Fearless Leader
Donor
Now I'm no expert on the history of Apartheid or Indian Independence (currently trying to read up on both...) But I do have a cursory familiarity with Gandhi.
Now Gandhi spent much of his early career in South Africa working as an advocate for the Indian population there. During his tenure in South Africa he made friends with a group of Quakers who apparently tried their best to convert Gandhi to their faith. We all know that they failed, Gandhi returned back to India and proceeded to become the leading figure for independence there.
But what if they had succeeded and Gandhi converts to the Quaker faith in the early 1900's?
My thinking on the matter is that Gandhi would recognize that his newfound faith would make a return to India both uncomfortable and impractical. So he decides to stay in South Africa and continue working with the Indian population there where his faith is much less of an issue.
So Gandhi's in South Africa for good. How does this affect things?
I'd wager that Gandhi's going to be quite active in South African politics perhaps cooperating with the various Native groups as well as the Coloureds. His philosophy of civil disobedience might definitely draw more attention. He'll probably advocate non-violent participation in both World Wars and use his support to forge an alliance with Jan Smuts. This then could result in the aversion of Apartheid through Smuts and his successors maintaining power by expanding the franchise.
Plausible?
As for India, this is where it gets messy. Without Gandhi I see Indian independence as being much bloodier. Who rises to lead the charge for Indian independence without Gandhi? How does more violence on the sub-continent affect British attitudes? Will it be enough of a problem to affect WWII? Britain has to withdraw from India at somepoint so how does Indian Independence look in this TL?
Any other thoughts?
Now Gandhi spent much of his early career in South Africa working as an advocate for the Indian population there. During his tenure in South Africa he made friends with a group of Quakers who apparently tried their best to convert Gandhi to their faith. We all know that they failed, Gandhi returned back to India and proceeded to become the leading figure for independence there.
But what if they had succeeded and Gandhi converts to the Quaker faith in the early 1900's?
My thinking on the matter is that Gandhi would recognize that his newfound faith would make a return to India both uncomfortable and impractical. So he decides to stay in South Africa and continue working with the Indian population there where his faith is much less of an issue.
So Gandhi's in South Africa for good. How does this affect things?
I'd wager that Gandhi's going to be quite active in South African politics perhaps cooperating with the various Native groups as well as the Coloureds. His philosophy of civil disobedience might definitely draw more attention. He'll probably advocate non-violent participation in both World Wars and use his support to forge an alliance with Jan Smuts. This then could result in the aversion of Apartheid through Smuts and his successors maintaining power by expanding the franchise.
Plausible?
As for India, this is where it gets messy. Without Gandhi I see Indian independence as being much bloodier. Who rises to lead the charge for Indian independence without Gandhi? How does more violence on the sub-continent affect British attitudes? Will it be enough of a problem to affect WWII? Britain has to withdraw from India at somepoint so how does Indian Independence look in this TL?
Any other thoughts?