Talk:German South West Africa (1983: Doomsday)/Archive

Welcome to the project, and thanks for contributing! I think this is a good (re-)start to DSWA. I like that it's being re-imagined as a small survivor community. It's not feasable to create a neo-neo-imperialist nation in Namibia, because the number of Germans that it's possible to have there is still so small. I also think a totally new flag is in order. The "Otto Von Bismarck" flag just seems very, very unrealistic in this time period. Benkarnell 16:02, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * To this very day in our very own timeline Otto von Bismarck's tricolour remains in use by the German minority of Namibia, so it appears to me as by far the most appropriate flag for their state, I really don't see what is so unrealistic about it. I think the usage of the word "refugees" is a bit inappropriate in the article, the Deutschnamibier are already present, even in a position of considerable power. I guess they'd just stay in Windhoek. --Karsten vK (talk) 18:08, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it? I admit I'm not familiar with that topic, but I'm looking through a number of deutschnamibier sites, and I don't see any pictures of that flag - lots of Namibian flags, a few 1848/BRD German tricolors, and one or two South African flags, but no Imperial German tricolors. Benkarnell 19:13, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

German Africa
Can I adopt the article relating to the German government in Africa? I have an idea of where to take this, inlcuding possibly reunifying it with the North German government, from where most of the refugees are derived. Lahbas 02:45, October 20, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with you adopting it, but I'm not sure that actual unification with a nation so far away would be practical. Perhaps they would create an "Alliance of German States", kind of like la Francophonie? --DarthEinstein 02:49, October 20, 2009 (UTC)
 * Though I have no problem with you adopting it, I agree with Darth that it is unlikely for them to unite with North Germany. They are already members of the New Union of South Africa. I do forsee close relations and maybe even some sort of international organization tying them together. Mitro 18:02, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Canon?
I must say I really don't like way this state is established, and it surprises me that this was canonised merely two days after having been written. The article has a shamefully Eurocentric outlook in the fact that it seriously only speaks of a convoy of Germans leaving Bremerhaven that settle in one of the most unlikeliest of places they could possibly go to, and only makes a brief mention of the actual 'Nambibians' as a bunch of lawless insurgents that are eventually given suffrage by the great and tremendously benevolent colonial administration, and then go on to disappear into nothingness. Seriously, just why on earth would a ship full of 'Deutschländer' head for, of all places, the Skeleton coast? The place didn't get that name because it's like Cockaigne or anything. And the very idea of a substantially damaged society that would most likely have degraded into utter chaos, managing to organise this epic scale mass migration strikes me as fanciful and absolutely unlikely. Apparently this society settling in the dust of South West Africa manages to stabilise and consolidate so quickly that it already has fully operational democratic systems in place to elect a new Chancellor (btw. does 'Conservative party' refer to the FDP liberals here?). I'm terribly sorry to say, but to me this version of the DSWA is pure ASB. --Karsten vK (talk) 10:23, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * I have marked the article as a proposal until this dispute is cleared up. Mitro 14:49, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree with you Karsten. Although I could see a German state in South West Africa, it would be made up of local German descended Namibians living in Windhoek, not actual Germans from Germany. Its territory would also be substantially smaller, likely limited to only the Khomas Region.--ShutUpNavi 19:35, October 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * This is actually a (no doubt unintentional) rehashing of some of the early, bad versions of New Britain: the whites in the country up and bring hundreds of thousands of countrymen over from Europe with no funding, no resources, and no real reason, either, since presumably they were concerned with issues like how to eat and how to find clean water. The only possible motivation, presumably, is to create a nation of whites in Darkest Africa, something that would be very far down on the "to do" list of any survivors or refugees in Walvis Bay. Sorry, Lahbas, this one can't happen.
 * There's a much bigger reason to object to the rewrite, however, which is that it was essentially hijacked from a new contributor, Connornics. S/he admittedly slipped in and wrote it without introducing him/herself, and then vanished again, but I think his/her version at least deserves a few days' consideration before being obliterated by something new.
 * I was beginning to regret the day that somebody first mentioned DSWA in an offhand way, and the idea of DSWA gradually seeped its way into the canon; I was afraid it would lead to all sorts of ideas like this one. But Connornics' version, which focused on a small, German-speaking survivor community, had for a moment put those fears to rest. Now, they're back. South and Southwest Africa are not going to turn into a white paradise in this TL. Like Angola, their history should be written mindful of what's actually happening in the region, not on unlikely scenarios of mass migration.
 * Benkarnell 20:45, October 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I must say that I tried to avoid with what happened in regards to New Britain, having read that original article myself. Also, the Skeleton Coast was not a suggestion I had in mind. However, I had no other good location in mind. Europe, in a large part, would be considered a wasteland by any refugees and the existing administration, and therefore avoided. At the same time, such lawlessness would prevail over a large part of Africa that would be within reach, including independance movements in Angola (which has been canonized into a fractured state). It is for this reason I chose Namibia, which was at the time still under South African occupation, along with the area being described by the page. Democracy is set within the society, but only because of the force of arms of the American and German soldiers who were loyal to those elements. Also, the Namibians were only given equal rights to ethnic Germans following a long fought war with members of the SWAPO. I had originally meant of dividing Namibia in two; however, most of SWAPO was based in Angola at that time, and there were other orginisations fighting for influence, so it is likely that such a union would not have existed, or at least be ineffective.


 * If you have a better location in mind, tell me. I am open to methods of modification regarding the article. Lahbas 00:20, October 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Leaving out the most important part of my argument by accident, I must say they left Europe to do two things. One, to ensure that German culture will not perish entirely. Two, there was a general fear that stability could not be mantained in their current location, due to refugees and other factors; this was determined by the city leaders and those of the military. Lahbas 00:24, October 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * One problem I have is how easily the 2nd load of refugees is integrated. If 160 thousand people suddenly show up, there won't be supplies, jobs, housing, etc. Maybe if the refugee boats are staggered, bringing only 1-2 thousand every couple months it might be more plausible. --Oerwinde 08:13, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Just to see where everyone is on the issue of GSWA, please vote in this poll:

What do you think should be done with GSWA? Keep, as is Keep, but modify Reject, not plausible

Pardon me for saying this, but I think this is just a Germanic version of New Britain. If one is "implausible", then both are. I dcon't want to complain. I love both of them. But if you discredit DSWA for its premise (which I admit needs work), then you are painting New Britain with the same brush. I am trying to be as polite as possible in saying this, and this is not a personal attack in the slightest. I just do not like hypocracy. --Yankovic270 20:27, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe people are reffering to the older versions of New Britain, not the current canon version. Meanwhile Britain was also a maritime state with strong ties with the region where they resettled. Mitro 20:39, October 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * No, this is like what New Britain used to be: shipload after shipload of people arriving from Europe, coordinated and funded by God-knows-who, where they create a nation-state and somehow take over the entire country. New Britain is now a state originally founded by English South Africans fleeing the Cape: not too bad.
 * There was actually a near-identical version of DSWA that we already rejected ,as well, quite apart from the one by Connornics buried in this page's history. I don't remember who wrote it, or under what title, or whether it was deleted or what, but it also relied on a large migration from Germany. I believe it listed Angela Merkel as head of state, actually. That one was also rejected very quickly because there could not be any such migration. Benkarnell 20:44, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

So if New Britain was like this, then there is still hope for it. If New Britain could be accepted I see no reason DSWA shouldn;t either. With the changes necessary, of course. --72.45.100.138 00:04, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe instead of having it take over the country, it could be a smaller nation within Namibia centered around Walvis Bay. With the lack of manpower the refugees could only secure an area large enough to support their own population. Perhaps though with the loss of their main port, the rest of Namibia eventually agrees to an associate relationship allowing free access to the port in exchange for some other concessions or something.--Oerwinde 04:10, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

What if they still have the terrtiory shown on the map, but not in one fell swoop. Maybe they got to this level recently. Slowing down the pace of expansion would make it more plausible. --Yankovic270 12:44, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Also by all means if Bremerhaven could have shipped that many people and take over that much territory, it would have been targeted and destroyed. The North German page takes into account its destruction. I never like using the "Missile missed” plotline and we should try and avoid it.Again this nation needs to be founded primarily by German Namibians. OTL they form the elite of Namibian society. One of the reasons I approve of the New Brittan article is because it is primarily made up of British descended South Africans, not by European refugies.--ShutUpNavi 14:49, October 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * Full agree with Navi here. Another mayor difference between New Britain and Namibia is that NB consist of perfectly arable land suited for settlement, whereas the Namibian desert coastline consists of one of the most barren pieces of land on the planet. The very location just isn't suited for large scale immigration, regardless of whether it happens at a slow or at a fast pace. Why people would sail all the way down to southern Africa to end up with a life standard edging on starvation is beyond me. Neither are such savagery conditions going to be really encouraging for the secondary goal of the whole mission: preserving German culture. The whole premises behind this article just doesn't work. --Karsten vK (talk) 15:32, October 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * A couple other things to consider: first, if the Deutschnamibier do create a state (didn't they already have one?) it's probably not going to be called "German Southwest Africa". They're going to give it a name that makes it clear that it's more than a colony. Second: it's probably relevant that Walvis Bay was administratively separate from the rest of SW Africa during this time, being controlled much more tightly by South Africa than the rest of the (future) country. Benkarnell 02:08, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

This nation was allready part of canon as part of the New Union of South Africa before the author decided to flesh it out. With necessary changes, including the origin of the Germans, the name, and the size I think this could be salvaged. it just needs an overhaul. --Yankovic270 02:30, October 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * ...Sort of. The New Union article was very, very short, basically just a list. At that phase just about everyhting's kind of tentative and liable to change, even if the basica ideas are acceptable to the group. Protecting the canon is important, but it's also imortant to allow ideas a chance to evolve, especially in their early stages. I think that close to 100% of this current version is implausible. The earlier version is somewhat better. Its creator hasn't done anything else on the site since posting it, but then, there's no way to know if he was just a fly-by who never intended to participate, or if he was just miffed by his article being taken over. Benkarnell 02:43, October 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * Just some ideas on what this nation may or may not look like, feel free to comment:
 * As for the name of the county, the local short-form of South West Africa amongst the local Germans is plainly "Südwest" or "South West". I guess that the German short-form could have also become the English short-form, perhaps without the umlaut. I don't see "South West" making its way to colloquial speech in the Anglosphere as a country name. The long form could then be something like "Südwestafrikanische Republik" ("South-West African Republic").
 * Despite the fact that the Deutschnamibier constitute one of the most influential and affluent groups in SWA, they are going the need the support of other parts of the population to actually create state viable of defending itself. I guess the most likely allies they might find are the Afrikaners that are in a similar position as theirs and the Rehoboth Basters. The latter having fought with the South Africans against the SWAPO and having a very traditional Afrikaner like lifestyle, would probably support the new republic as long as they are guaranteed their own self-governance in Rehoboth. For both the support of the Afrikaners and the Basters I guess the Afrikaans language would need to be given a degree of official recognition. As a seemingly random note that just passed my mind: The word "Afrikaanse" in "Suidwes-Afrikaanse Republiek" (The Afrikaans translation of the country's name) is both the adjective of "Afrika" as "Afrikaans", which could potentially ease identification of the Afrikaners with the new state.
 * The town of Windhoek (Windhuk in German) and the surrounding Khomas region, would certainly be under the control of the state. Other towns in the south of the country (the part of contemporary Nambibia where the amount of Germans is largest) may also be ultimately be under the control of the state, most notably Keetmanshoop and Lüderitz. I don't suppose the new republic would either have the means or the willingness to control the pieces of desert between the towns in the south, though they'd probably claim it on the map. --Karsten vK (talk) 15:01, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and the most probable national anthem:
 * kutzy4efujo --Karsten vK (talk) 15:03, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

this article is unrealistic, if mnot impossible. a fleet of refugee carrying ships makes survives a thermonuclear war and caaries a whole load of pleople to a new country? sounds like someone been watching to much battlestar galactica. --HAD 15:34, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

It may be impossible NOW, but it can be changed. we have the technology. --Yankovic270 15:42, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Why must evryone be a critic? If the Kingdom of Prussia can become plausible then so can this article. Everyone is willing to judge, but noone is willing to make the respective changes to the article. --Yankovic270 22:01, October 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm trying not to be terrible about it. I am a big fan of Lahbas' work (despite once criticising Superior before reading it, which I am still really sorry for), and the whole story surrounding Superior and its satellites and rivals is one of my favorites to come out of 1983DD. It really feels like it comes out of this post-nuclear world. This one, though, is just too fantastic, in nearly every detail. Karsten's presented some good ideas for it, and I still think we should resurrect the old version and give more people a chance to look it over. Benkarnell 23:16, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Make it so number one. Do anything neccesary to give this nation a fighting chance for canon status. No nation left behind. Except maybe Neuses Deutschland. That one was kind on half-assed. Who knows? Maybe New Germany might be a good alternative name for it. Gives it enough of a connection to the fatherland without making it sound like a colony.

ps: Obscure pop culture refrence number 2. Can you get where?

--Yankovic270 23:23, October 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * Reading over it again, I have to agree myself that it lacks realism. Even if Bremerhaven were not hit, which I seriously doubt, assuming the Soviets attempted to nuke it multiple times, the numbers of the refugees are off, in order to substain such a voyage. Even in that case, they likely would have joined with Pais del Oros (Spanish Morroco) than continue down the coastline. However, I am not well versed in Namibia, and so I am not sure I can write this article effectively. Lahbas 00:03, October 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. Karsten seems like the resident expert on the region. I wonder if you couldn't add a bit about German survivors in Western Sahara, or possibly in Cape Verde (now a federated part of Portugal, I believe). Meanwhile, would you mind if I restored the old version, just to give everyone a look? I've been pushing it so much that I'm afraid it may end up disappointing - it was very short - but I feel that it's the considerate thing to do for a new contributor. [EDIT] I just looked, and the old version is really short, and in fact it also says that it's a "community of German refugees" - the main premise for this one. OTOH, it could be German-Namibian refugees from Windhoeck who set up someplace else in SWA. That could be an interesting twist. Benkarnell 23:42, October 27, 2009 (UTC)


 * [EDIT] [EDIT] Actually, I like that best. It explains why there is a "German Southwest Africa" - quite odd, really, when Germans basically ran the plae before DD. How is this: urban German-Namibian refugees establishing new settlements after life in the city breaks down and there's not enough food. If they are on the coast, it's possible that German refugees living in, oh, insular Portugal, found out about them and moved down there in 2000 or so. Not millions, not hundreds of thousands, but a few. How does that sound? Benkarnell 23:50, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Thought about this idea for a while, but I really think the Germans momentum lies in the immediate aftermath of the Doomsday events. The Germans in Namibia are a rather small group and for them to hold the dominant position in a new state they would have to retain the position they already had. Once their grip on power is lost I think their weakness in numbers is going to render a German state quite unlikely, so for this state to be viable, order will have to be retained in Windhoek I'd say. As for the possibility of coastal villages making contact, I think that could be done via Lüderitz or possibly Walvis Bay (though I don't reckon the latter will be part of the state, the existence of which should at least be known over there). Such a flow of refugees would have to be small to keep Namibia inhabitable and would me-seems probably come into being only after several decades post-DD. Nevertheless there would surely be people willing to come. Perhaps that could even result in some societal tensions and the imposition of immigration caps by the DSWA? --Karsten vK (talk) 16:09, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

i hope u like my addition of the armed forces--Connornics 22:29, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think having a quarter of the population in a highly trained military is very unrealistic. 40,000 might be acceptible for a country of this size if it was a highly militarized nation, but its mostly made up of refugees so I would put it at more like 6-10k plus maybe another 4 of militia.

Would it be more realistic to set this up more north, maybe cutting a chunk out of Senegal or taking over the Bissagos Islands? Since it seems like we're assuming most of africa would be in chaos from the loss of foreign aid (though I think in some areas it would be the opposite, with no western arms dealers supplying weapons, the common folk would be more able to defend themselves and perhaps establish semi-stable republics with under-equipped warlords)--Oerwinde 08:24, October 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a suggestion, but wouldn't it be more realistic if they travelled to the nearest largely uncontaminated spot, so rather than going all the way down to Africa, they could possibly establish an autonomous commune within Scandinavia? --Karsten vK (talk) 16:09, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

I doubt it. Scandanavia is one of the few regions to be well covered. Speaking of this, I have an idea for a new location for my crappy Neuses Deutshland idea. The parts of South America (specifically Argentina) that are heaviily settled by Germans. I reluctantly admit that South America is a btter location for a German survivor state than Saudi Arabia. Looking back I don't know how I got such a stupid idea. --Yankovic270 19:38, October 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * SSouth America as brought up back when you wrote the Neues Deutschland page, and vetod. It would make as much sense as a "German" state within the US, which is also heavily German settled. The South American nations had some sputters, but on the whole remained stable and in control throughout the 80s and 90s. The Germans there would have no reason to create an ethnic state, being loyal to their own countries. The Brzilian archbishop, Oscar Scheid, is a good example. Benkarnell 20:20, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

So, wait the United States? May I ask where? Iowa? Ohio? --Yankovic270 22:05, October 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * Germans are the largest single ethnic group in the US. And the most German area is the Midwest, yes/. But the Greman language hasn;'t really been spoken since WW1. Benkarnell 23:29, October 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * No, not the United States. The same argument Ben used for Argentina applies to any area within the U.S. The best possibility for creating a "New Germany" is going to come from within North Germany or Prussia, IMO.--BrianD 02:35, November 1, 2009 (UTC

And why so judgemental? If there is something about this article you don't like, you tell the author about it. Or you adjust it accordingly (with full warning beforehand on the talkpage). Just don't blindly judge negatively without saying why you don't like the article. If everyone was so judgemental on the New Britain article, it wouldn't have had a chnce to grow, to become better. I ask that you give this courtesy to DSWA. Please. --Yankovic270 03:15, November 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yankovic, I had no intention to judge you, and certainly not to say anything in any sort of judgmental, negative manner. I left a more detailed comment on the New Deutschland proposal under its section on the main talk page. I honestly have a difficult time understanding how Americans, three generations removed from the country their grandparents or greatgrandparents came from, would, after the apocalypse, forsake their country for one their ancestors came from. What makes them decide that, if they are going to survive, that they need to model their society after Germany and not Iowa or the midwest? As far as your comment on "old" Germany you deleted, if a new Germany is going to arise, especially if people can still live there, that is the place it is most likely to happen. And your other comment, on the U.S. is gone and everyone knows it: definitely now, and probably forever in this timeline. But, not only does the CRUSA still exist, and not only are there surviving people in and outside the former U.S. today who see probably see themselves first and foremost as Americans, people who survived in the days and months after Doomsday would have considered themselves first as Americans.--BrianD 05:48, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Ok. But I wasn't talking about New Germany in my last comment. It was about German South West Africa. --Yankovic270 14:56, November 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * And I'm totally cool with German South West Africa; I was responding to where the thread began to address Neuses Deutschland.--BrianD 15:01, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

More people voted in favour of keeping it, and it still got canned? then what on earth was the point of the vote? You people too lazy and judgemental to alter it? This strikes me as impossible, as the idea of a German Southwest Africa did not start with this article. --Yankovic270 18:12, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
 * More people voted in favor of keeping it but modifying it, and that is why it was tagged as obsolete. Almost 20 people agreed that the article could not be canon as is. Unitl there are significant changes it can't be a part of canon. Mitro 23:20, November 20, 2009 (UTC)

Apartheid
The whole bit about the Germans-resorting-to-apartheid-to-preserve-their-culture is ridiculous. These people are enlightened Western Europeans who would never even contemplate enacting discrimatory laws of any kind.
 * At the top of the page you should see the obsolete template. This means the article is no longer a part of the 1983: Doomsday canon. Mitro 21:35, December 20, 2009 (UTC)