I would suspect that Paris now will be starting to look London today. Plenty of third generation children of migrant/mixed race families wandering about, covering all colours of the spectrum, facial features and the like. When I walk about my home/work suburbs I see some pretty interesting products of this - there are a surprising amount of red-haired affro school children who are clearly Afro-Caribbean-White British! You can often see the various generations walking about as family groups - elderly grandparents who are immigrants/local, their mixed race children, then their grandchildren who look indistinguishable from White British. Lots of British / Indian mixes and increasingly, East Asian mixes too. The next generation is going to look pretty cool.
Malê Rising
- Thread starter Jonathan Edelstein
- Start date
Jonathan, I'm not entirely sure that the scenario in Spain is all that likely. The formation of a military junta is very unSpanish.
IIRC, TTL there was never a Bourbon restoration, which means that the attempts at de-politicization or submission of the Armed Forces to the Crown (and to a lesser extent, the Parliament) never happened or happened in very different way, because OTL that depolitization transformed a left-wing army into a reactionary one. Furthermore, without the example of a normal coup d'ètat like that of Pavía in 1874, the only reference those soldiers would have had would be a traditional pronunciamiento.
I suppose it would have gone down like this: General X publishes a message to the nation calling for change and restoration of order against the parasitical politicians who just lost Philippines (never a big deal tbh), he gets the support of a few soldiers and officers and goes to Madrid, where if an equivalent of the 1869 Constitution is in place, only the King can name him PM (this will do wonders for the monarchy's prestige
). If he does so, there wouldn't be a military junta, most likely, it would be a mixed military-civil government, in which the civilians occupy most posts and the officers occupy the ones they care about: War, Navy and Gobernación (Interior).
Anyhow, even the military won't be fully behind such thing, most generals will be loyal to the monarchy, so they would accept what the King does, however, there was always a divide between the liberal segments of the military (artillery and engineers corps and peninsulares) and the conservative ones (infantry, cavalry, africanistas).
Also, Jonathan, I'm not sure the Rif would allow for gas attacks, since the Army itself was a better fighting force than the rifeños and the battles were usually fought through skirmishes and small, localized sieges trying to drive Spain towards the coast.
However, the retreat is realistic, the military was never fully behind the African enterprises, either before or after losing Cuba OTL.
In any case, even if the army is contaminated with subversive elements, the Guardia Civil will remain staunchly conservative and they will be used to crush rebellion. You could say Barcelona and its periphery could be controlled by the anarchists, although they will be disputed by the powerful bourgeoisie but the rest of the region was rural and fairly conservative, so it's hard to see how anarchists could dominate it.
IIRC, TTL there was never a Bourbon restoration, which means that the attempts at de-politicization or submission of the Armed Forces to the Crown (and to a lesser extent, the Parliament) never happened or happened in very different way, because OTL that depolitization transformed a left-wing army into a reactionary one. Furthermore, without the example of a normal coup d'ètat like that of Pavía in 1874, the only reference those soldiers would have had would be a traditional pronunciamiento.
I suppose it would have gone down like this: General X publishes a message to the nation calling for change and restoration of order against the parasitical politicians who just lost Philippines (never a big deal tbh), he gets the support of a few soldiers and officers and goes to Madrid, where if an equivalent of the 1869 Constitution is in place, only the King can name him PM (this will do wonders for the monarchy's prestige
). If he does so, there wouldn't be a military junta, most likely, it would be a mixed military-civil government, in which the civilians occupy most posts and the officers occupy the ones they care about: War, Navy and Gobernación (Interior).Anyhow, even the military won't be fully behind such thing, most generals will be loyal to the monarchy, so they would accept what the King does, however, there was always a divide between the liberal segments of the military (artillery and engineers corps and peninsulares) and the conservative ones (infantry, cavalry, africanistas).
Also, Jonathan, I'm not sure the Rif would allow for gas attacks, since the Army itself was a better fighting force than the rifeños and the battles were usually fought through skirmishes and small, localized sieges trying to drive Spain towards the coast.
However, the retreat is realistic, the military was never fully behind the African enterprises, either before or after losing Cuba OTL.
In any case, even if the army is contaminated with subversive elements, the Guardia Civil will remain staunchly conservative and they will be used to crush rebellion. You could say Barcelona and its periphery could be controlled by the anarchists, although they will be disputed by the powerful bourgeoisie but the rest of the region was rural and fairly conservative, so it's hard to see how anarchists could dominate it.
They'll still be a visible minority, so the situation won't be quite the same, but other than that, yeah, pretty much. Of course, by that time, they'll have profoundly influenced what being French is, just as Irish and Italians have done in the United States.
You'll find out what happens to the Basques and Catalans in the 1920s and 30s - it will be another post-Westphalian data point, or maybe two of them.
The Pope is still in Rio; the Italian government may be less militant about its anti-clericalism, but it still isn't ready to let him come back to Rome, and there's also an ongoing dispute about who owns the Vatican and what sovereign rights the Papacy would have if it returned.
I actually hadn't planned to say much more about it than was told in the American update, but since there's interest, I might include more detail in the upcoming Latin America update, or maybe discuss it as backstory when we get to the events in Mexico and Central America during the 1920s.
The cultural influence will be (and already is) major on both sides; France will be more African than OTL, but West Africa will also be considerably more French.
The Québécois are still conservative, although there's a difference between Québec City and Montreal as there is in OTL. There are still some lingering resentments left over from the wartime conscription riots; we'll see a bit more of them when we get to the British Empire's part of the 1910s.
The Filipinos have no immediate interest in socialism - the war of independence was a bourgeois and Legionnaire affair - although there will be conflicts over land reform, with the feudal families on one side and the Legion veterans and Church on the other.
The Rif Republic did exist in OTL; the difference in TTL is that left-wing France was not willing to intervene on the Spanish side (although both Spain and the Rif drew volunteers from Algeria), and the Spanish army ended up too demoralized and war-weary to fight on. It played out a bit like the Algerian war of independence in OTL; Spain won most of the battles but ended up losing the war.
Things will get better. Eventually. But the world is still assimilating all the post-Great War social changes and is going through economic trouble to boot, so for now it's in for a rough time.
Senegal was always going to stay. It's the other West African colonies and Algeria that are "reply hazy, ask again later," although at least Mali is definitely going to leave. Much will be clarified during the 1920s and 30s.
It's starting to, yes. In the 1910s there is still lingering racism, and there are also religious barriers to intermarriage. There are certainly biracial and even multiracial families - we've seen Souleymane and Chiara, for instance, and Funmilayo's half-Vietnamese daughter - but as yet they're a relatively small percentage of the population. Mixed marriages are on the rise, though, and will really take off during the third and fourth generations.
I was thinking that the example would be Prim's coup of 1866, which in TTL was successful in leading to the liberal monarchy.
But you're obviously correct about a purely military government being un-Spanish; I suppose it would be something more like the Peninsular War juntas, with a combined civilian and military leadership.
Maybe, as you say, a general or group of generals can proclaim that the government has failed. The grievance would be more than the loss of the Philippines - there's also the initial defeat in North Africa (comparable to OTL's disaster of the Annual), the loss of the Church's good opinion through blunder, and the economic depression (which is a worldwide problem but will be blamed on the government anyway). The king is then persuaded, with a threat of revolt in the background, to name one of the generals as prime minister, and that general then brings in a mixed right-wing government.
If this seems more realistic to you, I'll rewrite accordingly.
That's one reason why I was thinking that the Catalans might have some success beyond Barcelona and its immediate vicinity; i.e., that there might be a split in the army and some radical soldiers might go over to their side. The anarchists did have some success in the countryside in OTL when they became active in land reform - I figured that the combination of land reform and military disaffection, and maybe a few French and Italian volunteers, could make a Catalan quasi-state viable for a time. Of course, it would have major internal problems, which will play out in the 1920s.
If you don't think that will work, though, I have no problem reducing the borders.
Gas was used in OTL to flush out Rif military columns and disrupt population centers. I was thinking that the Spanish army would use it for the same reasons in TTL - it's an anti-ambush tactic, and everyone used it on each other in the Great War, didn't they? Of course, the state of gas warfare is more primitive in the 1910s TTL than in OTL's Rif War of the 1920s, and Spain will be using chlorine rather than mustard gas, so it will be less effective.
Yes, I do plan to update it - it's just that the ideas on this timeline have been flowing quickly and I haven't had much time for the others. When I reach the next break point in this story, I may take a couple of weeks to update the others.
But that was a coup against the monarchy, not the government, it's somewhat different. Isabel and the moderado dictatorship were extremely unpopular and the queen was accused of sleeping around with anyone (probably true) and her husband of being gay (probably true too). Any change that is not a pronunciamiento in 1866 would require popular support though.
I suppose it is possible, but if these officers accept the king, and I suppose they do, and since the Constitution was approved by the Crown, the final question will be whether they can get the King to grant them power and call off temporarily the Parliament until they can make some way of making sure they can control the chamber. The Parliament can be called off temporarily and special measures can be taken. But it's hard to imagine an actual, proper dictatorship, probably more of a authoritarian period with a state that can't make up its mind about whether being tolerant or repressive, especially with a military not so disenchanted with the parliamentary government as OTL (Cuba's loss was probably the defining event of the 20th century) and more liberal.
It's doable, but I suppose you should explain how the coup came to happen. They would probably need the support of the guardia civil and especially of the capitan general of Madrid, the officer in charge of all the troops in the region and in case of emergency would be pretty close to a warlord in terms of de facto powers.
I'd say that the new government wouldn't call itself of "national salvation", but much rather of "national regeneration". It was a vogue term even before the disaster.
Yes, I think so, it's likely. I suppose they'd pick a mix of conservative authoritarians from the pre-coup parties, like the ciervistas OTL as well as authoritaritarian democratic regenerationists such as the mauristas OTL. Though it'll depend on the personality of the new military PM and the influence the King and the Court can have on the appointments.
Well, maybe among the troops, but even if the officers were liberals, they are just that, Whigs. The liberals OTL were never close to the socialists, and even less to the anarchists. It's no wonder that the socialist parties were banned OTL from 1869 (Sexenio) until the 1890s. And in any case, the military was very contrary to this, even a liberal commander like Baldomero Espartero bombed Barcelona when it rebelled against him in the 1850s.
They can, but it's more likely to be more limited to Barcelona and Tarragona, the northern pats had more of a small property economic state, with heavy Church influence and very influenced by conservative ideals, whether Catalanist or not, usually the former though. In any case, any rebellion in Barcelona is going to end up crushed, the state is not going to tolerate such a rebellion and lose so much prestige, a combination of the capitan general de Cataluña using his troops, alongside the typical killers and thugs the Barcelonese bourgeoisie used to kill trade union leaders and cause lockouts and stuff and Madrid keen on crushing anything close to socialism and non-conservative Catalanism will, sadly, ensure a very violent end to any rebellion.
It is possible that they survive for some time but in any case, it'll end in a very bloody manner.[/QUOTE]
Finally arrived at the updates of the Great War. One thing that I really like is how you've managed to make even the colonized people of Africa, and the African minorities in Europe and the Americas have an interesting story to tell and a mark upon their nations and cultures. Also a big thing is the mention of women's role in history through all of this. These elements are enmeshed throughout the entire TL rather than brief focal points. Just beautifully done. Being a woman of color what you focus on is pretty much how I look at history and our role in it. We don't rule empires anymore, or even have our own states/nations, but we still have an influence on the world other than being steam rolled by the great powers.
I've rewritten the Spanish part of the update, following your suggestions. Hopefully it's more realistic now.
Thanks for helping me fix up Spain, BTW - when I go beyond Africa, I need others to keep me honest. (And things will get better for TTL's Spain once it comes through these troubles.)
Thanks. I tend to think of history as the sum of people acting in concert - great men and women do exist, but they are little without a foundation on which to stand. The actions of the colonized peoples are part of the history of their empires. And in TTL, the colonies are ideologically dynamic, and the great powers are fighting a war which they're less prepared for than OTL's Great War and for which they need the colonies' manpower and logistical support much more. This gives the colonized peoples more leverage - a chance to effect asymmetric change within the imperial system, if you will - and many of them are taking that chance.
Sorry, that should have been "landlords." I must have had the africanista officers on my mind when I wrote that. I'll fix it later.
EDIT: Fix made.
Last edited:
It just feels incredible... and yet somehow right that this is right path of the Philippines. Given how strong the Philippine experience with American rule is despite just lasting practically between 30-40 years; you just created a different Philippines and am I right that this is still TTL's Asia's first independent republic?
I wonder if you can still have a United States looking for some small scale imperialism and see the Philippines as some Asian gateway and turn it into some security/economic protectorate of sorts. I am actually hoping for some Thomasites arriving and introduce English as a medium of communication for TTL's Filipinos, just with more Spanish speakers lingering this time rather than it's almost total disappearance here in OTL.
And also looking forward to your other FAR FUTURE ASBish timeline...
I wonder if you can still have a United States looking for some small scale imperialism and see the Philippines as some Asian gateway and turn it into some security/economic protectorate of sorts. I am actually hoping for some Thomasites arriving and introduce English as a medium of communication for TTL's Filipinos, just with more Spanish speakers lingering this time rather than it's almost total disappearance here in OTL.
And also looking forward to your other FAR FUTURE ASBish timeline...
I am very interested to see what happens to the White Dominions being sundered by a breach of trust/financial breach. That didn't really happen OTL and so they all kept sort of in concert, although that simplifies things. If each of those nascent countries is firmly sundered from Britain (?) and its orbit/protection, I wonder what happens? They could fall into orbit of other countries, they could end up like the Latin American countries IOTL - making progress generally, but falling back regularly as well, due to political instability and military coups.
I wonder if America could take this opportunity to take on some satellites in a way they didn't IOTL? Not an empire per se, but something in between?
Certainly a patronless Australasia could easily fall apart without a firm counter-pressure, which it is possible the British empire provided IOTL. This TL's Australasia is perhaps weaker in many ways, as the NZ territories will strengthen the case of decentralisation that didn't really have legs IOTL
I wonder if America could take this opportunity to take on some satellites in a way they didn't IOTL? Not an empire per se, but something in between?
Certainly a patronless Australasia could easily fall apart without a firm counter-pressure, which it is possible the British empire provided IOTL. This TL's Australasia is perhaps weaker in many ways, as the NZ territories will strengthen the case of decentralisation that didn't really have legs IOTL
One last question on the Spanish update, Jonathan.
You mention that "Abd al-Karim" (which I suppose is the equivalent of OTL's Abdelkrim) that the new regime is both revolutionary and conservative. How's that possible?
Also, iirc, Abdelkrim was some sort of proto-socialist Berber nationalist, so will there be clashes soon between him and the qadis?
You mention that "Abd al-Karim" (which I suppose is the equivalent of OTL's Abdelkrim) that the new regime is both revolutionary and conservative. How's that possible?
Also, iirc, Abdelkrim was some sort of proto-socialist Berber nationalist, so will there be clashes soon between him and the qadis?
I wouldn't expect it to fall apart as such-after all, one of the big drivers behind Western Australian secession was the idea that London would act as a protector. Here, that's not the case.
But I certainly think it will delegate much more authority to the states in terms of domestic policy.
The problem is, if you're out of London's orbit who do you turn to? The Germans don't have any real presence east of Suez bar a few pacific islands, the Japanese and Russians are right out due to Australasian xenophobia (The nation would have to have changed fundamentally to be willing to be the junior ally of an Asian power) and the US is still fairly isolationist.
So I think you'd probably see a bargain where the states get more local control, but in return they agree to fund a larger military and more muscular foreign policy than OTL.
Perversely, louder voices for the states following a breakdown in British imperial authority might see a renewal of the expansionist streak of places like Queensland- in the late nineteenth century they wanted to seize the whole of New Guinea before Britain said "er, no."
If the British are in disarray and withdrawing from the region, there'll be a lot of voices who won't want its remaining pacific islands to end up in the hands of Tokyo, Washington or Berlin.
Good points all. I was just running some brief thoughts on where it may end up. As you say, there are other likely outcomes too. The muscular military is likely. I wonder if a dispersed country like Australasia would be prone to coups. It would seem unlikely a coup plotter could have any real hope of securing everything. The ATL state will not be a Primate City kind of country, where capturing the capital/main city wins the game, like say Argentina.
Yeah. If there were civil disturbances, I'd expect them to be at the state level- ATL Mannix marching Catholic unionists past the Melbourne parliament while it debates a resolution on the Irish question, Labour leaders in Perth having their heads broken by mining company thugs. That type of thing.
The Philippines now have Asia's first two independent republics! And there will certainly be several powers looking for economic and strategic advantage. Japan has the inside track due to its support of the Filipino nationalists, but its influence is weak in the south. Britain or even the Netherlands might try to bring the sultanates into their economic sphere of influence. The United States has the power to be a major investor in the north and south, as does Germany; France might see investment as a way back into East Asia, although it would be a minor player; maybe even Russia might try to establish a presence. The Filipinos will have to be smart and lucky if they want to avoid economic colonization, but on the flip side, many of them will get rich and the country will be exposed to ideas from all over the world.
Internal conflicts, especially over land reform, will also be an issue for the northern Philippines; there might not be Muslim insurgencies, but there's the potential for something like the Hukbalahaps.
I won't say too much now, because we're almost there, but the tensions between Britain and the Empire will play out differently in various places. Britain will still have an empire in 1925, albeit a somewhat reduced one, and whether the dominions are still in it will depend on domestic politics and the amount of leverage they have in managing their relationship. At least some of them will still be British, although there may be an early Statute of Westminister-equivalent initiated by the dominions themselves.
If any of them become fully independent - and at this point I won't say if any will or won't - I don't really see military coups, given the long tradition of responsible parliamentary government. But civil unrest of the type Senator Chickpea describes is very likely, independence or not.
It's a relatively calm backwater; there were some rebellions in the 1890s, but at the moment, the clan chiefs have come to an accommodation with Spain. It helps that there's nothing in Western Sahara which is really valuable to Spain, so that colonial rule isn't heavy-handed, and that Spain has favored the Sahrawi tribes in exchange for military service and to keep the Moroccan sultan in check.
The Rif leader has the same name as Abd el-Krim's father, although he is in fact a cousin from the same tribe.
The republic is revolutionary in its Abacarist-democratic and anti-colonial ideology, but conservative on social issues and in its maintenance of clan and tribal structure (the tribes are the units of electoral representation). In some respects it's a bit like Qaddafi's Libya, without the oil wealth and batshit-crazy leader.
A beautifully stated and succinct view of history, Jonathan!
When I was pursuing a formal BA in History in the later 1990s I was exposed to the phase of the "culture wars" going on then in the USA, where Republicans under the wing of the then only recently gone elder Bush Administration were giving firepower to the general conservative backlash against "history from below;" one of their champions (Gertrude Himmelfarb, IIRC) described the various ethnic, feminist and so on movements as "history with the politics left out."
Implying of course that real politics, the politics that matters, is a matter of a handful of high roller power players moving us all around like chess pieces. One thing your writing in general does is highlight the way these power moves propagate "down" to very ordinary people. Right from the beginning I was wowed by the feminist aspects of West African Islam as you showed it, with the jajils and so on.Actually, to paraphrase Aristotle in a less sexist way, human beings are political animals, and if you do history from below right, everything we do on every level is shot full of politics, starting with nuclear families. Without the social cohesion that comes from politics writ large being writ small as well, there would be no "chess pieces" and all the lines on the map would be written in sand, with random winds erasing them instantly.
It just feels incredible... and yet somehow right that this is right path of the Philippines. Given how strong the Philippine experience with American rule is despite just lasting practically between 30-40 years; you just created a different Philippines and am I right that this is still TTL's Asia's first independent republic?
I wonder if you can still have a United States looking for some small scale imperialism and see the Philippines as some Asian gateway and turn it into some security/economic protectorate of sorts. I am actually hoping for some Thomasites arriving and introduce English as a medium of communication for TTL's Filipinos, just with more Spanish speakers lingering this time rather than it's almost total disappearance here in OTL. ...
I've actually championed that sort of thing across many timelines and I certainly think we should have done that OTL (then it wouldn't be of course
) Instead of grand imperial ambitions founded on contempt for "new-caught, half-taught peoples, half-devil and half-child" to "Christianize and civilize" (ie, trying to grab some more chess pieces to mold as we would) the Philippine venture had been managed as support for an independent Philippines with us asking for no more than naval basing rights at Manila, it could have come across as a win-win deal; not only would the Filipinos acquire a richer patron nation to trade with, but our base there would be a tripwire serving notice to any other imperial power that messing with the sovereign Philippines would draw suspicious American attention. Might have been beautiful...But as with every other scheme of the ambitious American imperialists of OTL, it's been neatly scuppered here!
The Yank impies have shown their hand in Mexico, alienating a movement there with many broad similarities to the socio-political makeup of the Filipino rising. They are bogged down with no money to build and deploy a conquering fleet and the political consensus that permitted the ill-advised Latin American mess is eroding fast, undermining imperialists in general and reviving the sentiments of the old Peace Party. I'd have to check the exact timing to see which comes first, the Spanish crackdown in the Philippines or the American invasion of Mexico, but even if these Asian events started first, any American envoys who showed up to chat up the Filipinos would probably disclose a lean and hungry look that would put them off--they know that look.
If the Philippines need patrons, they know they'd better shop carefully. The British (if the Filipinos have no premonition of what is coming in London, or the stomach to look at India or the new regime in Indochina) already have plenty of choice possessions in Asia and won't seem particularly appealing. The French might not look so bad except I'm sure their trying to build up a suitable naval power to get the job done for the Filipinos would set off all manner of alarm bells in Europe. Maybe they can deal with the Germans, or simultaneously intrigue with both Japan and Russia...
Or just take a page from the Hawaiian book and play them all off against each other round robin. The Filipinos are better off than the Hawaiians; the latter owed their salvation from Yankee acquisition to the joint help of two belligerent powers, who in the middle of fighting each other could agree they didn't want to see the Yankees just sleaze up and take a plum colony for cheap while they were bleeding each other so expensively for theirs. The Hawaiians alone couldn't have done it. The Filipinos on the other hand are a much stronger force in being for any arrogant conqueror to deal with, as the OTL US Army and Marines were to discover so unpleasantly.
So if the Hawaiians can do it it ought to be a cinch for them.I wondered where all this "white colonies in chaos" premonitions were coming from and then thought twice; I really don't know much about British 19th century settler colonies after all!
But from my Yankee perspective, they were and are basically British North America: The Next Generation, especially Australia. We certainly had our secessionist crises but these were about some very deep issues of the national constitution (lower case, referring not to an organizing document but more the sense the word had in the 18th century--the nuts and bolts of how America normally ran). And just a couple; on the whole, most of the time USAians (the dominant Anglo ones anyway) had little interest in the idea of cutting loose.
I'd think the same logic would serve to hold Australasia together. What would be the nature of conflict between settlers in New Zealand versus New South Wales that couldn't be patched over by federal politics? The positive value of being part of a large power composed of people basically similar to themselves would outweigh any fleeting advantage of local sovereignty I'd think.
As for the other sorts of troubles you all see ahead--they look awfully American to me!
The solutions might be no prettier than the OTL USA ones, but by the same token no uglier either.The spiritual conflict of Australasia I'd foresee is basically an echo of the deep US one, the whole "revolutionary freedom" paradigm versus a real foundation on slavery and ruthless conquest of other people's homes. The Aussie version would be milder on the oppressive sides--the Aboriginals were too easy to push aside, whereas the Maori OTL cut deals with the colonists that Native Americans could only envy. And the other subject peoples will be the native Islanders of the Pacific that the British took from the French and consolidated with their own former acquisitions there and wrapped up in a gift package to hand to the Australasians, under the impression these were just another branch of the Empire after all. The white Australians and New Zealanders didn't seek them out of manifest destiny, just followed orders from London. So a lot less guilt all around--depending on how they handle these Polynesians and others henceforth. On the other hand, to this day Australia and New Zealand OTL are a lot more politically leftist than the USA and this reflects the combination of prison colony origin of some settlers with the general nature of the politicalization of British working class emigrants in the 19th century. OTL Australians danced in the streets on hearing the news of the Bolshevik Revolution, or so I've read, and here too I expect a pretty radical sensibility that might make shedding ties to London easier for them--but make the moral dilemmas of the likely racist shenanigans soon to ensue under their independent rule sting more sharply on their more revolutionary consciences.
I honestly don't see why you'd fear a greater likelihood of military juntas and the like than the USA should worry about! A Bolshevik type thing seems more likely to me, and that seems pretty far-fetched. (That's the type of thing that might split the Federation too. But I don't see it actually happening either--just maybe being more feared by the more conservative Aussies than OTL).
Well, I'm no Australian or New Zealander and might be way out of line. Canada, I certainly want to wait and see what Jonathan does with it! Who does this leave?
South Africa of course! With the hard lines of racial apartheid being blurred as they have been here, South Africa seems set for a quite different trajectory than OTL. Freed of their "laager" fortress mentality the white Afrikaaners blur into the "Coloured" ones (as OTL official Apartheid defined them, that is people of mixed Euro-African blood and culture) who have ties to the African natives; Anglo colonists have to insert themselves somewhere in this much more open and complex sprawl of cultural influence. The London regime is going to be very confused indeed trying to pull strings there! If there is a general secession, South Africa is in an interesting position. The angry British colonialists will find them a nearer target for punitive expeditions than Australasia, but the Afrikaaners have some experience resisting overseas domination and they can find allies--the Germans for instance might love to see their formal possessions in southern Africa multiplied tenfold (in value and population) and suitably disgruntled Anglo colonists might not mind the switch, as long as Berlin understands the importance of "ruling" with a very light hand. Or just accepts them as a soft power client/ally--the Boers after all have an independent streak.
If they don't slip into the bad habits of white supremacy, the soft power of an independent South Africa would be considerable; their influence will spread north until they run up against hard boundaries of other territories run well and with the locals having no interest--even there, the better run Central African polities can be wooed with trade and mutual development schemes.
If SA does split off from London I don't know how attractive it will be for British emigrants after that, but it would surely attract some from all over Europe, particularly Germans and Dutch and so forth to be sure. But the African majority will be increasingly assertive.
I see little reason for it to break up into little bits either. I suspect both South Africa and Australasia are already big and strong enough to do well on their own, without falling apart or under some strongman dictactorship.
This is sort-of off topic and potentially quite vain since it's postulating an AH inside an AH, but man, I just can't abandon the idea of French Philippines, especially with TTL's France doing it. I mean, if Frenchness can grant Black African Muslims so much influence upon TTL France, I can only wonder what it will give long-converted Catholic Asians. And it will do exotic things to Filipino as well as French culture. Don't forget the Moros, too !
When I was pursuing a formal BA in History in the later 1990s I was exposed to the phase of the "culture wars" going on then in the USA, where Republicans under the wing of the then only recently gone elder Bush Administration were giving firepower to the general conservative backlash against "history from below;" one of their champions (Gertrude Himmelfarb, IIRC) described the various ethnic, feminist and so on movements as "history with the politics left out."
Actually, to paraphrase Aristotle in a less sexist way, human beings are political animals, and if you do history from below right, everything we do on every level is shot full of politics, starting with nuclear families. Without the social cohesion that comes from politics writ large being writ small as well, there would be no "chess pieces" and all the lines on the map would be written in sand, with random winds erasing them instantly.
This is actually the view of history that I am subscribing with. A people's history kind of view.
I've actually championed that sort of thing across many timelines and I certainly think we should have done that OTL (then it wouldn't be of course
But as with every other scheme of the ambitious American imperialists of OTL, it's been neatly scuppered here!
I'd have to check the exact timing to see which comes first, the Spanish crackdown in the Philippines or the American invasion of Mexico, but even if these Asian events started first, any American envoys who showed up to chat up the Filipinos would probably disclose a lean and hungry look that would put them off--they know that look.
If the Philippines need patrons, they know they'd better shop carefully. The British (if the Filipinos have no premonition of what is coming in London, or the stomach to look at India or the new regime in Indochina) already have plenty of choice possessions in Asia and won't seem particularly appealing. The French might not look so bad except I'm sure their trying to build up a suitable naval power to get the job done for the Filipinos would set off all manner of alarm bells in Europe. Maybe they can deal with the Germans, or simultaneously intrigue with both Japan and Russia...
Or just take a page from the Hawaiian book and play them all off against each other round robin. The Filipinos are better off than the Hawaiians; the latter owed their salvation from Yankee acquisition to the joint help of two belligerent powers, who in the middle of fighting each other could agree they didn't want to see the Yankees just sleaze up and take a plum colony for cheap while they were bleeding each other so expensively for theirs. The Hawaiians alone couldn't have done it. The Filipinos on the other hand are a much stronger force in being for any arrogant conqueror to deal with, as the OTL US Army and Marines were to discover so unpleasantly.
I am hoping that the land reform issue be solved in the earliest time possible. I don't want an Asian banana republic around...
Or a Marcos please... Interestingly, with the geographical position of the Philippines, with enough skill of the Filipino leaders, they can make themselves a Thailand like entity with Japan style modernization but maybe not an Asian power result out of these actions... just enough decent independent survival. This might be how Filipino leaders might welcome American teachers enough to turn the country into an English speaking nation, maybe not as OTL since colonialism do have an effect on this (no speaking of native languages in schools in fear of some sanctions and punishments, carrot and stick approaches), if the British and the Americans share de facto protector status over the country.
That would be a nice picture to imagine!
Bring in French Indo China in the mix too....