Look to the West Volume VIII: The Bear and the Basilisk

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
Well, if the world ever unified in a mostly democratic fashion, even if only at first as a loose confederation, I imagine that there would be a trend towards homogeneity, just as the US has had a trend towards homogeneity.

I think there's a tendency on this topic to look at the outcomes of intensive/expensive top-down policy and see 'trends.' The US 100 years ago didn't seem very homogenizing by todays standards, except towards the Native Americans, which was the result of large-scale efforts and child confiscations on a very small target. Other groups were remarkably unhomogenized; the enormous fraction of German-speakers comes to mind.

Even with the OTL intense anti-immigration laws, US diversity would be unrecognizable without mass mobilization for total war twice in a generation.
 

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
Unrelatedly -

I just realized something

The Combine can't have anything like the competetive sports that we have in the modern world. No football teams or soccer clubs associated with this state or that town, hell, you can't even have competing teams at all because different people would divide up based on their favoritism for one side or another.

Team sports would be dead, wouldn't they, given the logic of the Combine?

Or else they keep them because clearly they're universal to Human Culture, but the teams are both untied to geography and randomly reshuffled every year so nobody develops a deep attachment to "the Blues" or whatever.

I figure they eliminate local sports under Alfarus in favor of a couple widely liked ball games. Dual Thought, remember.

Then later blackguards (heh) put an end to such disgusting competitive misanthropy.
 
I think there's a tendency on this topic to look at the outcomes of intensive/expensive top-down policy and see 'trends.' The US 100 years ago didn't seem very homogenizing by todays standards, except towards the Native Americans, which was the result of large-scale efforts and child confiscations on a very small target. Other groups were remarkably unhomogenized; the enormous fraction of German-speakers comes to mind.

Even with the OTL intense anti-immigration laws, US diversity would be unrecognizable without mass mobilization for total war twice in a generation.
A hundred years ago, the regional cultural diversity in the US was still less than a hundred years before that.

France used to have more regional gradiation in language, now they don't. Rome. The various arabian caliphates. the various chinese empires, and also y'know, China today.

Unified countries have a general trend towards homogenizing language and culture - how much that is by deliberate action and how much is accidental can varry, but it is an absolutely obvserved phenomenon across history.
 

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
A hundred years ago, the regional cultural diversity in the US was still less than a hundred years before that.

That's only true with geographic fudges.

Within 1822 borders, America was much less German than in 1922. Large and fairly healthy Italian, Hispanophone, Yiddish, Scandinavian, and Polish communities existed in many cities. In 1922 the US had significant Syrian, Filipino, Chinese, and Japanese communities in several places.

So what had actually homogenized in that time? Dutch had become less common in New York, French likewise in New Orleans, but these shifts were negligible in scale by comparison. They were incomplete, very gradual, and affecting few and small communities. There simply was not much white diversity to try and homogenize away in 1822, not by later standards.

No, rather the most dramatic 'homogenizations' between 1822 and 1922 were of the native peoples, of slaves, and of Irish gaelic speakers. None of the three are well-characterized as being merely a part of some neutral natural trend.

France used to have more regional gradiation in language, now they don't. Rome. The various arabian caliphates. the various chinese empires, and also y'know, China today.

Unified countries have a general trend towards homogenizing language and culture - how much that is by deliberate action and how much is accidental can varry, but it is an absolutely obvserved phenomenon across history.

Well yes, obviously.

And in the popular memory of the above there are often similar failures to fully recognize that homogenization generally doesn't just 'happen,' except on very long time scales. Instead it tends to operate on a sort of punctuated equilibrium, advancing in many cases as a result of major top-down efforts or population replacements.

You mention China, which really emphasizes my point: homogenizing modern China culturally to the current extent required herculean efforts building on a unique foundation of a plurality of (Ahem.) humanity who were already convinced bone-deep that they were fundamentally one people.

Obviously the vague general point is accurate: sharing a political/religious/economic/whatever unit does lead to increase similarities over time. I was speaking to the specific tendency to offer a specific historical example - the US - as a simple natural trend. When that is really not (most of) the story.
 
Last edited:
There was plenty of regional variation in the US in the 1800s among white people. The North and South had extensive cultural differences between them, as did East and West. And there was less of that by 1922. Still extent, but less as it is today, - extant, but it's still even less now.
 

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
There was plenty of regional variation in the US in the 1800s among white people. The North and South had extensive cultural differences between them, as did East and West. And there was less of that by 1922. Still extent, but less as it is today, - extant, but it's still even less now.

If we move the goalposts, maybe?

In 1822, we're primarily talking about the diversity between West English and North English colonists. Between Methodist, Baptist, and Congregationalist... Protestants. You also emphasize the 'diversity' between cardinal directions. So now diversity in the sense that societies with different economies and climates will be different.

I'll readily admit that if we consider this diversity, national development wore it away. The transition of Mississippi from a Western ( as in Frontier) state to a (Deep) Southern state is the focus of a book on my nightstand. But this seems real small potatoes as an assertion of what 'diversity' means. Because in 1822, Mississippi had two widespread indigenous tongues and was filling up with West African culture - a welter of languages, animism and some Islam, preferred styles of dress often visible even given slaves' limited ability to clothe themselves.

By 1922, yes Mississippi's local English dialects were significantly homogenized into the overarching 'Southern accent' and rural or small town culture in white areas shared more with Oregon and Indiana. But first, crises like the Civil War arguably determined that as much or more than gradual trends, and second, all that's a sideshow compared with the other cultural transformations the region had gone through.

A lot of the process of assimilation and loss of diversity depends on someone with a lot of power forcing the issue in some sense, and committing to the effort.
 
Last edited:

Admiral Matt

Gone Fishin'
The ENA really giving off a 1930-1940 France ambience in this period. Timeline L have a stereotype of Americans as haplessly prone to panic at the first surprise?
 
Okay, okay, okay. Dèi e spiriti, how do I put this?
TV Tropes has driven me back to this humdinger of a timeline, and I have to say—pardon my French, figurative and literal—chier une brique dans la chambre privée du Pape!
 
Last edited:
Okay, okay, okay. Dèi et spiriti, how do I put this?
TV Tropes has driven me back to this humdinger of a timeline, and I have to say—pardon my French, figurative and literal—chier une brique dans la chambre privée du Pape!
Those that mean you like the story?
 
Since the threads already bumped, I want to point to eSports as an example of what Combine team sports look like

eSports teams form without borders, since there are no oceans on the internet, and attempts to tie teams to geographic locations rarely have much success.

So eSports shows team sports without geography can work.

Also as for freedom of movement in the Combine, I'd say the Combine has it, they just wouldn't have freedom of not-movement.
As long as you keep pushing people to move away, you'd get the homogenised culture you're after. It wouldn't matter where they move as long as they don't stay.

I'm more worried about Diversitarian team sports, shouldn't every nation have different rules for their sports make competition between nation unviable
You'd have national leagues at best and the big national league IOTL are strong because they are supported by funding intended to make teams capable of competing on the international stage.

I'd bet Diversitarians are the ones that end up with small unpopular semi-professional local team sports, and the Combine are the ones that end with popular highly-professional global sports competitions
Wouldn't be surprised if the Combine team at the Diversitarian Global games is just an amateur team without Combine sanction, that manages to do embarrassingly well
 
After some time, I have finally caught up to the current end of this timeline and it was a great ride. While I do have some questions about the timeline, I will save those for the next volume. For now, I do have some observations that I want to give for this volume:
Miss Pérez: That was around the time that we did more treaties with the Chinese?
While California decided to work with China and reject russian influence, on the map after the pandora war said that California was close to becoming an official russian ally. So was there an error in the map since that end up not to be true?
Despite (or because of) this dysfunctional government, Greece in the second half of the nineteenth century enjoyed a new cultural flowering known as the Anagennisi (‘renaissance’), of which Katsouranis was one of the ringleaders. Greek literature, theatre and (to a lesser extent) painting became popular throughout Europe, spreading to the Novamund and (perhaps surprisingly) to the Ottoman Empire, which had many educated people who could read and write Greek (even many without Greek connections themselves). The Anagennisi helped mend Greece’s image in the western world, although it sparked an argument (both inside and outside Greece) over whether it should be regarded as a continuation of the glory of Ancient Greece, or something new altogether and worthy in its own right.
Now this is interesting, as in OTL, John Byron planted the seeds for the western world's modern romantic idea of Greece. But ITTL, John Byron gave Greece a not flattering image of the country. While this ruined Greece's image for some time, it lead to the interesting result of establishing their own world image on their own ground rules thanks to the Anagennisi and not by John Byron in OTL. At least in Europe and what's considered the developed world ITTL.

Something that I also notice is that Europe and this timeline developed world are more open to cultural renaissances that were not accepted in OTL. From Greece to Bengal to french Australia, places that were not in the purview of OTL, are ITTL. This ironically makes LTTW cultural purview more globalized then OTL.

[1] This reflects a situation quite different to OTL, with fewer British expeditions exploring the Pacific region in the late 18th century, in part due to the early death of James Cook whilst working as a surveyor for General Wolfe in the Third War of Supremacy.
Can you clarify what you mean by this statement?
Paul’s break with the Church over women in factories was therefore a significant shift in power dynamics, though this was little noted at the time by foreign observers.
I am surprised that Paul did not point out to the Church that women in the factories can be seen as a natural evolution of Prince Theodore's " National Marriage".
It is worth noting that the idea that blacks were ever truly on top in Carolina is an exaggeration based on complaintive propaganda by white Carolinians.
Something that is interesting, is that while the Meridians did not use Black Carolinians as much, in the minds of the white Carolinians, the Meridians did. What this means is that both white and Black Carolinians now have strong grudges against each other, with the Black Carolinians being enslaved, and now the white Carolinians and the grudge against the Black Carolinians and their involvement with the Meridians, even if the Black Carolinians grudge being more true then the White Carolinians grudge. What this means is that it makes a tiny bit more sense why both Carolinians are separated from each other of their own will, as their grudges can be one of the factors for that situation. And with the Combine bringing in soldiers from the Kongo, the white Carolinian's grudge against Black Carolinians and Blacks in general, is most likely going to grow worse.

While the ENA was created with the same people that made the USA (And Anglo-Canada), I always thought that the ENA would be more different than the USA. Its Peace with the first generation of German immigrants and America thanks Fredric should have made an America more friendly to german immigrant culture, not be xenophobic aginst them like OTL USA. The ENA had the "National Gloom" which was said to make the American populace accept themselves as any other country in Europe. This combined with the fact the ENA has had more conflict on its borders than the USA ( the last time the USA was attacked on its borders was the war of 1812), means that the ENA should have been more down-to-earth than the USA. Even the ENA version of manifest destiny is more down-to-earth than the USA manifest destiny, as the ENA version was a party policy for the supremacist instead of a full-on movement like OTL. Yet the ENA feels too close to the USA than it needs to be. The ENA can still be nationalistic, but I always thought that it would be more like every other nation's nationalism, and should not have developed "American exceptionalism" like the USA given the information we were given.

The same can be said for other north American countries in ITTL, as California should have been called "the land of broken dreams", But instead is instead called the land of dreams like OTL. And Carolina Should not have a Deep south culture thanks to cotton not being as important enough ITTL south to create a deep south culture, and thus Carolina culture should be more upper south dominated. Yet in recent updates, Carolina was shown to have a deep south culture when it should not.

While I am ranting, I just think there are too many examples of cultural things that happened in OTL that should not happen in LTTW, yet still do, especially when it comes to the ENA and its differences from the USA.

Edit: Something that I am interested with the ENA is its English. Since the ENA stayed with the British longer than the USA, the ENA English should be different from OTL USA English. I think the ENA would speak a more developed version of Tidewater, as that was the dialect that was closely related to what colonial America spoke. So since the ENA stayed with britian, I can see tidewater still being the main English dialect of the ENA and have it developed from there.
 
Last edited:
Top