Look to the West: Thread III, Volume IV (Tottenham Nil)!

[wolf_brother]

Originally Posted by Theodoric

Wow, (someone suspected of being) the Mahdi? That's going to be interesting.

Considering there were three that overlapped in the 19th century IOTL, and one that just barely missed not making that overlap a quadruplet, the fact that we've only heard of one ITTL is the most interesting part.

I wonder if the Great Jihad kicks the British out of India will it then turn west and take a bite out of Persia, as many north Indian Islamic states did.

[Theodore Gladstone]

Glad to see it's back! However, Diversitarianism seems to be self contradictory in the sense that having different viewpoints is itself a viewpoint which is encouraged. Diversitarianism seems to be to ideologies as anarchism (IOTL) is to governments. Still great!

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Grand Prince Paul II.

You mean Imperial Russia which is not quite the same as Czarist Russia despite many overlappings.

Ah yes; the terms are usually used synonymously in English but I know that's strictly incorrect, like when people think England/Britain or Holland/the Netherlands are the same thing. Though in this case a chronological rather than geographic confusion.

[Vosem]

I wonder if this Mahdi figure might be the start of a new religion (or at least a new brand of Islam); he seems much better-known than OTL claimants to the position, and this is right around the era where in OTL Babism began; so there seems there's room for another Abrahamic religion. Just idle speculation.

[Umbric Man]

The author REALLY gets defensive about Indian history in the first passage and how ancient it is. Is he referring to the Indus Valley civilization or the nationalist claims Indian civilization has extended back to like 10,000 BC?

As a little note I'm always up for helping with ENA toponymy - I've definitively settled my research on it after...what, the past couple years? Though it may make you happy to know most names in America 1850s onwards were dependent on local geography or Amerindian tribes or local VIPs not connected to any national scene even without a POD in 1727, so place names should be a good bit easier to come by or make for the country.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Umbric Man

The author REALLY gets defensive about Indian history in the first passage and how ancient it is. Is he referring to the Indus Valley civilization or the nationalist claims Indian civilization has extended back to like 10,000 BC?

I just based it on the way OTL anti-imperialists often claim this of basically anywhere in contrast to Europe, regardless of whether it's true or not. At least with India there is some ambiguity if you count the Harappans, but you can find it claimed about practically anywhere that was colonised, including Australian Aborigines.

Of course from a Diversitarian perspective, it is better to make deliberately misleading claims...

As a little note I'm always up for helping with ENA toponymy - I've definitively settled my research on it after...what, the past couple years? Though it may make you happy to know most names in America 1850s onwards were dependent on local geography or Amerindian tribes or local VIPs not connected to any national scene even without a POD in 1727, so place names should be a good bit easier to come by or make for the country.

Thank you for your efforts in that regard, I appreciate it.

[Finn]

Originally Posted by Umbric Man

The author REALLY gets defensive about Indian history in the first passage and how ancient it is. Is he referring to the Indus Valley civilization or the nationalist claims Indian civilization has extended back to like 10,000 BC?

I think it's just hyperbole about the Europeans not yet having discovered fire, because as far as we know all humankind has used fire since we emerged from Africa, and I fail to see how even a radically different understanding of paleohistory that could possibly pop up in this timeline would fail to notice this simple fact.

Edit: Then again, if I recall correctly Hindu myth stretches back for several million years, so maybe he's taking those stories for fact? It's interesting how in our timeline you can witness young-earth creationists claiming that theories show humans as being too old, while in an Indian-dominated timeline, say Gurkani Alam, it would be possible to witness most young-earth creationists saying that theories show humans as being too young.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Finn

I think it's just hyperbole about the Europeans not yet having discovered fire, because as far as we know all humankind has used fire since we emerged from Africa, and I fail to see how even a radically different understanding of paleohistory that could possibly pop up in this timeline would fail to notice this simple fact.

Yeah, as you say, it's hyperbole. I nearly went as far as having him make a ridiculous statement like "The Indians had civilisation before Europeans were even walking erect!" as a reference to that thing in Star Trek about the Bajorans, but decided that was going a bit far even for a Diversitarian.

[Finn]

Originally Posted by Thande

Yeah, as you say, it's hyperbole. I nearly went as far as having him make a ridiculous statement like "The Indians had civilisation before Europeans were even walking erect!" as a reference to that thing in Star Trek about the Bajorans, but decided that was going a bit far even for a Diversitarian.

I'm starting to understand why it has been so rare for in-timeline books to have modern-day publishing dates, until you had explained to your audience about this diversitarian stuff. That or the crosstime exploration team has been unable to afford newer history books, however they manage to get in-timeline funds.

Gah, I have to stop speculating!

Anyway, that anti-Eurocentric stuff means well, but they always end up making Europe sound even more superior because they went from exaggerated backwater to world-domination in a matter of centuries, with the truth being quite different from either philosophy.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Finn

Anyway, that anti-Eurocentric stuff means well, but they always end up making Europe sound even more superior because they went from exaggerated backwater to world-domination in a matter of centuries, with the truth being quite different from either philosophy.

Yeah, I've made that observation myself in the past--they make other older civilisations look like the spoiled brat who has everything and does nothing with it, while Europe works hard and wins, tortoise and hare, Protestant work ethic, etc., funny how that comes out even when the writer is actually trying to do Europe down. Ultimately, as with some of the discussions we've had here about fanatically anti-American Ameriteens, they don't know as much as they'd like about 'the other' they're idolising, and can come across as being exactly as exceptionalist as those they're railing against.

But enough about this for now.

I've just realised another area I keep meaning to update on but forget: the Mauré...that will have to be sorted out soon. I will probably be taking Gwench'lan up on his offer for French stuff as my attempts to transliterate Maori names into Frenchified forms are always a sticking point.

[Nevermore]

An update so soon after the interlogue was nice. I think one of the most fascinating things about alternate history is being able to view things from OTL with different details. I had no idea who Roy was until you mentioned him, but he seems like a fascinating figure. It's a pity that it seems like Huq's dreams of a generally peaceful resistance are going to come to naught. There's really only two options for Kalam's 'Great Jihad': either he succeeds and kicks the British out of Bengal and achieves some success before becoming a martyr for a new heretical sect of Islam or this is effectively the equivalent of OTL's Indian Rebellion: bad in many respects, but if the French and Portuguese are smart, they'll move to try to help the British stabilize the region and the rebellion is quashed, with Kalam becoming a martyr here being a possibility too.

Regardless, as our author seems to suggest, both will probably be inspirations for future generations of Indians in their approach to resisting colonial control, especially on how effective the Great Jihad turns out to be.

As for some votes for countries to cover...
-The Space-Filling Empire: or, really, any part of subsaharan Africa in general
-Republic of Man: a bit early to return to Europe, but how this little thing is going to survive bugs the heck out of me
-Superia: the exact details of how the ENA gets a black eye sound exciting
-Corea: since it's going to be a regional power ITTL, I think what was going on here during and after the Popular Wars is certainly warranted
-The Mauré: I have to say that the concept of a native 'Oceanian' state will certainly make it a fun player in the region...

And I forgot to ask this earlier: any chance we'll finally see where the Hohenzollerns are going to end up ruling this volume?

---

Originally Posted by Grand Prince Paul II.

Wasn't it suspected that the domains of the Austrian Habsburg will be very vulnerable to Societism?

I think someone mentioned that in the last thread, yeah. To be honest, it seems quite likely, too. That...thing might look impressive on a map now, but it's going to ultimately have just as many problems as OTL's Austria-Hungary, perhaps even more, as the Habsburgs have been pretty successful ITTL and that breeds complacency. It could, theoretically, be a recipe for disaster.

I see the German kingdoms as another possible victim to succumb to Societist thought as well, personally.

Originally Posted by Grand Prince Paul II.

Why do people think that the Combine will be autocratic and pro-slavery?

Well, I can't speak for others, but I thought it was pretty much confirmed when Sanchez was shaken by being chased by mobs. His faith in 'the people' was disturbed, and our writers do seem to say that this made him think they were incapable of making the correct decisions for society (as an example, see the notion ITTL that the lower classes are much more prone to racist tendencies than the more affluent, which we know is directly influenced by Societist thought).

The slave-holding bit is somewhat more hazy, however. I seem to recall it being mentioned a long way back that modern (in the since of the mid 20th century) had recently protested something. The context of this was in reference to talking about the UPSA's past, if I'm not mistaken. Not to mention: Sanchez is a 19th century man (which already informs his beliefs about race) who's been to varying countries that feature slavery in some fashion, along with having a close friend who's a slave owner, though it's true that he seems to have had an alright experience with blacks in Sierra Leone. While this post is getting way longer than it should, and if Thande will pardon me here, I think this might be what Societism looks like, roughly, at least in the UPSA:

-A state church exists to enforce Societist belief by combining it with theology; basically, codified Jansenist Catholicism

-While authoritarian or semi-authoritarian, Societism believes itself, at heart, to be a 'humanitarian' ideology: it seeks to destroy social as well as physical conflict (that is, wars)

-In contrast to Diversitarianism's 'doublethink,' Societism has 'thoughtcrime': deviation from the state's version of reality is not tolerated from citizens because it's seen as dangerous to the welfare of society

-Holds that those who have a right to rule are only the upper classes, as they're more intelligent and informed than those lower on the social ladder; the poor are also prone to various bouts of mob mentality and violence, and so are untrustworthy to act in the state's best interests (oligarchy, but may in some fashion still keep the trappings of a democracy)

-The world does, indeed, have a racial hierarchy, possibly influenced by Linnaen thought to an extent: whites are the most advanced (and so, are the most fit to stay in the ruling clique), with other races falling somewhere below them; because of this, there's the belief that these groups ARE meant to toil and serve but...

-This slavery is more 'libertarian' than one might expect: any 'lesser' group can be subject to enslavement (Asians, etc.). Actually, I can see a weird scenario where interracial marriages are enforced by the state to properly 'whiten,' and thus improve the condition of, future generations. Societism, at least in its native mother country, seeks to also create one humanity as a sort of end goal; of course, in practice, many officials probably create excuses to keep those in bondage, and their children, where they are

Or I could be totally off. There's always that distinct possibility as well.

[Thande]

You're about 50% there and 50% way off; but then I always enjoy people speculating about Societism (and I admit to sometimes stealing their ideas )

Somebody mentioned whether we will see where the Hohenzollerns end up ruling this volume: the answer to that is a definite yes.

[Beedok]

I think that they are probably pretty racially equal, but then again that might just be my suspiscions based around how it keeps foreshadowing my plans for my timeline.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I think that they are probably pretty racially equal, but then again that might just be my suspiscions based around how it keeps foreshadowing my plans for my timeline.

I'd forgotten about that At least it's better than when I (or another TL writer) accidentally foreshadows OTL (I'm currently suspicious about how Drew in "Fear, Loathing and Gumbo" managed to write extensively about a Syrian civil war a year before an actual and not dissimilar one kicked off in OTL...)

BTW, anyone alarmed at the amount of commentary and back-and-forth: don't worry, I will be adding updates to the Timelines & Scenarios definitive version for reading without commentary, probably be adding them after every three updates or so as a block.

[MarshalBraginsky]

So what are we expecting to see in the Far Eastern theater this time, Thande?

[Umbric Man]

I completely forgot of the *Maori/Maure! Considering how frightening Maori fighters are in OTL, the concept of them having an organized state with gunpowder absolutely terrifies the hell out of me.

Actually, I quite like how France is a much better competitor on world influence in TTL, what with Louisiana, a Frenchified southern India, Perousia, influencing the *Maori, etc. I absolutely love reading up on Canajun Louisiana whenever it shows.

Then I also love reading on the Meridians, Susan-Mary/Superia, Yapon, ...

[ColeMercury]

Originally Posted by Finn

Did you come up with the whole idea of Societism from the song Imagine? It is a rather absurd, naive song.

Well, it's not meant to be realistic. He does say "You may say I'm a dreamer", after all.

[Archangel]

Keep it up, Thande!

[SpazzReflex]

I had never posted in LTTW previously, but this is awesome (in the 'Wow that's incredible' sense). I can't wait to see more.

[Samm]

Originally Posted by ColeMercury

Well, it's not meant to be realistic. He does say "You may say I'm a dreamer", after all.

Yeah but to a lot of people it sounds more like a honey coated nightmare.