A good question. The normal demonym in the Soviet Union and the CIS itself is just "European" or "Slav", although the latter is only really used in a derogatory sense by Soviet individuals. Within the CIS itself, they often refer to themselves as "Easterners" or "Europeans" and to the outside wold they often describe themselves as "Cis" or, as you say, by their ethnic demonym. The latter is officially discouraged though. National identities and nationalisms are officially discouraged as "counter-revolutionary" but in practice they're suppressed through a process of divide and rule (e.g. "you're not a German, you're a Thuringian and you really don't have anything in common with those weird Brandenbergers over there...").The CIS seems like one of those countries that only exists on paper and given a moment will fly apart- do the Soviets do anything to mix the populations and suppress the old national identities? To promote being CIS over say Polish? Could the CIS stick together as a Federal entity without the USSR?
Nope. The Greeks were very concerned that the LEU has basically become a forum for all the members to take orders from the Italians and so stayed out (the Italians weren't too keen on having them in either, for the same reason).So Greece is not in the Latin Economic Union? Not it seems any other trade bloc?
I don't want to say that there's no tourist industry in Spain but its marginally better late 19th century and post-World War mean that their economy was already diversified (well, more than OTL) meaning they don't have to pursue that tourist option as aggressively as OTL. So some of the larger tourist complexes in Majorca, Ibiza and so forth will not exist or will be smaller. Club 18-30 and suchlike are more likely to provide trips to resorts in the UK or, for the more adventurous, the West Indies.Do all the cheap package holidays, 18-30 etc still happen in Spain or are the conditions to different here?
As I've said before in similar contexts: maybe at the margins but not hugely. The abandonment of collectivisation means there are more nomadic communities than OTL, which goes for the Soviet Union too, so that's interesting.Mongolia actually sounds better off ITTL than OTL? Not sure though, Has it been opening up to Western tourists and historians?
OTL it was the most popular sport in Pennsylvania up to WW1 but its chances in the region were really ruined when the cricketing authorities in Australia, South Africa and England deliberately cut them out of the touring program because they weren't in the British Empire. TTL obviously they take the opposite approach.Cricket in North America? Exactly as it should be old bean!
19, same age as Luke in A New Hope. The "he's too old" objection is mentioned but isn't as big of an obstacle as in OTL.How old is Anakin here?
Thrawn dies at the end of season 3 and the final season and Spectre of the Past is the Yuuzhan Vong storyline.What did Spectre of the Past do to annoy the critics so much?
To be honest, Henson is one of these people I've never quite been able to get into, although I did like the 2011 Muppets movie. Not really a sleight on him but I never got into the Muppets and wasn't allowed to watch Sesame Street as a kid (because of the American pronunciation) so I just never got into it. Anyway, enough about me, but the point was that I don't have firm opinions as to his TTL fate.You have never said what happened to Jim Henson and the Muppets ITTL. It would be nice if Henson lived a lot, lot longer and the Muppets remained their own thing somehow.
I'll put it on the to-do list but, to be honest, I don't think it'll be hugely different from OTL.Any chance of a write up for ITTL's KFC please?
Much obliged. I'll set up a Kickstarter to see if I can raise the $300 million to get it made...I would watch this.
Maybe Obi-wan never really fully turns back. After all, being with the CIS and Dooku is less clearly bad than it would have been in the OTL prequels. Obi-wan could end the movie not fully redeemed but having seen the error of his ways, seeing some of himself in Darth Vader.So, does Anakin manage to bring Obi-Wan back from the dark side, only to fall to it himself?
It also puts a new spin on the Darth Maul vs. Obi-Wan revenge thing from Rebels.Maybe Obi-wan never really fully turns back. After all, being with the CIS and Dooku is less clearly bad than it would have been in the OTL prequels. Obi-wan could end the movie not fully redeemed but having seen the error of his ways, seeing some of himself in Darth Vader.
I audibly said "whoah". This is a hell of a plot twist, and despite the fact that neither Vader, Yoda, or Obi-Wan never mentions the latter's fall from grace to Luke sticks out to me, a morally gray Ben tracks with the well-meaning but mind-tricking pathological liar hermit we meet in A New Hope.Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
That was a very interesting take. There's a whole load of stuff from the Clone Wars series in there.
So, does Anakin manage to bring Obi-Wan back from the dark side, only to fall to it himself?
That's quite a twist!
That's by far the most original idea I've seen in a prequel rewrite. Eager to see your Revenge of the Sith.
Maybe Obi-wan never really fully turns back. After all, being with the CIS and Dooku is less clearly bad than it would have been in the OTL prequels. Obi-wan could end the movie not fully redeemed but having seen the error of his ways, seeing some of himself in Darth Vader.
I've got to say, I'm slightly concerned that my ROTS won't measure up now...I audibly said "whoah". This is a hell of a plot twist, and despite the fact that neither Vader, Yoda, or Obi-Wan never mentions the latter's fall from grace to Luke sticks out to me, a morally gray Ben tracks with the well-meaning but mind-tricking pathological liar hermit we meet in A New Hope.
A minor retcon of a previous cricket update. The plot of Attack of the Clones will come tomorrow.
Can i say Firstly good work on the cricket, but secondly all that and not a Woman to be seen. Come on surely a few words on the Women's Game could have been included. Especially on the opening day of Englands OTL series with West Indies.......
* * *
Does the ban on Catholic clergy in political office not take place in this universe?Religion in the United Kingdom, and in the various nations that preceded it, has been dominated by various forms of Christianity for over 1,000 years but has grown more diverse over the course of the 20th century. Religious affiliations of British residents and citizens are recorded by regular surveys and published yearly as the British Religious Attitudes Survey.
According to the 2020 Religious Attitudes Survey, Christianity (taken together) is the majority religion, with just under two thirds of the population describing themselves as members of one Christian sect or another. The established Church of England has just over 34,000,000 members, representing around 47% of the nation. The memberships of the established churches of Scotland and Ireland (the Church of Scotland and Church of Ireland, respectively) are much smaller, with around 1.2 million and 0.5 million adherents, respectively. Catholicism is the second largest religion, with just over 10 million adherents nationwide, although nearly half of that comes from Ireland, where it is demographically the dominant religion. Other sects, such as Methodism and Baptism, are much smaller but retain certain regional strongholds.
After Christianity, Islam is the second most common religion, with just under 3 million members, of whom around 75% are of the Sunni sect. Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism (mostly Reform Judaism) and Buddhism then follow in terms of the number of adherents. Just over 250,000 people are members of other, smaller, religions and nearly 60,000 claim adherence to neopagan or wiccan beliefs. However, despite the numerical dominance of Christian sects, regular church attendance among self-described Christians is relatively low, at only 50%, whereas regular attendance at places of worship amongst Muslims, Hundus, Sikhs, Jews and Buddhists ranges from 75-90%.
After Christianity, however, the largest individual belief groups are those who do not state their religion (7%) or who declare themselves as being atheists, agnostics or otherwise having no religion (20%). These numbers increased rapidly over the course of the second half of the 20th century, peaking in the 1990s with just under a third of the country declaring themselves to be atheist or agnostic. However, numbers have declined since then due to a revival in religious feeling and have plateaued at around their present number in the past decade.
Religious figures have held political office in the United Kingdom and its predecessor states for many centuries. Bishops have sat in the House of Lords as Lords Spiritual since at least the 13th century. Since the Reformation, the position of Lords Spiritual came to be divided between archbishops and bishops of the Churches of England and Ireland. (The Church of Scotland does not have bishops in a traditional sense.) However, this settlement became increasingly unsatisfactory over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, particularly following the enactment of Irish Home Rule and then subsequent waves of non-Christian immigration to the UK.
Several attempts were made to reform the position of the Lords Spiritual, with a proposal to abolish them as part of the Lords reforms of the 1960s failing in committee. In the 1990s, under the Liberal-Conservative coalition, Ferdinand Mount (as Lord President of the Council) took on personal responsibility for reforming the Lords Spiritual, leading to the Lords Spiritual (Reform) Act 1993. Coming into force on 1 January 1995, the act reserved at least 26 seats for the Lords Spiritual, with one being set aside for the Archbishop of Canterbury (as the most senior cleric in the United Kingdom) and the remainder being divided up proportionally between all religions which have over 250,000 adherents. In each case, the number of Lords Spiritual allocated to each religion is rounded up to at least 1. In practice this means that there are often more than 26 in total (for example, for the 2020-25 term there are 33, including the Archbishop of Canterbury). These are then refreshed every five years according to the latest data on religious beliefs. By convention, the Lords Spiritual do not take a party whip but otherwise take a full part in Lords’ affairs.
This arrangement has caused controversy, particularly for the inclusion of atheism/agnosticism as a recognised spiritual belief. The Electoral Commission recognised the British Humanist Association as the official voice of British atheists and agnostics in 1994 and the organisation traditionally organises a ballot of its members every five years to decide who should be their representatives. The Electoral Commission has also designated certain organisations as the official leadership for British Muslims (the Association of British Muslims), Hindus (the Hindu Council UK), Sikhs (the Sikh Federation), Jews (the Board of Deputies of British Jews - although by convention their appointee as Lord Spiritual has been held by the Chief Rabbi to the Commonwealth) and Buddhists (the Buddhist Society). This has periodically caused controversy and is reviewed before each re-allocation of seats.
British Religious Attitudes Survey, 2020
View attachment 585193
Lords Spiritual 2020-25
View attachment 585194
View attachment 585195