WI, A Modern Day Boer Republic

Before we can discuss what surviving Boer republics might look like, we should probably consider how they survived.

No discovery of gold or diamonds? I imagine they'd be a poor, agrarian backwater. The racial balance would be more favorable to the Boers, since there wouldn't be massive numbers of British or black African immigrants into the area.

Boer victory in the Second Boer War? I remember discussion somewhere about how the Boers could have focused on immediately seizing Natal (and thus access to the sea), but got bogged down besieging Ladysmith or something like that. Maybe if they did this, they could get foreign aid more readily.

Thing is, the longer the war goes, the more likely the worldwide British Empire is going to crush them.

And if the Boers win--especially if they win in such a way that gets them formerly British territory, which is even more dubious--Britain may try to settle accounts with them during TTL's WWI, especially if the Boers won because of help from Germany.
 
Couldn't they have potentially obtained part of what is today Mozanbique?

Independent Orange Free State and Transvaal (across the Vaal from the Free State)would have traded through the Portugese Colony port of Laurenco Marques (modern Maputo) instead of through Natal. Logistically closer and Boer Republics would at least have been unfriendly to the British.

Once Portugese lost control of Mozambique I would see the Boer Republics taking control of their outlet to the sea.

The Transvaal would certainly not have remaoiined agrarian societes discovery of diamonds and gold had little to do with British domination. However, I can't see the British allowing the richest gold fields in the world in a small counry next to one of their colonies remaining independent for long.
 
Independent Orange Free State and Transvaal (across the Vaal from the Free State)would have traded through the Portugese Colony port of Laurenco Marques (modern Maputo) instead of through Natal. Logistically closer and Boer Republics would at least have been unfriendly to the British.

Once Portugese lost control of Mozambique I would see the Boer Republics taking control of their outlet to the sea.

The Transvaal would certainly not have remaoiined agrarian societes discovery of diamonds and gold had little to do with British domination. However, I can't see the British allowing the richest gold fields in the world in a small counry next to one of their colonies remaining independent for long.

1. They could try, but would they be able to defeat whoever it was who kicked the Portuguese out of Mozambique?

2. That's a more immediate problem, although the Boers did beat the British once. If they could get sea access and get aid from Germany, they might be able to survive Round Two, although that would risk making WWI Round Three and possibly the last.

(Unless the Boers show their ingratitude to their German benefactors and stay neutral in WWI, which might be doable.)
 
By what moral standard can you justify this?

Your position reminds of this character here, who thinks the Draka series is immoral because it depicts the bad guys winning.

http://www.bewilderingstories.com/issue166/stirling_rev1.html

But that is his position--by his logic, any theoretical alternate history or work of fiction that depicts evil as triumphing is in itself evil because...
All human interaction contains the possibility for even a small injustice. Let's say someone goes shopping and sees someone they haven't seen for a while. Their friend has gained some weight since the last time they met . Would it be moral for one friend to call the other "lard ass", even in jest?
..so asking 'What if the Boer Republics survived' is equitable to a personal insult.

At this point, I'd also like to point out that surviving Boer Republics doesn't mean triumph of evil. Who's to say that the Boer Republics don't get over Apartheid long before OTL South Africa? To have the Republics survive at all though, I think that the wars with the British Empire need to be avoided entirely. There's no way they can win those.
 
At this point, I'd also like to point out that surviving Boer Republics doesn't mean triumph of evil. Who's to say that the Boer Republics don't get over Apartheid long before OTL South Africa? To have the Republics survive at all though, I think that the wars with the British Empire need to be avoided entirely. There's no way they can win those.

They'd be weaker or more isolated, so apartheid might end earlier there than in a larger South Africa that the West supported because they didn't want to give Soviet-allied black nationalists control of the Cape of Good Hope.

Avoiding the Second Boer War is a good idea, although they *did* win the first one.
 
The Boer War began in 1898 IIRC. Given this is in post-1900, does this mean the war ends earlier than OTL with the Boer republics surviving?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

Perhaps the Boers defeat British attempts to relieve the sieges and then offer to negotiate?

Or maybe the war ends with the Transvaal surviving but the Orange Free State being annexed? After the OSF fell in 1900, the British experienced various problems, so they might be willing to claim victory by destroying one Boer state entirely and "humbling" (allegedly) another.
 
1. They could try, but would they be able to defeat whoever it was who kicked the Portuguese out of Mozambique?

QUOTE]

Boer Republics surving to the time when decolonization was occurring would have been
a) very rich from gold and diamonds
b) very paranoid due to being surrounded by British colonies and having had a history of British adventurers (such as Jameson and Rhodes) trying to create an excuse for the British to, at least, take over the gold and diamond mines.

Therefore they would have developed a very strong military and would easily have defeated any forces in Mozambique. Of course, given that the Soviet Union is still powerful at that time then its likely that they would have used surrogate Cuban (or other 'third world' communist countries) forces to try to resist the Boer armies. probably using the facade of supporting the 'Boer Republic Communist Party'. Would the US have allowed the wealth of SA to fall into the hands of Soviet surogates. I don't think so.

If the Boer Republics had survived, a form of institutionalised racial discrimination would have been part of the system. Apartheid didn't suddenly spring in to being in the 1950's but was the continuation by more blatant means of the domination by Afrikaner interests. Its likely that with a higher ratio of whites to blacks there would have been even more resistance to change with the 'bitter einders' being fanatical about maintaining white supremacy. Only way of ending it would be external intervention or civil war.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
The Boer republics would have a situation where the Boer are also a stark minority: the only part of south africa where the Afrikaner are a majority is Cape province outside of the Xhosa lands, and most of the Afrikaner are mixed race.

As for Smith's Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa: neither was prosperous, it was an illusion, little else, their economy sucked then as it does now even compared to South America.
 
The Boer republics would have a situation where the Boer are also a stark minority: the only part of south africa where the Afrikaner are a majority is Cape province outside of the Xhosa lands, and most of the Afrikaner are mixed race.

As for Smith's Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa: neither was prosperous, it was an illusion, little else, their economy sucked then as it does now even compared to South America.

Afrikaners are not and never have been a majority in any part of SA. Independent Boer Republics would have a higher white:black ratio (but still a very small white minority) compared to OTL SA as the large black populations of Eastern Cape (Xhosas and kwaZulu) would be in the British colonies. There would possibly also have been Boer immigration to the Republics from the Cape and Natal.

Not sure what you mean by all Afrikaners are mixed race. If the DNA testing of celebrities that I've seen is representative then we're all mixed race. Most Afrikaners, if not all, would have ancestors who under apartheid would have been considered as Balck.

I agree that the development of the SA economy was held back by apartheid; for example the majority of the population was denied the opportunity of gaining the skills to work in a modern economy. However, there was sufficient capital to build a well armed defence force, an indigenous oil from coal industry and nuclear weapons. Certainly well enough resourced to take on a Frelimo type army; especially using surrogate Mozambique froces to contribute to the Boer fight, similar to Renamo in OTL.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
Not sure what you mean by all Afrikaners are mixed race. If the DNA testing of celebrities that I've seen is representative then we're all mixed race. Most Afrikaners, if not all, would have ancestors who under apartheid would have been considered as Balck.

The people whose first language is Afrikaans include the "coloureds", sorry for the white supremacists. By the measure of language and nation, rather than racist bullshit, the Afrikaner are in fact the majority of the cape outside of Xhosa territory.
 
I think Apartheid would have died out in the Transvaal or Orange Free State. Today they or it would have a Black president. I don't see how Apartheid survives in a post colonial world with the international pressure to reform.
 
The people whose first language is Afrikaans include the "coloureds", sorry for the white supremacists. By the measure of language and nation, rather than racist bullshit, the Afrikaner are in fact the majority of the cape outside of Xhosa territory.

Many of the Afrikaans speaking 'coloured' people in the Cape would be offended to be called Afrikaners. They have a strong identity of themselves and were oppressed by the Afrikaners for decades. I don't see it in any way as white supremacist to recognise that in SA their historically has been a group who identify themeselves as Afrikaners and would not include 'coloured' Afrikaans speaking people as part of their group.
 
Many of the Afrikaans speaking 'coloured' people in the Cape would be offended to be called Afrikaners. They have a strong identity of themselves and were oppressed by the Afrikaners for decades. I don't see it in any way as white supremacist to recognise that in SA their historically has been a group who identify themeselves as Afrikaners and would not include 'coloured' Afrikaans speaking people as part of their group.

True, when people speak of Afrikaners they mean white people.

There has been a movement towards a kind of Greater Afrikanerdom, with people being called Afrikaanses, including everyone who speaks Afrikaans.

There are some similarities between white and Coloured Afrikaans speakers, but also some significant differences.
 
I guess I just see it as unlikely that the Afrikaners would be willing and able to do what is necessary to create a strong, Afrikaner state without all the present day issues that we saw arise out of OTL.

Given where the Afrikaners arose as a people, it is always going to be very hard to win that demographic race, given normal community/religious and cultural rules. There are just too many indigenous peoples nearby who both have a moral right to be there and also an economic reason to cluster around a succesful community/state. So long as the Afrikaners are based in SA that will be the case. Unless you can get some sort of intervention.

Then, the other alternative, focusing most Afrikaners into one place where they either dominate by demographics or come closer to it, well that might happen, but Afrikaners are like any other people. They want to be with each other but they also want economic, social or religious freedoms. They will move about for jobs/principle/money/religion/politics or love etc, so can you make sure they all stay in one area? Probably not.

Perhaps one option would be (and this may well be unlikely) to break the colonies/republics into smaller units at an earlier point, sort of more like today's RSA or a Swiss style cantonment. That way, it might be possible to create one or more areas with an actual Afrikaner majority, without any nasty racial steps. Problem with this approach is that it is unlikely the Afrikaners would form a super majority, so we may end up with an Ultster/Troubles like situation, where the majority organises the state to protect their interests against the large minority.

I'm not sure I see what the POD is for this latter idea though. If we look at it from a colonial perspective, well, colonies and states have to make money, or at least be self sufficient. Either that or have a rich parent who will subsidise them. If we break up the four into say nine, then is there an economic (as opposed to cultural) case for this? Would anyone support it, whether in SA or the UK? I suspect not
 
Last edited:
i think thered probably be nazi-aligned factions (assuming apartheid still existed at the time) but most would be against it because of the occupation of the low countries
 

DAMIEN

Banned
There is no right or wrong there is only opinions. That is my moral opinion.

Morality is not a law if it was it would be a physics law which is not able to be broken so that means there is no inherent morality in nature.
 
Top