How would a France that permanently keeps Algeria going to look like?

WolfBear

Well-known member
How would a France that permanently keeps Algeria going to look like? Specifically by enfranchising Muslim Algerians on equal terms (no gerrymandering, et cetera) to French people. I was specifically thinking of some kind of loose confederation where Algeria gets to manage its own affairs and has its own parliament, maybe with a separate territory (or territories) for the pieds-noirs with their own parliament, while European France gets its own parliament and thus gets to manage its own affairs, with only very basic decisions, such as foreign policy and the budget, actually being made on the national level. I would presume that such an arrangement would have open borders between France and Algeria, so instead of having two million people of Algerian descent in France (excluding other Maghrebis and Muslims who currently live in France, of course), European France might have something like 15-20 million people of Algerian descent living there right now, with a total Muslim population of 20-25 million.

I wonder if such an arrangement between France and Algeria might create a push for a similar arrangement between France and its other colonies. But of course such an arrangement wouldn't be very beneficial for France, since it would have to constantly subsidize Algeria due to its lower average IQ and thus greater amount of poverty, with there likely being systemic efforts in France to close the French-Muslim achievement gap similar to what there is in the US over the last several decades in regards to closing the white-black achievement gap. I also suspect that it would be even more dangerous for French people to make Muhammad cartoons and/or to satire Islam in any way in this TL due to the much greater number of Muslims living in European France even in comparison to real life. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that Algerians are relatively moderate for Muslims, but there would no doubt still be a decent-sized number of bad apples among them, unfortunately:


GRF_by_country-1024x659.png


Apparently, based on the data above, Algerians are almost as moderate on average as both Lebanese and Turks are. But of course getting Algerians, Lebanese, and Turks to embrace things such as same-sex marriage is likely to take an extremely long time, unfortunately. :(
 

Atarlost

Well-known member
The trouble is that the example of Mohammed endorses breaking oaths or swearing falsely to noncoreligionists. This undermines civilization in a fundamental way by casting doubt on everything from oaths of office to business contracts unless it is a civilization that contains only Muslims.

So long as Mohammed is a positive example or his endorsement of oathbreaking is seen as a revelation as a prophet rather than a sin, incorporating Algeria without first de-Islamizing it is dangerous.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
The trouble is that the example of Mohammed endorses breaking oaths or swearing falsely to noncoreligionists. This undermines civilization in a fundamental way by casting doubt on everything from oaths of office to business contracts unless it is a civilization that contains only Muslims.

So long as Mohammed is a positive example or his endorsement of oathbreaking is seen as a revelation as a prophet rather than a sin, incorporating Algeria without first de-Islamizing it is dangerous.

Yeah, that's probably fair and true enough as far as it goes, unfortunately. :(
 

Chiron

Well-known member
France becomes a Muslim Majority Nation and the French Culture is subsumed into an Algerian Muslim Culture and ceases to exist and NATO would have a large military that leans Soviet next to Western Germany which renders NATO non-viable and results in a Soviet Survival scenario.

De Gaulle crunched the numbers and made the best choice in France's own interests as he saw them and cut Algeria loose and threw the Pied Noirs under the bus. From the viewpoint of the French people's cultural survival, De Gaulle made the right choice and did not give in to the Jingoists who wanted to keep that ulcer festering.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
France becomes a Muslim Majority Nation and the French Culture is subsumed into an Algerian Muslim Culture and ceases to exist and NATO would have a large military that leans Soviet next to Western Germany which renders NATO non-viable and results in a Soviet Survival scenario.

De Gaulle crunched the numbers and made the best choice in France's own interests as he saw them and cut Algeria loose and threw the Pied Noirs under the bus. From the viewpoint of the French people's cultural survival, De Gaulle made the right choice and did not give in to the Jingoists who wanted to keep that ulcer festering.

Excellent analysis, Chiron! And Yep, sometimes a smaller country is a better-off country, regardless of whether this applies to France, India, Ukraine, Israel, et cetera.
 

ATP

Well-known member
The trouble is that the example of Mohammed endorses breaking oaths or swearing falsely to noncoreligionists. This undermines civilization in a fundamental way by casting doubt on everything from oaths of office to business contracts unless it is a civilization that contains only Muslims.

So long as Mohammed is a positive example or his endorsement of oathbreaking is seen as a revelation as a prophet rather than a sin, incorporating Algeria without first de-Islamizing it is dangerous.

Indeed.So,let it go was right decision,unless...berber there hate arabs,and they were once christians.Made them christian again,and let them rule over arabs.That would work.
Especially,that their islam vary from Machomet version - womans have rights there and are not cattle,and oaths actually matter.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Indeed.So,let it go was right decision,unless...berber there hate arabs,and they were once christians.Made them christian again,and let them rule over arabs.That would work.
Especially,that their islam vary from Machomet version - womans have rights there and are not cattle,and oaths actually matter.

Islam has the death penalty for apostasy, though. Even if not enforced, it's a huge mental obstacle to converting out of Islam. AFAIK, the only areas where large conversions away from Islam occurred were post-reconquista Spain and Adjara, in Georgia, post independence.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Islam has the death penalty for apostasy, though. Even if not enforced, it's a huge mental obstacle to converting out of Islam. AFAIK, the only areas where large conversions away from Islam occurred were post-reconquista Spain and Adjara, in Georgia, post independence.

Easy - made Berber ruling elite.And arabs suffering under Berber boot.
 

Atarlost

Well-known member
Easy - made Berber ruling elite.And arabs suffering under Berber boot.
Unless they're thoroughly de-islamized by the time Apartheid becomes internationally problematic this order would fall apart by the end of the 20th century.

This seems like it could only be achieved by ethnic cleansing. Round up all Arabs from Algeria and exile them to Syria and take any surviving Christian populations in Syria and ship them to Algeria. I don't think 20th century France has the intestinal fortitude to undertake such an operation somewhere so accessible to Metropolitan France and they don't have anywhere to displace the Moslems to until they get a mandate over Syria after WWI.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Unless they're thoroughly de-islamized by the time Apartheid becomes internationally problematic this order would fall apart by the end of the 20th century.

This seems like it could only be achieved by ethnic cleansing. Round up all Arabs from Algeria and exile them to Syria and take any surviving Christian populations in Syria and ship them to Algeria. I don't think 20th century France has the intestinal fortitude to undertake such an operation somewhere so accessible to Metropolitan France and they don't have anywhere to displace the Moslems to until they get a mandate over Syria after WWI.

True,but they could let Berber in 19th century kill as many as they need,and let rest run by themselves.
Something which Russia is making now on Ukraine.
Nobody cared much in 19th century when Belgia genocided blacks in Congo,or before WW1 when germans genocided Herero in Namibia.
 

ATP

Well-known member
But would it actually permanently last?
If they do that in 19t century,when nobody cared about what white people did to peope in every other colour,yes.
Till 1914 we would have Bewrber majority,and arabs who do not run or get killed would fear to even think about fighting.

It would be not christian thing to do,but....France was ruled by masons who attacked church in France,but in colonials they used religion as state tool.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
If they do that in 19t century,when nobody cared about what white people did to peope in every other colour,yes.
Till 1914 we would have Bewrber majority,and arabs who do not run or get killed would fear to even think about fighting.

It would be not christian thing to do,but....France was ruled by masons who attacked church in France,but in colonials they used religion as state tool.

I know about laicite, but do you have a source for the Masons bit? It sounds like some kind of conspiracy theory, similar to the claim that Jews run the world! :D
 

ATP

Well-known member
I know about laicite, but do you have a source for the Masons bit? It sounds like some kind of conspiracy theory, similar to the claim that Jews run the world! :D

Only in polish.But,you could see facts - in 1905 goverment stealed church land and property,including churches,which in France belong to state.
Vichy France captured mason archives,and made it public,you could find it there.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top