lay the foundations for modern Republic of Europe.

Even though the Central Government based in Paris likes to claim Rome's and Charlemagne's heritage, I think Europe would remain fragmented had Tamils not conquered them.

A unified Europe would also be impossible if the Tamils followed the Bengali practice to "Divide and Rule" the colonized in the Mexicoland.

What do you think?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Yes, before Europe became the Jewel of the Tamil Crown, Europe was divided in several barbarian kingdoms that all spoke different languages and always fought each other, because of mutual hatred. The European identity was born under Tamil rule, and without it we wouldn't have the Federal Democratic People's Republic we have today.
 
Yes, before Europe became the Jewel of the Tamil Crown, Europe was divided in several barbarian kingdoms that all spoke different languages and always fought each other, because of mutual hatred. The European identity was born under Tamil rule, and without it we wouldn't have the Federal Democratic People's Republic we have today.

I always find it quite amusing that the citizens of the old empires freely use the references created by the ancient Greeks and Romans so freely with such a negative connotation towards Europeans. Anyway...

Despite Europe being just a giant squiggly peninsula west of Khazakia we are far from a unified identity, Germans are still German, French are still French, Scots are still Scots, Ports are still Ports, Poles are still Poles, etc... That is not to say there is any widespread support for secession or anything like that, but don't make it sound like it was the glorious Easterners that brought together the warring westerners, especially considering when independence came about as a result of Stresserman and the ENC it was the Eastern Powers which supported partition of the old Tamil Crown-Lands and resisted unification later in the 1950s with the other eastern colonies in Scania *The modern day provinces of Juteland, Denmark, Scaneland, Noruland, Lapland, Finland, Livland, and Kurland*.

Also when you put "Democratic People's" in there as a hint of sarcasm or political commentary it really reveals your bias, or you haven't seen a map since 1981.
 
Pre-Indian Europe was especially riven by religious warfare. It's possible that, had the Protestant Reformation happened 50 years after OTL, the War of French Succession would have been avoided, which would have prevented devastating civil war in virtually all of Europe and enabled Europeans to start colonies abroad. After which the Tamils and a lesser extent Gujjars easily picked off European princedoms one by one. Remember in just ten years the entire Holy Roman Empire was picked off by an otherwise insignificant Tamil colonel!

Anyone who claimed that the Pope in Rome would be a decisive figure unifying all Europeans would have caused multiple deaths by laughter!
 
Pre-Indian Europe was especially riven by religious warfare. It's possible that, had the Protestant Reformation happened 50 years after OTL, the War of French Succession would have been avoided, which would have prevented devastating civil war in virtually all of Europe and enabled Europeans to start colonies abroad. After which the Tamils and a lesser extent Gujjars easily picked off European princedoms one by one. Remember in just ten years the entire Holy Roman Empire was picked off by an otherwise insignificant Tamil colonel!

Anyone who claimed that the Pope in Rome would be a decisive figure unifying all Europeans would have caused multiple deaths by laughter!

As a European I can assure you that I have never met a single figure who has credited the pope with independence or unification with other colonies post Eastern-Withdrawal. The pope does nothing but tell Christians "I am still relevant please listen", but years under Siamese "patronage" kind of discredited the catholic institutions of the old empire. It was the monarchies of old Germany and Stresserman plus the ENC which led Europe out of the colonial era, not the pope. Saying the pope was in any way popular or responsible for European independence is just a passive-aggressive jab at the old European-stereotype of "blindly listens to anybody who says god talks to them", and more generally "gullible".
 
A truly uncolonized Europe would allow the different nations self-determination. The continued suppression of people like the Occitans and the English for Tamil business interests shows that the "Republic of Europe" is just a neo-colonial puppet of the Tamils.
 
A truly uncolonized Europe would allow the different nations self-determination. The continued suppression of people like the Occitans and the English for Tamil business interests shows that the "Republic of Europe" is just a neo-colonial puppet of the Tamils.

Occitans were oppressed by the English because the English Kings came from the French because the Normans , now a part of France, conquered England in 1066, ruled from there, then claimed the French Throne.

If you had to name the 3 "founding" ethnic groups of the European Republic it would be the Germans , English, and Occitians.

In an uncolonized Europe there probably would have been the same development of nation-states we saw in Southeast Asia, East Asia, Indonesia, and Incania. History said otherwise and the ENC + Stresserman brought Europe together and today there is little point in separation.
 
Top