Discussion in 'Alternate History Maps and Graphics' started by Beedok, Jun 15, 2014.
This isn't the west - obviously it's implied that they're gonna make them fit
Interestingly, this map claims to show majorities, but going by a few of the indicated percentages, actually shows pluralities (largest single groups, whether they're actually a majority or not).
Here is a map of the same 2011 census date, broken down by district. It also shows how silly many of the proposed irridentist plans actually are, but offers a little more detail. (For instance, this shows us that while Kashmir as a whole has a Muslim majority, as shown on the other map, the sensible option would be to split it in two.)
Finnish Democratic Republic
That map has been posted before but I’m kinda wondering.
Did the Soviets plan to make Finland as a puppet “People’s Democracy” state or directly annexed it as a S.S.R?
I doubt there was a firmly established plan at this point, Soviet considerations for Eastern Europe not being firmly planned even in 1945, but I think the need to appear as open to compromise from Soviet diplomacy would make a "Democratic Finland" at least formally independent from USSR more likely in short term, as well in order to stress the idea of "new Democracy" as possible alternative to sovietization which took a greater importance in soviet ML in this period.
Or maybe even in three, as some people are already proposing.
Here we have the United States of Africa, a proposed federation of the entire continent, as proposed by people like Marcus Garvey and Muammar Gaddafi
This just proves to me that Gaddafi was crazy in his lifetime. There is no way this would've worked. A African equivalent to the European Union, maybe, but not one massive nation state. Africa has many cultures that would not have blended well in this united continent.
Also, why is Madagascar excluded?
This confuses me. I thought all the USSR wanted was the Finnish territory closest to Leningrad. When did they decide to throw that out the window and plan to make Finland a puppet state?
No kidding. And as far as I know, he didn't consider Madagascar part of Africa
Mostly when Finland didn't want to exchange territories, I'd think.
Also unless I'm mistaken the border there is more favorable when considering Leningrad than the interwar border was, though not as excessive as the post-war border.
Taking just a little bit of territory, as demanded before the Winter War, would have been just the first step in breaking Finland. Just like demanding bases from the Baltics was the first step for breaking them. The ultimate goal in 1939 was to conquer all of Finland as a puppet state under Kuusinen et al, to give it the borders outlined in the map, and (just like the Baltics) in the near future annex it into the USSR after the new "people's government" would practically beg for it.
It seems to me that having a Jain state wouldn't really make much sense and that Jain nationalism is sort of oxymoronic. What use would Jains have for a monopoly on force if they would never use it?
Leaving the peculiars of its creation aside for a moment, we should keep in mind that a Jain homeland wouldn't have to be a Jain state, as such. It could just end up being what essentially amounts to a very large exercise in religious anarcho-pacifism. From an AH perspective, it might be interesting to consider the idea. Still, that would bring us back to the matter of how it would come about. Jains themselves seem little inclined to even want such a thing, as their religious devotion allows them to be spiritually free of whatever "shackles" the realities of living in an existing state places upon them. Since they aren't a threat, reasonable people have little urge to support a Jain homeland just to be rid of them, and unreasonable people (unfortunately) are far more likely to go about killing them, rather than segregating them into their own region.
(This has been a long way of saying that I agree with you in practice, but that the concept would not have to be inherently oxymoronic.)
I suppose they could have a homeland but it would need to be policed and protected by an outside force, so I suppose some sort of vassalship would work. Still, I imagine many Jains would despair somewhat at having a homeland violently maintained for their purposes (assuming anyone who isn't Jain lives there/were removed).
Don't know if this qualifies as a proposal, but hey, here's Occiberia.
The legend says:
Regions that in antiquity were Occiberian during a brief time
Regions that in antiquity were partially Occiberian
Regions of Occiberian influence
Tbh I have no idea what language or mix of languages that's written on.
Having a doctrine which mandates pacifism hasn’t stopped other groups from forming states and conducting violence.
It's a map that is essentially more troll than anything else, slightly more extreme and silly than maps in Valencian showing maps of "Occitania" covering both Valencian Country, Catalonia, most of Oc regions because "we're not a Catalan language, we're an Occitan language just like Catalan or Provencal") like this one
Note : the translation rather is, IMO (de raso meaning probably "plainly", "antiguedat" meaning both Antiquity and formerly)
- Regions that were formerly fully Occiberic
- Regions that were formerly partially Occiberic
- Regions of Occiberic influence
I think even this map by fringe lunatics of the Vasconists sphere, themselves rather a fringe within the Gasconist movement, which is itself a fringe of anti-Occitanist regionalist movements...have more audience.
It's basically "Basques and Gascons, together in a same country".
Separate names with a comma.