|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 16:39:17 GMT
I'm almost done with a timeline that butterflies into the scramble either being greatly delayed, decreased or possibly prevented (outside of some coastal areas and South Africa. Please tell me if any of these Pros, Cons & gray areas are inaccurate or if I missed something major
Pros: None of the genocides or mass rapes carried out by colonial powers happen, no apartheid in Namibia or Zimbabwe/Rhodesia. North Somalia is likely wealthier since the British dismantled their railway system. More freedom in southern Nigeria. less cultural genocide. possibly less persecution of minority groups due to people being gerrymandered in and out of various countries due to retarded borders. Far less deforestation & most probably less pollution. Ethiopia possibly has a coast.
Cons: Bantus probably commit further genocide against the Khoisan. Less is done against the ongoing genocide against the pygmies, areas that were Italian colonies in OTL are likely poorer since Italy extracted almost nothing from it's colonies since they were the ones no one else wanted for a reason; little to no resources, so Italy had to invest in them, and in Eritrea it really did, so much of it's architecture and infrastructure was built to last by Italy. Slavery, wife beating, human sacrifices, cannibalism & polygamy are far more widely accepted and in many cases legal. Educational facilities remain, for the most part ineffective and outdated for a much longer time, possibly until this day. Technology progresses far more slowly than in OTL. Indian & Lebanese entrepreneurs who set up new retail and international trade networks never arrive.
Gray areas: Less Christianity and more Islam, animism & Fetishism. Abuses of Leopold II don't happen but the congo probably remains a place where people are taxed heavily and those who fail to pay it are sold as slaves to Arabs. However this also probably means that the period (which to some extent carried on til this day) where children were made to extract cobalt for little to no pay and forcibly made into soldiers doesn't happen.
Edit: Another gray area is Egypt. Muhammad Ali was doing a lot to modernize it but I find it to be a bit more than a stretch that he could have made the suez canal which helped them a lot. And personally I think Britain did the best thing u could do for Egypt. One of the reasons why it's so corrupt is Egyptians have been ruled by foreigners since the 5th century BC, so Egyptians are used to being ruled by foreigners out of touch with the common Egyptian. But when Egypt gained independence from Britain it ended up as a country ruled by Egyptians
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,970 
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2022 16:49:24 GMT
I'm almost done with a timeline that butterflies into the scramble either being greatly delayed, decreased or possibly prevented (outside of some coastal areas and South Africa. Please tell me if any of these Pros, Cons & gray areas are inaccurate or if I missed something major Pros: None of the genocides or mass rapes carried out by colonial powers happen, no apartheid in Namibia or Zimbabwe/Rhodesia. North Somalia is likely wealthier since the British dismantled their railway system. More freedom in southern Nigeria. less cultural genocide. possibly less persecution of minority groups due to people being gerrymandered in and out of various countries due to retarded borders. Far less deforestation & most probably less pollution. Ethiopia possibly has a coast. Cons: Bantus probably commit further genocide against the Khoisan. Less is done against the ongoing genocide against the pygmies, areas that were Italian colonies in OTL are likely poorer since Italy extracted almost nothing from it's colonies since they were the ones no one else wanted for a reason; little to no resources, so Italy had to invest in them, and in Eritrea it really did, so much of it's architecture and infrastructure was built to last by Italy. Slavery, wife beating, human sacrifices & polygamy are fare more widely accepted and legal. Educational facilities remain, for the most part ineffective and outdated for a much longer time, possibly until this day. Technology progresses far more slowly than in OTL. Indian & Lebanese entrepreneurs who set up new retail and international trade networks never arrive. Gray areas: Less Christianity and more Islam, animism & Fetishism. Abuses of Leopold II don't happen but the congo probably remains a place where people are taxed heavily and those who fail to pay it are sold as slaves to Arabs. However this also probably means that the period (which to some extent carried on til this day) where children were made to extract cobalt for little to no pay and forcibly made into soldiers doesn't happen. Going to give you a advice. Town down the stuff you have written, it does not need to be in this detail what would happen to the African people if there is no Scramble for Africa. |
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 17:40:22 GMT
Town down the stuff you have written How would you recommend I tone it down? |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,970
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2022 17:44:10 GMT
Town down the stuff you have written How would you recommend I tone it down? Well not with all the details you posted above. I understand you want to show what would be the Pros and Cons if there was no No Scramble for Africa but it is not needed to say every detail that some members might think of twice before responding. Keep it clean and simple as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 17:47:04 GMT
Well not with all the details you posted above. I understand you want to show what would be the Pros and Cons if there was no No Scramble for Africa but it is not needed to say every detail that some members might think of twice before responding. But I might be wrong about some of the details. I wanna be corrected if I am. I plan on putting this in a YT video, so I don't wanna embarass myself by getting something wrong about such a topic. I could come off as some racist who defends the scramble and all the horrors it unleashed or someone who wants Africans to free-ride off of unwarranted reparations. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,970
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2022 17:57:03 GMT
Well not with all the details you posted above. I understand you want to show what would be the Pros and Cons if there was no No Scramble for Africa but it is not needed to say every detail that some members might think of twice before responding. But I might be wrong about some of the details. I wanna be corrected if I am. I plan on putting this in a YT video, so I don't wanna embarass myself by getting something wrong about such a topic. I could come off as some racist who defends the scramble and all the horrors it unleashed or someone who wants Africans to free-ride off of unwarranted reparations. Well i do not know any answers that might help. |
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 18:00:55 GMT
Well i do not know any answers that might help. well, is my post accurate? |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,970
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2022 18:04:20 GMT
Well i do not know any answers that might help. well, is my post accurate? As i have said, i do not have any answers for it. |
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 12, 2022 18:05:59 GMT
I’ve previously used the phrase “getting the cart before the horse” with regard to some of your work and ideas. This is an example.
Here, you worry about what some YouTube commenters might think about you holding a historical opinion, when you should concern yourself with:
A.) Setting out your scenario parameters and seeing if it can realistically be done
B.) If it can, examining consequences
C.) Structuring your work logically
D.) Trying to find some hook that will get in viewers
Frankly, it is not possible to butterfly the SfA. It is inevitable once technology develops.
Secondly, you are setting yourself up on a hiding to nothing basis going on YouTube. The commenters there are generally the lowest level of behaviour and general deportment on the Internet. There are a lot better historians on there than you, so trying to break through would need a darn good body of work. To get that, and I think you are capable of doing so, you need to structure your approach differently. This probably entails structuring your research differently.
Don’t look at the side points, but start with the jolly question - can it be delayed? Discuss, research and formulate from there. What you’ve put up here is an incomplete brainstorm.
I’d advise against YouTube on account of its nature, but furthermore on the nature of this topic. It can get political and racial very, very quickly and you really don’t want to fall down that rabbit hole in this day and age. You come across as relatively young, with a future ahead of you; this is more reason to avoid some topics like the plague. Nothing good can come of it.
The base question can be discussed and debated, with an open mind. I’d add a note of caution that some of the depths of explicit detail seem to be striking Lordroel as a bit too much, so I’d take that into mind. My view is, without an exceptionally good PoD (not a multiple one), it is not possible to achieve in a halfway recognisable world.
|
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 18:30:42 GMT
it is not possible to butterfly the SfA. It is inevitable once technology develops. ok, well I thought it wouldn't happen since Prussia doesn't become powerful enough to hurt the pride of the French in the way it did causing the French to regain their prestige by conquering large swaths of Africa. What would you suppose would happen in such a scenario? |
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 12, 2022 18:36:30 GMT
Prior to the FP War, the French were already in North Africa and West Africa and had designs on large swathes of the continent. The Italians were already starting to sniff around and the British had their long-standing interests. The Portuguese were there and going along strong, prior to learning that they weren’t as big as they thought.
Briefly, there was a need for resources and markets, displacement of rivalries and expansion of pre-existing desires. It is now 0400, so I’ll leave it there for now, but will return to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 18:49:30 GMT
simon darkshade,Where is the profit? Private companies and protectorates are likely. But an outright scramble? The Berlin Conference was called by Bismarck in the first place
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,970
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2022 18:52:19 GMT
simon darkshade,Where is the profit? Private companies and protectorates are likely. But an outright scramble? The Berlin Conference was called by Bismarck in the first place In order to avoid conflict in Africa. |
|
|
|
Post by justiniano on Jul 12, 2022 19:44:26 GMT
conflict over something unprofitable?
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 13, 2022 2:28:41 GMT
You are working from an incorrect premise in the presumption that colonialism was driven by profit. There was that as part of the overall motivation, but the Hobsbawnian Marxist explanation misses out on the human factors, as usual. Those are: a desire for national prestige; keeping up with the Joneses; the civilising mission; and the general glory of Empire in the period 1880-1914.
Many colonies were not profitable, even if they provided raw materials and expanded markets. They were more valuable in intangible terms. Elsewise, why would hard nosed Germany plough so much money into peripheral colonies; the Belgians throw expositions; and the Portuguese base their whole self image around them?
To understand, you need to think not with the perspective of a 2020s twenty something from the British Isles, but like a late 19th century statesman. I would commend the video of ‘Disraeli buys the Suez Canal’ to see the mindset.
|
|
