Ricardolindo
Well-known member
- Location
- Portugal
-
Hi Guest!
The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress
Southern Rhodesia not granted self-government in 1923
- Thread starter Ricardolindo
- Start date
- Location
- Coventry
God no, the Britsh were desperately trying to offload parts of the Empire in that period.
History Learner
Well-known member
South Africa wanted to annex it in that time period, so that's a possibility. Likely the British would also offload Botswana later on too, which has interesting ramifications; I could see the National Party losing 1948 for example.
- Location
- Coventry
There were actually proposals for bits of Botawana to be annexed by Southern Rhodesia in OTL.
The two options presented in 1922 were really the only two left. Company Rule was unsustainable and Direct Rule from London impossible.
As for 1948 that's true but that leaves the door open for a broader based white supremacist party to come to power without the NP's more unique cultural and ethnic peculiarities.
History Learner
Well-known member
Yeah, that's what I was alluding to. Also, South Africa was looking to purchase much of Mozambique at this time; all of OTL Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia and most of Mozambique in South Africa would be an interesting timeline. As for 1948, probably, but still better than OTL Apartheid because the Liberal Party (at least is my understanding) would've left the Coloured and Asian franchises alone. More European immigration would've been done without Boer ethno-nationalism preventing it, which would be good for South Africa by bringing in a large flow of skilled labor; it might also lay the seeds for earlier reforms, given more recent immigrants might be more amendable to such and sooner too.
Union with SA was also a possibility.
Also, I think SR becoming SA's fifth province butterflies away the 1948 NP win and probably also sees the SAP and Smuts stay in power in 1924.
You would probably see the dominant party in SA be the SAP, with the Nats and a pro-Empire Party (with its support base mainly in Natal and SR) vying for second place. Labour will also get some support.
As has been pointed out no NP win in 1948 also means more European migration to SA with all kinds of implications for demographics.
I think you mean the United Party, the Liberal Party was a relatively minor party which opposed apartheid in the 1950s and 1960s. Alan Paton was a prominent member. The party dissolved when it refused to adhere to apartheid laws and restrict membership of the party to a single race.
Last edited:
Was that purely financial or for other reasons?
- Location
- Coventry
Purely fiscal, at least so far as I cam determine. British finances were not in a good way in 1922.
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
If the South Rhodesians vote for the United Party, then the United Party wins the 1948 election. Smuts had intended for something like the Cape Franchise nationwide coupled with a fairly liberal immigration policy for people from Europe IIRC.
I also wonder if SR joining the Union and thus weakening the NP electorally butterflies away Jan Hofmeyr's death in 1948.
By the standards of the day he was very progressive, especially for a white South African, and was firmly liberal in his political views. No NP win, and Hofmeyr surviving means he certainly succeeds Smuts as PM with a much better outcome for black, coloured, and Indian South Africans - indeed all South Africans.
en.wikipedia.org
By the standards of the day he was very progressive, especially for a white South African, and was firmly liberal in his political views. No NP win, and Hofmeyr surviving means he certainly succeeds Smuts as PM with a much better outcome for black, coloured, and Indian South Africans - indeed all South Africans.
Jan Hendrik Hofmeyr (1894–1948) - Wikipedia
Jackson Lennock
Well-known member
It appears his death was attributable to the very high workload he'd assumed under Smuts's leadership. How would an NP victory in 48 fix this? Did he have some sort of breakdown historically when they fell out of power?I also wonder if SR joining the Union and thus weakening the NP electorally butterflies away Jan Hofmeyr's death in 1948.
By the standards of the day he was very progressive, especially for a white South African, and was firmly liberal in his political views. No NP win, and Hofmeyr surviving means he certainly succeeds Smuts as PM with a much better outcome for black, coloured, and Indian South Africans - indeed all South Africans.
Jan Hendrik Hofmeyr (1894–1948) - Wikipedia
SR joining the Union changes SA politics significantly in the 1920s so who knows what changes to the TL happen, including Hofmeyr's health. That's the point of butterflies, innit.
History Learner
Well-known member
Yeap, United Party; got those two confused.
- Location
- Coventry
I also wonder if SR joining the Union and thus weakening the NP electorally butterflies away Jan Hofmeyr's death in 1948.
By the standards of the day he was very progressive, especially for a white South African, and was firmly liberal in his political views. No NP win, and Hofmeyr surviving means he certainly succeeds Smuts as PM with a much better outcome for black, coloured, and Indian South Africans - indeed all South Africans.
Jan Hendrik Hofmeyr (1894–1948) - Wikipedia
As I've said before elsewhere on the Forum, Hofmeyr was saying as early as the 30s that continued segregation was impossible, because non-white South Africans were joining trade unions and getting educations.
I ran the numbers on this, and after some corrections here, the 48 election would still be quite tight, unless there's redistricting. Smuts and the UP won the "popular" vote, but lost on constituencies
This was an old thread where we discussed it Referendum on Southern Rhodesia admission to the USA and I got these numbers after I was corrected
It depends I guess how the enlarged state changes after 1921, and how the parties change. The pairings I did above show 1948 parties, not 1921, and the two main parties in the next decade were both Anglo lead, with the Reform Party slightly to the left of the Rhodesia Party, and if Reform aligned with Smuts and United, then Rhodesia might not.
That actually gives Hertzog a better situation in 1924 (which he won OTL anyway), and in this context the 1933 election that returned Smuts to power is the unusual one.
Quite possibly, although the realignment that took place OTL in both territories - the NP reformation as the HNP, and the merger of the Rhodesia Party with the right wing of the Reform Party, could well take place differently in one country.
That's a fascinating possibility
It depends I guess how the enlarged state changes after 1921, and how the parties change. The pairings I did above show 1948 parties, not 1921, and the two main parties in the next decade were both Anglo lead, with the Reform Party slightly to the left of the Rhodesia Party, and if Reform aligned with Smuts and United, then Rhodesia might not.
That actually gives Hertzog a better situation in 1924 (which he won OTL anyway), and in this context the 1933 election that returned Smuts to power is the unusual one.
Quite possibly, although the realignment that took place OTL in both territories - the NP reformation as the HNP, and the merger of the Rhodesia Party with the right wing of the Reform Party, could well take place differently in one country.
I also wonder if SR joining the Union and thus weakening the NP electorally butterflies away Jan Hofmeyr's death in 1948.
By the standards of the day he was very progressive, especially for a white South African, and was firmly liberal in his political views. No NP win, and Hofmeyr surviving means he certainly succeeds Smuts as PM with a much better outcome for black, coloured, and Indian South Africans - indeed all South Africans.
Jan Hendrik Hofmeyr (1894–1948) - Wikipedia
That's a fascinating possibility
Last edited:
- Location
- Coventry
One thing about I've noticed is that the early deaths of Hofmeyr and Adolph Malan left a talent gap in South African liberalism thay left the United Party without a meaningful program or leadership to counter the NP for too long.
What's your impression of De Villiers Graaff?
- Location
- Coventry
Well-meaning, but not distinct or opinionated enough to offer a proper alternative for South Africa. That's both in the sense of a progressive and democratic alternative, but also as an electoral alternative.
The issue as I see it was that the internal opposition to the NP had a gaping hole in it for some years until people like Schwarz and Suzman really showed up. The United Party after 1948 was adrift, I'd argue. It took the rise of the Progressive/Reform Parties to see the rise of proper white dissidence within the old system.
As opposed to dissidence outside of it, of course.