The New Order: Last Days of Europe Thread II

A : Cynical politics. He's combined his genuine desire for a more democratic system with the fact that as an officially conservative member of parliament he can act as a defacto representative for people who might not agree with everything he says but doesn't have a better option. He then builds this constituency under the label of liberalism despite he himself holding views closer to a consensus-era OTL tory.

Basically think the Australian Liberal Party rather than the actual OTL british liberal party. A mix of conservatives and small l liberals who don't like the other representatives of the right.

B : Jellicoe OTL was a member of the Monday Club so Maudling is certainly more progressive on some issues (like race). But the reality is the political system he's in would never tolerate the amount of stuff Jellicoe has to do because his own party and the opposition want it.
Can we hope that the UK under a succesfull Maudling might get as liberal as modern UK, or it will always lag behind?
 

brooklyn99

Banned
Can we hope that the UK under a succesfull Maudling might get as liberal as modern UK, or it will always lag behind?
There is half a century between the TNO1 end-date of 1972 and the current year. So it's all up in the air, I'd say. It might be more so or it might be less so. Who knows?
 
Can we hope that the UK under a succesfull Maudling might get as liberal as modern UK, or it will always lag behind?
It is the closest thing to OTL UK, but to be blunt no (In the TNO timeframe compared to the UK of OTL at that time). The Collab legacy taints all Englands, Maudling included.
 
It is the closest thing to OTL UK, but to be blunt no (In the TNO timeframe compared to the UK of OTL at that time). The Collab legacy taints all Englands, Maudling included.
Wait

I had replied a "F", but then I saw something that shows that there is some hope, you said "On the TNO timeframe", so there is a hope that eventually by keeping the liberals in power, after the TNO timeframe it can catch up, right?
 
Wait

I had replied a "F", but then I saw something that shows that there is some hope, you said "On the TNO timeframe", so there is a hope that eventually by keeping the liberals in power, after the TNO timeframe it can catch up, right?
*shrug*

At that point its guessing either way, see it how you choose i guess.
 
*shrug*

At that point its guessing either way, see it how you choose i guess.
Look,

This have been going for months on, so I gonna drop the subject, but don't you worry, I understand the main points of what you have been saying

The main point is that as good things might improve, a collab victory means that everybody that suffered won't have their revenge and everyone who comitted crimes will be left alone, there are events with Maudling converting ex fascists to democracy, and it is very transparent that not only they are saving their career by doing that but they also might be seen as well intentioned reformists when they were people who went deep into support of crushing the british democracy

A collab victory cannot be seen as a good ending, even under Maudling, it is at the very least "The damage is done, but at least it won't remain that damaged", while Jellicoe can do everything they do, faster, and punish the culprits
 
On that note, I wonder what Stirling exactly does to make him the second worst path for Britain and unequivocally worse than Thatcher.
 
On that note, I wonder what Stirling exactly does to make him the second worst path for Britain and unequivocally worse than Thatcher.
Well just look at their ideologies for a start:
Thatcher for all her faults in both OTL and TNOTL is classified as an “Authoritarian Democrat” in TNO so there’s still some modicum of democracy(if minimal). While stirling is Despotist.
And judging by the sounds of Stirling’s super event his rule will be somewhat more violent
 

jparker77

Banned
On that note, I wonder what Stirling exactly does to make him the second worst path for Britain and unequivocally worse than Thatcher.

From what I remember from the trial of the collaborators events after winning as HMMLR, as well as the build up focuses and events, Stirling and his commandos are pretty bloodthirsty—advocating executions pretty universally during the trials, for instance, even for those whose crimes were not as vile.

So my guess is he conducts large scale purges.
 
So I was thinking with Toolbox Theory coming out soon + 2 weeks I was thinking about foreign support for conflicts specifically the South African War and Japan. In a scenario without the ANC would the Japanese covertly fund the Sheild, South Africa, both sides or just sit back and watch.
 
So I was thinking with Toolbox Theory coming out soon + 2 weeks I was thinking about foreign support for conflicts specifically the South African War and Japan. In a scenario without the ANC would the Japanese covertly fund the Sheild, South Africa, both sides or just sit back and watch.
Probably just sit back and watch. When your two main geopolitical enemies are bleeding themselves out fighting each other, why not just kick back and watch the world burn?
 
On times of democracy this organization is feared, I wonder what it will do in times of tyranny.
DOPS.png

From CSS
 
So, I just finished my Lydia run. It was good, though I got the sense the game wanted me to pick Yuriy and I felt kind of guilty by the end. Still, a very good run, on the level of Serov. I expected a stoic, pragmatic princess, which I sort of got, but I didn’t expect how smug and gleeful she was. It, and this is a far from fantastic comparison, kind of gave me Azula vibes?

I tried Speer-Go4, but I got to the part where you have to keep stability up and balance the conservatives and reformists, and I have no idea how you’re supposed to do that when the few options you get to raise stability don’t come frequently or in large enough doses to make it possible to avoid your regime collapsing. My regime collapsed and I just kind of gave up. How do you even do that?

My next run features a “visionary”.
 
NPP President Armstrong when?

Armstrong would certainly be the warmonger path, probably taking the war to Fascism directly to restore American pride since WW2. The question is how far would he go. Either something relatively sane in comparison like blockading the Treaty Ports, incendiary like arming any resistance in Hawaii, or highly risky such as American "volunteers" fighting under the Russian unifier during the 2WRW (of course it would depend on who reunites Russia).
 
Armstrong would certainly be the warmonger path, probably taking the war to Fascism directly to restore American pride since WW2. The question is how far would he go. Either something relatively sane in comparison like blockading the Treaty Ports, incendiary like arming any resistance in Hawaii, or highly risky such as American "volunteers" fighting under the Russian unifier during the 2WRW (of course it would depend on who reunites Russia).
Does an Armstrong basically want to plunge America into a social darwinistic hellscape?
Armstrong literally wants everyone to be free to kill each other for literally any reason they want until only the strongest are left alive.

Armstrong is not a garden variety Neocon or Fascist; he is literally a Social Darwinist who wants to privatize the culling of all the undesirables to the atomic individual until everyone he sees as weak is "purged" so that the strongest can thrive and "make America great again."

Armstrong is not going to make America better, he's going to make it a wasteland with maybe ten percent of its population left standing after he forces people to turn against each other so that only those he sees as most worthy are left standing. And he's going to let people wage war for whatever reason they want; so it's not going to be contained to America either.

Armstrong will literally kill billions of people for the sake of his college right-libertarian ideology born of an affluent Texan white man who's never been poor or hungry in his life and yet feels he's in the position to judge the weak as unworthy of life itself.

Trump sucks, Armstrong would be apocalyptic.

And Armstrong would make sure to guise his intentions until it's too late to stop them. This is a man literally willing to manufacture a third world war with Pakistan and the Islamic world as a whole in order to get the crisis needed to convince people to vote for his platform; disguised as much more conventional American patriotic peacekeeping and economic revitalization. He's not going to let his mask slip until he already has what he wants.

Then once he has his power; he will tear apart society itself and the Earth will drown in its own blood.

Nuclear fucking warfare would be less of a human catastrophe than Armstrong's vision for our species.
 
Top