Yes. I've actually heard that pre-WW1 Europe IOTL had basically open borders, but added border controls after the war.
English Canada/French Carolina: A Timeline
- Thread starter Gabingston
- Start date
A grass roots nationalist movement separate from the ruling houses is possible; after all, that was a driving force in Italian unification in OTL.
Any ideas for American political parties ITTL? I'm guessing that the Commonwealth would still use FPTP, thus leading to a two party system as with OTL's U.S., but it's possible that minor parties could win some seats in the legislature, as is the case in the U.K., Canada and Australia.
We could see some regionalist parties, perhaps? How have the Anglo-Americans been treating the native Americans? If they're integrated and have been forced into a certain area, and indeed get federal representation, we may see a First Nation's part, or perhaps a few depending on the population size.
Hmm, interesting idea. From a quick Wikipedia search the Whigs were Center-Left while the Tories were Center-Right, so that'll be the general orientation of the parties if they survive into the 20th Century.
The best outcome I could see for the Native Americans would be something like the Treaty of Waitangi for tribes like the Iroquois, but considering how badly the Natives were treated in Canada and Australia, I don't see it being much different for the most part.
Regionalism is the driving force behind their being minor parties in the Canadian and UK legislatures (Australia does not use FPTP).
Canada is essentially five or six different regions mashed together. Each region has a FPTP system with 2 major parties, it's just not the same two everywhere. In Ontario and the Atlantic it's the Liberals & Conservatives, in Quebec the Liberals & the Parti Quebecois, on the prairies the Conservatives & NDP, on Vancouver Island it's the NDP and Greens.
Likewise, UK is generally Labour and Conservative, but the SNP are big in Scotland, Plaid Cymru in parts of Wales, and of course something else entirely is going on in Northern Ireland.
I could see a Conservative/Liberal split eventually evolving into a Liberal/Labour split with the Tories becoming vestigial or merging with the Liberals for the Commonwealth
Is it possible for there to be a socially liberal and economically lazziez-faire party on one end and a socially conservative and economically interventionist party on the other? I could keep it like OTL, but it would be interesting for things to be flipped.
Part 87: Sea To Shining Sea
Part 87: Sea To Shining Sea
For this post, we return to the Commonwealth of America, which was by this point a global superpower and arguably the leader of the Anglosphere. The country spanned 4,000 miles from Virginia to Alaska, and despite losing hundreds of thousands of men in the Second Global War, had grown it’s population to 170 Million by 1930. With land having pretty much filled up and population pressure in Europe having been reduced by the mass casualties of the war, immigration slowed from its turn of the century highs, but the country was still the largest recipient of migrants in the world. New York, Mount Royal and Chicago were among the largest cities in the world, with New York having over 10 million inhabitants in the greater metro area and Mount Royal closing in on that number. On the topic of cities, the majority of Americans now lived in cities rather than rural areas, and that combined with lower immigration led to a slowdown in population growth. Speaking of population, how about a brief overview of the country as a whole? Of the 170 Million people in the Commonwealth, the most populous province was still Laurentia, with a population of 16 Million. New York was just behind at 14 Million and Pennsylvania at 10 Million. Although most Americans lived in the eastern half of the country, the provinces west of the Rockies were the ones that were growing the fastest, as the mild climate, growing industry and beautiful scenery was a draw to migrants, both domestic and foreign. While there weren’t any major cities north of New Westminster and Victoria, towns like Kamloops and New Archangel had grown to a decent size.
Alright, now that I’ve talked about that, how about the people living there? Of the 170 Million people that lived in the Commonwealth as of 1930, the overwhelming majority of them were of European descent, the largest components of which came from the British Isles, Germany and Northern Europe, but with smaller contributions from Eastern Europe, Southern Europe and from Jews. The second largest racial group were of African descent, numbering around eight million as of 1930. While slavery had been gone for a century by this point, that did not mean that African-Americans were free from struggle or prejudice, as both formal and informal discrimination were unfortunately commonplace (think OTL’s American North). While the Black population was initially concentrated in the regions that had slavery on a large scale (Virginia, Delaware, Maryland and Kentucky), they’d started to spread out from there, and there were now large Black populations in most major American cities.
The third largest ethnic/racial group were of Asian descent. The total Asian population numbered a few million (probably in the order of 3-5 Million), largely concentrated on the West Coast. The process of Asian immigration to the Commonwealth (and other British dominions like Australia) was tightly controlled, most arriving either because of familial connections, education or because they’d been hired to work in agriculture, forestry or construction by an American business. Somewhere around 20,000 Asian immigrants arrived annually to the Commonwealth, about half of whom were Japanese, with smaller segments from China, The Philippines, Korea and British India. While Asians didn’t have the legacy of slavery weighing them down, that didn’t mean that there wasn’t anti-Asian prejudice in the Commonwealth, although it varied in intensity by region, nationality and whether one was native-born.
The smallest ethnic minority in the Commonwealth were also the first ones in this land. The percentage of Natives in the Commonwealth was only around 1%, although that varied significantly by region (highest in the Far North and Plains, lowest on the East Coast). Many of them were of mixed Native-European ancestry, such as the Measca, who were descended from Scots-Irish fur traders and Native women. As for their status in the Commonwealth… well, it varied. A few tribes like the Iroquois maintained much of their ancestral land and had slowly integrated into broader society, but most tribes faced a much less rosy fate of being shoved onto reservations and generally being treated like crap (it happened in OTL’s U.S., Canada and Australia, so I don’t see it being much different here).
Getting that elephant in the room out of the way, I’m gonna wrap things up. The Commonwealth of America had grown from a collection of colonies lining the East Coast to spanning thousands of miles from Sea To Shining Sea. Even though it was far from perfect, it stood as a beacon of opportunity for millions of people and was a cultural, economic and political juggernaut. I’ll hopefully get to the situation in Russia soon, so stay tuned for that, but until then, have a good day.
If the Commonwealth's politics evolved roughly around OTL America's lines it's not unthinkable, seeing as how American populism historically has been socially conservative and economically interventionist. If they hew closer to the rest of the Anglosphere, probably not as much.
It's possible those could be the two big parties, with quite a few regionalist parties.
"The rest of the anglosphere" had these tendencies as well. Within Canada we had Social Credit & prairie populism; in NZ currently Labour is less pro immigration than National; Canada also has the left-nationalist Parti Quebecois; traditionally the Liberals were seen as pro-American and therefore pro-Business and free trade and the more right wing party; it was the "Progressive Conservatives" who introduced universal health care to Canada in alliance with the CCF, the conservatives in Canada were traditionally pro-British and nationalist/populist
My next update is going to be on Mexico, which currently stretches from Panama in the south to Colorado in the north. Do y'all think that Mexico will stay together as one country, or will it fracture between its various regions?
I hope they stay together. If it isn't too much to ask, would you mind telling me the populations of Mexico and Florida? I mean, the commonwealth is a juggernaut with 170 million people.
Well, the Floridian population in 1900 was 17.15 Million, so I'm guessing 25-30 Million by 1930. OTL's Mexico was around 16.5 Million in 1930, but factoring in Central America and the American Southwest (also more immigration), my guess would be something similar to La Floride.
Well, they were a French colony and Mexico was a Spanish colony, and France and Spain were allies for most of their existence.
Oh shoot, forgot about that part. But I can't just imagine a slaveholding power (colony) being content with the land they have.