Larger Scale Asian migration to Africa

He might be.

The story of Indian migration in the early 19th century Empire is pretty unknown by most of us. I have in fact just purchased a new book about NZ's early colonial history within the imperial trade routes that deals a little (so far as I can tell) with the movement of Indians to and from NZ before 1840 (on British ships usually).

Fair enough.

But any Indian migration to southern Africa prior to 1840 would have been restricted to the Cape (if it happened). The Boers wouldn't have been particularly open to Indian migration I don't think (during apartheid it was still illegal for a person of Indian origin to stay overnight in the Orange Free State). The Pioneer Column only entered Rhodesia in (I think) 1893, so any Indian migration there would have likely only started in the late 1890s or early 1900s.
 
Fair enough.

But any Indian migration to southern Africa prior to 1840 would have been restricted to the Cape (if it happened). The Boers wouldn't have been particularly open to Indian migration I don't think (during apartheid it was still illegal for a person of Indian origin to stay overnight in the Orange Free State). The Pioneer Column only entered Rhodesia in (I think) 1893, so any Indian migration there would have likely only started in the late 1890s or early 1900s.

You're right, I don't think the Boers would accept a affluent non-White minority in Transvaal or the OFS. That'd probably keep migration restricted to Cape Town.
 
[QUOTE
It doesn't take much, just look at the Japanese of DRC mixing was so common that their doctors and nurses were murdering dozens of new born babies.[/QUOTE]

Good Lord, man! I've looked up the issue on the internet. I don't understand how a human being could do that to a newborn, especially their own child. those miners are scum, and shame on the Congolese government. Reminds me of how the Haitian government stood silent after Trujillo massacred their people.
 

Benevolent

Banned
Good Lord, man! I've looked up the issue on the internet. I don't understand how a human being could do that to a newborn, especially their own child. those miners are scum, and shame on the Congolese government. Reminds me of how the Haitian government stood silent after Trujillo massacred their people.

Because anti-blackness is intrinsically connected to Occidental and Oriental colonialism and socio-economic neocolonialism.

But that alone doesn't stop non-black men from fucking black women.

I wasn't surprised basically.

Also 1. Haiti couldn't do shit 2. The international community didn't care and 3. Both the Haitian Elite and most of Dominican society are anti-black as hell.

Eurocentricism doesn't just have a white face. (Also many Moreno oscuro Dominicans died during the Parsley Massacre as well; not just Haitians)
 
Last edited:
You're right, I don't think the Boers would accept a affluent non-White minority in Transvaal or the OFS. That'd probably keep migration restricted to Cape Town.

To be fair, the other colonies in what is now South Africa probably also wouldn't have allowed unrestricted migration. The Cape was more liberal than the Boer republics, but I don't see them allowing floods of non-white migrants, Natal even less so (although large numbers of Indians did go there in OTL).
 

Benevolent

Banned
To be fair, the other colonies in what is now South Africa probably also wouldn't have allowed unrestricted migration. The Cape was more liberal than the Boer republics, but I don't see them allowing floods of non-white migrants, Natal even less so (although large numbers of Indians did go there in OTL).

I mean the Cape Colony by the time of British claiming was full of enslaved Malay and Malagasy people dude, they made up the majority of the colony.
 
I mean the Cape Colony by the time of British claiming was full of enslaved Malay and Malagasy people dude, they made up the majority of the colony.

Not sure if they outnumbered the native Africans, but your point stands.

But I'm not sure any of the colonies in the region would have been happy to see relatively prosperous non-whites come as ordinary migrants. Indentured labourers is one thing, traders etc. is something else.
 

Benevolent

Banned
Not sure if they outnumbered the native Africans, but your point stands.

But I'm not sure any of the colonies in the region would have been happy to see relatively prosperous non-whites come as ordinary migrants. Indentured labourers is one thing, traders etc. is something else.

Cape colony, at the time of British take over had not yet even ventured beyond the far western part of East Cape in 1815.

The expansion wasn't until five years later in 1820 :3

So I am not talking about the whole of SA

If you really think Malay and Malagasy all remained slaves and low level labourers than so be it!
 
Cape colony, at the time of British take over had not yet even ventured beyond the far western part of East Cape in 1815.

The expansion wasn't until five years later in 1820 :3

So I am not talking about the whole of SA

If you really think Malay and Malagasy all remained slaves and low level labourers than so be it!

I know they never all remained slaves or labourers and so on.

Indeed, the second governor of the Cape Colony was mixed-race.

What I'm saying is, I doubt widespread migration of prosperous non-whites would have been allowed into any of the colonies, not that there weren't prosperous non-whites in the colonies.
 
If the Hindu taboo is such an issue, perhqps it might be a draw to the pariahs and other lower castes. I admit i dont know enough, but would it be possible for that to somehow take a preferential view?
 
If the Hindu taboo is such an issue, perhqps it might be a draw to the pariahs and other lower castes. I admit i dont know enough, but would it be possible for that to somehow take a preferential view?

I think that did happen; but I don't really know.

Also, as stated earlier on this thread, the Hindu taboo on Sea Travel was already dying by the 1670s.
 
Top