Milton Keynes!But an interesting alternative that no one explores is the Canberra option- I.E. build a city in the middle of England designed to house the Government.
Aargh!
Milton Keynes!But an interesting alternative that no one explores is the Canberra option- I.E. build a city in the middle of England designed to house the Government.
Thus full devolution comes with a separate English parliament (Manchester? York? Oxford even?) Maybe in 1919 in the wake of the war. Or perhaps in 1930 when representation is extended to the Dominions?
I don't think the issue of non-White dominions being underrepresented in the Imperial Parliment would be resolved so quickly.
It is likely that it would continue with perhaps several ineffectual attempts at reform until the late 50s at the very earliest. By this time it will have become clear to the powers in Westminster that the Imperial Federation's (United Empire?) power in large part relies. on the resources and manpower of the nonwhite dominions such India and Malaya.
Faced with the prospect of extending political equality, or losing their global position they are more likely to then reform the institution. However I think they will initially only do this with the lower house, a upper house weighted in favour of Britain and the white dominions will likely continue until late in the century.
By 1990 I think you might find a set of Dominions like this;
United Kingdom
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
India
Burma
Malaysia
West Indies Federation
Central African Federation (Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi)
West African Federation (Sierra Leone, Gambia, Ghana, Togo)
East African Federation (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda)
South Africa (inc. Namibia and Botswana)
Nigeria
And maybe a set of smaller Dominion like states that also have representation;
Malta
Gibraltar
Falkland Islands
Hong Kong
Inevitably India would be the big beast here, but the various African Dominions would be a significant counterbalance, and the white dominions would retain massive economic power until the late 20th century.
I think such a state might have been possible to construct, but it would have not have been easy by any definition, and there would be points mid century where it would have looked certain to fly apart. By the 90s to remain intact, it would had to have enact equal franchise to all dominion one, and in doing so would definitely no longer be the British Empire. Rather it would probably call itself a successor state to that institution, perhaps something like 'The United Commonwealth'.
Tensions could erupt if Ireland isn't left as it's own dominion, and republican support could rise if the population feel they are being ignored. A country wide Troubles could happen, particularly if groups like the IRB or IRA still exist.
Sorry forgot to add them. Witness my terrible Anglo chauvinism at work.
I don't think the issue of non-White dominions being underrepresented in the Imperial Parliment would be resolved so quickly.
It is likely that it would continue with perhaps several ineffectual attempts at reform until the late 50s at the very earliest. By this time it will have become clear to the powers in Westminster that the Imperial Federation's (United Empire?) power in large part relies. on the resources and manpower of the nonwhite dominions such India and Malaya.
Faced with the prospect of extending political equality, or losing their global position they are more likely to then reform the institution. However I think they will initially only do this with the lower house, a upper house weighted in favour of Britain and the white dominions will likely continue until late in the century.
By 1990 I think you might find a set of Dominions like this;
United Kingdom
Ireland
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
India
Burma
Malaysia
West Indies Federation
Central African Federation (Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi)
West African Federation (Sierra Leone, Gambia, Ghana, Togo)
East African Federation (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda)
South Africa (inc. Namibia and Botswana)
Nigeria
And maybe a set of smaller Dominion like states that also have representation;
Malta
Gibraltar
Falkland Islands
Hong Kong
Inevitably India would be the big beast here, but the various African Dominions would be a significant counterbalance, and the white dominions would retain massive economic power until the late 20th century.
I think such a state might have been possible to construct, but it would have not have been easy by any definition, and there would be points mid century where it would have looked certain to fly apart. By the 90s to remain intact, it would had to have enact equal franchise to all dominion one, and in doing so would definitely no longer be the British Empire. Rather it would probably call itself a successor state to that institution, perhaps something like 'The United Commonwealth'.
Not really. India's current population is very large due to their low economic performance and their choice around education so families had lot's of children who themselves had lot's of children. If you can get their economy of the ground (which as is implied via industrializing it), which will then subsequently need education facilities to train their work force, then you can cut of that population cycle a lot sooner meaning it wouldn't get close to OTL India population. This also has the advantage that while India's incredible jungles and forestry resources are likely to be weakened, they may not be completely killed off like today just to feed themselves.I agree the issue non-white representation would take a lot longer to resolve, I've pushed it back to the late 80s and it does become an Indian empire, it's simply unavoidable. The population disparity will mean it ends up that way.
I don't think the issue of non-White dominions being underrepresented in the Imperial Parliment would be resolved so quickly.
It is likely that it would continue with perhaps several ineffectual attempts at reform until the late 50s at the very earliest. By this time it will have become clear to the powers in Westminster that the Imperial Federation's (United Empire?) power in large part relies. on the resources and manpower of the nonwhite dominions such India and Malaya.
Faced with the prospect of extending political equality, or losing their global position they are more likely to then reform the institution. However I think they will initially only do this with the lower house, a upper house weighted in favour of Britain and the white dominions will likely continue until late in the century.
By 1990 I think you might find a set of Dominions like this;
United Kingdom
Ireland
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
India
Burma
Malaysia
West Indies Federation
Central African Federation (Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi)
West African Federation (Sierra Leone, Gambia, Ghana, Togo)
East African Federation (Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda)
South Africa (inc. Namibia and Botswana)
Nigeria
And maybe a set of smaller Dominion like states that also have representation;
Malta
Gibraltar
Falkland Islands
Hong Kong
Inevitably India would be the big beast here, but the various African Dominions would be a significant counterbalance, and the white dominions would retain massive economic power until the late 20th century.
I think such a state might have been possible to construct, but it would have not have been easy by any definition, and there would be points mid century where it would have looked certain to fly apart. By the 90s to remain intact, it would had to have enact equal franchise to all dominion one, and in doing so would definitely no longer be the British Empire. Rather it would probably call itself a successor state to that institution, perhaps something like 'The United Commonwealth'.
I like this. So if you base representation on population and contribution you initially maintain British dominance and then when the Dominions are placed on the same level as the UK nations, white dominance. You can keep British and white control of the Lords simply by keeping hereditary peers.
Off to teak the timeline.
Ooh I like a good teak timeline: nice, solid and durable!
I imagine in a 1919 era Manchester would be the best bet for an English capital. Anything too 'southern' (Oxford, Winchester, etc) would be too close to London and risk sinking into obscurity. By pushing it further north, but still on good travel links, it has a chance to thrive and develop. Also would stop it looking like a sop to English nationalists and a talking shop. I like the idea of an alt-London as the capital of the Empire, sorry Commonwealth, full of diplomats and embassies.