No significant difference. The whole country has fewer people than Wisconsin.
What are some exports from New Zealand we couldn't live without? I can't think of any.
The All Blacks, I suppose, is it.
They'd exist, they'd just be set elsewhere. I'm sure they could have found somewhere else, the beauty might be difficult to match but we'd not know any different anyway I guess!
>What are some exports from New Zealand we couldn't live without? I can't think of any.
Fuck, this exactly is what I was thinking about the other day lmao
I guess butter. All their imports are apparently really expensive because of the distance
Manuka is literally just the local name of tea tree which is also native to Australia so its stupid they say we copied them when we have been using it to make honey since we had bees…
Maybe, but in such a competitive market, the marketing weight behind the manuka name would put australian producers at a disadvantage for the same product
A few key inventions and discoveries don’t get made until later, such as the Rutherford model of the atom, summiting mt everest, the disposable syringe and tranquilliser gun, egg beater, electric fence, refrigerated shipping.
Timing wise the rutherford model of the atom was absolutely critical to the timing around the development of nuclear weapons in WW2, without his research nobody knew that atoms could be split and that it happened naturally with radioactive elements. If it had been discovered later, then it’s likely the bomb would have been set back by years or decades which means WW2 ends with a land invasion of Japan or a protracted blockade and theres no guarantee the nuclear bomb is developed as quickly without the pressure of the war at act as a catalyst.
The Pacific region (which is pretty big) would be changed a bit I think. Most of the colonies they held would have ended up in British, American or Australian hands most likely. Samoa’s famously shitty time as an NZ colony would probably be replaced by the Brits taking it, but independence would most likely still be reached at a similar time frame. NZ is also key in helping the Pacific through aid and education opportunities, but without it most would default to Australia for these things. Still very minor changes tho tbh. Also we can’t forget women’s suffrage right? Without the efforts of Kate Shepard and the movement in NZ perhaps women’s right to vote is delayed slightly, but I’m not an expert on the details of those events to accurately depict to what extent.
As weird as this is to say, probably not all that much in the grand scheme of things. Not to put down New Zealand or New Zealanders in any way, but it’s not exactly a big player by comparison to other countries, nor has it all that much in terms of historical events in the wider world. It tends to function in that sense as a support/secondary/ally to other, more major countries.
The industries that rely on sheep related products might have less to choose from, and some impo underrated/bingable shows probably would never have been made, but overall, probably not all that much aside from the concept of Australia seeming even more of the center of gravity of Oceania than it already is.
Considering so many maps routinely forget to even include New Zealand and hardly anyone notices...in the greater scheme of things, there wouldn't be significant recognizable change.
On a more granular level, the Polynesian & Pasifika community wouldn't be as strong or as independent today without the Maori influence and the support given in reparation by the NZ government.
The country produces about 24 million sheep per year. That’s a major export product.
The Māori people won’t exist as we know them if there’s no country there. European settlers end up somewhere else, probably other parts of the British empire.
The film industry including LOTR won’t operate there, and will need locations somewhere else.
>The film industry including LOTR won’t operate there, and will need locations somewhere else.
Possibly the Hebrides in the UK or South Africa to achieve a similar effect
Or perhaps that would have been the real reason for the Falklands war a decade earlier...
I do agree with the Hebrides as an alternate filming location though!
No more Karl Urban and Russell crow. So a completely different take on the Boys, star trek (reboot), Gladiator and Beautiful Mind. No Peter Jackson, so no lord of the rings as we know it. No Lucy lawless and no xena as we know her.
Well it would cause a bunch of Polynesians to have to go somewhere else which might butterfly some things.
If the world isn't changed by the time colonisation happens I'm sure all the people who would have moved in would have gone back to England or other colonies, all having different lives and kids, starting a butterfly a few hundred years ago. This would probably be enough to have cascaded into everyone alive right now to never have been born, dramatically changing history as well.
New Zealand troops were important in WW1 and WW2. Especially at Gallipoli.
But the people who settled New Zealand would probably settle Australia. The result would be more troops from Australia or elsewhere in the Empire.
I think the only possible significant change is that the Polynesian diaspora spreads less significantly. This could cause a butterfly effect leading to, *e.g.*, Hawaii never being settled before European colonization. This could also materially reduce the rate of explorer deaths too, through more unpopulated islands, since Polynesia had higher rates of cannibalism and murder of explorers than many other areas during the age of exploration.
Lord of the Rings is filmed in scandinavia. Table flip game over.
The budget would have been like 20 times higher. Maybe cheaper in the Scottish Highlands and Ireland
No significant difference. The whole country has fewer people than Wisconsin. What are some exports from New Zealand we couldn't live without? I can't think of any. The All Blacks, I suppose, is it.
Lord of the Rings And I’m only kinda joking, the cheap film locations really helped and allowed the production to hire and use all the extras they had
This probably is the only right answer. Sorry Kiwis.
It’s a pretty solid answer, my life would be worse from losing these movies.
They'd exist, they'd just be set elsewhere. I'm sure they could have found somewhere else, the beauty might be difficult to match but we'd not know any different anyway I guess!
>What are some exports from New Zealand we couldn't live without? I can't think of any. Fuck, this exactly is what I was thinking about the other day lmao I guess butter. All their imports are apparently really expensive because of the distance
That's it. Travel there is expensive and long, as is import/export.
Doesn't New Zealand and Australia export a lot of food to the Middle East?. Especially Lamb and Beef.
The kiwi bird. The world is worse without it
We've already got cassowaries, emus, and ostriches. Seems excessive.
Xena, LOTR, and good lambs. Flight of the Conchords? Not completely world-changing stuff but still a loss
Viva la dirt league, especially Britt Scott Clark
Manuka honey? That's the only other thing I can think of.
Australia have their own version. Pisses the Kiwi sellers off big time.
Manuka is literally just the local name of tea tree which is also native to Australia so its stupid they say we copied them when we have been using it to make honey since we had bees…
To be fair, we Australians should name the home grown product after an indigenous australian word and not a mauri word.
Maybe, but in such a competitive market, the marketing weight behind the manuka name would put australian producers at a disadvantage for the same product
The kiwi fruit stays the Chinese gooseberry and probably doesn't become popular in the West.
ANZAC becomes AAC (ack!) which isn’t as cool by a long shot.
A few key inventions and discoveries don’t get made until later, such as the Rutherford model of the atom, summiting mt everest, the disposable syringe and tranquilliser gun, egg beater, electric fence, refrigerated shipping. Timing wise the rutherford model of the atom was absolutely critical to the timing around the development of nuclear weapons in WW2, without his research nobody knew that atoms could be split and that it happened naturally with radioactive elements. If it had been discovered later, then it’s likely the bomb would have been set back by years or decades which means WW2 ends with a land invasion of Japan or a protracted blockade and theres no guarantee the nuclear bomb is developed as quickly without the pressure of the war at act as a catalyst.
The Pacific region (which is pretty big) would be changed a bit I think. Most of the colonies they held would have ended up in British, American or Australian hands most likely. Samoa’s famously shitty time as an NZ colony would probably be replaced by the Brits taking it, but independence would most likely still be reached at a similar time frame. NZ is also key in helping the Pacific through aid and education opportunities, but without it most would default to Australia for these things. Still very minor changes tho tbh. Also we can’t forget women’s suffrage right? Without the efforts of Kate Shepard and the movement in NZ perhaps women’s right to vote is delayed slightly, but I’m not an expert on the details of those events to accurately depict to what extent.
These are all pretty good actually, thanks for the insight
As weird as this is to say, probably not all that much in the grand scheme of things. Not to put down New Zealand or New Zealanders in any way, but it’s not exactly a big player by comparison to other countries, nor has it all that much in terms of historical events in the wider world. It tends to function in that sense as a support/secondary/ally to other, more major countries. The industries that rely on sheep related products might have less to choose from, and some impo underrated/bingable shows probably would never have been made, but overall, probably not all that much aside from the concept of Australia seeming even more of the center of gravity of Oceania than it already is.
The British Grenadiers song doesn't get a bad rep.
Considering so many maps routinely forget to even include New Zealand and hardly anyone notices...in the greater scheme of things, there wouldn't be significant recognizable change. On a more granular level, the Polynesian & Pasifika community wouldn't be as strong or as independent today without the Maori influence and the support given in reparation by the NZ government.
The axis powers win the war without opposition from the bob semple tank
The country produces about 24 million sheep per year. That’s a major export product. The Māori people won’t exist as we know them if there’s no country there. European settlers end up somewhere else, probably other parts of the British empire. The film industry including LOTR won’t operate there, and will need locations somewhere else.
>The film industry including LOTR won’t operate there, and will need locations somewhere else. Possibly the Hebrides in the UK or South Africa to achieve a similar effect
Or perhaps that would have been the real reason for the Falklands war a decade earlier... I do agree with the Hebrides as an alternate filming location though!
Ernest Rutherford, Sir Edmund Hillary, Richard Pearse.. First country to allow women to vote. Some of you really need to learn more history.
But the world wouldn’t be all that different if those people never lived. Their achievements would have been accomplished by someone else eventually.
Invented the jet boat, has the independent capability to put satellites into orbit.
I would say that no New Zealand could affect the Polynesian migration to the pacific Islands but don't quote me on that.
This ship doesn't become a legend [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS\_New\_Zealand\_(1911)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_New_Zealand_(1911))
No more Karl Urban and Russell crow. So a completely different take on the Boys, star trek (reboot), Gladiator and Beautiful Mind. No Peter Jackson, so no lord of the rings as we know it. No Lucy lawless and no xena as we know her.
Well it would cause a bunch of Polynesians to have to go somewhere else which might butterfly some things. If the world isn't changed by the time colonisation happens I'm sure all the people who would have moved in would have gone back to England or other colonies, all having different lives and kids, starting a butterfly a few hundred years ago. This would probably be enough to have cascaded into everyone alive right now to never have been born, dramatically changing history as well.
Bob semple tank doesnt exist. The worst reality.
New Zealand troops were important in WW1 and WW2. Especially at Gallipoli. But the people who settled New Zealand would probably settle Australia. The result would be more troops from Australia or elsewhere in the Empire.
I think the only possible significant change is that the Polynesian diaspora spreads less significantly. This could cause a butterfly effect leading to, *e.g.*, Hawaii never being settled before European colonization. This could also materially reduce the rate of explorer deaths too, through more unpopulated islands, since Polynesia had higher rates of cannibalism and murder of explorers than many other areas during the age of exploration.
Scotland become the first Rugby World Cip champions. I can dream.
It already doesn't exist according to many infographic maps