As far as what the leaders would be would depend on not so much what the structure of the Parliament is, but what the objective is. If you're oging to make any sort of Imperial Parliament work, you must - I repeat, MUST - make it very worthwhile for the Dominions to be willing to give up ultimate control over their countries, and what is needed to be given up? Foreign policy, trade laws and military leadership are obvious, but beyond that there is a number of yawning differences between the needs and desires of the Dominions and that of Britain itself.

If this is done in the late 19th Century or very early 20th, the problem of Ireland's ultimate fate probably lands in the Imperial Parliament's lap, which is a serious problem from a political standpoint as approving of Ireland's breaking away from the Empire will cause you to have the same problem with the Afrikaners (a certainty) and French-Canadians (quite possible). Knowing that, perhaps the end result is that Ireland is allowed to become a Dominion as a compromise? Likewise, New Zealand would at first have a real issue with the Maori likely being in line with Native Canadians and colored South Africans. Giving control over foreign policy to the Imperial Parliament also means they have to deal with the issues surrounding India, and as people mention Palestine also would become a problem. If the result is a demand for equality across the Empire, the Imperial Parliament would be immediately facing issues with regards to regressive social treatment across the Empire - Apartheid, White Australia, Canada's treatment of its First Nations....lotsa problems here.

The Caribbean territories would probably eventually be integrated into Canada (except for the Falklands, St. Helena and Bermuda staying colonies), with South Africa gaining South-West Africa, Bechuanaland and Southern Rhodesia and many of the smaller islands around Australia from as far east as Pitcairn to as far west as Christmas Island becoming part of Australia or New Zealand. Malta and Cyprus would be possibilities for parts of the Empire as well, particularly the former. Israel would be a very real possibilities, particularly if the Empire forces a solution that allows both sides access to Jerusalem in some way. If Ireland remains a Dominion (I grant this is unlikely, but not impossible if the Imperial Parliament allows the Dominions wide control over domestic policies), it may well dodge The Troubles in their entirety and if not they would likely be much reduced in size and the country would probably be less intertwined than the UK of IOTL, because being a Dominion and with Irish all over the world they'd have the ability to work with all of the rest of the Empire without the need to involve the UK.

But assuming they got over all of the most serious difficultes....it would be invariable that the nations would use each others' truly-immense natural resources for their own advantage, and that of their closest allies. China would probably never get the chance to be the world's factory because the Commonwealth would make absolutely certain India gets it first, and while India wouldn't likely fit in the Commonwealth, it would absolutely be tied to it in pretty much every way possible. China would probably eventually emerge from the Maoist era, but even if they demanded Hong Kong back, they'd not get it, though they would probably get a major sum and priviledged access to the Empire in return for relinquishing the New Territories. Aden would be the same, and by 2020 Aden and Singapore would be two of the richest places on the world as a result of the massive trading that would be heading from India west to Europe and east to Asia and Australia, and with goods heading from the booming East Asian economies to Europe via Singapore. Canada would be the UK's energy source via a pipeline to Halifax (and later probably supplies from offshore platforms on the Grand Banks) and tankers to the British Isles, while India's massive heavy industry is fueled by minerals from South Africa and vast supplies of Australian iron ore, while food moves to the more-densely populated areas from Canada and Australia in unimaginable quantities. The Empire's inter-war desires for growth of value-added industries would create the genesis of some of the world's largest makers of automobiles, railroad equipment and aircraft, and standardization ultimately comes to some degree - Canada eventually begins driving on the left, railroads are built in standard gauge with buckeye couplers and British-standard signalling, the metric system comes across the Empire in the 1950s and 1960s. After World War II, the ever-better systems of air travel created by British and Canadian-manufactured jet airliners results in the Empire's respective populations moving around quite frequently, bringing with it many of the cultural interests. Canada joins their Empire brothers in the competitions of rugby, cricket and football (and prove shockingly good at the first of those rather quickly....), while India's taking their place as the Empire's industrial ally in the second half of the 20th Century massively increases their country's wealth and cultural influence, even as the connections make things go the other way to a large degree as well, particularly as Indians of wealth begin becoming a common sight across the Empire starting in the 1960s.

Established minimum prices for agricultural goods during the Depression ends up being a massive benefit to South Africa most of all, and as a result of this and the massive resource wealth of South Africa by the 1960s the Afrikaners of South Africa are some of the richest people on Earth, even as land reform and more people moving off of the land results in a titanic growth in income for South Africans of colour after the War. (This also all but eradicates the anti-British sentiments among the Afrikaners as time goes on.)

London is the absolute financial capital, but there are numerous capital centres with massive resources of their own - Toronto, Melbourne, Hong Kong, Singapore, Johannesburg, Mumbai. British banks and financial institutions dominate the Empire early on, but the biggest of the Dominions quickly gain a major presence in the post-war era. The British pound sterling is used as the reserve currency and is the currency the natural resources within the Empire are traded in - something that helps the UK's economy immensely - but the currencies of the individual nations are all strong by themselves, particularly the Canadian and Australian dollars. Banking regulations between the nations are standardized in the 1990s primarily on the Canadian mold - this done because of the Canadians' reputation for excellent regulatory management - and the result is that the City of London is by the 2000s every bit the equal of Wall Street if one wishes to go find money, particularly for places in the world that have a lesser view of Americans.

The Royal Navy and Royal Air Force are the established global armed forces for the Empire and all ships carry the HMS Prefix, with military leadership being the Imperial Parliament's job, with the Admiralty and the Air Forces leadership being based in the UK, but with explicit divisions established. The Royal Navy is divided into the Home Fleet, Atlantic Fleet, Mediterranean Fleet, Indian Fleet, Asiatic Fleet and Pacific Fleet, each with their own established bases and command centers, likewise the Royal Air Force, which is divided into First (UK), Second (Australian/New Zealander), Third (Canadian), Fourth (South African) and Fifth (Asian) Air Forces. The Royal Marines are similarly divided into Brigades that have their own established bases across the world. The Armies of the Empire are a little different as there are British, Canadian, Australian and South African Armies and Armed Forces of New Zealand, Ireland and all of the smaller Dominions.

The abilities the combined forces have is absolutely immense - compared to the American armed forces they have a rather smaller total army (though still huge) and a smaller carrier fleet, but a massive Expeditionary Fleet to support the multiple Royal Marines brigades, a very large submarine force (both nuclear and advanced conventional), a massive surface fleet and logistic assets to support all of the above, as well as a gigantic air force with worldwide reach and immense logistical and airlift capacity. Virtually all of the equipment of the Empire's armed forces is made in the Empire itself, and the Empire's armed forces are trained very well indeed, with training in many different environments to suit individual missions - cold weather in northern Canada and hot weather in the interior of Australia, for example.

Politically, the belief of the growth of the Empire as a force for good and for equality of peoples defined its politics throughout the post-War era, particularly as it was felt (not unreasonably) that without the Empire being for all who lived in it it would invariably come apart, the horrors of World War II and the nastiness of Indian partition being hoisted as a real to make sure all who lived in the Empire benefited from it. This focus on the balances between the rule of law, social and economic equality, resolute honesty and as great a personal freedoms as is possible is the driving force for the Empire in modern times, beginning with the immense efforts to improve the lives of blacks of the Caribbean, Native Australians and Canadians, the Maori and all of the various minorities of South Africa in the Post-War era being the genesis of many policies. The Empire of 2020 has long ago condemned bigotry as totally unacceptable in politics, and since the 1980s has pushed new frontiers in the steady growth of LGBTQ rights, which by 2020 are also nearly universal. Individual Dominions have long held differing viewpoints on what is acceptable in society, but as travel and communications improvements have brought the Empire closer together, many of these viewpoints have closed up.

The political parties - Conservative, Labour and Liberal are the three largest ones, and there are many smaller ones, with this diversity of representation existing to such a degree that a single party having a majority of the Imperial Parliament is regarded as almost an impossibility - tend to be led by strong, capable leaders, as they have many good candidates to choose from. Being a Member of the Imperial Parliament is a highly-prestigious position in any right and so the parties are very capable of finding highly-qualified candidates for both party positions and cabinet positions, resulting in a "Imperial political class" that is almost entirely drawn from highly-qualified men and women, an environment that has encouraged the parties to look out for who might be the next great leader. Originally the leaders tended to come from British backgrounds, but starting with the Depression-era years and particularly during the Imperial Prime Ministerships of Winston Churchill (1934-1942), Jan Smuts (1942-1946) and Clement Attlee (1946-1951), the best from the Empire began entering the Cabinets of the Imperial Parliament, a tradition that grew far beyond the first Dominion-born Prime Minister (Smuts) to include a great many of the best from the Empire. Conservative successor, Anthony Eden (1950-1955), was followed by Canadian Lester Pearson (1955-1964), who was then followed by the first Australian Imperial Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, who assumed the post in May 1964.

Imperial Prime Ministers

Joseph Chamberlain - 1902-1906
Henry Campbell-Bannerman - 1906-1908
Herbert Henry Asquith - 1908-1916
David Lloyd George - 1916-1924
Stanley Baldwin - 1924-1929
John Robert Clynes - 1929-1934
Winston Churchill - 1934-1942[1]
Jan Christiaan Smuts - 1942-1946
Clement Attlee - 1946-1950
Anthony Eden - 1950-1955
Lester Pearson - 1955-1964
Gough Whitlam - 1964-1970
Tommy Douglas - 1970-1974
Robert Stanfield - 1974-1982[2]
Edward Heath - 1982-1986
Robert Hawke - 1986-1991
Nelson Mandela - 1991-1998[3]
Edward Broadbent - 1998-1999
Tony Blair - 1999-2008
David Cameron - 2008-2014
Justin Trudeau - 2014-2018
Jacinda Ardern - 2018-present

[1] Resigned due to health issues, remained in War Cabinet under Smuts, remained as a member of the Imperial Parliament until 1962
[2] Retired in an attempt to not bog his party down during an election, Heath's victory seven weeks later was proof this plan worked
[3] Retired at Age 80
I think this must be one of my favourite posts on here...ever. Can I live in this world please? It's either this one or Rattigan's Anglo Saxon Social Model - either will do me fine. I've always hated the idea of Little Britain or Little England; if Britain can't be tied into the security of the EU, something like this would be great.

As I've suggested somewhere on here before, I like the idea of Britishness becoming an international identity rather than something solely associated with our damp little islands off the coast of Europe. If 'British' was unacceptable, I'm assuming that the word 'Imperial' would be dropped at some point in the 50s and some sort of United Commonwealth Federation would take its place? I can imagine Trudeau and Ardern being Commonwealth Prime Ministers, but Imperial Prime Ministers? Not so sure.

I like the idea of India being attached at the hip to the 'UCF' (or the UCF being joined at the hip to India) but being a free federal republic that is able to pursue its own course and being TTL's analogue of China. Maybe it's China that gets partitioned between the CCP and the KMT and India remains united if federalised? Can we butterfly all the horrors of Indian partition in that way?

Come to think of it, what you've laid out here might butterfly quite a few horror stories of the 20th and 21st centuries that can be traced back to the aftermath of Empire: Palestine (obviously), the Troubles, Indian Partition, violence in Cyprus, apartheid. Didn't Ireland go through a dominion phase before the establishment of the Republic or am I misunderstanding? I think Dominion status for the home nations/home rule all round would be something that would allow the Commonwealth Parliament to have a chance of being seen as a proper supranational institution rather than an extension of domestic British arrangements - which long term would be a disaster for such an organisation.

The idea of the UCF being an industrial powerhouse is an attractive one. I would hope its continuing military might would be a relatively benign influence and perhaps a counterweight as well as a partner to American hard power.

And yes, I think Canada had the potential to be an absolute rugby superpower. Not sure I can see cricket being played there though, although I did visit the Sticky Wicket pub in Victoria last year!
 
Last edited:

sprite

Donor
Monthly Donor
Imperial Prime Ministers

Joseph Chamberlain - 1902-1906
Henry Campbell-Bannerman - 1906-1908
Herbert Henry Asquith - 1908-1916
David Lloyd George - 1916-1924
Stanley Baldwin - 1924-1929
John Robert Clynes - 1929-1934
Winston Churchill - 1934-1942[1]
Jan Christiaan Smuts - 1942-1946
Clement Attlee - 1946-1950
Anthony Eden - 1950-1955
Lester Pearson - 1955-1964
Gough Whitlam - 1964-1970
Tommy Douglas - 1970-1974
Robert Stanfield - 1974-1982[2]
Edward Heath - 1982-1986
Robert Hawke - 1986-1991
Nelson Mandela - 1991-1998[3]
Edward Broadbent - 1998-1999
Tony Blair - 1999-2008
David Cameron - 2008-2014
Justin Trudeau - 2014-2018
Jacinda Ardern - 2018-present

[1] Resigned due to health issues, remained in War Cabinet under Smuts, remained as a member of the Imperial Parliament until 1962
[2] Retired in an attempt to not bog his party down during an election, Heath's victory seven weeks later was proof this plan worked
[3] Retired at Age 80
Few nitpicks. I'd say Douglas, Mandela, Broadbent and Ardern would be Labo(u)r & i'd put Blair and Trudeau in the Liberal camp.
 
As far as what the leaders would be would depend on not so much what the structure of the Parliament is, but what the objective is. If you're oging to make any sort of Imperial Parliament work, you must - I repeat, MUST - make it very worthwhile for the Dominions to be willing to give up ultimate control over their countries, and what is needed to be given up? Foreign policy, trade laws and military leadership are obvious, but beyond that there is a number of yawning differences between the needs and desires of the Dominions and that of Britain itself.

If this is done in the late 19th Century or very early 20th, the problem of Ireland's ultimate fate probably lands in the Imperial Parliament's lap, which is a serious problem from a political standpoint as approving of Ireland's breaking away from the Empire will cause you to have the same problem with the Afrikaners (a certainty) and French-Canadians (quite possible). Knowing that, perhaps the end result is that Ireland is allowed to become a Dominion as a compromise? Likewise, New Zealand would at first have a real issue with the Maori likely being in line with Native Canadians and colored South Africans. Giving control over foreign policy to the Imperial Parliament also means they have to deal with the issues surrounding India, and as people mention Palestine also would become a problem. If the result is a demand for equality across the Empire, the Imperial Parliament would be immediately facing issues with regards to regressive social treatment across the Empire - Apartheid, White Australia, Canada's treatment of its First Nations....lotsa problems here.

The Caribbean territories would probably eventually be integrated into Canada (except for the Falklands, St. Helena and Bermuda staying colonies), with South Africa gaining South-West Africa, Bechuanaland and Southern Rhodesia and many of the smaller islands around Australia from as far east as Pitcairn to as far west as Christmas Island becoming part of Australia or New Zealand. Malta and Cyprus would be possibilities for parts of the Empire as well, particularly the former. Israel would be a very real possibilities, particularly if the Empire forces a solution that allows both sides access to Jerusalem in some way. If Ireland remains a Dominion (I grant this is unlikely, but not impossible if the Imperial Parliament allows the Dominions wide control over domestic policies), it may well dodge The Troubles in their entirety and if not they would likely be much reduced in size and the country would probably be less intertwined than the UK of IOTL, because being a Dominion and with Irish all over the world they'd have the ability to work with all of the rest of the Empire without the need to involve the UK.

But assuming they got over all of the most serious difficultes....it would be invariable that the nations would use each others' truly-immense natural resources for their own advantage, and that of their closest allies. China would probably never get the chance to be the world's factory because the Commonwealth would make absolutely certain India gets it first, and while India wouldn't likely fit in the Commonwealth, it would absolutely be tied to it in pretty much every way possible. China would probably eventually emerge from the Maoist era, but even if they demanded Hong Kong back, they'd not get it, though they would probably get a major sum and priviledged access to the Empire in return for relinquishing the New Territories. Aden would be the same, and by 2020 Aden and Singapore would be two of the richest places on the world as a result of the massive trading that would be heading from India west to Europe and east to Asia and Australia, and with goods heading from the booming East Asian economies to Europe via Singapore. Canada would be the UK's energy source via a pipeline to Halifax (and later probably supplies from offshore platforms on the Grand Banks) and tankers to the British Isles, while India's massive heavy industry is fueled by minerals from South Africa and vast supplies of Australian iron ore, while food moves to the more-densely populated areas from Canada and Australia in unimaginable quantities. The Empire's inter-war desires for growth of value-added industries would create the genesis of some of the world's largest makers of automobiles, railroad equipment and aircraft, and standardization ultimately comes to some degree - Canada eventually begins driving on the left, railroads are built in standard gauge with buckeye couplers and British-standard signalling, the metric system comes across the Empire in the 1950s and 1960s. After World War II, the ever-better systems of air travel created by British and Canadian-manufactured jet airliners results in the Empire's respective populations moving around quite frequently, bringing with it many of the cultural interests. Canada joins their Empire brothers in the competitions of rugby, cricket and football (and prove shockingly good at the first of those rather quickly....), while India's taking their place as the Empire's industrial ally in the second half of the 20th Century massively increases their country's wealth and cultural influence, even as the connections make things go the other way to a large degree as well, particularly as Indians of wealth begin becoming a common sight across the Empire starting in the 1960s.

Established minimum prices for agricultural goods during the Depression ends up being a massive benefit to South Africa most of all, and as a result of this and the massive resource wealth of South Africa by the 1960s the Afrikaners of South Africa are some of the richest people on Earth, even as land reform and more people moving off of the land results in a titanic growth in income for South Africans of colour after the War. (This also all but eradicates the anti-British sentiments among the Afrikaners as time goes on.)

London is the absolute financial capital, but there are numerous capital centres with massive resources of their own - Toronto, Melbourne, Hong Kong, Singapore, Johannesburg, Mumbai. British banks and financial institutions dominate the Empire early on, but the biggest of the Dominions quickly gain a major presence in the post-war era. The British pound sterling is used as the reserve currency and is the currency the natural resources within the Empire are traded in - something that helps the UK's economy immensely - but the currencies of the individual nations are all strong by themselves, particularly the Canadian and Australian dollars. Banking regulations between the nations are standardized in the 1990s primarily on the Canadian mold - this done because of the Canadians' reputation for excellent regulatory management - and the result is that the City of London is by the 2000s every bit the equal of Wall Street if one wishes to go find money, particularly for places in the world that have a lesser view of Americans.

The Royal Navy and Royal Air Force are the established global armed forces for the Empire and all ships carry the HMS Prefix, with military leadership being the Imperial Parliament's job, with the Admiralty and the Air Forces leadership being based in the UK, but with explicit divisions established. The Royal Navy is divided into the Home Fleet, Atlantic Fleet, Mediterranean Fleet, Indian Fleet, Asiatic Fleet and Pacific Fleet, each with their own established bases and command centers, likewise the Royal Air Force, which is divided into First (UK), Second (Australian/New Zealander), Third (Canadian), Fourth (South African) and Fifth (Asian) Air Forces. The Royal Marines are similarly divided into Brigades that have their own established bases across the world. The Armies of the Empire are a little different as there are British, Canadian, Australian and South African Armies and Armed Forces of New Zealand, Ireland and all of the smaller Dominions.

The abilities the combined forces have is absolutely immense - compared to the American armed forces they have a rather smaller total army (though still huge) and a smaller carrier fleet, but a massive Expeditionary Fleet to support the multiple Royal Marines brigades, a very large submarine force (both nuclear and advanced conventional), a massive surface fleet and logistic assets to support all of the above, as well as a gigantic air force with worldwide reach and immense logistical and airlift capacity. Virtually all of the equipment of the Empire's armed forces is made in the Empire itself, and the Empire's armed forces are trained very well indeed, with training in many different environments to suit individual missions - cold weather in northern Canada and hot weather in the interior of Australia, for example.

Politically, the belief of the growth of the Empire as a force for good and for equality of peoples defined its politics throughout the post-War era, particularly as it was felt (not unreasonably) that without the Empire being for all who lived in it it would invariably come apart, the horrors of World War II and the nastiness of Indian partition being hoisted as a real to make sure all who lived in the Empire benefited from it. This focus on the balances between the rule of law, social and economic equality, resolute honesty and as great a personal freedoms as is possible is the driving force for the Empire in modern times, beginning with the immense efforts to improve the lives of blacks of the Caribbean, Native Australians and Canadians, the Maori and all of the various minorities of South Africa in the Post-War era being the genesis of many policies. The Empire of 2020 has long ago condemned bigotry as totally unacceptable in politics, and since the 1980s has pushed new frontiers in the steady growth of LGBTQ rights, which by 2020 are also nearly universal. Individual Dominions have long held differing viewpoints on what is acceptable in society, but as travel and communications improvements have brought the Empire closer together, many of these viewpoints have closed up.

The political parties - Conservative, Labour and Liberal are the three largest ones, and there are many smaller ones, with this diversity of representation existing to such a degree that a single party having a majority of the Imperial Parliament is regarded as almost an impossibility - tend to be led by strong, capable leaders, as they have many good candidates to choose from. Being a Member of the Imperial Parliament is a highly-prestigious position in any right and so the parties are very capable of finding highly-qualified candidates for both party positions and cabinet positions, resulting in a "Imperial political class" that is almost entirely drawn from highly-qualified men and women, an environment that has encouraged the parties to look out for who might be the next great leader. Originally the leaders tended to come from British backgrounds, but starting with the Depression-era years and particularly during the Imperial Prime Ministerships of Winston Churchill (1934-1942), Jan Smuts (1942-1946) and Clement Attlee (1946-1951), the best from the Empire began entering the Cabinets of the Imperial Parliament, a tradition that grew far beyond the first Dominion-born Prime Minister (Smuts) to include a great many of the best from the Empire. Conservative successor, Anthony Eden (1950-1955), was followed by Canadian Lester Pearson (1955-1964), who was then followed by the first Australian Imperial Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, who assumed the post in May 1964.

Imperial Prime Ministers

Joseph Chamberlain - 1902-1906
Henry Campbell-Bannerman - 1906-1908
Herbert Henry Asquith - 1908-1916
David Lloyd George - 1916-1924
Stanley Baldwin - 1924-1929
John Robert Clynes - 1929-1934
Winston Churchill - 1934-1942[1]
Jan Christiaan Smuts - 1942-1946
Clement Attlee - 1946-1950
Anthony Eden - 1950-1955
Lester Pearson - 1955-1964
Gough Whitlam - 1964-1970
Tommy Douglas - 1970-1974
Robert Stanfield - 1974-1982[2]
Edward Heath - 1982-1986
Robert Hawke - 1986-1991
Nelson Mandela - 1991-1998[3]
Edward Broadbent - 1998-1999
Tony Blair - 1999-2008
David Cameron - 2008-2014
Justin Trudeau - 2014-2018
Jacinda Ardern - 2018-present

[1] Resigned due to health issues, remained in War Cabinet under Smuts, remained as a member of the Imperial Parliament until 1962
[2] Retired in an attempt to not bog his party down during an election, Heath's victory seven weeks later was proof this plan worked
[3] Retired at Age 80
Not bad. A few there( Like Trudeau) ain’t can’t really see in power beyond the Dominion level. But you never know.

Tommy Douglas though, There are two issues with:
He is highly unlikely to fit in the Liberal party. He was a socialist through and through. And I don’t think in a world with Lester Pearson as PM he would be able to follow up the leadership of the Liberal Party. Basically Tommy was a bit of a radical. Definitely too much for a liberal party recently run by Pearson and possibly too radical for the top job in an empire wide political system.

On a broader note, I am not sure about the idea of Majority governments going away. In most Westminster systems you end up having something like the Conservative-Liberal-Labour split with an occasional breakaway, split and special interest party coming and going over time. I think an imperial parliament would probably end up settling more or less along these lines as different National parties and figures join those imperial parties that fit them best.
 
Few nitpicks. I'd say Douglas, Mandela, Broadbent and Ardern would be Labo(u)r & i'd put Blair and Trudeau in the Liberal camp.
Truthfully, I had a bit of a shift in politics, as Attlee's Labour Party only lasted one term in office and as Pearson's Liberals were the successors to Eden's Conservatives, the Labour Party felt that the Attlee-led Labour was too conservative for the tastes of the Empire, whereas the Pearson and Douglas (his lieutenant here) Liberals led major social changes of their own, resulting in there being something of a reversal of positions between the two parties, resulting in the Labour choosing union-friendly moderates like Whitlam and Hawke while the Liberals move more notably to the left side of the political spectrum, resulting in a newer generation of leaders growing into the party in the 1970s and 1980s, of which Mandela and Broadbent were a part of. The Labour Party saw in Blair the ability to counteract Mandela's charisma (and others in the party - he wasn't the only one) while maintaining a more centrist position, and Blair got the job done, even if he was intellectually not quite the equal of Broadbent. Blair left the leadership of the party as a result of the loss to Cameron - the first transfer of power from one Brit to another since Attlee to Eden nearly sixty years earlier - but Justin Trudeau, the handsome, charismatic son of a leading Canadian national leader of the 1960s to 1980s, was pretty much in the right place at the right time. Unfortunately for him, four years later he faced a young woman from New Zealand who was every bit his equal in that regard....

The Conservatives here have always held the viewpoint that competency matters more than charisma and that honestly rules all, resulting in a long list of capable leaders of the party going all the way back to Eden and MacMillan, and Stanfield and Heath were among the best of these, along with other capable party leaders and influencers of the 1980s and 1990s - John Major, Malcolm Fraser, Paul Keating, William Davis, Malcolm Rifkind, Peter Lougheed, Frederik de Klerk, Lee Kwan Yew, Murray MacLehose - who while highly capable were unable to effectively challenge the leaderships of Hawke, Mandela and Blair due to all three being very popular people during their times in office. Despite this, the absolute necessity of consensus among the various portions of the Empire made sure that all of the above had their voices heard.

Basically Tommy was a bit of a radical. Definitely too much for a liberal party recently run by Pearson and possibly too radical for the top job in an empire wide political system.
He was a radical by Canadian standards, yes. But among a body that was pushing for major social changes to suit a wide-ranging Empire, and with Pearson (who was more than a little liberal in his social policies as well) as a mentor, I think he would fit just fine, and charisma and leadership skill are two areas where Tommy Douglas certainly would not be lacking.

On a broader note, I am not sure about the idea of Majority governments going away. In most Westminster systems you end up having something like the Conservative-Liberal-Labour split with an occasional breakaway, split and special interest party coming and going over time. I think an imperial parliament would probably end up settling more or less along these lines as different National parties and figures join those imperial parties that fit them best.
I can see that point, but at the same time when you're talking about a unified global empire with a population of 200+ million in many very different societies, I would say traditional Westminster-style systems would be all but unworkable just because of the vast gaps in opinions among its participants. Imagine what's happening among the political parties in the UK IOTL and multiply that and you see the problem. That's why I went for the idea of a long series of regular minority governments, as it gives a greater say to smaller groups and parties, which IMO would make the whole works more stable in the long term and pushes for the higher quality of participants, making it harder for party apparatchiks to gain influence by riding party successes.
 
I think this must be one of my favourite posts on here...ever. Can I live in this world please? It's either this one or Rattigan's Anglo Saxon Social Model - either will do me fine. I've always hated the idea of Little Britain or Little England; if Britain can't be tied into the security of the EU, something like this would be great.
I can understand the idea of nationalism as well as anyone, but at the same time if it means withdrawing into one's own castle it to me seems counterproductive. Why wouldn't you want to expand your horizons?

As I've suggested somewhere on here before, I like the idea of Britishness becoming an international identity rather than something solely associated with our damp little islands off the coast of Europe. If 'British' was unacceptable, I'm assuming that the word 'Imperial' would be dropped at some point in the 50s and some sort of United Commonwealth Federation would take its place? I can imagine Trudeau and Ardern being Commonwealth Prime Ministers, but Imperial Prime Ministers? Not so sure.
I'm kind of of two minds on the whole "British" thing. Yes, the British did build said Empire, but at some point Dominion identity is going to form, that's unavoidable. IMO, such an Imperial Federation such as this presents an opportunity to be both at the same time. The individual Dominions would have a sizable amount of control over their own territories, but the possibility of someone from Canada or Australia or New Zealand or South Africa (or any of the other smaller Dominions, too) leading the Empire is something that would be an immense draw to many in politics. Politicians in leadership positions tend to be by their very nature ambitious, you don't get to such positions without such ambition. The ability for the "British" identity to be the base point for many elements of the Empire - and many of the cultural aspects of all of the countries there both IOTL and ITTL are linked to that identity, ITTL far more so of course - would make the idea of this being the British Empire, or perhaps just the Empire, a much more positive view. And this would absolutely eliminate the whole Little Englander view, I'd bet. After all, they built the Empire, they created horizons far beyond the dreams of the likes of Cecil Rhodes, why would they even consider limiting themselves to their collection of small islands? I can't see the "Imperial Parliament" and "Imperial Prime Minister" names being a problem in this world even to dedicated social liberals like Trudeau or Ardern or even to those who are only members of the Empire by conquest like Mandela.

I like the idea of India being attached at the hip to the 'UCF' (or the UCF being joined at the hip to India) but being a free federal republic that is able to pursue its own course and being TTL's analogue of China. Maybe it's China that gets partitioned between the CCP and the KMT and India remains united if federalised? Can we butterfly all the horrors of Indian partition in that way?
India was a major bugbear and a major financial loss to the Empire for much of the first half of the 20th Century, primarily because it was the jewel in the crown that London had no desire to give up on even if it was proving enormously difficult and expensive to hold in the Empire. The Imperial Parliament would have every desire to build it up as they do the White Dominions for economic reasons, and if the result of their efforts is an India that is far ahead of OTL in 1947 keeping it connected to the Empire becomes much easier, even if keeping it as part of the Empire itself is probably ASB. I can easily see Jawaharlal Nehru becoming a very big ally of the Imperial Parliament and vice versa, particularly with the Attlee and Pearson Parliaments being much closer to Nehru's personal views and that of the Indian National Congress than those of Churchill and Eden. (While the former was never a fan of him, Churchill is known to have said to Gandhi and Nerhu that if they do well with what the UK gave them with the Government of India Act of IOTL that they would get much more later on. I can see that being amplified here, as while Churchill wouldn't be a fan of such a move as Imperial PM, he'd be easily smart enough to see what could be done with it.)

The problem with avoiding partition was an explicit problem in that Jinnah and the Muslim League would have spent the entirety of Imperial Parliament times with explicitly different goals than those of the Indian National Congress - Congress wanted India to remain a unitary state, whereas the Muslim League felt that such an arrangement would lead to Hindu domination and thus the taking away of rights from Muslims by Hindus. (Considering the fact that the RSS was pretty much endemic among many sections of the Hindu communities of India, this was not an unjustified fear.) Short of working with Gandhi on forging the alliances between Hindus and Muslims much earlier on - like post-World War I, here - avoiding partition to some degree is ASB, as trying to forcibly hold it together after World War II will invariably cause immense levels of communal violence. IMO, giving that an outlet would be an absolute necessity, something that even Gandhi and Nehru realized. Establishing partition but doing so in a more steady and organized way would likely result in fewer of the violent outbursts, particularly in Punjab.

I don't think dividing China would be a good idea either for all of the same reasons, and as much it would be nice to kneecap Mao, I don't think you could do that unless you want to occupy in China, which I can't see as possible, or massively supporting Chiang, which creates a long list of additional problems. Better to keep out of that mess, aside from Hong Kong of course. I can't see the Imperial Parliament being any less than enormously anti-communist so I can't see Mao getting much in the way of support, but I also don't think they'd want to back up Chiang both of the problems above and for fear of Mao's armies attacking Hong Kong.

Come to think of it, what you've laid out here might butterfly quite a few horror stories of the 20th and 21st centuries that can be traced back to the aftermath of Empire: Palestine (obviously), the Troubles, Indian Partition, violence in Cyprus, apartheid.
Palestine is a hard one to solve, made worse by the presence of Irgun and the Stern Gang (particularly after Deir Yassin and the bombing of the King David Hotel) and by the desire of the Arab leadership to take over Palestine for themselves. Again, the only real way to solve this one is to get at it early, and speak up early and often against the treatment of Jews by the Nazi, the first one easily done but the second one rather harder. Not impossible, but harder. If you choose to jump on this early, it may make sense to send out non-British armed forces units to try and act as neutral arbiters between the sides involved.

I've already mentioned the Troubles, and as Smuts and his colleagues from South Africa would have a considerable amount of prestige from being the leaders of the Empire them being able to push through many aspects of the Fagan Commission as well as kneecap Daniel Malan's leadership abilities, thus making Apartheid as we know it impossible, wouldn't be all that difficult. (It wouldn't hurt that the aforementioned agricultural supports would be a massive benefit to the Afrikaners.) Cyprus would be nice to keep aboard but that one would invariably lead to some difficulties with the Turks and a lot of difficulties with Greece.
 
Following on what has been said earlier in the thread, the next question I'd ask is, absent a particular POD, what portions of the Empire would be part of the Imperial Parliament?

I think it's obvious that the UK and the White Dominions would be a part of it, bringing in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Plenty of smaller territories would likely eventually be moved into these larger countries - since the likelihood of failure of the West Indies Federation is fairly high, and talk of the Caribbean territories becoming a part of Canada had existed to some degree for pretty much the entirety of the 20th Century having them be part of Canada is logical, while South Africa outright annexing the former German South-West Africa colony and integrating Bechuanaland and Southern Rhodesia is similarly logical. (You might consider annexing the entirety of Rhodesia, but I think that would be a much harder sell.)

Australia and New Zealand would divide up the territories of the Pacific - New Zealand takes over Fiji, Tonga, Tuvalu, Western Samoa, Kiribati and Pitcairn, Australia everything else, thus including Christmas Island, Norfolk Island, the Solomon Islands, Nauru and the New Hebrides. After the Independence of Indonesia and their subsequent aggression towards the Dutch over New Guinea the proposed single state over the Island (proposed IOTL by New Zealand) comes to pass, with New Guinea becoming a separate colony as a result, initially administered by Australia until they grant independence to the island in the mid-1970s, whereupon it joins the Imperial Parliament as a dominion. Malaysia and Singapore are also part of the Federation, initially as one entity but as two after the Union of Malaysia and Singapore is broken in 1965, as IOTL.

Many smaller territories either remain as British dependencies (Bermuda, the Falklands, Saint Helena, Gibraltar, Aden) or move to being smaller independent nations on their own (Malta, Cyprus, Maldives, Seychelles). I'm divided on what to do about Palestine and Hong Kong. Hong Kong sooner or later is going to be much, much too large and powerful to be left without any representation beyond its British-appointed Governor, but granting them complete independence (even as a Dominion under the Imperial Parliament) would certainly piss China off. Keeping Jews out of Palestine is difficult before World War II and absolutely impossible afterwards, and after the Holocaust it would probably be better in any case to figure out how to get Jews and Arabs to live in Palestine without too much difficulty. I'm seeing an Israel established with the British helping its creation being a member of the Imperial Parliament if for no other reason than to use its membership as a warning to the Arabs - come after us and the whole damn world is gonna land on your heads.

Ireland I think is a possibility depending on how the separation of Ireland from the United Kingdom goes, though I grant it isn't an easy one to pull off. Best option of dealing with that as I see it is to separate Northern Ireland early on and suppress both the UVF and the Republican forces, with the goal of avoiding both the Easter Rising and the War of Independence and allowing the British to carefully and gently allow Ireland Home Rule. Provided the problems with the Ulster Volunteers and the Irish Volunteers can be avoided, the sort of independence achieved by the White Dominions can be made to pass through the constitutional nationalism that had been the key way forward by the Irish since the Fenian Rising.

India is certainly not going to be a Dominion, but obviously it would be the single biggest ally of it, aside from the Americans of course. (Who may not be as keen on the Brits as IOTL, namely because of the Americans' long stance against colonialism and the Monroe Doctrine.) India being the heavy industry capital of Asia would on its own result in major changes to history, particularly as the Empire's support of them would likely result in the Europeans thinking of them as an ally as well. India's frequent butting heads with the Pakistanis and the rather-wretched leadership Pakistan has suffered from for most of its history would invariably result in Pakistan eventually having as little to do with the Empire as possible, seeing them as partisan against them in favor of India, giving openings to both China and the United States. (Whether they want to involve themselves is another matter, particularly with regards to the Americans.) Sri Lanka is unlikely to have any involvement with the Empire post-independence beyond the usual trade and diplomatic relationships. The African nations are the same outside of South Africa, of course, though again the relationships with the Empire would be considerable, particularly for economic reasons.
 
India is certainly not going to be a Dominion, but obviously it would be the single biggest ally of it, aside from the Americans of course. (Who may not be as keen on the Brits as IOTL, namely because of the Americans' long stance against colonialism and the Monroe Doctrine.)
This makes me wonder how Commonwealth/Imperial Federation relations develop with the US, post WW2 (if WW2 runs a similar course) and how the suggested IPMs would influence such relations. I find the 'special relationship' something of an embarrassment, mainly because an enfeebled Britain is the only one who goes on about it.

In ITTL, perhaps there would be a cooling off post WW2 as the Federation started to take off, Churchill's influence faded and if there was still some kind of stand off re: Suez. It looks like the Reagan/Thatcher love in which seemed to have rekindled the Anglo American relationship in the 80s is butterflied in this timeline. Would an ATL Tony Blair have been the one to rekindle it instead, by jumping into the 'War on Terror'? (Although perhaps if the situation in Palestine is less of a running sore ITTL, maybe there would be no War on Terror in the first place...)

I guess a more technologically assertive Federation would be able to stand on its own two feet far more in fields such as defence and aerospace generally. Might we also see a mini space race in the 50s between the US and the Federation before a 'main event' space race begins with the Soviet Union and the launch of Sputnik? At that point, it might be that the Federation and the US throw their lot in together, not just in space but in terms of defence cooperation? Would the Federation under the suggested leaders be happy for its European forces to be integrated into NATO or would it have a more stand offish approach, like that of France in OTL, standing apart, but in a common cause to contain the USSR.
 
This makes me wonder how Commonwealth/Imperial Federation relations develop with the US, post WW2 (if WW2 runs a similar course) and how the suggested IPMs would influence such relations. I find the 'special relationship' something of an embarrassment, mainly because an enfeebled Britain is the only one who goes on about it.

In ITTL, perhaps there would be a cooling off post WW2 as the Federation started to take off, Churchill's influence faded and if there was still some kind of stand off re: Suez. It looks like the Reagan/Thatcher love in which seemed to have rekindled the Anglo American relationship in the 80s is butterflied in this timeline. Would an ATL Tony Blair have been the one to rekindle it instead, by jumping into the 'War on Terror'? (Although perhaps if the situation in Palestine is less of a running sore ITTL, maybe there would be no War on Terror in the first place...)

I guess a more technologically assertive Federation would be able to stand on its own two feet far more in fields such as defence and aerospace generally. Might we also see a mini space race in the 50s between the US and the Federation before a 'main event' space race begins with the Soviet Union and the launch of Sputnik? At that point, it might be that the Federation and the US throw their lot in together, not just in space but in terms of defence cooperation? Would the Federation under the suggested leaders be happy for its European forces to be integrated into NATO or would it have a more stand offish approach, like that of France in OTL, standing apart, but in a common cause to contain the USSR.
In OTL Post WW2 Britain had a choice. They could put their focus into the Commonwealth, the U.S or Europe. The commonwealth wasn’t quite as interested as they used to be, the U.S didn’t really see Britain as an equal (which is probably a fair assessment at that point) and Europe was a bit of an unknown at that point. Not a lot of good choices.
ITTL the Commonwealth of OTL is already a single political unit. Therefore the choice is different. Expanding relations with former members of the empire (India for example) is, I hope, a no brainer. (Incidentally, If better moves were practiced in the first decades of the 1900’s I could see India being the first member of the ITTL Commonwealth, but that’s probably a separate discussion). However, an Imperial Federation may still be strong enough to forge close relations with both Europe (France initially) and the US without being dependent on either.
A version of the Dunkirk Treaty or similar efforts could increase partnership with France. The Atomic Energy Act in 1946 could definitely drive the post-war government to establish a nuclear technology share with France after the US took the bomb and said no one else can have it. That could lead to greater partnership. If anything the Imperial Federation would be the stronger partner. I also read in a thread on here somewhere that at one point Belgium and The Netherlands were set to join Britain and France in the Suez invasion. That could help create an Empire- West Europe Partner bloc within NATO.

Contrasting with this, if Canada has any influence at all, some relationship with the US is inevitable. It’s kind of an economic necessity. And with (eventually) a majority of your voters outside of Europe, Integration with it is probably not even considered, though favourable trade relations with the EU as a whole are probably possible.

All that to say, an Imperial Federation would probably be almost required to stand a little separate from both the US and Europe, but assuming similar goals and attitudes they probably have an initially closer connection with the former but their goals more easily along with the latter.
 
This makes me wonder how Commonwealth/Imperial Federation relations develop with the US, post WW2 (if WW2 runs a similar course) and how the suggested IPMs would influence such relations. I find the 'special relationship' something of an embarrassment, mainly because an enfeebled Britain is the only one who goes on about it.
I'm not sure I would say the special relationship is an embarassment at all, if anything it can be seen as a distinct advantage in normal times and can (and has) allowed Britain to engage in diplomatic and economic pursuits they otherwise almost certainly couldn't have. It may not be one of equals, but few nationstate to nationstate relationships are, and being the smaller of the two doesn't necessarily make them feeble.

And yes, I can see my list making things interesting indeed. Lester Pearson and Dwight Eisenhower would be an interesting one indeed, largely because while they came from dramatically different backgrounds they had a similar worldview in many regards, and its similarly true with a lot of the pairings, if we assume OTL's US Presidents. Kennedy and Pearson would probably get along well too. Johnson's Civil Rights pushes would probably be enthsuiastically supported by Whitlam. Richard Nixon and Tommy Douglas....yeah, that one is gonna be a touch prickly. Carter and Reagan would have it fairly easy with Stanfield and Heath, perhaps a little less so with Hawke. Clinton and Mandela would be an intriguing relationship, I suspect. We've already seen the George W. Bush and Tony Blair show, of course. Obama and Cameron would be an interesting one, though him and Trudeau I suspect would get along swimmingly. Trump and Ardern....ouch, let's just not talk about that one.

In ITTL, perhaps there would be a cooling off post WW2 as the Federation started to take off, Churchill's influence faded and if there was still some kind of stand off re: Suez.
I agree that Churchill and Smuts' relationships with FDR would certainly help keep things smooth, and yeah perhaps something of a cooling off after the war, though as I said above the personal relationships wouldn't be all that bad. Of course, the desires of the United States versus the Empire would be necessarily different.

As for Suez, I can't see that not going down as OTL at least at first, but if Israel is part of the Imperial Parliament, it would likely look more like a UK/France vs. USA deal. The Soviets IMO were bluffing during that whole mess, as they had their hands very full in Hungary at that time, and changing nothing else if they tried to get into it, with the Empire having bases at Malta, Cyprus and Israel, that's not gonna work out for them, even assuming the Turks let the Russian fleet steam through the Bosporous headed for war in any case - I can't see them wanting to piss off London, either. Would Washington try to force the Brits to back down here? Knowing that the Brits will have every intention of not giving in this time and will have a much stronger hand to play, I can't see Washington being willing to screw their relationship with the Empire to save Nasser's backside, particularly if he's courting the Soviets at the same time.

It looks like the Reagan/Thatcher love in which seemed to have rekindled the Anglo American relationship in the 80s is butterflied in this timeline. Would an ATL Tony Blair have been the one to rekindle it instead, by jumping into the 'War on Terror'? (Although perhaps if the situation in Palestine is less of a running sore ITTL, maybe there would be no War on Terror in the first place...)
I would imagine the relationship would probably here be an relationship between two serious heavyweights, both of whom respect each other. None of the names I ran with above (excepting Mandela, but I think he'd be rather different here) are in any way friendly to communism, and I can't see the Empire being particularly chummy with the Soviets. They'd almost certainly be NATO supporters - none of the White Dominions were friendly to communism, and many of the smaller Dominions and territories (especially Singapore and Hong Kong for obvious reasons) are even less friendly to the idea - and while the commercial relationship would be a complicated one, it wouldn't be any more so than the United States' relationship with Japan or Germany by the 1980s. The best odds for real friendship may well be Bush and Blair, but I think Reagan and Stanfield and Heath would be just fine too. Thatcher I can't see as being a particularly good Imperial PM, namely because she was too hardheaded and neoliberalism of the type she leaned so heavily on will get her into all kinds of trouble in several of the Dominions (especially South Africa and New Zealand) which is why I had Heath, who was a good man who dealt a shitty hand, be the guy who replaced Stanfield (who was also more of a pragmatist too).

'War on Terror'? I can't see it. No way would the Empire not want to figure out the problems in Palestine way before now, and dealing with it immediately after WWII is the best time, when the memories of the Holocaust make the politics easier and the Arabs are still reliant on the British for protection from the Soviets and from each other. Give the Palestinians a sizable slice of the Sinai and part of the Jordan to make life easier for them and figure out how to get both sides able to live in Jerusalem and you're making headway on the problem. The Empire pretty much has to deal with either the Shah or the House of Saud, and the former is easier at least at first. (Have the Shah deal with many of his country's structural issues long before IOTL and maybe he stays on the throne, or at least the chaos of late-1970s Iran results in a constitutional monarchy of some sort.) I think if there is gonna be troubles with Muslim-majority nations, the most likely flashpoints are with Turkey (bullheaded nationalism invariably banging heads with others), Pakistan (what ISN'T a problem here?) or Indonesia (who won't like the Empire because of West Papua).

I guess a more technologically assertive Federation would be able to stand on its own two feet far more in fields such as defence and aerospace generally. Might we also see a mini space race in the 50s between the US and the Federation before a 'main event' space race begins with the Soviet Union and the launch of Sputnik? At that point, it might be that the Federation and the US throw their lot in together, not just in space but in terms of defence cooperation? Would the Federation under the suggested leaders be happy for its European forces to be integrated into NATO or would it have a more stand offish approach, like that of France in OTL, standing apart, but in a common cause to contain the USSR.
On the more assertive front, remember what I said about the aerospace industry earlier. IOTL Britain and Canada effectively flushed opportunities to be the Americans' equals on many fronts. Yeah, not happening here. The Vickers V-1000 was meant to be part of the support forces for the V-Bombers, and as they now have places to set up bases all over the globe, no way is the Royal Air Force not going to do that, so the V-1000, and thus its civilian brother in the VC-7, is going to fly. Perhaps even the De Havilland Comet doesn't have the problems of IOTL and thus it gets going earlier, too. With such far-flung lands to connect, no way is the Empire not going to want to develop a huge aerospace industry, and no way with such an industry available will they give up anything to the Americans they don't have to. And considering the number of projects the Commonwealth Nations passed on that they could have used....

As far as a space race, I honestly am not sure they'd want to get into it at least at first, but after Sputnik, yeah that'll be a rapid jump-in for sure. With access to worldwide bases and huge numbers of bombers and aircraft carrier fleets, I don't think the Empire would bother with ICBMs at first, but I think they'd be the best developers of cruise missiles on the planet, and they'd probably be quick to work on IRBMs and the like, with SSBNs probably coming in the 1970s, with a handful of bases developed to suit them to allow them to sail on all the world's oceans, making an enemy's already-difficult task of finding them that much harder.

I'd be inclined to say that they'd be more along the common-cause lines than integrating into NATO and thus under American command. It's not necessary here, and more to the point I'd expect in this world that the Commonwealth's land army commitments to Europe would probably be rather bigger in any case because of the size of the forces available to them. The additional carriers that NATO has access to as a result of the Empire makes the Soviets' job of trying to stop resupply into Europe during any NATO-Warsaw Pact conflict even harder than it already was IOTL, particularly if they have sufficient forces in Scotland or the Shetlands to allow their forces to make life more difficult for Soviet Naval Aviation. If anything you might end up with the French being an arbiter between the two sides, acting as the neutral party between the American-led NATO Command and the Empire's forces in the event of any disputes.

In OTL Post WW2 Britain had a choice. They could put their focus into the Commonwealth, the U.S or Europe. The commonwealth wasn’t quite as interested as they used to be, the U.S didn’t really see Britain as an equal (which is probably a fair assessment at that point) and Europe was a bit of an unknown at that point. Not a lot of good choices.
ITTL the Commonwealth of OTL is already a single political unit. Therefore the choice is different. Expanding relations with former members of the empire (India for example) is, I hope, a no brainer. (Incidentally, If better moves were practiced in the first decades of the 1900’s I could see India being the first member of the ITTL Commonwealth, but that’s probably a separate discussion). However, an Imperial Federation may still be strong enough to forge close relations with both Europe (France initially) and the US without being dependent on either.
I agree. I think the Empire would hang on to India as a colony for as long as humanly possible, but they would definitely be the big player as far as allies go. As for Europe, I think the smaller players of Western Europe would be interested from Day One (Netherlands probably first in line if as IOTL they are liberated from the Nazis mostly by Canadian troops) and indeed France wouldn't be too long to seek help from the Empire both from a defense and economic standpoint as well. Assuming World War II is as IOTL the Empire's first concern would be the rebuilding of the UK, along with the helping of others. (That rebuilding would probably also be where the British political and economic dominance of the Empire ends, simply because they'd need the help and the Dominions, part of a Federation or not, wouldn't do that without there being a quid pro quo of some kind.)

A version of the Dunkirk Treaty or similar efforts could increase partnership with France. The Atomic Energy Act in 1946 could definitely drive the post-war government to establish a nuclear technology share with France after the US took the bomb and said no one else can have it. That could lead to greater partnership. If anything the Imperial Federation would be the stronger partner. I also read in a thread on here somewhere that at one point Belgium and The Netherlands were set to join Britain and France in the Suez invasion. That could help create an Empire- West Europe Partner bloc within NATO.
I agree, though I think the Empire would be quite quick to go for nuclear technology even without the Manhattan Project. It wouldn't take long for High Explosive Research to create a working weapon in this world, particularly with access to the scientists of many sections of the Empire as a result. France in this scenario may be quite keen to work with the Empire to as great a degree as possible for a variety of reasons, and nuclear research (both weapons and for power reactors) would I suspect be quite far up that list - particularly as IOTL nearly two-fifths of the world's uranium production comes from Australia, Canada, South Africa and Namibia (which here would be part of South Africa). I would expect that nuclear energy would be a major scientific push across the Empire and that nuclear power plants would be seen in many, many corners of the Empire, taking advantage of the developed technology.

Contrasting with this, if Canada has any influence at all, some relationship with the US is inevitable. It’s kind of an economic necessity. And with (eventually) a majority of your voters outside of Europe, Integration with it is probably not even considered, though favourable trade relations with the EU as a whole are probably possible.
Again, agreed fully.

All that to say, an Imperial Federation would probably be almost required to stand a little separate from both the US and Europe, but assuming similar goals and attitudes they probably have an initially closer connection with the former but their goals more easily along with the latter.
Yep, and I think over time there would be a drift away from the American-led world, particularly once the Empire no longer is dealing with the costs and political headaches of colonies to rule over and is focused on the well-being of its citizens through social and economic development. Such an Empire would absolutely require the development of a large navy and air force just to ensure the safety of its territories and its shipping lanes and air travel, which brings them closer to the Americans at first, but I would expect (especially after the end of the Cold War) that the Army would be transformed into more of an expeditionary force, still capable of bringing immense power to a fight but having many additional uses. As with Europe's steady integration, the gradual merging of the Empire's social and cultural distinctions would make become more of a single entity, even if many aspects of the cultural differences are bound to remain long into the future.
 
The other thing about an Imperial Federation is that its geographical spread and the necessity of excellent infrastructure might not only be a stimulus to a global Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. In OTL, the internet was developed by the needs of the US military AFAIK, although Tim Berners-Lee enabled the world wide web in its current form. One wonders whether the Federation's military, political and cultural needs might have accelerated the development of the internet and it would have been the Federation (with the extraordinary heritage of the UK in computing particularly) that took the lead in this area. As a result, it could have been the Federation, as much as the US, that was a driver of online commerce and social media and perhaps places like Cambridgeshire or even Manchester that might be world wide hubs of information technology as much as Silicon Valley. If that's the case, you also wonder how the proposed leaders of an integrated Commonwealth/Federation might use/abuse such power. Would the global RN and global RAF be joined by a Royal Cyber Force? Would the Federation's proposed leaders use such power responsibly?
 
The other thing about an Imperial Federation is that its geographical spread and the necessity of excellent infrastructure might not only be a stimulus to a global Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. In OTL, the internet was developed by the needs of the US military AFAIK, although Tim Berners-Lee enabled the world wide web in its current form. One wonders whether the Federation's military, political and cultural needs might have accelerated the development of the internet and it would have been the Federation (with the extraordinary heritage of the UK in computing particularly) that took the lead in this area. As a result, it could have been the Federation, as much as the US, that was a driver of online commerce and social media and perhaps places like Cambridgeshire or even Manchester that might be world wide hubs of information technology as much as Silicon Valley. If that's the case, you also wonder how the proposed leaders of an integrated Commonwealth/Federation might use/abuse such power. Would the global RN and global RAF be joined by a Royal Cyber Force? Would the Federation's proposed leaders use such power responsibly?
Part of the reason that Silicon Valley was such a hub was, well, the silicon mines. Something I don’t think Cambridge has. I think it would still be a, perhaps the, centre for Imperial federation computer research though. They wouldn’t need a specialized force, or the publicity that brings. GCHQ was reading signal traffic, both internal and external, long before the NSA tried their hand. And still does so today. I doubt it would be much different ITTL. You would just have one Amgen you in charge of it instead of a dozen in the area covered by the Federation.
 
Part of the reason that Silicon Valley was such a hub was, well, the silicon mines. Something I don’t think Cambridge has.
Really? See, this is why I'm so glad I found this site - you learn new things every day. I guess 'Silicon Fen' in Cambridgeshire is just poetic license!
 
I'm more or less in agreement with @ArtosStark as there really isn't a lot of point to a flashy organization when what you're doing is meant to be secretive.

Beyond that point, I would imagine this world probably would have internet rather sooner, at least as soon as commercially-available computer power is able to make it work, more than anything because of the communications links this Federation would require. You could get it done without it, but as you say, it wouldn't be crazy to see Imperial computer laboratories create the internet simply by having Berners-Lee do his work there rather than at CERN. It's also possible in this world to make the history of technology go very differently. After all, Commodore was founded in Toronto, you could easily make Steve Jobs' parents go to Canada or Australia rather than the United States....
 
I'm more or less in agreement with @ArtosStark as there really isn't a lot of point to a flashy organization when what you're doing is meant to be secretive.

Beyond that point, I would imagine this world probably would have internet rather sooner, at least as soon as commercially-available computer power is able to make it work, more than anything because of the communications links this Federation would require. You could get it done without it, but as you say, it wouldn't be crazy to see Imperial computer laboratories create the internet simply by having Berners-Lee do his work there rather than at CERN. It's also possible in this world to make the history of technology go very differently. After all, Commodore was founded in Toronto, you could easily make Steve Jobs' parents go to Canada or Australia rather than the United States....
Or have BIM/Blackberry recognize that competition was coming and continue to innovate before being overtaken by Apple. The lead they had was pretty enormous. If they had recognized the dangers they may have been able to maintain it to the present day.
 
Or have BIM/Blackberry recognize that competition was coming and continue to innovate before being overtaken by Apple. The lead they had was pretty enormous. If they had recognized the dangers they may have been able to maintain it to the present day.
Or how about all of the above, force the Americans to catch up? 🙂 If Jobs goes to the Empire some place he probably doesn't meet Steve Wozniak, who was perhaps more key to the beginnings of Apple than Jobs was as he actually could (and did) design the original Apple products. Perhaps Jobs meets another computer genius somewhere in the Empire and Wozniak meets another computer-knowledgeable businessman in America, and Apple is born in any case, but as one of the 1977 Trinity (Commodore's PET) is now an Empire creation, perhaps it becomes a quartet thanks to another product from Canada or Australia or the UK.

If Research in Motion can be one of the Empire's biggest developers of communications devices, perhaps they would look into being a maker of other products? I can see them making all kinds of other communications and home integration products like the Google Nest series, smart watches and glasses, radios, smart displays and the like.
 
Or how about all of the above, force the Americans to catch up? 🙂 If Jobs goes to the Empire some place he probably doesn't meet Steve Wozniak, who was perhaps more key to the beginnings of Apple than Jobs was as he actually could (and did) design the original Apple products. Perhaps Jobs meets another computer genius somewhere in the Empire and Wozniak meets another computer-knowledgeable businessman in America, and Apple is born in any case, but as one of the 1977 Trinity (Commodore's PET) is now an Empire creation, perhaps it becomes a quartet thanks to another product from Canada or Australia or the UK.

If Research in Motion can be one of the Empire's biggest developers of communications devices, perhaps they would look into being a maker of other products? I can see them making all kinds of other communications and home integration products like the Google Nest series, smart watches and glasses, radios, smart displays and the like.
And if alt Steve Jobs still meets Sir Jony Ive, you have an ATL Federation version of Apple products too! Had no idea that Commodore was originally a Canadian company. How many other American brands had their origin north of the border? The demise of Blackberry at least makes me think that wasted head starts in certain industries isn't an exclusively British disease. Perhaps being member states of the Federation would allow us all to knock some sense into each other...you never know.
 
And if alt Steve Jobs still meets Sir Jony Ive, you have an ATL Federation version of Apple products too! Had no idea that Commodore was originally a Canadian company. How many other American brands had their origin north of the border? The demise of Blackberry at least makes me think that wasted head starts in certain industries isn't an exclusively British disease. Perhaps being member states of the Federation would allow us all to knock some sense into each other...you never know.
It most certainly is not an exclusively British disease....or Commonwealth one. Remember that Blockbuster had the opportunity to buy Netflix for peanuts. Yeah, I'm sure of they had known they'd have done it and been accepting of any early losses, knowing what was to come.

IMO, as the Empire in the earlier years of its existence would be more than a little nationalistic (both because of the times, the need to make the Empire work for all of its inhabitants and the tendency of many Brits of the time to only truly trust what they built, made and did) you would invariably end up with a massive genesis of many industries meant to employ armies of people throughout the Empire. Canada (and to a lesser extent Australia and South Africa) are large enough markets to be capable of creating major corporations of their own, in addition to what is made in Britain itself. The question is what could come from it. When I did my bigger-Canada TL I researched a lot of Canadian companies that could have been bigger and created a few of my own, and I kinda wondered whether a bigger Canada and/or bigger Australia would be a result of a unified Empire. Either way, Britain has plenty of what could have beens that probably would be if they were in any way unified, but always remember that you would still need to make it worth the Dominions' while to stay part of the Empire.
 
It most certainly is not an exclusively British disease....or Commonwealth one. Remember that Blockbuster had the opportunity to buy Netflix for peanuts. Yeah, I'm sure of they had known they'd have done it and been accepting of any early losses, knowing what was to come.

IMO, as the Empire in the earlier years of its existence would be more than a little nationalistic (both because of the times, the need to make the Empire work for all of its inhabitants and the tendency of many Brits of the time to only truly trust what they built, made and did) you would invariably end up with a massive genesis of many industries meant to employ armies of people throughout the Empire. Canada (and to a lesser extent Australia and South Africa) are large enough markets to be capable of creating major corporations of their own, in addition to what is made in Britain itself. The question is what could come from it. When I did my bigger-Canada TL I researched a lot of Canadian companies that could have been bigger and created a few of my own, and I kinda wondered whether a bigger Canada and/or bigger Australia would be a result of a unified Empire. Either way, Britain has plenty of what could have beens that probably would be if they were in any way unified, but always remember that you would still need to make it worth the Dominions' while to stay part of the Empire.
I've read your Canada TL - it was excellent btw. I totally agree that it would have to be worth the Dominions' while to stay within the Federation. For that to happen, the ludicrous Little Englander mentality (that I've just encountered on another similar thread elsewhere, as a matter of fact) would have to go out the window, quick smart. As has already been pointed out, UK post war reconstruction, aided and abetted by the dominions, would go a long way to helping that.
 
I've read your Canada TL - it was excellent btw. I totally agree that it would have to be worth the Dominions' while to stay within the Federation. For that to happen, the ludicrous Little Englander mentality (that I've just encountered on another similar thread elsewhere, as a matter of fact) would have to go out the window, quick smart. As has already been pointed out, UK post war reconstruction, aided and abetted by the dominions, would go a long way to helping that.
Thank You for the compliment. 🙂 I think confronting such attitudes is best done through the explanation of what can be done, but that's for another thread.

A thought that occurs to me here - since we've already more or less established that any government is going to have the possibility eventually of being elected from anywhere in the Empire, what does that do for the Royal Family and their representatives? Do Governor-General and Lieutenant-Governor positions still exist throughout the Empire and if so, what positions and authority do they have? I can't see a situation like Whitlam being dismissed by Sir John Kerr happening here in a Dominion or on the Imperial level, regardless of the situation - the possible consequences are too great. And is the Imperial Parliament directly administered by the Royals, and if not, by whom?
 
Thank You for the compliment. 🙂 I think confronting such attitudes is best done through the explanation of what can be done, but that's for another thread.

A thought that occurs to me here - since we've already more or less established that any government is going to have the possibility eventually of being elected from anywhere in the Empire, what does that do for the Royal Family and their representatives? Do Governor-General and Lieutenant-Governor positions still exist throughout the Empire and if so, what positions and authority do they have? I can't see a situation like Whitlam being dismissed by Sir John Kerr happening here in a Dominion or on the Imperial level, regardless of the situation - the possible consequences are too great. And is the Imperial Parliament directly administered by the Royals, and if not, by whom?
I am not sure why they would not to tell the truth. The position of Governor Generals are meant to fulfill the Monarch’s duties where it is not practical for the Monarch to do so themselves. That situation hasn’t changed.

Though, this might depend on when this all starts. There is a fair chance that the change over to a Federation is going to take some new legislation. Based on the time frame, the Monarchy is not going away. It could even get stronger if some of its powers that are limited by constitutional convention are more explicit roles in the new system. It’s doubtful, but it’s possible. Or it could go the other way. Still doubtful but maybe more possible.
 
Top