Map Thread XV
- Thread starter rvbomally
- Start date
- Status
003. The Conclusion of Geopolitics
dA link
This map is based on a Russian book titled “Foundations of Geopolitics.” I have yet to find a copy in a language I understand, so my interpretation is based on the Wikipedia entry and the English translation of its table of contents. I’m not saying I understand the project at all, but when I visited Seoul and stumbled on a unification fair, there was a tent that was displaying children’s school books smuggled out of the North. One English language book (why North Korean children are learning English is already puzzling) was very interesting in its first lesson vocabulary: Revolution, glorious, patriot, etc.
When taking notes on this project, I felt a bit of deja vu.
“Foundations of Geopolitics” is a nearly 600 page book written/compiled by one Mr. Aleksandr Dugin. The book is, if reports are believed, popular among Russian military, elites, and even the Top Dog himself, President Putin. Does that mean that Dugin is making policy decisions and is the shadow master behind the Eurasian project?
No. Obviously not. I say “obviously” because there’s already political happenings and decisions taking place that go against Dugin’s strategy. At least as many (like China) that act counter to actions where his strategy is clearly being implemented (Ukraine). If I were to make a serious conclusion about the influence of Dugin’s book, it is more like a strategy guide than an ideological purity test of international focus. Were the goals Dugin lays out to actually be achieved, they will most likely take a different course of actions than what we see in the book. Think of the Bible, if all Christians listened and followed every word it said exactly, we’d still have slavery and no banking industry (story for another time).
This map (with no year decided but I had imagined it being 7 October 2052, Putin’s 100th Birthday) takes Dugin at his word and portrays the world as he would like to play Russia if he was suddenly given the keys.
I won’t rehash the English sources on the book (they’re either quoted directly above or portrayed directly on the map) but I will need to explain the parts of the map that are extensions of Dugin’s logic but not explicitly described.
The two areas he doesn’t seem to touch are Africa and South America. Reasonable since access to them precludes unrestricted naval access, Russia’s perennial problem (outlined by Admiral McMahon and portrayed often by Tom Clancy). While they’ve been gunning for access to the sea at least since St. Petersburg was built, and arguably was a motivation behind the First World War, domination of the sea trade and market access still eludes Russia in the ways that other countries (like the dual ocean United States) has just fine. Dugin’s main idea tries to turn this naval strategy (called by the euphemism “Atlanticism”) on its head, and make a united Eurasia to combat the influence from oceanic power. Dugin insists that conventional military strategies haven’t really worked for Russia in the past, so expansive espionage, subterfuge, and propaganda campaigns should be favored instead.
The German sphere of influence (with France as junior partner) is “all of Catholic and Protestant Europe.” This basically summarizes most of the EU today, which Russia would certainly want to keep for shopping vacations and a market place to sell all of that Natural Gas. The ultimate goal is “Finlandization,” keeping Europe weak and out of “Atlanticist” hands. This means that, like in the world before 1500, the Atlantic Ocean will become a relative backwater. Russia knows what pirates did in the Aden Gulf, and the ultimate victory here would be to make America and her allies uncomfortable in to sail here. In this world, there’s a rise in old, rogue, Soviet-era captains with aging, retired, or stolen ships that prowl the general lawlessness of the Atlantic.
This Russia would need to do with China what it did to Europe. In this world, (colored purple because they’re neither an ally nor enemy of Russia… picture Austria’s relationship with Germany 1850-1900), Russia made sure to dismantle the least Chinese parts of China and absorb them into “the Eurasian Project.” She now has access to the Sea via Manchuria but it’s a shaky position at best. While Russia will insist that the American settlers of Alaska and Hawaii were Russian, and seek to annex them, she’ll also want to encourage China to be their proxy power in the Pacific, encouraging and helping them get that pipeline in Burma, in securing the Spratly Isles, and in gaining exclusive mining rights in Australia.
Iran “as a key ally” and Islam in general as allied to anti-Atlanticist ideology, is another key here. Russia will draw lines of battle not against Christian civilization and Islamic civilization, but as the mystical, romantic east (of which they are a part) versus the rational, overly logical west (there’s a lot to say here, but this is not the place for that…). These two prongs – a naval China, and an Islamic bloc – is how Russia, now the master of Eurasia, will expand into Africa and South America, serving as the endgame of their world strategy: the conclusion of geopolitics.
Now hold off on that polonium. I didn’t make this map out of some commentary on Putin’s politics, or to serve as a warning of the dystopian future that awaits if Russia becomes the sole world power. Actually, I would expect stability, high market access, increased consumer goods, higher standards of living, and a Eurasia of many cultures to be one that is generally prosperous and beneficial for its denizens, regardless of the political structure that got it there. Imperial China wasn’t always bad, and neither was the century of Pax Americana. While Dugin is an honest-to-God Fascist, he’s only human, and plans, even if they succeed, have a way of getting out of hand. This time line sees a world where Russia, and by extension Russians themselves, rise exponentially on the world stage. Some places may be falling by the way side, some old infrastructure will crumble, some politicians bought off, but I guess what I’m getting at is that this version of earth (taken as a whole) isn’t a dystopia. No more than ours is.
Artistic notes: The flag of Eurasia is a “North Koreanized” version of the current Russian flag. No, it’s not a political choice. They come from this thread (www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/c…) by u/Driver3 and only because I love most of those flags. My personal favorites are Bhutan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, and… well, frankly, I prefer most of them to most of the maps we have in the world currently.
dA link
This map is based on a Russian book titled “Foundations of Geopolitics.” I have yet to find a copy in a language I understand, so my interpretation is based on the Wikipedia entry and the English translation of its table of contents. I’m not saying I understand the project at all, but when I visited Seoul and stumbled on a unification fair, there was a tent that was displaying children’s school books smuggled out of the North. One English language book (why North Korean children are learning English is already puzzling) was very interesting in its first lesson vocabulary: Revolution, glorious, patriot, etc.
When taking notes on this project, I felt a bit of deja vu.
“Foundations of Geopolitics” is a nearly 600 page book written/compiled by one Mr. Aleksandr Dugin. The book is, if reports are believed, popular among Russian military, elites, and even the Top Dog himself, President Putin. Does that mean that Dugin is making policy decisions and is the shadow master behind the Eurasian project?
No. Obviously not. I say “obviously” because there’s already political happenings and decisions taking place that go against Dugin’s strategy. At least as many (like China) that act counter to actions where his strategy is clearly being implemented (Ukraine). If I were to make a serious conclusion about the influence of Dugin’s book, it is more like a strategy guide than an ideological purity test of international focus. Were the goals Dugin lays out to actually be achieved, they will most likely take a different course of actions than what we see in the book. Think of the Bible, if all Christians listened and followed every word it said exactly, we’d still have slavery and no banking industry (story for another time).
This map (with no year decided but I had imagined it being 7 October 2052, Putin’s 100th Birthday) takes Dugin at his word and portrays the world as he would like to play Russia if he was suddenly given the keys.
I won’t rehash the English sources on the book (they’re either quoted directly above or portrayed directly on the map) but I will need to explain the parts of the map that are extensions of Dugin’s logic but not explicitly described.
The two areas he doesn’t seem to touch are Africa and South America. Reasonable since access to them precludes unrestricted naval access, Russia’s perennial problem (outlined by Admiral McMahon and portrayed often by Tom Clancy). While they’ve been gunning for access to the sea at least since St. Petersburg was built, and arguably was a motivation behind the First World War, domination of the sea trade and market access still eludes Russia in the ways that other countries (like the dual ocean United States) has just fine. Dugin’s main idea tries to turn this naval strategy (called by the euphemism “Atlanticism”) on its head, and make a united Eurasia to combat the influence from oceanic power. Dugin insists that conventional military strategies haven’t really worked for Russia in the past, so expansive espionage, subterfuge, and propaganda campaigns should be favored instead.
The German sphere of influence (with France as junior partner) is “all of Catholic and Protestant Europe.” This basically summarizes most of the EU today, which Russia would certainly want to keep for shopping vacations and a market place to sell all of that Natural Gas. The ultimate goal is “Finlandization,” keeping Europe weak and out of “Atlanticist” hands. This means that, like in the world before 1500, the Atlantic Ocean will become a relative backwater. Russia knows what pirates did in the Aden Gulf, and the ultimate victory here would be to make America and her allies uncomfortable in to sail here. In this world, there’s a rise in old, rogue, Soviet-era captains with aging, retired, or stolen ships that prowl the general lawlessness of the Atlantic.
This Russia would need to do with China what it did to Europe. In this world, (colored purple because they’re neither an ally nor enemy of Russia… picture Austria’s relationship with Germany 1850-1900), Russia made sure to dismantle the least Chinese parts of China and absorb them into “the Eurasian Project.” She now has access to the Sea via Manchuria but it’s a shaky position at best. While Russia will insist that the American settlers of Alaska and Hawaii were Russian, and seek to annex them, she’ll also want to encourage China to be their proxy power in the Pacific, encouraging and helping them get that pipeline in Burma, in securing the Spratly Isles, and in gaining exclusive mining rights in Australia.
Iran “as a key ally” and Islam in general as allied to anti-Atlanticist ideology, is another key here. Russia will draw lines of battle not against Christian civilization and Islamic civilization, but as the mystical, romantic east (of which they are a part) versus the rational, overly logical west (there’s a lot to say here, but this is not the place for that…). These two prongs – a naval China, and an Islamic bloc – is how Russia, now the master of Eurasia, will expand into Africa and South America, serving as the endgame of their world strategy: the conclusion of geopolitics.
Now hold off on that polonium. I didn’t make this map out of some commentary on Putin’s politics, or to serve as a warning of the dystopian future that awaits if Russia becomes the sole world power. Actually, I would expect stability, high market access, increased consumer goods, higher standards of living, and a Eurasia of many cultures to be one that is generally prosperous and beneficial for its denizens, regardless of the political structure that got it there. Imperial China wasn’t always bad, and neither was the century of Pax Americana. While Dugin is an honest-to-God Fascist, he’s only human, and plans, even if they succeed, have a way of getting out of hand. This time line sees a world where Russia, and by extension Russians themselves, rise exponentially on the world stage. Some places may be falling by the way side, some old infrastructure will crumble, some politicians bought off, but I guess what I’m getting at is that this version of earth (taken as a whole) isn’t a dystopia. No more than ours is.
Artistic notes: The flag of Eurasia is a “North Koreanized” version of the current Russian flag. No, it’s not a political choice. They come from this thread (www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/c…) by u/Driver3 and only because I love most of those flags. My personal favorites are Bhutan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, and… well, frankly, I prefer most of them to most of the maps we have in the world currently.
I would be in favor of a monarchy, if the monarch in question were to have the crown as nothing but a job: they'd receive a pay smaller than that of the OTL politicians of Italy, they'd pay taxes, they'd live in a house and not in any kind of palace (not even the Castello Sforzesco or the Palazzo Reale), etc.
Th'fck happened with Berlin?!003. The Conclusion of Geopolitics
dA link
This map is based on a Russian book titled “Foundations of Geopolitics.” I have yet to find a copy in a language I understand, so my interpretation is based on the Wikipedia entry and the English translation of its table of contents. I’m not saying I understand the project at all, but when I visited Seoul and stumbled on a unification fair, there was a tent that was displaying children’s school books smuggled out of the North. One English language book (why North Korean children are learning English is already puzzling) was very interesting in its first lesson vocabulary: Revolution, glorious, patriot, etc.
When taking notes on this project, I felt a bit of deja vu.
“Foundations of Geopolitics” is a nearly 600 page book written/compiled by one Mr. Aleksandr Dugin. The book is, if reports are believed, popular among Russian military, elites, and even the Top Dog himself, President Putin. Does that mean that Dugin is making policy decisions and is the shadow master behind the Eurasian project?
No. Obviously not. I say “obviously” because there’s already political happenings and decisions taking place that go against Dugin’s strategy. At least as many (like China) that act counter to actions where his strategy is clearly being implemented (Ukraine). If I were to make a serious conclusion about the influence of Dugin’s book, it is more like a strategy guide than an ideological purity test of international focus. Were the goals Dugin lays out to actually be achieved, they will most likely take a different course of actions than what we see in the book. Think of the Bible, if all Christians listened and followed every word it said exactly, we’d still have slavery and no banking industry (story for another time).
This map (with no year decided but I had imagined it being 7 October 2052, Putin’s 100th Birthday) takes Dugin at his word and portrays the world as he would like to play Russia if he was suddenly given the keys.
I won’t rehash the English sources on the book (they’re either quoted directly above or portrayed directly on the map) but I will need to explain the parts of the map that are extensions of Dugin’s logic but not explicitly described.
The two areas he doesn’t seem to touch are Africa and South America. Reasonable since access to them precludes unrestricted naval access, Russia’s perennial problem (outlined by Admiral McMahon and portrayed often by Tom Clancy). While they’ve been gunning for access to the sea at least since St. Petersburg was built, and arguably was a motivation behind the First World War, domination of the sea trade and market access still eludes Russia in the ways that other countries (like the dual ocean United States) has just fine. Dugin’s main idea tries to turn this naval strategy (called by the euphemism “Atlanticism”) on its head, and make a united Eurasia to combat the influence from oceanic power. Dugin insists that conventional military strategies haven’t really worked for Russia in the past, so expansive espionage, subterfuge, and propaganda campaigns should be favored instead.
The German sphere of influence (with France as junior partner) is “all of Catholic and Protestant Europe.” This basically summarizes most of the EU today, which Russia would certainly want to keep for shopping vacations and a market place to sell all of that Natural Gas. The ultimate goal is “Finlandization,” keeping Europe weak and out of “Atlanticist” hands. This means that, like in the world before 1500, the Atlantic Ocean will become a relative backwater. Russia knows what pirates did in the Aden Gulf, and the ultimate victory here would be to make America and her allies uncomfortable in to sail here. In this world, there’s a rise in old, rogue, Soviet-era captains with aging, retired, or stolen ships that prowl the general lawlessness of the Atlantic.
This Russia would need to do with China what it did to Europe. In this world, (colored purple because they’re neither an ally nor enemy of Russia… picture Austria’s relationship with Germany 1850-1900), Russia made sure to dismantle the least Chinese parts of China and absorb them into “the Eurasian Project.” She now has access to the Sea via Manchuria but it’s a shaky position at best. While Russia will insist that the American settlers of Alaska and Hawaii were Russian, and seek to annex them, she’ll also want to encourage China to be their proxy power in the Pacific, encouraging and helping them get that pipeline in Burma, in securing the Spratly Isles, and in gaining exclusive mining rights in Australia.
Iran “as a key ally” and Islam in general as allied to anti-Atlanticist ideology, is another key here. Russia will draw lines of battle not against Christian civilization and Islamic civilization, but as the mystical, romantic east (of which they are a part) versus the rational, overly logical west (there’s a lot to say here, but this is not the place for that…). These two prongs – a naval China, and an Islamic bloc – is how Russia, now the master of Eurasia, will expand into Africa and South America, serving as the endgame of their world strategy: the conclusion of geopolitics.
Now hold off on that polonium. I didn’t make this map out of some commentary on Putin’s politics, or to serve as a warning of the dystopian future that awaits if Russia becomes the sole world power. Actually, I would expect stability, high market access, increased consumer goods, higher standards of living, and a Eurasia of many cultures to be one that is generally prosperous and beneficial for its denizens, regardless of the political structure that got it there. Imperial China wasn’t always bad, and neither was the century of Pax Americana. While Dugin is an honest-to-God Fascist, he’s only human, and plans, even if they succeed, have a way of getting out of hand. This time line sees a world where Russia, and by extension Russians themselves, rise exponentially on the world stage. Some places may be falling by the way side, some old infrastructure will crumble, some politicians bought off, but I guess what I’m getting at is that this version of earth (taken as a whole) isn’t a dystopia. No more than ours is.
Artistic notes: The flag of Eurasia is a “North Koreanized” version of the current Russian flag. No, it’s not a political choice. They come from this thread (www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/c…) by u/Driver3 and only because I love most of those flags. My personal favorites are Bhutan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, and… well, frankly, I prefer most of them to most of the maps we have in the world currently.
Th'fck happened with Berlin?!
There's a list of three axes in the book that Moscow is supposed to organized their "Anti-Atlanticist strategy" around: Moscow-Berlin, Moscow-Tehran-Yerevan, and Moscow-Tokyo. Originally, I had made lines connecting all of the cities to portray the axes, but in the end decided they looked dumb. So I just left the city markers and took out the lines.
This is the map of Europe circa 1861, in my Frankfurt Empire timeline. Probably not the best, but I've only ever made two maps before so be kind haha
Is Maastricht (in Limburg) part of Germany, Belgium, or the Netherlands here?
I would suggest finding some newer maps with which to use as bases. Mostly due to how they show provinces and such, which often form the most interesting parts of maps. You may also want to edit your link to the timeline, as it is a third of the way down the first page, and might give spoilers to those begining to read it.
That's easy enough, it mostly already happen. But the palace kinda comes with the territory, it's not just the place where the king lives, it's also where it works.
Then what would be the point? I thought pomp and circumstance was the entire purpose of a monarchy.
Nice map! I like the short-lived Sudetan German state.
Well, working through the entire night I managed to finish up the map for the WIP timeline from last night. More detailed, non-worlda, maps are planned as I work on this. Eventually I will take this up to the *Industrial Revolution, or whatever is closest to that in this timeline. Europe is the only landmass that is majorly changed for now, besides a few tribes and counties annexing smaller groups across the Americas, Africa, and Asia.
Eastern Europe has turned into a torrent of powers simply pecking away at Rus, Lithuania, and Poland. Along with that, Hungary has been absorbing its vassals down to Bulgaria and Bosnia, both now act as the bastion against the Ottoman Empire. If there are any other questions let me know, this map took around 4-6 hours (vague as I lost track after my third cup of coffee)
Last edited:
Hmm. I am skeptical that the descendants of late 20th century Chinese and Indians are going to go back to 1950 fertility rates of 6 plus, not without a horrendous drop in the level of education, living standards, and women's rights. As you say yourself, it's not a dark ages map.
I get the impression it's the northern areas like Arnhem land and Cape York that will get wetter rather than the deserts, but it's hard to make these sorts of predictions definitively: there's always a new one along as the models get more sophisticated and the computers more powerful. I still dunno re Australia as a great refuge: the Aborigines apparently had a hard time last go-around: http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/news/2013/09/ice-age-struck-indigenous-australians-hard
Project Sahul might need some restructuring. If there were an equal population of Australian and Sahulian people, that would look pretty much the same on the map. Revise Jadida down to twenty-five million people, with food imports instead of exports.
I stand by the overall world population. They're moving into virgin lands, or at least emptied lands. The Eruption would have caused one or two billion casualties in the first five years, and population would start to grow again after twenty years, starting at about four billion. The growth curve for the C21st wouldn't have been as steep as in the C20th, the limiting factor wasn't technology exploiting each acre more, but cleaning new acres from the dust and salt that followed the Eruption and climate change. And their growth is intended to be more stable, or at least responsive, they do not assume the climate will remain the same, the New Ice Age has more extreme weather, and more extreme cycles.
It's interesting that you begin all the lines from Hong Kong.
Attachments
-
螢幕快照 2017-04-01 上午2.34.51.png
I decided to spruce up my US Western States map in Qbam! I've made some changes which I will note below but it is very similar to the original. In this timeline Lincoln was not assassinated and lived to reconstruct the south. Also, the Sioux Wars were much longer and much more violent which is why Dakota has a southern border on the Platte River.
Changes:
Nevada- The southern border is the Colorado River which was transferred to Nevada upon the Federal Government's realization that the Territory of Colorado (otl Arizona) was having difficulties supplying any settlement across the River.
Idaho Territory- Due to the vastness of the Territory it was determined by the Fed it would be divided. Before this division could be implemented, post-Civil War, a group of renegade Confederates fled to the mountainous regions of Northern Idaho Territory and claimed them as a separate state from the Union loyal Idaho. This feud became very hostile so much so that Custer was ordered to proceed to Idaho to install martial law and end the conflict. This would allow the Sioux War to go on for at least another decade or lustrum. The Eastern portion of the Territory was separated, due to the Sioux, and became the Territory of Absaroka. The States of Idaho, Montanas and Absaroka.
Dakota- Dakota is expanded due to the Indian Wars. The southern extension was added to the Territory when Kansas Territory could not maintain settlements north of the Platte River. This portion was tacked to Dakota with the plan of dividing the Territory. This plan later fell apart due to the Sioux Territory located within the State and the need of a larger population to maintain the area surrounding the reservation (in less long winded terms the settlers were racist and din't want the Sioux grabbing for more land).
Jefferson (otl Colorado)- This State seized the Northern border following the civil war. In this timeline Jefferson did not get involved in the Civil War (New Mexico defeated Texas.... Texas Revolution was much longer and a much larger revolution which spread into neighboring Mexican States leading to a US intervention (gaining northern Sonora but losing the Rio Grande border) and then during the Civil War Texas invested heavily into an armed offensive into New Mexico in which the New Mexicans defeated the Confederate Texans. When the states were reintroduced the Union did not recognize the panhandle as part of Texas and gave it to the newly founded New Mexico territory. In a sense New Mexico was much more stable earlier and was able to keep large portions of the original borders a la Santa Fe de Nuevo México). This allowed the settlers to focus on expanding north rather than having to worry about a Confederate attack to the south.
Now for the weird southern states. As I mentioned above, Lincoln was never assassinated and lived to reconstruct the south. Using his Presidential authority (a little heavy handily) refused to acknowledge certain states and let them return into the Union.
West Virginia- Stripped of the Eastern Panhandle to provide more land to the State of Maryland so that the capitol is not bordering a Southern, antagonistic state.
Virginia- Stripped of the Eastern Shore to grant Maryland the southern Delmarva. Virginia is also stripped of some of the Western portions of the State to create a new Appalachian State.
Franklin- A new state created out of Tennessee (retains the same name), North and South Carolina and Virginia when Lincoln did not recognize this area as belonging to any state that left the union.
Carolina- South Carolina, the first state to leave the union, suffered the worst fate. It was divided between 3 states, Carolina, Atlanta and Sherman.
Atlanta- Following the division of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida were divided. Northern Georgia became the state of Atlanta with coastal access in otl South Carolina.
Sherman- For the integrity and determination of two of his generals during the war, Lincoln renamed Southern Georgia and Northern Florida the state of Sherman. What is otl southern Florida re-joined the union as Florida.
Grant- Nextdoor to Sherman is another state named after a general. Southern Alabama, Mississippi and parts of Louisiana were admitted into the union as a separate state in honor of Grant.
Alabama & Mississippi- The northern sections of these two states were re-admitted into the Union as the states they left, Mississippi and Alabama.
Louisiana- Louisiana was divided between the city of New Orleans and the Northern city of Shreveport. Southern Louisiana was re admitted as a the separate state of Acadiana.
Here is the map!
Changes:
Nevada- The southern border is the Colorado River which was transferred to Nevada upon the Federal Government's realization that the Territory of Colorado (otl Arizona) was having difficulties supplying any settlement across the River.
Idaho Territory- Due to the vastness of the Territory it was determined by the Fed it would be divided. Before this division could be implemented, post-Civil War, a group of renegade Confederates fled to the mountainous regions of Northern Idaho Territory and claimed them as a separate state from the Union loyal Idaho. This feud became very hostile so much so that Custer was ordered to proceed to Idaho to install martial law and end the conflict. This would allow the Sioux War to go on for at least another decade or lustrum. The Eastern portion of the Territory was separated, due to the Sioux, and became the Territory of Absaroka. The States of Idaho, Montanas and Absaroka.
Dakota- Dakota is expanded due to the Indian Wars. The southern extension was added to the Territory when Kansas Territory could not maintain settlements north of the Platte River. This portion was tacked to Dakota with the plan of dividing the Territory. This plan later fell apart due to the Sioux Territory located within the State and the need of a larger population to maintain the area surrounding the reservation (in less long winded terms the settlers were racist and din't want the Sioux grabbing for more land).
Jefferson (otl Colorado)- This State seized the Northern border following the civil war. In this timeline Jefferson did not get involved in the Civil War (New Mexico defeated Texas.... Texas Revolution was much longer and a much larger revolution which spread into neighboring Mexican States leading to a US intervention (gaining northern Sonora but losing the Rio Grande border) and then during the Civil War Texas invested heavily into an armed offensive into New Mexico in which the New Mexicans defeated the Confederate Texans. When the states were reintroduced the Union did not recognize the panhandle as part of Texas and gave it to the newly founded New Mexico territory. In a sense New Mexico was much more stable earlier and was able to keep large portions of the original borders a la Santa Fe de Nuevo México). This allowed the settlers to focus on expanding north rather than having to worry about a Confederate attack to the south.
Now for the weird southern states. As I mentioned above, Lincoln was never assassinated and lived to reconstruct the south. Using his Presidential authority (a little heavy handily) refused to acknowledge certain states and let them return into the Union.
West Virginia- Stripped of the Eastern Panhandle to provide more land to the State of Maryland so that the capitol is not bordering a Southern, antagonistic state.
Virginia- Stripped of the Eastern Shore to grant Maryland the southern Delmarva. Virginia is also stripped of some of the Western portions of the State to create a new Appalachian State.
Franklin- A new state created out of Tennessee (retains the same name), North and South Carolina and Virginia when Lincoln did not recognize this area as belonging to any state that left the union.
Carolina- South Carolina, the first state to leave the union, suffered the worst fate. It was divided between 3 states, Carolina, Atlanta and Sherman.
Atlanta- Following the division of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida were divided. Northern Georgia became the state of Atlanta with coastal access in otl South Carolina.
Sherman- For the integrity and determination of two of his generals during the war, Lincoln renamed Southern Georgia and Northern Florida the state of Sherman. What is otl southern Florida re-joined the union as Florida.
Grant- Nextdoor to Sherman is another state named after a general. Southern Alabama, Mississippi and parts of Louisiana were admitted into the union as a separate state in honor of Grant.
Alabama & Mississippi- The northern sections of these two states were re-admitted into the Union as the states they left, Mississippi and Alabama.
Louisiana- Louisiana was divided between the city of New Orleans and the Northern city of Shreveport. Southern Louisiana was re admitted as a the separate state of Acadiana.
Here is the map!
When the fascist regimes in the Balkans began to fall apart by mid to late 1945, Slovenia was all the Italians/Allied Forces could get before the Yugoslav communists took over the rest when peace was declared in '46. After thinking about it, I'm thinking Slovenia is a rump government ran by Peter II at the insistence of the UK.
Tito doesn't think too highly of Italy or the Germans but it's more of a case of mild paranoia.
Yes. Originally it was to suggest that the House of Hashim fled to Palestine after the war (originally to Cyprus after Transjordan was captured) but I realize now that I could have them in charge of Iraq and have them govern Palestine as well. I'm going to change the map to reflect that.
Pretty much. After the invasion, Germany was too wrecked to enforce their claim on the Sudetenland (they were luck to keep East Prussia only because the USSR was just as wrecked but it could've easily went the other way). By 1962, while Europe may be divided to an extent (Anglo-French, Germany & co, and Communists) all of them agree to keep a united appearance against the Race. Going to war over German land would not only destroy any hope of European cooperation but could be seen as a weak point for the Race to exploit.
fashbasher
Banned
Development levels, but as of 1890-1900, blended with geography. Australia in 1900 was pretty developed outside of the deep bush.
- Status