WIP Map Thread

simplysupported47

Višeslav said:
Everyone has offered the classic gripes with this map, but lets say we do want a realistic balkanized China, what does that look like?

If we want to take it really far, we could see regionalism in economically powerful regions which want to break off from an economically collapsing country, perhaps. Places like Guangdong COULD potentially then back-justify this by saying that Cantonese speakers are a distinct ethnicity and thus deserve a nation state, but Id need people who know more about China to tell me if thats even remotely viable.

Manchuria and inner Mongolia re staying almost certainly. If you REALLY want ethnic separatism, MAYBE a Zhuang state though I imagine that's economically a bad idea, I doubt they have much to work with in inland Guangxi.
Click to expand...
I know two Mainland Chinese Cantonese speakers, and neither of them consider themselves "not-Chinese". On the contrary, I've heard more that Cantonese-speakers view the language as being the more " authentic" Chinese. Guangxi actually has a lot of Canto speakers too. Improved linguistic rights are more likely, but the greivences that would induce seccession don't seem to be there, especially in 1989-91, so it would probably not even be an issue to be addressed till later down the line, when the proportion of Mandarin speakers increases with China's economic growth.

The Zhuang don't seem to have any problems with the CCP that would lead to seccessionist feelings, especially in 1989, as the regime was more conciliatory with ethnic minorities. Otherwise, we would've heard about it. A lot of minorities were/are pretty well assimilated into China and Chinese society owing to longer periods of Chinese rule. The ones that arent are the ones we know. (Tibetans, Uighurs, Mongols to a much lesser extent)

Realistically, only Tibet and Xinjiang have the best chances, but even then, Xinjiang would probably be a war zone owing to the large numbers of (armed) Han living there.

My biggest gripe with independent Xinjiang borders is that they go off of PRC-drawn boundaries, which in turn reeks of "lets balkanize China by removing provinces marked differently" and ignores realities on the ground...
 
Višeslav

Višeslav

simplysupported47 said:
I know two Mainland Chinese Cantonese speakers, and neither of them consider themselves "not-Chinese". On the contrary, I've heard more that Cantonese-speakers view the language as being the more " authentic" Chinese. Guangxi actually has a lot of Canto speakers too. Improved linguistic rights are more likely, but the greivences that would induce seccession don't seem to be there, especially in 1989-91, so it would probably not even be an issue to be addressed till later down the line, when the proportion of Mandarin speakers increases with China's economic growth.
Click to expand...
Makes sense.
simplysupported47 said:
The Zhuang don't seem to have any problems with the CCP that would lead to seccessionist feelings, especially in 1989, as the regime was more conciliatory with ethnic minorities. Otherwise, we would've heard about it. A lot of minorities were/are pretty well assimilated into China and Chinese society owing to longer periods of Chinese rule. The ones that arent are the ones we know. (Tibetans, Uighurs, Mongols to a much lesser extent)
Click to expand...
Gotchy.
simplysupported47 said:
Realistically, only Tibet and Xinjiang have the best chances, but even then, Xinjiang would probably be a war zone owing to the large numbers of (armed) Han living there.
Click to expand...
I did have the thought of like the Taliban making its way into Xinjiang too, as it indeed has tried to set up an emirate there before and in the extreme chaos of collapsing China, Han countersecession in the style of like Serbs in 90s Croatia and Bosnia, and potentially Kyrgyz and Kazakh resistance to an Uyghur state they may actually have an opening to do so.

simplysupported47 said:
My biggest gripe with independent Xinjiang borders is that they go off of PRC-drawn boundaries, which in turn reeks of "lets balkanize China by removing provinces marked differently" and ignores realities on the ground...
Click to expand...
Yeah that seems to be the case though, to be generous to OP, that DID happen in both the USSR & Yugoslavia.

After all, Bosnia is full of armed Serbs in the eastern and northern portions and similarly armed Croats in the southwest and other pockets. Bosnias borders had at times been drawn differently too. Herzegovina has very little in the way of Bosniaks (Muslims) beyond Mostar and a long history of being part of separate states and administrative units, at various points in time the West bank of the Drina has been part of Serb states and regions even when the rest of Bosnia was not (under the Serbian empire and the post-collapse states for a bit, administered by Serb rebels during the first uprising, and part of the Drina Banovina in the kingdom of Yugoslavia) and West Herzegovina and adjacent Croat-majority parts of Bosnia HAD been part of the Croatian Autonomous Banovina in the kingdom of Yugoslavia. On top of that, at a few points in time, Bosnia and Herzegovina as an administrative unit under the Turks and later the Austrians contained Herceg Novi in modern Montenegro. However, Bosnia in the end had its communist borders (barring the irrelevant dispute over the northern tip of the Klek peninsula which has since been resolved).
 

simplysupported47

Emperor-of-New-Zealand said:
For China to be too unstable to "keep" Manchuria, there would need to be a popular independence movement in Manchuria. Such a thing never existed in 1991, because, as has been stated, Manchuria is 98% Han Chinese. If you want an independent Manchuria, you're better off having it split off along ideological lines, not manufacturing some kind of ethnic situation that doesn't exist in real life.
Click to expand...
I would argue that "manchurian" independence is irrelevant regardless of the demographics of the region. The biggest legitimate case for secession I've seen is that the traditional culture of the locals will be at risk of destruction. However, the Manchu are much more assimilated into China than the "problem" minorities we traditionally associate with secession. Much of this can be thanks to the Qing Dynasty rule, which had included Han Chinese into its ranks.

Besides, even if the ethnic demographics would favor a Manchu state, how would independence work? Xinjiang and Tibet are individual entities, so it would be easier for them. But "manchuria" is three provinces and part of an autonomous region. Which provincial governor would end up controlling the country? How would you make sure all 4 parts broke away successfully? What if the other governors wanted to rule instead? Many cases of secession are when a single administrative unit (province, republic, state, etc) breaks off. There aren't many cases of mulitiple units breaking off to form a single country. There is the USA but the country started off very decentralized and it took a civil war to create a coherent identity. Kurdistan faces this same problem, except its divided between 4 countries. 2 portions (Iraq, Syria) have broken off, but we don't see a unified Kurdish state. Instead, we have two entities, one Kurdish, another Kurdish-dominated but not explicitly.

Besides, Manchus and other Northeastern ethnicities are basically China's model minority, IIRC. Why trade that position for an independent state, where you need for blue collar and manual labor jobs. If you're part of China, you just leave that to the Han living there instead. Especially given that Northeastern China is a rust belt that lives off support from the center.
 

simplysupported47

Višeslav said:
I did have the thought of like the Taliban making its way into Xinjiang too, as it indeed has tried to set up an emirate there before and in the extreme chaos of collapsing China, Han countersecession in the style of like Serbs in 90s Croatia and Bosnia, and potentially Kyrgyz and Kazakh resistance to an Uyghur state they may actually have an opening to do so.
Click to expand...
The Taliban were Pashtun, probably wouldn't want anything to do with Xinjiang. Al-Qaeda and more interestingly, Turkic ultra nationalist groups like the Grey Wolves OTOH....

Potential Kazakh, Kyrgyz resistance is an interesting concept, but it would depend on how Uighur-centric the movement is. Maybe an initial period of unity followed by division, or vice-versa.
 
Višeslav

Višeslav

simplysupported47 said:
The Taliban were Pashtun, probably wouldn't want anything to do with Xinjiang. Al-Qaeda and more interestingly, Turkic ultra nationalist groups like the Grey Wolves OTOH....

Potential Kazakh, Kyrgyz resistance is an interesting concept, but it would depend on how Uighur-centric the movement is. Maybe an initial period of unity followed by division, or vice-versa.
Click to expand...
I meant Al-Qaeda, I keep mixing up whos the Afghan political party & whos the global Islamist organization. Yes, I can definitely see Turanist types hopping in on this.

I think the former makes sense. United as Turkic Muslim brothers when they have to resist China but dissatisfaction grows as the numerically superior Uyghurs come to dominate the state.
 
Višeslav

Višeslav

1679363900925.png


A quick and rough take on a potential collapse of China in the early 90s that I've begun to work on. Macau and HK weren't reintegrated like OTL when the British treaty ran out in the late 90s, and ended up as independent city states which joined together. They are big economically but also closely tied to China and have a strong movement to join as Chinas newest federal unit. China and Taiwan reunited following the fall of the CCP & though nominally an equal partner in a state union with the rest of China, Taiwan is really just a very autonomous federal unit within China.

India jealously guards Tibet as its anti-Chinese buffer and threatens nuclear retaliation if Tibet is attacked. East Turkestan on the other hand presents an excellent opportunity for a counterterrorist operation on the part of newly reconsolidated China.

The CPRX is much more PRC-nostalgic than the rest of China as the local Chinese see it as having been able to protect them and hold some resentment towards the leadership of the anticommunist uprising and by extension the leadership of the new China for causing their situation, but still hope for reintegration. Resemblance in shape to Republika Srpska is actually entirely coincidental.
 
Vladyslav

Vladyslav

Wafflenalia said:
they democratic now
Click to expand...
Why Democratic Notzist Reich annexed Poland with its Polish and Ukrainian population?
Why Democratic Notzist Reich created colonial administration of Ostland instead restoration of annexed by USSR Baltic States?
Why Democratic Notzist Reich create Ukraine with this ridiculous borders?
 
Wafflenalia

Wafflenalia

Vladyslav said:
Why Democratic Notzist Reich annexed Poland with its Polish and Ukrainian population?
Why Democratic Notzist Reich created colonial administration of Ostland instead restoration of annexed by USSR Baltic States?
Why Democratic Notzist Reich create Ukraine with this ridiculous borders?
Click to expand...
based off the 1941 worlda map i didnt make those borders i just kept them
 
MasterSanders

MasterSanders

A draft for my upcoming A Perfect Democracy reboot. Still a lot of work to do and aesthetics to sort out. My hope is to commission a pixel art version of this map using the Winkel-Tripel Projection. If anyone knows someone who can do it, be sure to let me know.

apd_political_draft.png
 
Last edited:
artificialCartographer

artificialCartographer

MasterSanders said:
A draft for my upcoming A Perfect Democracy reboot. Still a lot of work to do and aesthetics to sort out. My hope is to commission a pixel art version of this map using the Winkel-Tripel Projection. If anyone knows someone who can do it, be sure to let me know.

View attachment 820075
Click to expand...
i'm under the impression this is, in part, an axis victory map of some kind. also, is that the US divided into commonwealths a la fallout?
 
artificialCartographer

artificialCartographer

Wafflenalia said:
yes they were promised Greece, Bulgaria, Albania, Arabia, parts of Africa, Persia, and the turkic nations
Click to expand...
...that's quite a bit of promised territory. also i'm pretty sure the european (and to some extent, african) ambitions heavily overlap with both pre-war italian territory and mussolini's ambitions
MasterSanders said:
It is, though it's a little more complicated. It's a revision of my previous TL which I link to in my signature. The "Commonwealths" are rooted in a real life proposal made by William Yandell Elliott in the 1930's which figures into the story.
Click to expand...
ah, so there's some real-life historical precedent to the model. i suppose it makes sense, people have been trying to think of ways to rearrange the US, for lack of better wording, for a long time now
 
Wafflenalia

Wafflenalia

artificialCartographer said:
...that's quite a bit of promised territory. also i'm pretty sure the european (and to some extent, african) ambitions heavily overlap with both pre-war italian territory and mussolini's ambitions

ah, so there's some real-life historical precedent to the model. i suppose it makes sense, people have been trying to think of ways to rearrange the US, for lack of better wording, for a long time now
Click to expand...
Italy is dead they were annexed by the germans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top