Settler colonialism followed by secession

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
15,559
SoCal
#1
Which cases have there been of settler colonialism followed by a secession movement among the settlers at some future point in time?

So far, I could think of:

-The Texas Revolution: A lot of Americans moved into Mexican Texas and then staged a successful rebellion against the Mexican government.
-The Bear Flag Republic: Similar to Texas, but in California and it was done by a much smaller amount of settlers who could have never actually pulled this off if the US government hadn't gone to war with Mexico at that point in time.
-Not quite the same thing, but Northern Ireland didn't want to become a part of Ireland and thus remain a part of the UK after 1922. Northern Ireland presumably has a much greater British settler presence (and certainly Protestant presence) than the rest of Ireland has.
-The secession of Israel from Palestine as a result of the efforts of Zionists who wanted to create a Jewish state after the end of World War II.
-The separation of Transnistria from Moldova in 1992 and the separation of Crimea and the Donbass from Ukraine in 2014. All of these regions had a large Russian settler component to their populations.
-This hasn't actually been achieved, but the pieds-noirs in Algeria might have considered seceding from Algeria after independence. Likewise, while this hasn't actually been achieved (at least not yet), there was a risk of secession for the Russians in Latvia, Estonia, and Kazakhstan after these countries acquired their independence from the Soviet Union. The pieds-noirs settled in Algeria between 1830 and 1962 whereas Russians settled in the countries above in the 19th and/or 20th centuries.

Anyway, what examples of this am I forgetting to list here?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
15,559
SoCal
#2
I also feel that Singapore's secession from Malaysia deserves an honorable mention here (Singapore's population is composed mostly of Chinese who or whose ancestors moved to Singapore in the 19th and/or 20th century). However, AFAIK, Singapore was kicked out of Malaysia for posing a demographic threat to it--which is different from a territory voluntarily seceding.
 
Apr 2017
973
U.S.A.
#3
Pretty much every country in the new world.
Pretty much every arab speaking country.
Turkish Cyprus sort of.
Taiwan eventually sort of.
Austria in a really long term indirect way.
All latin Europe (from Rome) in an indirect way.
Australia/New Zealand sort of.
South Africa sort of.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
15,559
SoCal
#4
Pretty much every country in the new world.
Pretty much every arab speaking country.
I meant secede from a state with a different religion, dominant ethnic group, and/or et cetera here--not secede from the metropole.

Turkish Cyprus sort of.
Yep.

Taiwan eventually sort of.
Austria in a really long term indirect way.
All latin Europe (from Rome) in an indirect way.
Australia/New Zealand sort of.
South Africa sort of.
I don't want secession from the metropole, though. The metropole has the same language, religion, and/or ethnicity as the settler colonies have.
 
Apr 2017
973
U.S.A.
#5
Visigoth Spain (and other territories they were settled in/ruled in the name of Rome), the Frankish territories and Anglo-Saxon kingdoms.
Uruguay sort of.
After the battle of Manzakerit, many turks were settled by the Byzantines along the border. Many would later switch sides or seize the territory for themselves.
South Africa could still fit this description as it was conquered from the dutch, settled by the British and then spilt from Britain and following its own culture.
The Caribbean countries could still fit this description as many of them are of African descent.
Cape Verde, it was originally uninhabited, then settled by Africans/Portuguese. Later becoming independent.
Seychelles.
Mauritius.
Eastern Europe as a whole sort of. Much of it was held by the Avars who pushed the slavs into the region. The slavs would later rebel against them.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
15,559
SoCal
#6
Visigoth Spain (and other territories they were settled in/ruled in the name of Rome), the Frankish territories and Anglo-Saxon kingdoms.
Whom did they secede from? I thought that they were conquered by barbarians.

Uruguay sort of.
Isn't a lot of the population there Spanish, though?

After the battle of Manzakerit, many turks were settled by the Byzantines along the border. Many would later switch sides or seize the territory for themselves.
Yeah, I guess that works.

South Africa could still fit this description as it was conquered from the dutch, settled by the British and then spilt from Britain and following its own culture.
Eh ... I guess.

The Caribbean countries could still fit this description as many of them are of African descent.
The Blacks didn't settle there voluntarily, though.

Cape Verde, it was originally uninhabited, then settled by Africans/Portuguese. Later becoming independent.
Seychelles.
Mauritius.
What exactly was driving the independence movements in these territories?

Eastern Europe as a whole sort of. Much of it was held by the Avars who pushed the slavs into the region. The slavs would later rebel against them.
Where did the Slavs live beforehand?
 
Apr 2017
973
U.S.A.
#7
Whom did they secede from? I thought that they were conquered by barbarians.

Isn't a lot of the population there Spanish, though?

Yeah, I guess that works.

Eh ... I guess.

The Blacks didn't settle there voluntarily, though.

What exactly was driving the independence movements in these territories?

Where did the Slavs live beforehand?
The Visigoth were a Germanic barbarian people that fled from the huns and were allowed by rome to settle in the empire. They were mistreated by the romans and rebelled. There were numerous times when they were given roman lands to rule in exchange for loyalty to rome. Various things would happen and they would rebel again. Spain was the last of these areas, where eventually the Visigoth (who made up maybe 10% of the population) broke away from rome entirely. Unlike the Romans they were (initially ) Arian Christians and spoke an east Germanic language.
Uruguay's territory used to be pat of the lands claimed by Portugal/Brazil. They lacked the people to settle it so allowed Spanish (and other) settlers have a go at it. It was also claimed by Spain (sort of) and eventually the growing Spanish population declared it Uruguay.
Many Boers are very resentful of Britain, which is why I included it.
Most of these territories are mixed race states, they don't strongly identify with any other region.
The slavs originate from around Belarus/northern Ukraine, in the many marshes and forests. When the numerous barbarian tribes were rampaging around the time of the fall of rome it put many peoples into motion. After the collapse of the Huns, the Avars became the dominant group in eastern Europe. Their most numerous subjects were the slavs, who they pushed into the Balkans and other areas. They became settled farmers and as the avars weakened they threw off their yolk.
 
Likes: Futurist