Earliest possible date for a unified earth?

[Hkelukka]

What would be the earliest possible date for a state that has 99-100% of global surface area under its both De Jure and De Facto rule. So that as far as people are concerned its not just a random ruler but someone that is in general accepted as being rightful (so UN is both too unpopular and too weak to count) but a state like the EU would be accepted.

So. What is the earliest possible date at which you can fathom a entirely unified earth. I cant think of any pre1900 POD's that result in whole world. PoD's can be as far back as you can think of but unless you have eqyptians living from both poles to the equator, you dont have unified ancient eqypt even if its the only civilization.

My best bet for a unified earth is some kind of communist revolution during the 20th century. Only time it could conceivably happen. Other possible times are US that goes batshit insane after 911 and A cold war that turns into a all out match with very little nuclear weapons used for some reason ending in global conquest.

[MattII]

This belongs in Future History.

[Hkelukka]

Not as far as I see. What if the UN for example had been massively more succesful and the US given it its nuclear authority and so on and eventually creating a superstate of all non warsaw pact states by say 1980's?

Granted, borderline ASB but its hardly future history. Its post 1900 or ASB but def not future since i'm talking for the earliest possible alt.

[SergeantHeretic]

What I can see is a second world war that is more costly in lives, this leads, potentially to a Korean war that is much the same led by the UN/US/UK.

IF this tri-allied force carries the war to Pyongyang, Russa threatens Nuclear response. This might cause the U.S. to pass it's nuclear arsenal to the UN as a panacea to critisim.

The USSR then losses steam as they are presented with an effectivly united free world under the UN and the possibility of becoming an outlaw state by definition.

Over the next fifty years you have similar peacekeeping efforts led by the UN but bolstered by the US and UK militaries/NATO.

I figure, maybe by the turn of the millenium you'll have a fedreration of effectivly unified nation/state using the UN as their de facto head.

In this TL I figure by 2050 you'll have an effectivly United Earth.

[MattII]

Originally Posted by Hkelukka

Not as far as I see. What if the UN for example had been massively more succesful and the US given it its nuclear authority and so on and eventually creating a superstate of all non warsaw pact states by say 1980's?

You said 99-100% of the world, but the USSR alone accounts for just about 15% of the world's land area, and China (which is going to join only when hell freezes over) accounts for a good portion of its population (not quite 1/4, but probably more than 1/5).

This belongs either in Future History, or in ASB, take your pick.

[Hkelukka]

I meant that the rest of the world and NOT warsaw pact unifies under UN against their (requires a much better USSR performance in ww2.)

so, what if the rest of the world unifies under the UN when faced with a much stronger soviet union. Eventually its 2 powerblocks and one collapses and its one powerblock in say. Late 1995?

Anyway, if there are no takers then mods could prolly move to best section and leave there.

[SergeantHeretic]

Hey, this, right here,

Originally Posted by SergeantHeretic

What I can see is a second world war that is more costly in lives, this leads, potentially to a Korean war that is much the same led by the UN/US/UK.

IF this tri-allied force carries the war to Pyongyang, Russa threatens Nuclear response. This might cause the U.S. to pass it's nuclear arsenal to the UN as a panacea to critisim.

The USSR then losses steam as they are presented with an effectivly united free world under the UN and the possibility of becoming an outlaw state by definition.

Over the next fifty years you have similar peacekeeping efforts led by the UN but bolstered by the US and UK militaries/NATO.

I figure, maybe by the turn of the millenium you'll have a fedreration of effectivly unified nation/state using the UN as their de facto head.

In this TL I figure by 2050 you'll have an effectivly United Earth.

[Hkelukka]

Ahh, my thoughts exactly! Anyone come up with any others?

[SergeantHeretic]

Imagine a UN led force in South East Asia i nthe 1960's, A La, the Korean conflict.

The whole Free world in effective terms taking action to contain communism.

This would mean a refferedum in the Security council that all protected/defended governments have to be functional democracies in order to qualify for UN aid.

So no or very few fascist juntas.

[MattII]

Originally Posted by Hkelukka

I meant that the rest of the world and NOT warsaw pact unifies under UN against their (requires a much better USSR performance in ww2.)

Well the PRC isn't going to play ball for starters, and getting the French to sign up to any US controlled government is a no go (as is getting the US to sign up to any non-US controlled government).

To get a world government, you have to make the idea of nation-states unpopular, and I just can't see any point up till now at which that could happen.

[The Doctor]

I would argue that this fits in the section of the board its already in, if not maybe in the pre-1900, only for the reason that any earlier POD could just as potentially lead to a Unified Earth. It is a biased opinion that a Unified Earth is not possible any time but in the future just because our own timeline has resulted in the way it has.

[Hkelukka]

If the US tied Marshail aid to the military budget it could do it under "national security" and use it to "buy" countries over. If aid is conditional upon representative laisses-faire democracy and UN and NATO partnerships under US guidance then it is effectively a single empire with a chain of dominions.

In that situation, everyone except for the facists and the communists would join.

Facists would join once the old guard dies in the 1970's, and eventually via the internet and a openly pro-UN stance on the US the world effectively unites so that nationstates become like they are today in the EU, little better than US states by say 2030. So. In ATL 1970's the integration from our 1990's had been going on for 20 years. All using one currency backed by the US, in one alliance under one law system and so on.

By the time communism falls everyone but countries like cuba would have switched over. And if the US decreases military spending and increases foreign aid they could very quickly effectively subsidise all 2nd and 3rd world states and have primary alliances with all 1st world states. Then the security council collectes all 1st world states into one

and voila, you have a superstate by 2000

[SergeantHeretic]

This of course assumes a LOT of good results from good intentions.

[LHB]

For the global revolution approach you'd need something similar to Jello's Second American Revolution happening PLUS the Spartacist Revolt in Germany becoming a successful Revolution. If you throw in Italy during the 20s that wouldn't hurt. With the US, Germany, the USSR, and Italy in the global communism column exerting their influence to make the global revolution a reality that could give you the force you need to unite the world under one state by the end of the century.

Another possibility for global revolution, though much more ASB, would be if you can inspire mutinies by all the Great Power armies during WWI leading to revolutions across the board. If most of Europe and America goes down under a tide of revolution in 1918-1919 then whatever hasn't succumbed will in the next few generations.

[Biggles]

Ahem. Might I suggest the Imperial Federation?

If the world went down that route then I'd say 1950s 60s as earliest possible date for unification.

[oshron]

Originally Posted by Biggles

Ahem. Might I suggest the Imperial Federation?

If the world went down that route then I'd say 1950s 60s as earliest possible date for unification.

so Code Geass, then

[Hkelukka]

If you give the security council less of a "speaking club" role and a more of an actual budget and economic decision council of the shared post WW2 nations resources it might work. Eventually ofcourse the communists would drop out citing IS EVIL CAPITALIST CRIME! but they would as they always do.

Now, in 1945, the US ran the world. If for some insane reason the american people had wanted to, they could have dictated terms for their conquest of the world, how lucky we all are that the american people preferred partying and going home.

I suppose its sellers remorse because it seems that ever since about 1947 america has done nothing but try to get that power back. Oh well.

Anyway. If you reform the security club so that it is both the NATO and UN "government" and the budget decider so that it only has a say on how UN-NATO resources are directed "in general" but still quite detailed. Similar to the EU parliament now. And the funding would come from NATO-UN entrance fees and such, and seeing as the US would see it as a military neccesity they would fund it for more than 500 billion a year.

This UN-NATO parliament would have the budgetary descrition of 500 billion dollars or so in about modern day dollars.

This would quickly turn all fighting to be instead of about gaining resources, it is about gaining the money in the budget so that your country gets the most of it, while all of the money actuall ycomes from the US as taxation on the american consumers and spent on "propaganda"

If it is done well, with a specific intent of literally ruling the entire planet, and care is taken to do it so that no one is greatly upset by it and the definition of unified earth is sort of loose, the whole of the "free world" could easily be a single state by 1980's There would still be countries just like there are states like california. But effecitvely speaking, it would be a single state(organism/entity).

[vuun]

I can't see UN/US/West uniting against communism resulting in global unification, even with comparable fall of communism to OT. Ever heard of the Non-Aligned Movement (of which India is prominent)? My point being that the whole Third World is never going to unite behind the US/UN anticommunism coalition, which will be perceived as just another form of Western imperialism. Britain and France are still colonial powers in the 50s, albeit declining ones. Communism looks pretty good if you're a fledgling former colony in poverty that just gained independence.

[MattII]

Originally Posted by Hkelukka

Now, in 1945, the US ran the world. If for some insane reason the american people had wanted to, they could have dictated terms for their conquest of the world, how lucky we all are that the american people preferred partying and going home.

the US has a population of less than 150 million in 1945, and there's a lot of countries that don't owe them a cent, so that's going to require a lot of occupation troops.

[Somes J]

If we're talking about when a unified world would have been technologically feasible, I guess one way of determining that would be to look at ancient empires like Rome and China, figure out the response time of such states (how long it would take a ruler to get word from his minions and back again, how long it would take to respond effectively to rebellion or incursion), and then calculate when technology placed the entire earth in this potential response time frame.

My guess would be technologically the earliest time you could get a unified world would be sometime in the 1800s (or equivalent level of technology). Put together all European colonies and conquests and imagine it all being done by one state, you'd have something close to a world empire.

Politics, of course, is a different matter, as OTL nicely demonstrates (in many ways the present world is far smaller than the Roman Empire in terms of effective distance; you can travel from one end to the other in a day or two, and get a message from one end to the other in an instant).

I think it might just be an accident of history that this didn't happen. Have the industrial revolution happen in a more politically unified civilization like China instead of a politically fragmented one like Europe and I could see the world ending up like this. So a pre-1900 POD might be a good bet for this.

As for the earliest possible date this could happen ... maybe if you could somehow get a scientific/industrial revolution going in ancient Egypt or Sumeria or Shang Dynasty China...