Black version of Apartheid or Jim Crow

Anyway you could get a formal system of ethnic separation similar to Jim Crow or Apartheid, anywhere in Black ruled Sub-Saharan Africa.

What would be the impact of this.

What would be the international reaction.

To clarify I am talking about a system led by a dominate black ethnic group either minority or majority against other black ethnic groups . Not rule by Europeans or a system directed exclusively against Europeans or other non-Africans.
 
Anyway you could get a formal system of ethnic separation similar to Jim Crow or Apartheid, anywhere in Black ruled Sub-Saharan Africa.

What would be the impact of this.

What would be the international reaction.

To clarify I am talking about a system led by a dominate black ethnic group either minority or majority against other black ethnic groups . Not rule by Europeans or a system directed exclusively against Europeans or other non-Africans.

You'd need a much different history with a pre 1900 POD.
 

Paradoxer

Banned
Anyway you could get a formal system of ethnic separation similar to Jim Crow or Apartheid, anywhere in Black ruled Sub-Saharan Africa.

What would be the impact of this.

What would be the international reaction.

To clarify I am talking about a system led by a dominate black ethnic group either minority or majority against other black ethnic groups . Not rule by Europeans or a system directed exclusively against Europeans or other non-Africans.
Pretty sure they already have this in some places especially before colonization but it’s often more de facto instead of official. For example, being included from some positions in government or military because your not part of certain tribe or tribes that hold political or economic power
 
Compared to some of the things that have gone on between tribes in post colonial Africa Jim Crow would seem like a paradise to the victims. As for how the rest of world reacts? Without outright massacres I doubt the world notices.
 
Rwanda comes to mind.

Either main ethnic group there could be used. Prior to 1959, Rwanda was essentially a minority government run by the Tutsi ethnic group. Just prior to independence, there was essentially an ethnic civil war in which the Hutus (the majority ethnic group) rose up and dismantled the Tutsi monarchy. The Belgian authorities in Rwanda at the time made almost no attempt to restore order, and actually aided in deposing the Tutsi monarch, which led the way for democratic reforms and a 1961 referendum which officially abolished the monarchy, prior to 1962 Rwandan independence. The local Belgian governor was keen to make Rwanda into a democracy, and admitted disliking the Tutsis, viewing them as oppressing the Hutu majority.

Flip this situation, have Belgium put down the 1959 uprising, and Rwanda gains independence as a monarchy in 1962. Faced with an increasingly militant Hutu majority, the regime could very well develop into an apartheid-like state.

The international reaction would be muted. The King would be leading the internationally recognised government. Rwanda is not too strategically important, so it's really not going to attract too much attention.

Post-independence, it doesn't take much to flip this dynamic. Indeed, OTL is pretty close to it, culminating in the Rwandan Genocide.
 
Last edited:
Liberia under the True Whig Party might fit your definition. The Americo-Liberian community ruled Liberia as a colonial settler elite, creating their own ethnic caste system not unlike the Jim Crow South while suppressing indigenous religion in favor of Protestantism. I've heard Liberia described as "Gone with the Wind with an all-Black cast". It eventually fell apart in the '70s during the Presidency of William Tolbert, who tried to extend equal rights to the indigenous majority and bring more of them into the government but was also accused of nepotism and economic mismanagement as rubber prices fell, culminating in a 1980 coup by the indigenous army officer Samuel Doe that ended Americo-Liberian dominance of the country (and made matters even worse).
 
Liberia under the True Whig Party might fit your definition. The Americo-Liberian community ruled Liberia as a colonial settler elite, creating their own ethnic caste system not unlike the Jim Crow South while suppressing indigenous religion in favor of Protestantism. I've heard Liberia described as "Gone with the Wind with an all-Black cast". It eventually fell apart in the '70s during the Presidency of William Tolbert, who tried to extend equal rights to the indigenous majority and bring more of them into the government but was also accused of nepotism and economic mismanagement as rubber prices fell, culminating in a 1980 coup by the indigenous army officer Samuel Doe that ended Americo-Liberian dominance of the country (and made matters even worse).

Liberia is absolutely the example of this. It's a fascinating and odd history and was, as you said, a transposed Black American population taking the culture and everything down to the plantation architecture of the Antebellum South, placing themselves in the role at the top, and oppressing the native African population.
 
Liberia is absolutely the example of this. It's a fascinating and odd history and was, as you said, a transposed Black American population taking the culture and everything down to the plantation architecture of the Antebellum South

Not to mention the Lodge. Liberia was one place where saying "The government is controlled by Freemasons!!" would have been literally true.
 
Top