Most Utopian World Possible

Stephen

Banned
In a democracy there are always allot of people in the media telling you how awful things are to put them in power during the next election. In a dictatorship the media is always telling you how wonderful things are in order to mantain the status quo. So as bad news is depressing and thinking for yourself makes your brain hurt the most happy world would be one where every country is a dictatorship!;)
 
Assuming Utopia is a world in which we all get along and there is very little fighting and most people are blissfully happy, what you need is a huge catastrophe. War works but it has to be bigger that WW's I and II and not end with a Cold War. Plague and Pestilence work just as well. And bonus points if you mix both.
By the end of the catastrophe a totalitarian government that controls the media needs to arise. Ultimately they will control the world. I know, you are thinking Nazis but no cause for Utopia the killing has to stop.
Anyway the government tell people
How bad things were and how bad things can get but how good things are now that they are in place.
Also inter-race marriages and coupling is encourage to make everyone a tingy shade of beige and brownish amber eyed. Until everybody is the same. This can be accelerated once genetic engineering comes along. And an universal constructed language is enforced.
The give a free t-shirt to everyone, and other merchandise to keep everyone content.
Within a few generations everything is so blissful that even the government forgets what exactly it is needed for and it loosens its grip.

Now in my opinion I rather the world not be Utopian. Honestly the above sounds kinda boring.
 
[...]
Also inter-race marriages and coupling is encourage to make everyone a tingy shade of beige and brownish amber eyed. Until everybody is the same. This can be accelerated once genetic engineering comes along.
[...]

Genetics don't work that way.
 
Ok, here's what I might do...

Hitler is somehow killed in the spring of 1939. Let's say he falls down the stairs and breaks his neck or something. Over the next decade, Nazi Germany gradually tones down, and democracy is restored in about 1950 or something. The Germans get Danzig back, so they're happy, and form a close alliance with Poland against the Soviets, who remain very weak ITTL due to the lack of German invasion.

The British and French empires are unbroken by the Second World War, and easily beat off Japanese attacks in the 1940s. Increasing protests for Indian independence are eventually granted by Prime Minister Clement Attlee. Following the 1943 general election, Labour takes power, and begins to introduce a gradual socialist reform in Britain, as well as making moves towards independence. When Anthony Eden and the Tories regain power in 1948 they are unable to stop the movement, but instead grant India full Dominion status, which most Indians accept. The French make similar moves in Algeria over the 1950s, seeing how the British were able to pacify India.

The African colonies remain under European rule until te 1970s. While this is certainly a rather racist and repressive rule, it is far better than the civil wars and genocides that ravaged the continent in OTL. In the 1981 General Election, the Conservative Prime Minister, Keith Joseph, and his Foreign Secretary Margaret Thatcher decide to grant Dominion Status to the rest of the Empire. By 2009, the British Empire is a peaceful and prosperous trading bloc.

The rest of the world? I don't know. Let's say Mussolini decides to attack Turkey sometime in the 1940s, but is swiftly defeated by an Anglo-French taskforce. The facist regime is toppled in 1947, and Italy is returned to democracy. Abyssinia also gets its independence back, as a close ally of Britain and France. In Spain the facists are able to hang on for longer, but their regime comes to a peaceful conclusion in 1972.

Imperial Japan is defeated by Britain, the Netherlands and France following an abortive invasion of Indochina in 1943, when they presume the empires are distracted by the Italo-Turkish war. Japan is forced to give up all of its gains in China save for Manchuria. Korea and Manchuria both remain rather hellish places until the 1960s, when the Japanese finally begin to make reforms, and eventually they are fully integrated into the Empire on September 18th 1992.

The United States remains isolationist. Due to the lack of a Second World War, the economy takes far longer than usual to pick up, but by the 1950's, it is finally beginning to boom again. The Civil Rights movement is delayed ITTL, but by the 1970s, it finally begins to emerge in a strong way. The end result is that by 2009, the United States is as tolerant as it is today.

The Soviet Union is ironically ITTL crippled by the lack of a major push to unite before the Nazi threat. Independence movements in the 1950s are brutally repressed, but they continue throughout the 60s. In 1974, the Soviet Union begins attempts at reform, which eventually lead to the system somewhat resembling modern China, though slightly more open. The economy booms, and the state is able to ease restriction on its citizens behaviour, since being a Soviet citizen is far more desirable ITTL than it ever was before.

The Jews of Europe remain settled, and there is a steady trickle of immigration towards Palestine. However, it is not the flood of OTL. Terrorist atrocities continue towards the British, who are determined to "stay the course". Palestine eventually gains Dominion status in a merger with Egypt and Iraq in 1969. Anti semitism remains rather more prevalent ITTL for a long time, beginning to recede only in the 1970s. The election of a Jewish Prime Minister of Great Britain, Keith Joseph, greatly helps this.

Is this utopic enough? Or just plain ASB?
 
ASB as we are humans, who will always be suspicious, aggressive, hierarchical and corrupt, and who will never be 100% content.
 
Is this utopic enough? Or just plain ASB?
How about "Rose Glasses Brit Wank", since it pretty much ignores a mountain of things OTL that would disagree. Like, you know, the fact that American isolationism never applied to Latin America and Asia, or the fact that colonies were economic losers even before WW2 and that independence movements had no interest in remaining under European colonialism (leading to a continuation of European crackdowns and brush wars).

Your entire scenario revolves around "if the Nazis, Russians, and Americans had stayed in their place, than benevolent liberal European empires would make everything happy." Which is neither true or even possible; the largest factor in prompting modern European liberalism and pacifism was WW2, and removing it completely shatters OTL political developments.
 
Seems to me before you start such a TL we need to list the major problems facing the world in the 20th century (if we're utopianish enough at 1999 the 21st will likely be pretty good also:)).

1: Imperial European powers locked into competion heading for conflict. Avoiding this seems ASB.

2:Racism and anti-semitism in Europe/North America (other bigoty elsewhere, but Europe is the center of the world at this time, with America coming up fast). Needs dealth with.

3:Excesses of industialism/capitalism leading to communism. THis was a source of great suffering OTL.

4:Decolonization leading to generally failed attempts at rapid industrialization. Nationalization of foriegn assests part of this issue. Leads to loss of foriegn investment, less economic growth.

5:Oil shocks, very hard of third world economies in the 20th.

6:Debt, both third world and first. Differant causes.

That's off the top of my head. Any other that we need to deal with?



Oh, BTW, fun idea!:D
 
I like the gist, but...


Ok, here's what I might do...

Hitler is somehow killed in the spring of 1939. Let's say he falls down the stairs and breaks his neck or something. Over the next decade, Nazi Germany gradually tones down, and democracy is restored in about 1950 or something. The Germans get Danzig back, so they're happy, and form a close alliance with Poland against the Soviets, who remain very weak ITTL due to the lack of German invasion.


HItler was not the sole cause of the horrors of WWII. He played on exsisting anti-semitism and anger in Germany to gain power. Germany at that time or previously was in need of some cultural change (if we want utopia.). WWII discredited facism.

Better I think to have a shorter WWII, with Europe not completely exhausted.

Recently read a great timeline dealing with earlier rifle-grenades used as anti-tank weapons (mostly by poles) leading to a plausable early German defeat.
 
The British and French empires are unbroken by the Second World War, and easily beat off Japanese attacks in the 1940s. Increasing protests for Indian independence are eventually granted by Prime Minister Clement Attlee. Following the 1943 general election, Labour takes power, and begins to introduce a gradual socialist reform in Britain, as well as making moves towards independence. When Anthony Eden and the Tories regain power in 1948 they are unable to stop the movement, but instead grant India full Dominion status, which most Indians accept. The French make similar moves in Algeria over the 1950s, seeing how the British were able to pacify India.

The African colonies remain under European rule until te 1970s. While this is certainly a rather racist and repressive rule, it is far better than the civil wars and genocides that ravaged the continent in OTL. In the 1981 General Election, the Conservative Prime Minister, Keith Joseph, and his Foreign Secretary Margaret Thatcher decide to grant Dominion Status to the rest of the Empire. By 2009, the British Empire is a peaceful and prosperous trading bloc.

You need a reason why the decolonization, with a stronger Europe, does not turn into a bloodbath with bad longterm effects.

Perhaps more colonial troops used in WWI and WWII, leading to stronger pro-western but still pro-independance native elites.

Especially if those troops are needed to occupy the Soviet Union after an early WWIII (get back to that later;)).







The United States remains isolationist. Due to the lack of a Second World War, the economy takes far longer than usual to pick up, but by the 1950's, it is finally beginning to boom again. The Civil Rights movement is delayed ITTL, but by the 1970s, it finally begins to emerge in a strong way. The end result is that by 2009, the United States is as tolerant as it is today.

Having the US sit this out seems like a bad idea. You are losing a huge asset for the more liberal west (vs nazi germany or USSR).

The Soviet Union is ironically ITTL crippled by the lack of a major push to unite before the Nazi threat. Independence movements in the 1950s are brutally repressed, but they continue throughout the 60s. In 1974, the Soviet Union begins attempts at reform, which eventually lead to the system somewhat resembling modern China, though slightly more open. The economy booms, and the state is able to ease restriction on its citizens behaviour, since being a Soviet citizen is far more desirable ITTL than it ever was before.

Seems unlikely that the Soviet Union with it's size and character is not going to be a problem.

HOw about after the short WWII, while the allies (here without the US, yet) bloodied and disorganized by occuping Germany, Stalin launches an attack on Germany.

If WWII could discredit Fascism, perhaps a WWIII, could discredit communism.

THe US could come in for this. Japan? Ally of SU or America? Stalin could be supporting Mao against Japan by now.

Could the Japanese be crazy enought to get in a two front war with the USSR and the US?

Here no big Manhattan project.
 
20th century is hard.
The best way to do this would be to have the civil war with a better, democratic, lasting outcome rather than a puritan dictatorship but they still get into imperialism later on. Nicer world all round.

Hmm...I suppose early quashing of Hitler and perhaps fascism in general then WW2 is the big smack down of the Stalinists? Leave the whole of the second half of the 20th century sans bad guy rather than just a period in the 1990s.
 
What about China and Latin America?

China : No Mao Zedong. KMT or CCP China , one party, but under the control of reformist, and strong incorruptable leaders of the calibre of Lee Kuan Yew and above. ( Very difficult ) Rapid Economic take off in late 60's . OTL South Korean GDP Per Capita Income by today.
 
20th century is hard.
The best way to do this would be to have the civil war with a better, democratic, lasting outcome rather than a puritan dictatorship but they still get into imperialism later on. Nicer world all round.

Hmm...I suppose early quashing of Hitler and perhaps fascism in general then WW2 is the big smack down of the Stalinists? Leave the whole of the second half of the 20th century sans bad guy rather than just a period in the 1990s.

Sort of where I was going.

Then around 1960, have a demiliterized Germany launch a orbital satelite, ushering in the Space Age,

In a era of peacefull economic competion, the Space Race becomes the way to one up your rivals.:cool:

Between US, UK, France and Germany?

Maybe have France build a space fountain, circa 1975?

THat way peace doesn't lead to less tech.

Oh, and just butterfly away, Isreal, OPEC, the Oil Shocks, and thus most THird World debt.:D
 
Top