What would a Communist Britain name things?

Jonah Carter

Unless the revolution somehow takes place before 1792, the term "commune" signifying a revolutionary city government has already been done in Paris (if it's after 1870, it's been done twice). Still, more boring terms like "council", "committee", "assembly", etc. probably prevail.

The new British authorities probably want to do anything possible to separate themselves from the legacy of Cromwell, who was and is viewed as a mass murderer of Irish people (fair) who wanted to be a dictator (not really). If they're drawing at all from the English Civil Wars, it's probably from the more radical Levellers. They probably call themselves a Republic rather than a Commonwealth.
 

Happy Nihilist

Would they be likely to follow a Leninesque nationalities policy? Meaning that the Scots, Irish, and Welsh would have their own homelands recognised as equal to England (which might itself be divided up?). In that case the name of the country might be something neutral like USSR was, perhaps the United Commonwealth of Socialist Republics? Commonly referred to as the United Commonwealth.
 
Dan1988

Dan1988

JohnBull said:
I was thinking about that. If this Revolution spills over one or more Dominions, the whole things would probably ended up in a very centralized state in London, like happened in OTL USSR.

A communist version of the old Imperial Federation trope: they might be de jure more independent (Socialist Republic of Great Britain, Socialist Republic of Canada, etc.), but de facto a single centralized state.
Click to expand...
And if that ever happened, the US would be trying to invade Canada, Newfoundland (at the time separate from Canada), the Bahamas, the BVI, maybe even Jamaica, Anguilla, and British Honduras (yes, I know the last 4 were colonies, not Dominions, at the time - doesn't really matter for Washington, though) to try and prevent the spread of Communism. Which then opens up several different kettles of fish that accentuates already existing issues within the US.
 
JohnBull

JohnBull

Dan1988 said:
And if that ever happened, the US would be trying to invade Canada, Newfoundland (at the time separate from Canada), the Bahamas, the BVI, maybe even Jamaica, Anguilla, and British Honduras (yes, I know the last 4 were colonies, not Dominions, at the time - doesn't really matter for Washington, though) to try and prevent the spread of Communism. Which then opens up several different kettles of fish that accentuates already existing issues within the US.
Click to expand...

Would Washington really care about Communism at this point of history to the point of invading neighbouring countries and waged a war against the formidable British Empire? One thing if Britain and Canada were still engulfed in a civil war. If they were already stable and the revolution victory, it would be complicate for the isolationist US to get involved.

But as you mentioned colonies, it would be interesting to see how this probably post-racial Communist British Empire would work. Central Asia was small compared to Russia. India, on the other hand, was like 80% of the British Empire population.
 
Dan1988

Dan1988

JohnBull said:
Would Washington really care about Communism at this point of history to the point of invading neighbouring countries and waged a war against the formidable British Empire?
Click to expand...
The US certainly got involved with aiding the Whites during the Russian Civil War IOTL, so that's one precedent. In addition, AFAICT there was some sort of resigned sentiment in Whitehall that American annexation of Canada would be inevitable (that it didn't happen, at least politically, was certainly a miracle unto itself), and by that point Canada had long had independent military capabilities. So, Britain going Communist would trigger panic in the US (since it would seem threatening enough to the existing economic model in the US that groups like the Socialist Party would get *ideas*) and demands that Washington do something - with Canada as the obvious target, because there had been pro-annexationist sentiments lurking underneath the surface. Isolationism didn't necessarily translate well to a Western Hemisphere that the US saw as its backyard, so US imperialism is still a thing.
 

Aslangeo

tonsofun said:
Anything with a monarchy connection would get their name changed too.
There is a street near me named 'King Edward Avenue' which wouldn't be allowed to remain. I can imagine that any street with the name of a former monarch would need to change.
There is also a lot of places with royal names too. Royal Tunbridge Wells is just one. I imagine though, it would just lose the royal bit though. The town of 'Kings Lynn' might revert to Bishops Lynn or just Lynn.
Click to expand...
Not always sure - A few royal names may remain if the particular monarch was seen as an ancient national hero for example Alfred the Great or Edward III. I could see names from the 17th Century such as Cromwell , diggers , levellers, fifth monarchists etc, being seen as proto revolutionaries and a lot of things being named after them. As well as maybe other historical figures such as the chartists or Wat Tyler
 

LeX

Somewhat unrelated but what if the situation is like the United Kingdom still exists by virtue of the royal family escaping overseas, with Socialist Britain just running the main island? Kind of like Taiwan and mainland China except the "Taiwan" in this case encompasses a vast number of disparate territories.
 

walmart

I can't see a communist Britain with anything outside the British Isles.

LeX said:
Kind of like Taiwan and mainland China except the "Taiwan" in this case encompasses a vast number of disparate territories.
Click to expand...
I imagine the dominions will de-facto take over the majority of the surviving empire with bits taken by Italy, Spain, and France. India will get an early independence. Egypt will kick out the British and get at least North Sudan.
 
Last edited:

walmart

I'm interested in how things play out in the continent. With Britain out of the picture, I see Italy and Germany being more bold. Maybe an early German-Italian war against France? At the same time, France without British backing might opt to throw Eastern Europe to the Soviets for a two-front war against the Fascists.
 
Dan1988

Dan1988

LeX said:
Somewhat unrelated but what if the situation is like the United Kingdom still exists by virtue of the royal family escaping overseas, with Socialist Britain just running the main island? Kind of like Taiwan and mainland China except the "Taiwan" in this case encompasses a vast number of disparate territories.
Click to expand...
The Channel Islands and Isle of Man are right there; they might depend on the UK for a few things, but they are technically (quasi-)independent countries. So there's certainly potential for a *Taiwan analog/ues just a stone's throw away.
 

walmart

Dan1988 said:
The Channel Islands and Isle of Man are right there; they might depend on the UK for a few things, but they are technically (quasi-)independent countries. So there's certainly potential for a *Taiwan analog/ues just a stone's throw away.
Click to expand...
The Isle of man is small and surrounded by the British isles. I don't see it being viable. It's more likely the royals head to Canada or France.
 

Wendell

LeX said:
Somewhat unrelated but what if the situation is like the United Kingdom still exists by virtue of the royal family escaping overseas, with Socialist Britain just running the main island? Kind of like Taiwan and mainland China except the "Taiwan" in this case encompasses a vast number of disparate territories.
Click to expand...
It's going to matter where. Ireland is a nonstarter, as is most of the empire, but maybe one of the settler dominions or India?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top