The Land of Milk and Honey: An American TL

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was wondering if you considered the geopolitical history of countries like Russia and China and how they influence these nations. I think these should be taken into account because OTL geopolitical rivalries stem from the geopolitical ambitions that stemmed from the past that affect them now.

For example the causes of Russia's authoritarian and military state date due to the vast territory forcing Russia to maintain centralized control to get everyone into line and the lack of geographical barriers that forces Russia into conquering territories to annex geographical barriers to defend itself.
 
I was wondering if you considered the geopolitical history of countries like Russia and China and how they influence these nations. I think these should be taken into account because OTL geopolitical rivalries stem from the geopolitical ambitions that stemmed from the past that affect them now.

For example the causes of Russia's authoritarian and military state date due to the vast territory forcing Russia to maintain centralized control to get everyone into line and the lack of geographical barriers that forces Russia into conquering territories to annex geographical barriers to defend itself.

Fair comments, but the reason Russia is the way it is is because 75 years of communism was followed by two years of brutal civil war and two decades of poverty following that, and as a result while Russia does require a strong central government, that central government is guarded by a political establishment that is totally unwilling to accept totalitarianism and a population which is almost-militantly supportive of democracy and civil rights, to the point of having a populace and media more than happy to burn anyone who seeks to limit those rights. This doesn't always work out as well as it might otherwise - the media and communications sectors in modern Russia are incredibly disorganized (though many individual journalists are very good at their jobs) and it causes problems with groups like Neo-Nazis and the like.

Geographical barriers largely stems from paranoia, but modern Russia isn't exactly a slouch in terms of military power, which tends to help matters, and its potential rivals are usually reliant on their weapons, resources, infrastructure and or some combination of the three. Moscow is very good at leveraging this influence, as well. The new Russia of post-1995 or so has put a lot of effort to rebuild its society, and the strong armed forces and tough police Russia has are a result of wanting to protect that society - but the society is totally and utterly unwilling to let the police or security services get out of hand, and trying to suppress rumors in the chaotic media world of Russia ITTL is next to impossible, a fact that some members of FSB, Russian Federal Police and several local agencies have found out the hard way. The directing of projects and development from Moscow is still quite centralized, but protests against developments are usually loud and clear, and so the usual Russian way of settling this is to figure a deal with those effected by the job, then do the job demanded.

Russia and China in this world have many economic agreements, but modern Russia sees being the bridge between affluent Europe and growing Asian powers as being its future, and so China's long history of disagreements with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam and Korea are largely ignored by Russia, and Russia's wishes to be affiliated with the European Union (they don't expect to ever be a full EU members, though they are eligible) and its own political realities make sure that Russia does not at all approve of China's authoritarianism. China recognizes that, and while their internal security is a subject they take seriously, they do not advertise this too much - they still aren't huge friends with the UK over Hong Kong, Japan and China remain at odds despite Japan's 2010s and 2020s efforts to know the truth of its dark past and they do not exactly want to advertise their tactics for security to countries like the United States, Russia and Australia which China relies on for resources and investment.
 
I wasn't talking just about Russia and China but also every country in the world you portray in a way that wouldn't be so in an OTL.

What I'm trying to say is this. Many nations across the world you portrayed in act like so open, prosperous and democratic which isn't normal in OTL. There are reasons for that and I want you to address how they are overcome.

Does it help?
 
Chapter Twenty-Seven: The Rising

As the world evolved into the 2030s, what changes were happening had everyone's attention, namely because the "end of history" idea that had first seen in the minds of academics and politicians after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s was again starting to grow up, though in this time it was not so much because of the end of competition between nations - such competition was, if anything, stronger than ever - but because nations of the world found themselves more intertwined than ever, thus causing conflicts involving armed actions or economic sanctions to all but disappear as economics forced things to improve. This isn't to say wars ended, but they just got smaller in size and less destructive in terms of both blood and treasure. This was not a moment too soon, either - the advancement of electromagnetic weapons (both of the EMP variety, railguns and kinetic energy weapons) made sure that things could get more destructive. Pervasive commuications technology made potential cyberattacks both potentially far more devastating, though the advancement of such technology and growing decentralization of the systems made sure that this was harder to do. This manifested in such events as India's declaration that they have defeated the Naxalite Insurgency in 2034 (they weren't totally defeated, but the problem's size had been reduced to the point that they were less of a military problem and more of a police one) and the fact that terrorism between state-sponsored actors was reduced to next to nothing. Even in the Middle East, the former hotbed of the world's terrorism problem, the issues had largely become limited to the more hard-line states and their neighbors - and time had proven that while the Israelis had been legendary at terrorist hunting, time had made sure that the Iranians, Jordanians, Palestinians, Lebanese and Egyptians were just as harsh towards terrorists as the Israelis. (Seeing as Israel's security forces trained many of these forces, they should be competent at it.) While environmental terrorism was a small-but-very-visible problem in many places in the world, that was about it as far as the West was concerned, and it was a similar story in Asia as long-running insurgencies of both the Islamic and Communist sort began to sink in power both due to prosperity, agreements and dogged police work.

Perhaps paradoxically, one result of the world's more prosperous and peaceful status was a steady growth in some assets of the world's armed forces, but this was in ways more focused on the use of such forces for purposes other than war, and it showed in the develop of both the forces for it and the equipment they used. Air Forces saw their fighter forces shrink in number (though they did in just about every case improve in quality) but their transport aircraft and helicopter fleets grow, while Navies around the world invested in vessels not only capable of conflict actions but also of humanitarian ones, while fewer heavy armored and mechanized units were complemented by motorized and airmobile units, while specialized units began to swell in number and quality. With even medium-sized air forces (like those of Australia, Argentina, South Africa, Israel, Canada, Germany and Mexico) acquiring heavyweight airlifter aircraft like the American C-17A Globemaster III, Russian Ilyushin IL-476 and Ukrainian Antonov An-124-400, the combination of this, smaller airlifters (of which designs from the United States, Europe, Brazil, China, Japan and India fought for orders) and the use of cargo aircraft based on commercial designs (Canada, Australia, Japan and South Africa pioneered this in the early to mid 1990s using Boeing 747s, others have since copied this) led to air forces all being able to respond to disasters and emergencies in ways that they may never have been able to before. The Royal Canadian Navy's Columbia-class Littoral Combat Ship and the Royal New Zealand Navy's Canterbury-class Strategic Operations Vessels were designs of naval vessels ideally suited to small-scale conflict and humanitarian mission roles, and even the largest vessels in the world, America's monstrous Enterprise-class aircraft carriers [1], the huge Global Carrier designs used by the British, French, Canadian and Australian navies [2] and the even-bigger than the Global Carrier Vishal-class carriers [3] of the Indian Navy, got modified in order to be able to provide purposes beyond power projection and armed forces operations.

[1] The Enterprise class is the Gerald R. Ford class, just Congress decided to stop naming carriers after politicians and instead decided famous past names would do just fine, thank you.

[2] The Global Carrier was a 1980s joint project between the four nations. The class is referred to as the Queen Elizabeth II class in the Royal Navy, the Charles de Gaulle class in the Marine Nationale, the Terra Nova class in the Royal Canadian Navy and the Australia class in the Royal Australian Navy. Seven of these were built by the four nations (Australia's carrier was built in Britain, but the other six were built in the nations that operate them) with them being commissioned between 1989 and 1998. These are full-bore carriers, roughly 70,000 tons displacement fully loaded, capacity of about 75 aircraft. Nuclear powered and equipped with all kinds of advanced facilities, they are able to be part of any NATO group and they serve as the flagships of every navy they are a part of. Their replacements are now being considered, and in the replacement project Germany and Brazil want in on it, though whether this happens or not is an open question.

[3] The Vishal class is the largest non-United States Navy vessel ever built. Two built between 2016 and 2027, the Vishal class are full-on nuclear-powered supercarriers, displacing 87,500 tons, carrying 80-85 aircraft, nuclear powered. The Vishals resulted in the Vikramaditya's retirement in 2027 and are well-regarded in the world's naval communities, though the opinion of many is that they are in many ways inferior to western designs, though this is more inexperience than skill.
 
I asked this earlier but it was mostly ignored so I ask again: How is Disney doing ITTL?

To be honest, I don't know nearly enough about Disney to make much more than an educated guess. The entertainment industry ITTL has far more money than OTL due to the massively-grown demand both in North America and worldwide, but it also has a lot of extra competitors, of which the toughest in the movie industry come from India, Western Europe and Canada.

The theme park division I can see having a number of additional parks, while I would suggest that their media divisions would have expanded as OTL.
 
What I'm trying to say is this. Many nations across the world you portrayed in act like so open, prosperous and democratic which isn't normal in OTL. There are reasons for that and I want you to address how they are overcome.

Does it help?

To be fair, a lot of these are simply due to societal changes leading the political ones.

The biggest change (the Muslim world) is namely because IOTL, Islamic fundamentalism became a safety valve for the calcified, rigid hierarchical societies these places became, as the rulers of many of these places figured that they could entirely suppress dissent. Iran is a classic example of this - Shah Pahlavi IOTL suppressed all dissent until it all blew up on him, and with the fundamentalists having been fighting this for decades, they had the upper hand and thus swept all of the other factions out of its path to power. ITTL, Pahlavi (pushed by his wife, Farah) saw that coming long before it all came to a boil and headed it off by allowing a steady opening of their society, which allowed for the time after Pahlavi dies in 1980 to be chaotic, but the democratic factions of Pahlavi's opponents had the upper hand thanks to support from the state, allowing them to claim the ability to say "Khomeini achieved nothing, we achieved a lot, and we will achieve more." In much of the rest of the Muslim world, it's a similar story - Algeria's elections were not interrupted by its civil war, and as a result the Islamists proved utter failures at governing and were destroyed largely as a result, a similar story in Tunisia. Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon got driven forward after the Ottawa Treaty by association with Israel, using Israeli technology and connections to develop their own businesses, in the process allowing Israel to make a bunch of money in the process by being the region's concierge, if you will. Egypt and Syria saw this happening in the 1990s, and both Hosni Mubarak and the Assad Brothers decided they wanted in on it, but realized that they would have to change their societies to get it....so over the course of 15 to 20 years, they did just that. All of the moderating forces were helped by the 9/11 attacks - they were able to use the pain inflicted in New York as a sign of the bloodlust of the Islamists, and when America and its allies stomped the Taliban and Al-Qaeda flat and then made a point of putting considerable efforts into rebuilding Afghanistan, it got noticed. America's single biggest OTL problem among Arabs in modern times is the Israel-Palestinian conflict....but here, that settled forever in 1981, and today the Palestinians are every bit as wealthy as their Arabian Peninsula brothers, but they live better lives because of the much-more advanced state of their societies. Iran has in the eyes of the world taken over the mantle as the leader of Islam - a fact the House of Saud absolutely loathes - and the more moderate societies have come to have a real dislike of both the religious hardasses supported by the House of Saud and thuggish dictators like Saddam Hussein.

In Africa, what helped here was more intelligent development. The better development of the world in general and America having more interest in the Third World forced the Europeans to do the same. Apartheid started coming apart when it was clear that South Africa's economic and social progress relied on this, and the ANC realized in the late 1970s that they were going to one day win and that they needed to be ready when that happened. South Africa's economy completely went to shit in the second-half of the 1980s IOTL thanks to Western pressure, and what was left was devastated by the chaotic early 1990s - but here, South Africa's government began talking about the end of apartheid in the mid-1980s, and after the ANC's legalization in 1990 they set about uniting the country immediately, and the white government in Pretoria saw its mission as making sure it had a place in the country post-apartheid. That got done, and as a result the more moderate forces were able to hold back the violent ones. The chaos of 1990-1994 in South Africa was nearly entirely avoided, and the country's early years spent working on reconciliation, education and service improvements as well as providing meaningful jobs was substantially successful, causing South Africa's economy to go back to growth by 1991-92 and the 1994-2004 unity government era to be marked by huge economic progress - and that got added to by the 1995 Rugby World Cup win by South Africa, and then by the 2004 Cape Town Olympics and the 2010 FIFA World Cup. An increasingly-rich South Africa soon powered all of its neighbors forward (particularly Namibia and Botswana), Zimbabwe went the unity government route in the late 1990s (Mugabe left power in 2000 to Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC and retired a well-respected hero of liberation), allowing for a mostly-smooth transition of power and no chaotic land reform and terrible economic planning problems of the 2000s. Many of the nations of Africa saw the problems with central planning in the 1980s, and the prosperity and rising commodity prices of the time allowed many to use the funds to pull out of the slump and build modern infrastructure and education systems.

India's economic reforms began once governments began dismantling the License Raj in the early 1980s, but partly as a result of that India hit the Balance of Payments problem in 1984 instead of 1991, forcing them to kick-start the dismantling of the License Raj. China's epic fail in Tiananmen Square caused a massive shift in manufacturing, and India got a huge chunk of that including nearly all of the clothing and garments business that China lost. That earned the country a vast pile of hard currency, and they exploited that to spend the 1990s rebuilding infrastructure, as well as letting the value of the Indian Rupee rise slowly and carefully, raising the standard of living (and reducing the cost of raw materials imports) while continuing to keep the country's exports competitive. End result was massive economic growth in India - the country's economy more than tripled in size between 1985 and 2015 - and the dismantling of the License Raj allowed for hundreds of thousands of Indian firms to expand and gain positions in the marketplace. Some of these failed, but more than a few succeeded.

That help? :)
 
Your vision of the world sounds idealistic to the point it's realistic-beds is put into question. What POD(s) have caused these people to become more compassionate than OTL? I just don't get it. :/
 
To be honest, I don't know nearly enough about Disney to make much more than an educated guess. The entertainment industry ITTL has far more money than OTL due to the massively-grown demand both in North America and worldwide, but it also has a lot of extra competitors, of which the toughest in the movie industry come from India, Western Europe and Canada.

The theme park division I can see having a number of additional parks, while I would suggest that their media divisions would have expanded as OTL.
That's cool. On the subject of media history, how is Marvel Comics doing?
 
Part 2 for RandomWriterGuy (Conflicts, Democracy, Human Rights, Major Global Issues)

I'm wondering if you can cover the geopolitics, international relations between countries, major global issues, conflicts, poverty, democracy and human rights, the economy and population growth of the world.

In this world, most conflicts have become more about economics and competition for diplomatic, political and social influence than the armed conflicts of times past, namely because modern technology makes it rather harder to attack another nation with a competent set of armed forces - better anti-aircraft missiles, advancement of radar systems and modern fighter and AWACS aircraft make air attacks harder even for the most advanced armed forces, while AIP-equipped submarines, fast-attack craft and anti-ship missiles make attacking from coasts harder and even heavily-armed and armored land forces can frequently find themselves faced with enemies armed with lots of anti-tank missiles, attack helicopters and better artillery which would make such attacks far harder and far more costly. In a very real sense, war is too expensive for nearly everyone to contemplate against other nations, regardless of the differences between them. This has in some parts of the world pushed for lots of unconventional armed forces like special forces units, and on the darker side some acts of supporting terrorism or even organized crime in an attempted to undermine a rival. The terrorism problem is most common in the Middle East from India to Morocco as well as in Central Asia and some parts of Southern Europe. Many of the more infamous terrorist groups of Europe - the Provisional IRA, Ulster Volunteer Force, Red Brigades, Red Army Faction, ETA, Action Directe - ceased to exist as a result of the end of communism, agreements in nations involved or both in the 1980s and 1990s. The first generation of Middle Eastern terrorist groups (Palestine Liberation Organization, Abu Nidal, Black September, PFLP) largely faded after the Ottawa Treaty and the Independence of Palestine in 1981 and second-generation Islamic terrorist organizations have in most cases faced similar fates - al-Qaeda largely faded into irrelevance after its top leadership was decapitated in the 2000s, while others such as the Taliban, Abu Sayyaf, Boko Haram, Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Haqqani Network were wrecked by both campaigns against terror in their respective nations and by political agreements. The Tamil Tigers were finally defeated in 2007, though it took massive pressure from India to get Sri Lanka to begin reducing discrimination against Tamils in the years after that, and Israel's dismantling of Kach in the late 1980s (that coming after an amendment to Israel's constitution in 1986 with the specific goal of combating Jewish extremists) earned them a sizable amount of goodwill from its neighbors. The Americas have also seen economic prosperity and better government largely made groups like FARC, Shining Path and MS-13 less relevant in modern times. Terrorism remains an issue in the Middle East and many portions of North Africa and Central Asia.

Outside the terrorist / criminal element, one active way many nations have been striving to add to their power is in movements to support poorer nations and respond to disaster relief. Numerous air forces have developed dedicated disaster relief units and have sizable amounts of airlift capacities. The intervention by Canada in Rwandan Genocide in the summer of 1994 is seen by many as where the idea of humanitarian intervention was born, and many of the world's non-aligned nations and the better-regarded nations among both East and West pride themselves with their abilities to help those less fortunate in times of crisis. The Europeans have found themselves struggling in many areas in competition for allies in the less-developed world - India, Russia, Canada, Australia, Iran, Brazil, Argentina and the United States have had better luck in Africa, as many Africans still harbor memories of colonial exploitation - but other nations in the West have proven themselves more able to build goodwill in the less-developed world. The BRIICSA nations bloc, which began to serious coalesce into a forum for power and influence in the early 2000s, ultimately seek to provide an alternative to Western social, political and economic hegemony. As the two sides are ultimately intertwined with one another economically and prosperity has tended to trump many elements of geopolitics, the conflicts have proven to be more ideological and in peaceful pursuits than in armed actions, though many nations do retain a powerful armed deterrent in case of an unlikely of conflicts, as most among the nations feel that if there ever was to be a conflict to break out, it would be a truly massive one.

Democracy has become the dominant form of government operation in the world, though the local conditions and traditions influence many elements of democratic government in many nations in the world. While all modern democratic societies are universal-suffrage ones - South Africa's infamous system of apartheid which crumbled in the 1980s and 1990s was one of the last vestiges of democratic systems that did not include voices for all - where the nations stand on a spectrum of democratic nations varies from nation to nation. While countries like Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, Israel and Iran have legal political parties that promote ethnocentrism, in modern times few pay attention to such groups. What also proves different is that many unitary states prove to have very different politics than federal ones, and countries with far more central command and control of the nations involved like South Korea, Turkey and Singapore contrast with more libertarian nations like Russia and many of the former Soviet Republics, as well as federal states with massive and explicit separations of powers and responsibilities like the United States, Canada and Australia. Nations like Italy, Israel, New Zealand and Japan which use proportional representation (and countries with multi-faction political alliances like Canada, Australia, Iran, Germany, Greece and the Philippines) muddy the waters that much further.

Beyond these differences, most of the democratic world follows some form of a demand to advance all of the peoples of an individual society, and this makes for many nations having wide social welfare nets (though how wide varies by nation) and multi-aspect trade agreements, and most nations in the world in modern times loudly promote education as a way forward for people, though what direction this education takes depends on the nation in question. It is not unusual in some nations to have a single party dominate politics for many years (Japan's Liberal Democratic Party, which led Japan for all but seven years between 1947 and 2012, is one of the most extreme examples of this, but Japan's political system despite this domination is fairly good by global standards), this is usually not a result of political problems in most democratic nations.

Outside of this, the Human Rights Treaty of 2033, proposed by Canada and the United States to the United Nations, proved just how far human rights have come in most of the world. The Treaty proposed would require members of the United Nations to protect a series of "fundamental freedoms", including freedoms of conscience, religion, belief, thought and peaceful expression, peaceful assembly and association and freedom of the press. The Treaty also required protection against discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, ethnic background and sexual orientation, and had a number of legal rights including those of life, liberty and security of person and rights against unreasonable search and/or seizure, arbitrary detention, legal counsel and habeus corpus, self-incrimination, any form of cruel or unusual punishment and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. To most of the developed world of 2033, this was already a widespread reality, and even many nations of the developed world, particularly ones with dark pasts like Argentina, Russia, Iran and South Africa, were by this point pushed by their populaces and elements of their governments to expand the rights of individuals. (This didn't always work out perfectly, but it did result in a steady improvement in the rights of both majority and minority populations in most cases.) The most common differences in human rights in many places are based on differences over policies of racial equality and LGBT rights, but even those have started to decay as time moves on, even in nations once known for serious difficulties in these regards.

Major Global Issues in modern times primarily relate to the free movement of people, goods and capital in the world and the problems that global issues with regards to resource development and supply and climate change present. The fact that climate change has made for more-common examples of extreme weather has not gone unnoticed, as has the fact that climate change ultimately caused a vast growth in rainfall in many areas of the world, adding to the extreme weather difficulties in some areas of the planet. The advancement of technology and the enormous drop in carbon emissions from industry and substantial falls of carbon emissions from transportation has largely leveled off the changes in the climate of Earth that began to be seen in the 1970s, but the first half of the 21st Century in many parts of the world has seen many nations struggle to deal with the problems climate change has presented them with - from serious problems with regular flooding in the densely-populated Ganges River Delta in India to increasingly-powerful Typhoons and Hurricanes menacing parts of Asia and the Caribbean to major flooding issues in Australia, Brazil and North Africa to the United States having to move a city of two and a half million people to accommodate an endoheric basin's growth from additional rainfall - but the result of the greater rainfall in much of the world has included a massive growth of food production in some parts of the world (the American West, Patagonia, sub-Saharan Africa, southern and western Australia, North Africa, northern India, Iran and the Iberian peninsula being major beneficiaries of this) and the fact that water concerns in much of the world began to subside in the 2020s as a result of this and better food production made sure many in the world felt that climate change had both upsides and downsides. In modern times, many fossil fuel operations have to contend with massive changes in government regulations resulting from climate change as well as in many cases problems with product demand, which has caused huge diversification for many of these - Royal Dutch Shell, for example, by the 2030s had major synthetic fuel divisions, spent billions every year on the development of alternative energy development, operated a major nuclear operations division (which provided a complete nuclear fuel cycle from mining uranium and thorium to reprocessing waste) and operated huge chemicals and recycling divisions. Climate change also led to growing demands among populations for environmental protection, which led to a strengthening of many environmental regulations (especially those related to air and water pollution and contaminated land) in a process that largely began in the late 2010s and continues to the present day.

Resource exploitation, particularly that of fossil fuels, rare earth minerals and rarer metals like tin and antimony, was the other problem of the 21st Century. Rare Earth Metal usage had grown massively to deal with the advancement of computer and imaging technologies, and while the development of solid-state computer memories and better electric motors that did not require rare earth minerals did ultimately reduce demand somewhat, it was still a serious issues that was dealt with in most cases in increasingly-innovative ways, with supplies from space and nuclear reprocessing proving to be more and more economically viable. While there was lots of fossil fuels in the world, climate change and the growing use of vehicles powered by biofuels, hydrogen and electricity and the improvement of vehicle efficiency, as well as the growing popularity of electrically-powered rail systems reducing the demand for both air travel and truck transport of goods, the needs of oil producers slumped, a fact that caught some nations unawares but which many others were ready for. The production of natural gas and methane for fuel from calthrate deposits had come of age in the 2010s and 2020s, but the serious problems that accidents could cause there meant these companies were often regulated as heavily as any.

Energy is in this world a place where many make names for themselves. From the birth of commercial nuclear fusion in southern Ohio in May 2040 to the development of all kinds of environmentally-friendly sources of energy - Wind turbines, solar cells and solar thermal power stations, geothermal and ocean thermal energy conversion, tidal power stations and space-based solar power - and the massive advancement of power from nuclear fission (and the constantly-improving safety and efficiency of nuclear reactors), there is more ways than ever to harness energy for man's pursuits, and this has contributed when combined with the growing material prosperity and robotics and artificial intelligence into people having more time to pursue leisure pursuits and more money to pursue them. This has proven to be a major source of energy usage both for pursuits themselves and for travel and transport. Space tourism, which first began to grow in the 2010s, was by 2040 becoming a major business, as the single-stage to orbit spacecraft of the 2020s and 2030s made the development of such space tourism far more accessible, and the first complete space stations for commercial use are expected to be complete and in operation by 2050.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top