Tales of the Shining Pearl: A Magsaysay Lives TL (Revamped)

Something that came to mind. In the novel Starship Troopers, Rico was originally Filipino. In the ATL, what if Director Paul Verhoeven kept a Filipino lead, maybe Joseph Estrada plays his father. You can even keep Neil Patrick Harris in his role....

PS Love the direction of the ATL,...
 
Well, this is your ASB timeline.

I disagreed if you are going to make a more realistic timeline.

technology transfer only happens if the other country allows it, US counter intelligence fails, US technology stagnates, US didn't do anything about it politically, embargoes, etc. meaning the USSR and China kept doing something while the US didn't barely do anything.

Once you achieve tech parity, The problem with new technology is you need US culture and US freedom in access of information.

Authoritarian and communist countries in modern society hasn't proven to be technological leaders due to requirement of new technology is throwing out conventional wisdom and embracing new ideas and letting all your population have access to this information. This is essentially the opposite of an authoritarian society is or communist economy in the Soviet and Maoist form.

If they did adapt to new technologies, this would have made the Soviet and Maoist Chinese government collapse due to all of their people have access to information including political protests.

But like I said since this is an ASB thread, no problem.
 
One idea to consider is that in June-August 2015, there were rumors in Silicon Valley and China, that Apple CEO Tim Cook was planning to relocate the manifacturing facilities of the iPhone, iPod and iPad to the Philippines, citing the substandard humn rights and labor record of the People's Republic of China...
 
Let me repeat this: Technological advancement alone can't bring down a government, as long as the necessary economic reforms are gradual, smooth, and provides much inclusive growth for the economy, since the disillusionment effect of failed reforms then followed by rapid reforms would not be existent in the two countries ITTL.

My issues are a lot with your stories. It is very forced to get your desired ending. Nor did you understand what I meant. Since political freedom is very different from economic freedom.

The most believable part of Soviet wank is increasing production since it was the Soviet managers who were afraid of the Ratchett effect. Now, for quality control and technological advancement is very far from how Germany, Japan, USA does it or their system since quality control and technological advancement would drive price very high nor does the Soviet in OTL or your ATL have a better system in terms of quality control or technological advancement than the USA.

The USSR, although authoritarian, did have its own bunch of geniuses that were not utilized by the hardliners. The reformists did want reform, and were adamant that the people participate, under the condition that they won't call for the ousting of the Party. The people were fine with this, but because these reforms weren't enacted IOTL earlier, they became radicalized.

Authoritarianism, if led by the proper leaders, could have become technologically advanced.

If you can predict what technology or those who is going to discover them yes. But you cannot.

You have to let the people be part in control of the economy to drive technology in all aspects. But for central planning or any state oversight, technology is limited to what the politicians deemed as future technology not by the inventors themselves.

Authoritarianism can be in certain aspects. But it is the same problem as the Soviet-Type planned economy. The ones involve in planning/government controls are not inventors nor the most creative people but politcians, in the case of Soviets and Red China, limited to the Communist party. In the US type economy, technological advancement is two fold, one funded by the state close to the one you described e.g. DARPA/Manhattan project(politcian drive), the other funded and controlled by the private sector, like Apple,Facebook, Ford etc. which the state has no control(inventor /individual driven).

You can say that Authoritarianism will be more advance in certain aspects wherein the state focused more money than a US Mixed economy. But will never be more advance in all other aspects nor any quality control. Example in OTL would be North Korea vs South Korea. North korea is more advance in ICBMs/Nuclear weapons. But South korea is more advance in everything else.
 
Last edited:
Give it a rest, Namayan. It's ok. It may seem like in the wrong part of the forum, but it's fine by me. In some way or another, we do have our own fantasies of our country (if you're Filipino) doing very well. This may seem just a wish fulfillment TL, but it's enjoyable for me. We've seen many kinds of this, and many authors end up quitting their work, because others just raised up the word "ASB". But I am for some leeway.

If you want a "more realistic" Philippines, you can look to Male Rising's Philippines, then. There are others around too.

But this is unique. Hehe.
 
Personally, my thought is to just embrace the utopian critique and as they say in San Francisco, "own that critique ". Consider that too many of the ATLs are simply dystopian and depressing just for the sake of being depressing. This is something unique and different, with a Third World nation being the originator, a very big accomplishment...
 
Some ideas as to what could cause some controversy. Consider that Filipino women will demand greater access to birth control and abortion, both of which are prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church. Also there is the issue of women priests. Consider how many of the religious leaders of the Philippines were women, such as the nuns of the 1986 People Power Movement. Consider the pressure since the 1970s to have a greater voice in the policies and practices of the Church. Also consider how would be greater attention to sex scandals within the Roman Catholic Church under the TL, rather than being swept under the rug...The best European models would be the situation in Ireland.
 
The Arab League will be like this TL's ASEAN, only focusing on trade and free movement. There would be no united currency and political unification, because 1.) There is a big divergence in economic sizes and government types in the Arab states, and 2.) Many Arab leaders don't want to give up their own power, e.g. the Assad Family and the Ba'athist Regime under Kazar in Iraq, and 3.) each Arab state still wants a lot of sovereignty, esp. on the part of Syria, Egypt and Iraq.

Though like the ASEAN, agreements on human rights are to be accepted and applied to each Arab state's conditions, with observers from the UN and non-Arab League states also invited to oversee the process, especially in this TL's Saudi Arabia after the 2009-2013 turmoil. This means much greater human rights recognition in Syria, although it is lesser than the moderate Iraqi government (Ba'athist) and the democratic Southeast.

Why wouldn't Arab nationalism still work though? It's not like the OTL failures have plagued it post-1967. Besides a more successful Yom Kimpur war would even legitimize the movement. Plus what if the majority of the populace wants unification?
 
Top