Islands of Blood

Well, I like it, and I'm curious where you're going with this.

I'm intrigued, but because I have little beyond that to add, i tend not to post. So if it keeps you going, more I say

Thanks for the posts of support. :)

I'm with everyone else here. So dar we have some big adn meaty broad sweep of people and events so I'm facinated to see how it will all tie up. For myself I would like to hear more about the interaction with the higher reaches of the civil service and the military in the 70's as my feeling was always that without them the UK was never likley to make a swing to either of the political extremes. Anyway, keep the excellent work and hope to see more posts very soon.

Again, it'll be a while before we get any big NF event happening.

As usual its a great update, but I am tempted to say that too much mystery is perhaps not a good thing as it only confuses readers as to what went on. I realise that this is what you want though ;).

It is becoming pretty clear that all the cards about the world as we know it have been massively reshuffled. South Africa is obviously a rather powerful nation and it seems likely that the white population is now over ten million at least if not more. The reference to the Boer enemy alongside the mulatto, black and others is very intriguing, does it mean that some Afrikaners went up in arms against a massive immigration of white refugees, possibly.

For France to become utterly unstable by now, something big must have happened. Methinks that France ended up on the same side as Britain during one of the conflicts, but that unlike Britain it never turned its back on extremists.

Benjamin Zephaniah as opposition leader means a lot just by itself, I had to look up the man on wikipedia. But it is becoming rather obvious to me that politics is a lot more polarized in TTL world. The right is rather more right wing, possibly because "only strong nations survive" in this world. But the left on the other hand seems a lot more pacifist, anti-racist and such compared to OTL as a reaction of the war. This would translate into a nasty and very confrontational political culture everywhere.

When you're trying to have a good Dystopia, it's better that things are vague until we get to the really bad bits.

The SACP is strongly against Separatism which is what the Boer community supports along with the remnants of the NF and the Boer community isn't popular due to perceptions of them trying to get out of the Federation when things got tough along with a revenge fantasy against the lobby that wanted them to stay in the holding camps that were referred in Medvedev's speech.

Told you France was going to be in trouble. ;)

He's going to be part of a strong anti-NF lobby in Canada as very soon places like Canada and Sierra Leone become seen as safe havens from the fierce political hatred that engulfs many countries.

I'd say more but the joy of a Dystopia is in the surprise. :p
 
A billion people dead in some war called WWIII.

As nuclear holocausts go, that's sort of midrange--the Big One I grew up dreading would completely destroy techno-industrial civilization the world over and any surviving political entities would be about the size of a county, in all the 50s-70s SF books I was reading anyway. Given the level of armament both the USA and USSR had built up to by 1970 and that one would think that once the bombs started falling the whole thing would surely avalanche (with generals, colonels, and submarine captains on both sides thinking "use it or lose it"), for the USA, the UK, France in any form, or even South Africa to exist at all, with massive immigration from the former Soviet sphere yet, this war must have been markedly restrained, unless one or the other of those great nuclear powers (or both?) was not directly involved. It's not a "Firecracker War" nor the Armageddon I would expect--a lot of people are dead, we don't know where yet--for all we know (unless I'm forgetting something) we don't even know if any nukes went off anywhere.

I'd think if the war and its immediate aftermath killed a billion people outright, the current world population would be a lot lower than OTL 6 billion+, minus one billion--a lot of those dead hundreds of millions would have had children and conceivably the world population is less than ours by as much as 2 billion, or more if widespread devastation caused Beyond Thunderdome conditions to persist...but it really doesn't look like it's that kind of post-war world, what with all those nations existing still, in however dystopic a form.

I suppose the USA might have taken a terrible pounding and its dead may contribute a hundred million or more of the death count, and it might be some radioactive garrison-bunker society (but still grimly united). Or the problems Blackadder alluded to may be of a much lower order. This American hopes.:eek:
 
Extract from the Guardian. Dated 20/08/11

Public support Police Response to Riots, but should we really?

The Guardian has always acknowledged the fact that our readership's political views and ideal party would probably flounder in the polls, but we've always hoped that the general public would not blindly allow the police to protect the main interests of bankers and big business, while the youth of Britain, and the people who stood with us when the National Front reigned supreme, were thrown to the dogs, in the name of the Free Market. Now we know about the outrage that poured into our offices when the letters from our readers, about the Leakgate scandal about how John Smith worked with Portillo, Ashdown and Lamont with privatising what little of the family silver we have left and how they would co-operate with the Marketisation of our beloved NHS during negotiations for a National Government during our time of crisis.

We also know how the people of Britain shook with anger as Nigel Farage made his speech about the so-called 'Whiner Class' made up of students, trade unions and 'benefit scroungers' along with everyone else who opposes his vision of a Libertarian paradise. The Guardian supported the protesters against the government's new 'Balanced Budget Act' which would essentially make Keynesian solutions impossible and allow for the Tory dream to be realised, when the Labour chief whips actually threatened the party if they publicly supported it (the reason for our support for Ed Balls' heroic stand). Of course the loathsome Act was passed and we had to deal with the fact that we weren't likely to get a real return of Social Democracy, even with our new system of P.R, which was also compromised.

However we also condemn the violence that shook the streets of London but, we need to remember that these people are not thugs but are the people who have been let down by society, this was shown to me by a sight that shocked this writer to his core.

I could see a cafe where a gang of teenagers were joining in with the looting of a nearby shop, it was close to where the big riots were happening, as I then saw a stubborn man in an expensive suit looking at them with the same disdain that is common for the bankers of society when they see the disadvantaged cry out for help, one of the teenagers saw this and picked up a nearby brick, fear then seemed to take the man in the cafe, but it then became one of smugness as he then pointed behind the teenager.

We both turned to see that the gang was now being beaten with batons, no doubt will their benefits being stripped if Hague has his way, and the brick-holding teen had just been tasered for no reason, no attempt at peaceful dialogue or anything like that, just being beaten down and probably used as an example of 'Yob's put in their place.' The man in the suit walked down the road near the looted shop and began to whistle a tune, similar to Singing in the Rain while all the teen could do was scream the familiar cry of 'You rich bastards can get away with it!'

It is like the two girls who were turned in by the BBC, they said they were showing the rich that they could do what they liked, they were sentenced to one year in jail and they were forced to be a part of 'Rioter's Face the Victims' as they were forced to publicly apologise for their comments and say that 'When we said 'rich' we were drunk and were inflicting the punishment onto the good law-abiding people of Britain.' Of course we saw one of them snap and say that she regretted nothing but that's for another time.

But as the polls come out and show that 65% support the new police measures of having tranquillisers again and the laws that would force the rioters to donate part of their pay, in their jobs, to the RiotCleanUp organisation or force them to donate their benefits we must wonder if we are heading down a familiar road.

The NF gave the police these new powers and John Smith was able to stop that nonsense but it seems that rather then the, now far lowered to 40,000 non-white population, being used as a scapegoat, we now act as if anyone who isn't 100% luvvy-duvvy to the government is part of the so-called Whiner-Class, as if we were Sierra Leone with their Citizen-Civilian plan that discriminates against many.

But we must now urge our readerships to sign our petition to have Hillary Benn condemn the violence on both sides, as wrong as his father has, or else we may find ourselves, returning to a police state.
 
Last edited:
Interesting.
Did you read cumbrias timeline?
I liked it until he started wanking about an ethnic cleansing of South Africa.
 
A billion people dead in some war called WWIII.

As nuclear holocausts go, that's sort of midrange--the Big One I grew up dreading would completely destroy techno-industrial civilization the world over and any surviving political entities would be about the size of a county, in all the 50s-70s SF books I was reading anyway. Given the level of armament both the USA and USSR had built up to by 1970 and that one would think that once the bombs started falling the whole thing would surely avalanche (with generals, colonels, and submarine captains on both sides thinking "use it or lose it"), for the USA, the UK, France in any form, or even South Africa to exist at all, with massive immigration from the former Soviet sphere yet, this war must have been markedly restrained, unless one or the other of those great nuclear powers (or both?) was not directly involved. It's not a "Firecracker War" nor the Armageddon I would expect--a lot of people are dead, we don't know where yet--for all we know (unless I'm forgetting something) we don't even know if any nukes went off anywhere.

I'd think if the war and its immediate aftermath killed a billion people outright, the current world population would be a lot lower than OTL 6 billion+, minus one billion--a lot of those dead hundreds of millions would have had children and conceivably the world population is less than ours by as much as 2 billion, or more if widespread devastation caused Beyond Thunderdome conditions to persist...but it really doesn't look like it's that kind of post-war world, what with all those nations existing still, in however dystopic a form.

I suppose the USA might have taken a terrible pounding and its dead may contribute a hundred million or more of the death count, and it might be some radioactive garrison-bunker society (but still grimly united). Or the problems Blackadder alluded to may be of a much lower order. This American hopes.:eek:

A billion dead in the war itself. In the aftermath...
 
Blimey it looks like Britain went utterly bonkers during the eighties, a marketisation of the NHS no less than that ...

I however think that the new police powers you describe are not a definite depending on what government take shapes in the eighties. A return to traditional policing with bobbies on the beat would be far more likely if common sense politicians get their way. Said return coupled with a modernisation of the force would have highly positive effects overall and prevent certain feelings of alienation in communities.

Now if society really becomes polarised during the eighties, Britain could well end up with an "Americanised" police force and all the consequences good or bad this entails ...

I also think that the same breakdown of society and of the working classes which happened during the eighties OTL, may not happen in the way you imply TTL. Especially if the National Front draw a significant part of its support from the working classes. Not having a multicultural London would by itself have massive consequences. To put it bluntly, the black gang culture won't exist in a Britain which is 99,9% white.

However, knowing the Tory Party from the inside and certain "gut feelings" which exist under the surface in it. I think that the "Thatcherism on steroids" which you are implying will happen, could create huge rifts in British society and potentially make the underclass a lot more angrier at "the rich" than it is now.
Let me explain:
The political reforms done by the National Front/Conservative Party will be hugely driven by emotion. Feelings of frustration (we are not great anymore), anger (it is all the fault of the bloody foreigners) and "urge" (we have to do this sooner rather than later, otherwise ...) are rather widespread in the party.
Said emotions will find an echo in the leader in place.
Said leader will have good intentions, but won't have a clue on how to implement the changes needed and might be very naive and easily influenced by "advisors" and committees.
Reforms will be implemented, but these will have been designed in haste, under the influence of emotions and can be described as "we will do it now and think about it later".

You will therefore end up with angry and slightly paranoid Tories, seeing ennemies everywhere and not answering to reason or pragmatism. Needless to say that the results won't be pretty. Without internal and external checks and balances, rash policies like marketising the NHS are not impossible.

In turn the left will be even angrier than now, thus making for a very nasty political atmosphere.
 
Interesting.
Did you read cumbrias timeline?
I liked it until he started wanking about an ethnic cleansing of South Africa.

Yep, The Red and I did read it and we did develop some suspicions during that time but didn't follow through with that chain of thought.

Our TL is going to be a much crappier world then ENF with ethnic cleansing and all that jazz.

Blimey it looks like Britain went utterly bonkers during the eighties, a marketisation of the NHS no less than that ...

I however think that the new police powers you describe are not a definite depending on what government take shapes in the eighties. A return to traditional policing with bobbies on the beat would be far more likely if common sense politicians get their way. Said return coupled with a modernisation of the force would have highly positive effects overall and prevent certain feelings of alienation in communities.

Now if society really becomes polarised during the eighties, Britain could well end up with an "Americanised" police force and all the consequences good or bad this entails ...

I also think that the same breakdown of society and of the working classes which happened during the eighties OTL, may not happen in the way you imply TTL. Especially if the National Front draw a significant part of its support from the working classes. Not having a multicultural London would by itself have massive consequences. To put it bluntly, the black gang culture won't exist in a Britain which is 99,9% white.

However, knowing the Tory Party from the inside and certain "gut feelings" which exist under the surface in it. I think that the "Thatcherism on steroids" which you are implying will happen, could create huge rifts in British society and potentially make the underclass a lot more angrier at "the rich" than it is now.
Let me explain:
The political reforms done by the National Front/Conservative Party will be hugely driven by emotion. Feelings of frustration (we are not great anymore), anger (it is all the fault of the bloody foreigners) and "urge" (we have to do this sooner rather than later, otherwise ...) are rather widespread in the party.
Said emotions will find an echo in the leader in place.
Said leader will have good intentions, but won't have a clue on how to implement the changes needed and might be very naive and easily influenced by "advisors" and committees.
Reforms will be implemented, but these will have been designed in haste, under the influence of emotions and can be described as "we will do it now and think about it later".

You will therefore end up with angry and slightly paranoid Tories, seeing ennemies everywhere and not answering to reason or pragmatism. Needless to say that the results won't be pretty. Without internal and external checks and balances, rash policies like marketising the NHS are not impossible.

In turn the left will be even angrier than now, thus making for a very nasty political atmosphere.

Actually the copy of the Lansley Reforms happened in 2010, the NF aren't going to do any like Marketising the NHS as you will soon see.

Policing will have a massive change in NF Britain as you said but there will be more violence used as riots increase in the early years of NF control and in response to the more nasty things that will happen ITTL.

Polarisation will start emerging as people start to blame one another for what happened but it won't just be during the 80's remember.

All of those things will happen but in a different way and due to a different cause but gang and criminal culture in Britain is going to be radically different ITTL.

The National Government is doing all these Privatisations because the money would prefer it, they need to clean everything that has been Powellised and because they want to make a new fresh start. The reforms the NF, when they get in, will bring in will be varying in results but what you said sort of is correct with what will happen.

That all depends if there is a Tory party left to do all those things after the NF is done.

The Guardian is feeling very bitter because the main left-wing parties have decided to ignore the Guardian and they feel that the National Government, and the governments after, have let them down.
 
Last edited:
The EEC and what nearly was: Dawn of the Euro special

With the banknotes beginning to exchange hands in Warsaw banks and the markets beginning to waken in the Berlin stock exchange, it might be worth giving s final ode to the project that so many had hoped could have brought European unity, which like the phoenix has risen despite all attempts to destroy it.

It is easy in hindsight to see why the EEC would have been destined to fail. The British were always going to be a hostile partner argue politicians, despite the Prime Ministers recent supportive gestures. Sociologists argue the the inherent xenophobia of the French would have destroyed their project when they realised it wouldn't have allowed them to dominate Europe, despite the refugees which have contributed so generously to the new Europe whilst economists have always argued that the division of Europe between east and west would never have allowed Europe to work together and that only now the conditions are correct for the Germans and Poles to finally hammer out a lasting deal.

We must consider that history can't always be seen as fate however, Britain did in fact overwhelmingly support the project at one point in the mid nineteen seventies, the French might have easily avoided the terrors of the sixth Republic without the all consuming crisis of the Third World War and eastern Europe may have overthrown it's chains peacefully and embraced democracy without the Soviet Union necessarily tearing itself apart.

Could the EEC have brought in European brotherhood a generation before it's successor? Possibly.

Unfortunately history has taken a very different path.
 
Top