A Jewish Australia

Is this crazy? I don't think so.

Say a few years before the discovery of Australia, an influential rabbi has a vision or dream or whatever, that God would grant the Jews a New Israel. People laugh at first, but when Australia is discovered he is vindicated. With a few wealthy sponsors(ie governments wanting to get rid of them and getting something out of it), colonization is begun. With a Law of Return, Australia's population could grow very quickly.

What do you think?
 
An excellent idea! ;) *Goes off to write 1800-1900 installment

In all seriousness though, this does have interesting ramifications. Would the Jews eventually assert their right to self-determination? How does this affect Jewish standing in the Empire? How would this affect Middle Eastern History?
 
I can't see them settling for anything less than the Holy Land, in the long run.

But they could have done worse, and did in OTL.
 
EvolvedSaurian said:
You evil, evil man.
Dr%20Evil.jpg


:D
 
Smaug said:
I can't see them settling for anything less than the Holy Land, in the long run.

But they could have done worse, and did in OTL.

Between staying in Europe and facing persecution or moving to a very large island with nearly empty land, decent climate and mineral resources, which would you choose?
 
Believe it or not, there were two actual attempts to make part of Australia a Jewish homeland. These attempts either involved the Kimberly region of north-west Western Australia & a western part of Tasmania.

Both attempts, however, failed pretty well not long after they began as for various reasons, such as remoteness, unsuitability for human settlement & that the state governments weren't too keen on letting go of their territory.
 
EvolvedSaurian said:
Between staying in Europe and facing persecution or moving to a very large island with nearly empty land, decent climate and mineral resources, which would you choose?

I totally concur. But the draw of the Holy Land would eventually make them part of Middle-Eastern politics at some point. They don't say, " next year in Jeruselem", for nothing. just sayin.

It would be an excellent place to distance them from European, and Arabic hostility, until thier ready to make a move, either diplomatically or whatever.
 
DMA said:
Believe it or not, there were two actual attempts to make part of Australia a Jewish homeland. These attempts either involved the Kimberly region of north-west Western Australia & a western part of Tasmania.

Both attempts, however, failed pretty well not long after they began as for various reasons, such as remoteness, unsuitability for human settlement & that the state governments weren't too keen on letting go of their territory.

That's interesting. This is after the British were already established, correct?
 
Smaug said:
They don't say, " next year in Jeruselem", for nothing. just sayin.

It would be an excellent place to distance them from European, and Arabic hostility, until thier ready to make a move, either diplomatically or whatever.

Was that meant literally? If it was..... that would make things interesting, later on.

Exactly my thoughts, although Arabic hostility didn't really apear until the modern era.
 
EvolvedSaurian said:
That's interesting. This is after the British were already established, correct?


Yes it was. It was around the 1890s.

In fact the Kimberly homeland idea was again looked at in the 1930s, whilst Tasmania was also revisted during WWII. Needless to say neither idea was successful for a second time.

Trying to establish a Jewish homeland prior to British settlement is even harder, as the British soon discovered within a few months of setting up shop in Sydney in 1788. This is an extremely harsh land & the first colony almost failed within 2 years. Just as importantly, several early attempts, by the British, to set up colonies elsewhere in Australia did fail - some with dire consequences (such as death) for the settlers involved.

So if the British had such troubles, considering they had the back-up of the Empire to call upon, I don't see anyone else having much success.

Having said that, if the British gave their blessing for a Jewish colony, to be set up somewhere a few years after Sydney (say some time between 1789-1799) as a Crown Colony with a British Governor etc, then the chances that it could be successful, & develop into a prominent Homeland which may have some autonomy at a later date, is certainly on the cards.
 
Last edited:

Keenir

Banned
EvolvedSaurian said:
Except, perhaps, the Aborigines. How would they be treated?

IMHO, that depends on which descendant of Adam or Abraham (or Jacob) the various Aboriginal tribes are considered by the Jewish settlers to be descended from.


EvolvedSaurian said:
Is this crazy? I don't think so.

Say a few years before the discovery of Australia, an influential rabbi has a vision or dream or whatever, that God would grant the Jews a New Israel.

Before who discovers it? :D

(the Chinese? the Portugese? the French? (they'd found Australia a year before the Revolution started))...I'm guessing you mean the British.
 
Keenir said:
IMHO, that depends on which descendant of Adam or Abraham (or Jacob) the various Aboriginal tribes are considered by the Jewish settlers to be descended from.




Before who discovers it? :D

(the Chinese? the Portugese? the French? (they'd found Australia a year before the Revolution started))...I'm guessing you mean the British.

I'm not completly sure it would work that way.

Between 1606(first undisputed European(Dutch) sighting) and 1770 (Cook's expedition and the mapping of New South Wales).
 
A Jewish Australia might be better in a sense than a Jewish Israel. A lot more space, enough to house the entire world's Jewish population, and no angry neighbors. :)
 
BGMan said:
A Jewish Australia might be better in a sense than a Jewish Israel. A lot more space, enough to house the entire world's Jewish population, and no angry neighbors. :)


I think the Aboriginals might have something to say about things like that ;)
 
EvolvedSaurian said:
How many Aborigines were in Australia at that time? How many would die from introduced diseases?


The Aboriginal population is a difficult question to answer as we have only estimates. So it depends who you talk to I'm affraid. Most accept a figure somewhere between 1.5 & 3.3 million. However, considering it's been white Australians, who've usually written Australian history & thus have a bias towards pro-white history (so they want a lower Aboriginal population in 1788), I'm more prepared to accept the higher 3.3 million figure myself...

The death rates from introduced diseases was high among the first contact tribes in 1788. In fact it could have been as high as 65%. However, as the British expanded out of their Sydney enclave, from the mid 1890s onwards, the impact of illness dropped off dramatically as it seemed that the various illness had run their course, amongst the more distant Aboriginal tribes, & their population levels hadn't suffered as much. Hence, when first contact eventually took place, between the British & these inland tribes, the impact of illness had little effect other than what could be expected from any European.
 
EvolvedSaurian said:
How many Aborigines were in Australia at that time? How many would die from introduced diseases?

Other questions in a few minutes.

The Aboriginal population was probably less than a million at its peak, and the low population density and nomadic lifestyle of the Aborigines meant that they weren't decimated by epidemics immediately after contact like the Native Americans.
 
Top