How come white settlement in Angola and Mozambique?

[Clandango]

Because that would be evil?
Actually, it couldn't have been done in large scale because - other than whites - Portugal didn't have a pool of millions to move to Africa. There were several ethinc Asians in Mozambique. Some Africans moved from one colony to another. But nothing in the scale that could disrupt the autoctonous demography.

That is why I mentioned everyone but Europeans being moved around.

 

[Admiral Matt]

Perhaps so. And it would have been for the best if Portugal could have retained it's overseas territories AS overseas territories and integrated them into a democratic Greater Portugal on a one man one vote basis. It would have avoided three ruinous civil wars in Angola, Mozambique and East Timor, for one thing, that killed many people, and set all three territories as well as Guinea Bissau on a path to economic growth of which only Angola currently is on. Metropolitan Portugal, too would be both growing and solvent, with Lisbon and Douro being predominantly African cities and huge and growing populations from African migration.

An interesting picture indeed.

But because Portugal chose such a radically different path from the other EU members, Portugal would probably not be permitted to be part of the EU. The EU wants decolonization, not integration of former colonies into the metropolitan nation. And the EU finds any member nation with a rapidly growing population potentially destabilizing.

Well, they'd be in an even more awkward position there than with Turkey in OTL. The cultural and religious links are there and there'll be the awkwardness that many will be saying it's "because they're black." I mean French Guyana and Caledonia are pictured on the Euro, for heaven's sake. Not to mention Greenland.

If it went that way, membership would be blocked probably on the grounds of human rights issues of some sort. They'll be safe preconditions because these African and Asian societies won't come close to European standards for the foreseeable future. If they start to get there the goalposts can be shifted.

Does the EU actually have policy on that, though? Avoiding high growth populations? I'm not familiar with anything of that sort. I do know that slow population growth is a long-term crisis for many member states.

I'd guess Portugal to still have some chance of entering the EU, if certainly a smaller one.

 

[Admiral Matt]

To fend off decolonization pressure the Portuguese regime promoted the argument that Portugal was conceptually pluricontinental and pluriracial. That ideology had also been promoted internally and it was somehow accepted given the small country complex the Portuguese suffered from.

With that said, the color blind society was little more than a façade. The White Portuguese would not allow their vote to be diluted.

In other conditions the Portuguese would happily integrate smaller colonies the way the French did, potentially even leaving a larger non-White percentage of the population within the Republic. But I simply cannot see Portugal creating a federation where the Metropole is outvoted by Angola and Mozambique.

But "Portugal" wasn't necessarily making these decisions. A handful of Portuguese leaders could continue the status quo so long as they remained in power. And the status quo was that Timor was Portugal.

Obviously there's no simple or easy transition to democracy where the European Portuguese are comfortable with it all, but I don't see that that makes it impossible. By 1995, for example, there would probably have been a lot more inter-migration in every direction. Plenty of undemocratic regimes made it to the nineties.

 

[miguelrj]

But "Portugal" wasn't necessarily making these decisions. A handful of Portuguese leaders could continue the status quo so long as they remained in power.

Yes, that's right. As long as they're in power, the government will mostly consist of Catholic Conservative white dudes that are well-connected in Lisbon. But as long as they're in charge, there's no way to avoid a Colonial War. And as long as there's a Colonial War, there's no way to sustain this kind of government for long. And as long as Portugal democratizes in these conditions the black-majority Angola and Mozambique will not even want to hear proposals of federation and the like...

 

[Dunois]

A good thread for informed discussion, this.

What's most interesting is the implications. There seems to be room for timelines exploring a Portugal that retained its African provinces much longer, perhaps even to the present day. It would take a truly odd political settlement Lisbon for no one to accept separation for forty years, but that seems to be the only absolute requirement.

I imagine things would get dicey around the same time the Soviets and Apartheid were coming unstuck, but it'd be a fascinating timeline to explore. Albeit kind of a people's history sort.

In 1975, the Portuguese colonial empire surviving marked them as behind the curve. But a generation later its survival might be seen quite differently. Marking it and France in a separate category of modern state, perhaps.

I have done some thinking on this, as the subject is indeed fascinating, but to be fair in my opinion this requires a POD that at the very least is 1949 with Norton de Matos booting out Salazar somehow and even this may not be enough.

Ideally there should be 300 000 whites in Angola by 1945 and not 1975 to get a better "base" from which to start ...

It is also worth remembering that even though white settlemnt did increase, it was still 5% of the population in Angola by 1975 which is puny. The countryside development plans were failures and the educational background of a lot of colonist very poor to say the least. A good book on this subject (readable on Google Books) is Angola Under the Portuguse by Gerald Bender.

Considering Portugal limited ressource base I think that the smartest move would have been to ditch Bissao and perhaps Mozambique as well. The remaining ressources would be concentrated on Angola alone as well as the islands. Having a wealthy foreign patron that can pay for the development of the oil fields/mines/infrastructure would help as well. Basically using large scale foreign investment to build up Angola, with some Portuguese contribution.

Apparently the Hudson Institute wrote a development plan for Angola in the early 1970s. It may have been fantaisist and pie in the skies. But I would love to get my hands on it!

 

[Archangel]

I have done some thinking on this, as the subject is indeed fascinating, but to be fair in my opinion this requires a POD that at the very least is 1949 with Norton de Matos booting out Salazar somehow and even this may not be enough.

Ideally there should be 300 000 whites in Angola by 1945 and not 1975 to get a better "base" from which to start ...

It is also worth remembering that even though white settlemnt did increase, it was still 5% of the population in Angola by 1975 which is puny. The countryside development plans were failures and the educational background of a lot of colonist very poor to say the least. A good book on this subject (readable on Google Books) is Angola Under the Portuguse by Gerald Bender.

Considering Portugal limited ressource base I think that the smartest move would have been to ditch Bissao and perhaps Mozambique as well. The remaining ressources would be concentrated on Angola alone as well as the islands. Having a wealthy foreign patron that can pay for the development of the oil fields/mines/infrastructure would help as well. Basically using large scale foreign investment to build up Angola, with some Portuguese contribution.

Apparently the Hudson Institute wrote a development plan for Angola in the early 1970s. It may have been fantaisist and pie in the skies. But I would love to get my hands on it!

I think it's this book, but I can't find it available for free:
http://books.google.pt/books/about/...ns_of_Angola.html?id=V1xBAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
http://arquivos.ministerioultramar....do.php?id=PT/IPAD/MU/GM/GPZ/2356/16229&tipo=6

 

[Marius]

I have done some thinking on this, as the subject is indeed fascinating, but to be fair in my opinion this requires a POD that at the very least is 1949 with Norton de Matos booting out Salazar somehow and even this may not be enough.

Ideally there should be 300 000 whites in Angola by 1945 and not 1975 to get a better "base" from which to start ...

It is also worth remembering that even though white settlemnt did increase, it was still 5% of the population in Angola by 1975 which is puny. The countryside development plans were failures and the educational background of a lot of colonist very poor to say the least. A good book on this subject (readable on Google Books) is Angola Under the Portuguse by Gerald Bender.

Considering Portugal limited ressource base I think that the smartest move would have been to ditch Bissao and perhaps Mozambique as well. The remaining ressources would be concentrated on Angola alone as well as the islands. Having a wealthy foreign patron that can pay for the development of the oil fields/mines/infrastructure would help as well. Basically using large scale foreign investment to build up Angola, with some Portuguese contribution.

Apparently the Hudson Institute wrote a development plan for Angola in the early 1970s. It may have been fantaisist and pie in the skies. But I would love to get my hands on it!

Jan Smuts wanted to buy the southern half of Mozambique from Portugal, with the northern half going to the British as part of Tanganyika.

Perhaps, this happens and the money from the transaction the Portuguese is used to develop Angola?

I'll see if I can find a firm source for this.

 

[Clandango]

Well, they'd be in an even more awkward position there than with Turkey in OTL. The cultural and religious links are there and there'll be the awkwardness that many will be saying it's "because they're black." I mean French Guyana and Caledonia are pictured on the Euro, for heaven's sake. Not to mention Greenland.

The coins and bills don't quite count, as they added Norway then the whole continent to the coins while Greenland is on neither of them, as well as not being part of the European Union.

 

[Admiral Matt]

The coins and bills don't quite count, as they added Norway then the whole continent to the coins while Greenland is on neither of them, as well as not being part of the European Union.

Well, yes I meant that Greenland was in the Union, not on the bills. Hadn't known it wasn't.