What would a fascist Australia look like?

I don't know if Australians could get excited enough about politics to go 'black-shirt and jackboot' fascist, if it did in the 30s they'd be in charge of one of the most racially homogenous countries in the world, with few to no convenient minorities to blame for the Depression.

Maybe the Old Guard would simply make the trains run on time and other ineffective but grandiose shit, more like Italian fascism than the more genocidal versions.
 
A fascist Australia would look like this:

cities-in-australia.jpg


:p

Anyway, if the australofascists take power sometime during the 1930's (assuming they can), then i expect them to be mostly neutral towards Japan's expansionism in the Pacific; Thus, no Battle of Coral Sea.


The hell is this "Canterbury"?

And where are Tamworth and Orange?, those places are bigger than several of the things on the map.
 

Pangur

Donor
A fascist Australia would look like this:

cities-in-australia.jpg


:p

Anyway, if the australofascists take power sometime during the 1930's (assuming they can), then i expect them to be mostly neutral towards Japan's expansionism in the Pacific; Thus, no Battle of Coral Sea.

Why on earth did you pick places like Alice? Secondly the Old Guard where so up the arse of the British empire and racist not to stay out of WW2. Fair chance BTW for example that the Japanese pearl fisher men around Broome would have been deported

I don't know if Australians could get excited enough about politics to go 'black-shirt and jackboot' fascist, if it did in the 30s they'd be in charge of one of the most racially homogenous countries in the world, with few to no convenient minorities to blame for the Depression.

Maybe the Old Guard would simply make the trains run on time and other ineffective but grandiose shit, more like Italian fascism than the more genocidal versions.

BTW I question their ability to do even that however basicilly yes thats the size of it.
 
historically, 1930s AU and NZ fascists were pro-whites only immigration status-quo (see white australia policy) and super pro-Empire and pro-supporting britain.
So on that side they'd more or less be exactly the same as OTL no change as the liberals and conservatives were all about that too.

the only real big thing is economic ideology, they all espoused some version of corporatism, anti-capitalist populist centralise and streamline the economy under government control, nationalised major industries and support small private businesses, break up big business. Like the anglo-Canadian fascists, they were basically just copies of britains B.U.F., even importing the pamphlets instead of writing their own.
but... historically fascists didnt actually do that after they came to power so again,
Probably more or less exactly the same as the OTL no change.
 
A fascist Australia would look like this:

cities-in-australia.jpg


:p

Anyway, if the australofascists take power sometime during the 1930's (assuming they can), then i expect them to be mostly neutral towards Japan's expansionism in the Pacific; Thus, no Battle of Coral Sea.

Why doesn’t this map show the two occupied states to the east? ;-)
 
In a scenario where a much more severe economic depression during the 1920s-1930s results in a revolution similar to the March on Rome, leading to the overthrow of the Australian government in favour of a fascist regime, what would this fascist Australia look like? How would the government function? Would it be a fully totalitarian regime, separate from the British Commonwealth, or would it be a somewhat democratic regime that retains links to the Commonwealth, but holds fraudulent elections to give an appearance of democracy?

Have Jack Lang stick around longer as Premier of NSW and maybe even gain a wider following throughout the Commonwealth. The 'Lang-isation' of the Labor party and movement pushes conservative and business interests into the arms of the New Guard movement, who mount a coup sometime in the mid-30s. The result is a hybrid fascitoid-democratic regime akin to apartheid-era South Africa or renegade 60s Rhodesia, where the facades of liberal parliamentary democracy and British constitutionalism (and of course, undying loyalty to King and Empire) are kept, but in reality, the country is run as an authoritarian one-party emergency state. The Lang-ites stage a general strike and a civil war breaks out. London intervenes and sends an Imperial peacekeeping expedition to restore order.

1938-39 sees the political reconstitution of the Commonwealth as carried out by the the administration of the Governor-General Earl Wavell; the coming of war with Japan unites the country and the era of the Australian Civil War comes to a close.
 
AU/NZ in the 1920-30s were pretty awful
there's not really any racist horribleness that we werent already doing.
not harsh, just history. it wasnt really a good time.

You might want to do a bit of research before comparing Australian and New Zealand race relations.
 
You might want to do a bit of research before comparing Australian and New Zealand race relations.
in terms of immigration policies, subtle v proud and loud is the only difference. they were leagues apart in native relations, but they were both going backwards at the time and neither were good to start with. Comparative less bad aint good.
So no.
 
in terms of immigration policies, subtle v proud and loud is the only difference. they were leagues apart in native relations, but they were both going backwards at the time and neither were good to start with. Comparative less bad aint good.
So no.

They were not going backwards at the time. Seriously, there is much more nuance in the understanding of race relations in any country then you are presenting here.
 
rights gained in the 20s in both countries were lost in the 30s.
even just in the 30s, the 1934 aboriginals act was a step forward, the '36 western australian act and the '37 assimilation policies steps back. In NZ, you had a royal commission into treaty breaches giving land back in the '20s that gets confiscated again in the '30s and all the injustices Ratana was rallying against. Immigration both nations were continually narrowing restrictions on who could come in so they could protect white british identity, they went about it in different ways and each had different target groups but it's history and its not nuanced to say that because it sounds bad it must be black and white bad so cant be true.
no one is denying nuance, unless say simplifying what the other said for the sake of having an argument instead of a discussion.
There was alot of nuance, but not enough to say times were good and things were all fine.
Racism was a major driving force in politics, thats not a criticism or 'being harsh' its just a fact. As it wasn't seen as a negative at the time they were quite bold and open about it. theres no need to deny it for sake of feeling good about it now, there are the decades of great strides since, before and during too to celebrate without having to deny the steps back and pretend they were never there.
Even the debate about abolishing the white australia policy was about economics with both sides being vocal with views that even the far right would be ashamed to be caught saying today. It was very important at the time, bipartisan and there's no getting round it. You can say oh compared to one the other the worse but both were still very racist. It was as they say 'a very different time' and what with nuance they put the lines of good and bad in different places.

more nuance is the thing, going backwards happens in history about as often as 'forwards' because as you say, nuanced. and its not an attack to say the policies and governments of the time were racist, its just true. It's no more an insult or harsh than to point out they didnt have colour tvs no need to get in hackles to defend them, they didn't think it was a bad thing and wouldnt want you to.
 
a worse Great Depression? ?

I'm going to go contrarian and say a less worse depression where it's easier to blame people out of work for various personal failings or say that they don't belong to the right group. And/or a slower moving depression where it's easier to blame the victim.

That is, with a lesser or slower moving depression, you more hit the "sweet spot."
 
Top