The top ten best decisions in history

Inspired by @Byzantine fanatic’s thread (https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/the-top-ten-worst-decisions-in-history.456386/), I decided to create this one: what were the top ten best decisions in history?

I’ll try to give my list tomorrow, I need to sleep now.
Caesar making his grand nephew Octavius his heir.

The Second Continental Congress appointing George Washington Commander in Chief

Hadrian's arrangements with his succession, in effect choosing both Antoninus and Marcus Aurelius

Nerva adopting Trajan

Sending young Scipio to Spain after the death of his uncle and father.

Philip Augustus confiscating King John's French possessions for not appearing in Court

Charles VII trusting Joan of Arc

Electing Marius Six times as consul (not the seventh election)

Nominating LIncoln as Republic candidate for PResident in 1860

Dumping Henry Wallace and replacing him with Harry Truman in 1944
 
Best for who, and for how long? A lot of the 'good' decisions in history tend to come at the expense of someone else. Some examples of what I'm talking about:

Nurhaci's decision to rebel against the Ming was good for the Qing, as it led to their conquest of China and ultimately to China's greatest territorial expansion and power during the early Qing dynasty. It wasn't good for the Ming, the Shun, Koxinga, the Dzungars, or in the long term, the Manchu themselves as their culture and language were sinicized during their rule.

Jefferson's decision to purchase the Louisiana territory was a great decision for America, but not so much for the natives who were being displaced. It also led to the Mexican-American war and the spread of slavery.

The Fourth Crusade was good for Venice and the Catholic church's position vis-a-vis the Patriarchy of Constantinople, but it was tragic for the Byzantines.
 
I mean, it can be whatever you want it to mean, or what you view it to mean, as long as its justifiable.
 
If by "best", you mean the game theory definition of a "dominant strategy", then the Louisiana Purchase is up there. Purchased for something like $400 per square mile (adjusted for inflation), the area's estimated value today is on the order of $1.2 trillion which is more like $1.4 million per square mile. This, in effect, means Thomas Jefferson bought the land for 1/3500th of its eventual value, which is a pretty solid calculation (not that he could have possibly ever known the magnitude of that decision)
 
Last edited:
If by "best", you mean the game theory definition of a "dominant strategy", then the Louisiana Purchase is up there. Purchased for something like $400 per square mile, the area's estimated value today is on the order of $1.2 trillion which is more like $1.4 million per square mile. This, in effect, means Thomas Jefferson bought the land for 1/3500th of its eventual value, which is a pretty solid calculation (not that he could have possibly ever known the magnitude of that decision)
To be honest, the WHOLE US GDP in that time grew by about 800 times (checking compared to 1820, no number for 1800 in the list I found). So it's more, but not as massively as you'd think.
 
To be honest, the WHOLE US GDP in that time grew by about 800 times (checking compared to 1820, no number for 1800 in the list I found). So it's more, but not as massively as you'd think.

Even then, comparing growth by 800 times to growth by 3500 times, that's still a difference bordering on a factor of six, especially considering that the other largest purchase of land in US history came at the cost of a war up front (the Mexican Cession)

EDIT: I checked my original source, and the $1.2 trillion figure only includes the actual land value, and therefore doesn't even consider the economic output of all the cities therein (which includes all or part of fifteen states and eight of the top 50 largest cities in the country)
 
Last edited:
Stanislav Petrov deciding the incoming missiles were a hoax in 1983. Pretty clear-cut benefit for everyone, I'd say.
 
I'm an English Catholic and of course a big Stuart fan, so this might seem a little out of character, but the Glorious Revolution was a daring and abrupt way to solve a 150-year-long religious crisis and put Britain on the path from second-rate European power full of discontent to the most successfully balanced state in modern history. William's depth and ability to compromise for the sake of continuity was simply unprecedented, and laid the foundations for a political strategy that allowed his successors to dominate for the following two and a half centuries, even as the economic and diplomatic landscapes changed beyond recognition. Absolute monarchy and revolutionary libertarianism were both zero-sum games, and avoiding them - partially by skill, mostly by chance - was the key to British power.
 
Last edited:
Here's my top ten. I look at the question in a very utilitarian way. This list may be subject to change.

1. Stanislav Petrov deciding not to respond to a false alarm of US attack on the USSR. Thank you so much. Honestly, I don't greatly believe in the Great Man interpretation of history, but he's definitely an exception...

2. Any country that decided to abolish slavery, and end the slave trade. Especially slavery in mines, sugar plantations, etc. I mean, I know there were lighter forms of slavery and even things like wage slavery, but limiting outright slavery, with all the cruelties it involved, was a start.

3. The creation of the vaccine and discovery of penicillin. I know they're not the same, and didn't even happen at the same time, but I'm going to combine them anyways. Life is good, right? Saved quite a few parents a lot of grief as well...

4. Mahatma Gandhi's decision to use nonviolent resistance against British rule. I'm going to bet that it saved quite a few lives, and led to other nonviolent resistance movements like the Civil Rights movement.

5. Augustus establishing the principate, setting the stage for the Pax Romana

6. Liu Bang’s decision to fight the feudal fragmentation endemic in China at the time and centralize it into the Han dynasty.

7. The establishment of a democracy, with the beginnings of basic human and citizen rights and of wider representation in the constitution of the US. Though it wasn’t perfect by a long shot, it set the stage for a lot of freedoms and benefits we all have today.

8. All edicts of toleration.

9. The US supporting the allies in WWII, so that the Nazi Regime would not be a world superpower.

10. Glasnost and Perestroika. Helped end the Cold War, finally.
 
I'm an English Catholic and of course a big Stuart fan, so this might seem a little out of character, but the Glorious Revolution was a daring and abrupt way to solve a 150-year-long religious crisis and put Britain on the path from second-rate European power full of discontent to the most successfully balanced state in modern history. William's depth and ability to compromise for the sake of continuity was simply unprecedented, and laid the foundations for a political strategy that allowed his successors to dominate for the following two and a half centuries, even as the economic and diplomatic landscapes changed beyond recognition. Absolute monarchy and revolutionary libertarianism were both zero-sum games, and avoiding them - partially by skill, mostly by chance - was the key to British power.

It also confirmed a parliamentary system based on rule of law and representative elections as supreme, which has, in my opinion, been the most successful model for governance globally since then. If you look down the list of most prosperous states today, almost all of them got there after adopting such a system or slight modifications of it. In fact, its success is such that we take for granted how rare such concepts were in history before their spread.

On top of that, his invite brought over the latest in financial and commercial developments, which laid birth to the spread of modern capitalism, adding the most successful economic system in human history to the most successful political one.
 
British raid on Nazi heavy water plant in Norway in early 1943. Permanently crippled German equivalent of the Manhattan project and possibly prevented a Nazi "wunder weapon" from being deployed.
 
It also confirmed a parliamentary system based on rule of law and representative elections as supreme, which has, in my opinion, been the most successful model for governance globally since then.

It confirmed the supremacy of the parliament (though the monarch still could veto) but we should note that few English could vote at that time for the House of Commons, and the House of Lords remained powerful. England after 1688 was essentially an oligarchy.
 
It confirmed the supremacy of the parliament (though the monarch still could veto) but we should note that few English could vote at that time for the House of Commons, and the House of Lords remained powerful. England after 1688 was essentially an oligarchy.

Except it wasn't the same oligarchy in power. Power primarily was given to an institution where there was a rotation between oligarchies in and out of government. Such a system means there has to be an agreed set of rules that take precedence above any individual or faction. That is the critical point.
 
Top