For All Time: Earlier POD?

[Communist Wizard]

Most of us know what FAT is: A POD used to make the world extremely bad all the time. Where it gets worse and worse...
So what if we made everything bad happen earlier? Say, FAT from 1700. Or 200 BC. Or something.
How could you do it? When should you start? What would the world look like (no nuclear holocausts, death of civilisation, but a much worse civilisation)?

 

[rcduggan]

A "Mongols conquer all of Eurasia" scenario, if done brutally enough, could usher in a new dark age. How would Old World society function if every major city was destroyed?

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Much better because they are united in one giant empire that cares not about religious or racial differences as long as they pay tribute to the great Khan.

 

[Jaydoh]

You could have Constantinople fall much earlier, leading to far more 'barbaric' states of Germanic and Slavic origin popping up. Some events could lead to the loss of most ancient Greek and Roman texts, so that the Renaissance would never happen. To keep the scenario from getting too Rice and Salt-ish, the loss of the classic texts would keep Islam from having the scientific golden age that they did, and a few well-placed butterflies could keep India and China fragmented. If Eurasians don't colonize the New World, then we could have the clichéd 'evil, death-worshiping, sacrifices-having-their-hearts-cut-out' Aztecs.

 

[Admiral Canaris]

Much better because they are united in one giant empire that cares not about religious or racial differences as long as they pay tribute to the great Khan.

Doesn't that stifle the creative competition between the various European city-states that was at least a factor in the continent's development? Also, doesn't that huge a disaster in economical/demographic terms "set back the clock", so to speak? Not that I'm an expert on the Mongol invasions, but isn't, say, the relative historical backwardness of Russia as compared to the West often attributed to the Mongols destroying their burgeoning centres of trade?

 

[Faeelin]

Doesn't that stifle the creative competition between the various European city-states that was at least a factor in the continent's development?

Creative competition is entirely possible in this environment, no? Especially if you don't have to risk getting your city sacked by wandering condottieri.

Not that I'm an expert on the Mongol invasions, but isn't, say, the relative historical backwardness of Russia as compared to the West often attributed to the Mongols destroying their burgeoning centres of trade?

There's something to this, although as a rule I am leery of blaming events 800 years ago for modern backwardness.

 

[Admiral Canaris]

Creative competition is entirely possible in this environment, no? Especially if you don't have to risk getting your city sacked by wandering condottieri.

As I understand it, monolithic empires are bad for creative competition. They're a very conservative force in and of themselves.

There's something to this, although as a rule I am leery of blaming events 800 years ago for modern backwardness.

I primarily meant it in a historical context.

 

[Nikephoros]

Creative competition is entirely possible in this environment, no? Especially if you don't have to risk getting your city sacked by wandering condottieri.

Actually, if you had the problem of "wandering condottieri", you would be more inclined to find new ways to defend yourself. If you didn't have that problem, you would likely be very conservative.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Well, what if your rampaging bosses were always trying to find ways to cross rivers and valleys and mountains and oceans to extend their rule to every corner of the earth?

 

[hewhocaves]

Why does this remind me of the Star Trek 'Mirror Mirror' episodes?

 

[Faeelin]

Actually, if you had the problem of "wandering condottieri", you would be more inclined to find new ways to defend yourself. If you didn't have that problem, you would likely be very conservative.

You're assuming that better cannons equals progress.

 

[Nikephoros]

You're assuming that better cannons equals progress.

More than weapons: Tactics, Strategy, Buying them off, etc.

Tactics: Improving and creating tactics may lead to looking at problems in different ways, probably same with Strategy.

Buying them off: You'll need to improve your economy most likely, which could involve creating more economical ways to do things.

 

[Admiral Canaris]

You're assuming that better cannons equals progress.

Military development often fuels discoveries that can be used in civil life. And the competition could also be one of trade, etc. With a monolithic empire imposing equalising measures, as heavy regulation discourages innovation.

 

[Faeelin]

Military development often fuels discoveries that can be used in civil life. And the competition could also be one of trade, etc. With a monolithic empire imposing equalising measures, as heavy regulation discourages innovation.

This is why America's economy has been so backward for years, right? The crippling price of uniformity and equalizing measures?

 

[Tolkiene]

"Much better because they are united in one giant empire that cares not about religious or racial differences as long as they pay tribute to the great Khan."

It is debatable whether the Mongol Empire would have remained unified if had conquered the entire Occident.

Logistically it would have been very difficult to maintain contact between the various satrapies and the Great Khan. After all, the historical Mongol Empire pretty soon devolved into various fiefdoms - the Ilkhanata in Iran, which only nominally accepted the suzerainty of the Great Khan, the Golden Horde in Russia, which did not even do so nominally and also in time devolved into several squabbling fiefdoms, and then the Yuan Dynasty in China and parts of Mongolia.

It can be assumed that the conquest of even more territory would have accelerated rather than stopped this procress.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

True, but from what I understand the individual khanates were pretty laid-back in regards to religious and ethnic differences, even if they did end up converting to one local religion or another.

 

[Admiral Canaris]

This is why America's economy has been so backward for years, right? The crippling price of uniformity and equalizing measures?

Don't confuse economy with innovation. One can do great economically (for a while) while still falling behind in key research. IIRC, this happened to Britain.

 

[Valdemar II]

Much better because they are united in one giant empire that cares not about religious or racial differences as long as they pay tribute to the great Khan.

Interesting the area which gave us the industrial and scientific revolution was one of the only area of Euroasia never conquered by the Mongols.

 

[Alayta]

The really bad things need industrialazation!
Without it, you just cant destroy effective enough!"

 

[maverick]

How about FaT in the 1790s?

Lets say Robespierre and the most psychotic of the Jacobines never lose power and begin to spread their lunacy to the rest of Europe, starting with Italy and Germany...or, what if Napoleon became a Jacobine instead of being incarcerated by them?

Or Roman FaT?

Let's say Caligula or Nero become even more despotic while at the same time are more capable and not overthrown...