The World is burning to the Ground: A Story of Life

[FONT=&quot]The World is burning to the Ground[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A Story of Life, Bureaucracy, and War after the end of the World
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] “… the week before the end of the world she was reading the story of Job. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You know the story right?
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It goes like this: God and Satan make a wager. They want to see how much shit God’s most faithful servant will eat before he renounces his faith. The servant’s name is Job. So they make the wager, and God starts feeding Job Shit. Takes his riches, takes his cattle, takes his health. Deprives him of friends. On and on. Finally- and this is the part that always got Wyndham – God takes Job’s children. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Let me clarify: In this context “takes” should be read as “kills”. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]You with me on this? .... Job’s kids. Dead…[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As for Job? He keeps shoveling down the shit. He will not renounce God. He keeps the faith. And he’s rewarded: God gives him back his riches, his cattle. God restores his health, and sends him friends. God replaces his kids. Pay attention: Word choice is important in an end of the world story. I said “replaces not “restores”.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] The other kids? They stay dead, gone non-functioning, erased forever from the Earth, just like the dinosaurs and the 12 million undesirables incinerated by the Nazis and the 500,000 slaughtered in Rwanda and the 1.7 million murdered in Cambodia and the 60 million immolated in the Middle Passage.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]That merry prankster God.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That jokester.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]That‘s what the end of the world is about… The rest is just details.” –The End of the World as We Know it By Dale Bailey[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Prologue[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] When did the world end? The exact date depends on where you were then the bombs started dropping, what time zone you were in, and what hemisphere you lived it. But these are semantics that we need not trouble ourselves. You can be sure though that the world ended in October of 1962. Sure there are people who would disagree with me; they would say the Last War (every time I read that name in a text book I get a little bit sick) wasn’t the end of the world anymore than the Second World War was. They might say that in every Post-Apocalyptic story they have read (and most of us have read quite a few; can you say escapism?) feature a few survivors of a cataclysmic disaster rebuilding western civilization, except they are careful to avoid the old mistakes. To that all I have to say is that in most post-apocalyptic stories there are three archetypical characters. The rugged, self-reliant, gun totting bad ass with a good heart that by the end of the story is reestablishing western civilization, except without the bad old ways. Then there is the rugged bandit that accepts the new world and the bad parts of the old world in tandem and tries to stop the bad ass with the good heart from rebuilding civilization. The last is the world weary intellectual (usually a scientist or a lawyer who is very pessimistic about the rebuilding of civilization) he allies with the bad ass with the heart of gold against the bandit type and they work to rebuild civilization. The United States is the rugged survivor, the bad ass with a heart of gold (though this part is debatable). The US, just like our first archetype, worked to rebuild civilization after the end of the world and just like our first archetype it was sure to avoid the bad old ways of giving its enemies a fighting chance and of war in general. Post-apocalyptic stories are in essence the story of rebuilding after a great tragedy. History ever since the Last War has been about the pursuit of rebuilding what we lost in that war. We are like weary children clinging to the skin of the world as it burns around us, hoping that somehow we can make things better and make things just like they used to even though we know that it will never be possible. This isn’t the story of how the world ended, this is the story of the world after it ended and all the horrors that come along with living in that world.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot]
Blog Entry 1: Not Waving, But Drowning[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]--


[FONT=&quot]“And when, still calling to each other, one of them fell at last into the molten lava stream, the other still refused to save itself. Last of its kind, masters of the air and earth, strongest, swiftest creatures that ever breathed, now they sank against the earth like weary children. Each had refused to live without the other, and so they were dying together. I wondered whether I, twentieth century man, could ever hope to die as well” – Rodan, Toho Studios, 1956[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]“Sometimes, I’m afraid that the good lord put me on earth to start a nuclear war”- John F. Kennedy

--[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]I recently read a book about a fictional machine invented after the Second World War that is able to predict how you die. Now the machine cane sometime be very specific, but generally it is vague and sometimes misleading. Like it will say old age and that could mean you get old and die or you get hit by a car driven by an old person. The device doesn’t predict nuclear war, instead it would say things like “incinerated”, “poisoning”, “extreme heat”, “crushed”, all things caused by the nuclear war. When people born after the war pull their death card it just says “born dead”…[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Kennedy’s Legacy[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In most end of the world stories I’ve read the collapse of humanity is brought about by a plague or some kind of massive natural disaster (though in a Counterfactual History I once read the Last War is avoided only for an even worse and more total nuclear conflict to arise twenty years later). In these stories there really isn’t anyone to blame, well except maybe God, but most people tend to blame the real world apocalypse on former President Kennedy. Dying in 1979 of lung cancer, few people wept for Kennedy in fact a much larger number wished he had died back in the Second World War so that he never would have screwed the United States over. The USSR of course gets its fair share of hate and blame for the war, but I don’t think any man in American history has ever been as hated as Mr. Kennedy (maybe Benedict Arnold). I don’t think it’s fair to blame Kennedy and treat him so harshly, after all his decision not to engage in a first strike was out of a naive hope of preserving humanity not out of any kind of malice, but people needed a scapegoat after the war and Kennedy was that scapegoat. Though his successor, President Nixon, would pardon Kennedy as a preemptive strike against more radical Republicans and American Independence politicians looking to string Kennedy up for the War it would not stop these more right-wing conservatives from making him the most hated man in America and as a poster boy for why the Democratic Party was bad for America. Men like Goldwater and Wallace used Kennedy as a weapon against the Democratic Party, forcing the splintering of the Party as politicians scrambled to abandon ship, after all no one wanted to be tied to the man who was responsible for the death of the most American citizens in history. Kennedy’s decision against a first strike was used as political weaponry to get the Nuclear Proliferation Ban passed and would also be used to justify the Anti-War Treaty. These pieces of international legislation act as totalitarian and arguably omnicidal laws that take the philosophy of “the ends justify the means” to a hellish level that after decades of use are finally getting criticized by the public.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now I’m not saying that I love Kennedy, because I don’t. The man presided over the United States after the war until the election of Richard Nixon in 1964. During the period of Martial Law thousands of Americans were shot without trial and Habeas Corpus was suspended. This being the main reason why many modern Anarchist movements look at Kennedy as being no better and in some ways worse than the Right-wing leaders that would rise to power after the war, holding the firm belief that he should have simply allowed the nation to fall into the same collapse that occurred in several of the European nations. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
--[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A land of Ashen Waste[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Last War burnt much of Europe to the ground, millions were dead, and vast swaths of land were heavily contaminated by nuclear fallout. This war ravaged continent where black snow and poison rain fall to the earth to further destroy the land was no longer a hospitable place for much of its populous. France, like the United States, instated brutal martial law and forcible silenced leftists within their nation (though many were either killed in the war or by private citizens). By 1964 De Gaulle will pull all French troops from Algeria as they are needed to assist in France proper to deal with the massive refugee crisis. The French will not leave Algeria in one piece though; they will enact a brutal policy of scorched earth that would horrify anyone not already emotionally torn asunder by the Last War. There is a vow upon the lips of many French generals that they will return to retake what they had lost; the Algerians will eventually find out that the French were not lying.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the Iberian peninsula Spain and Portugal are under the massive strains of a deluge of refugees. The Portuguese government, having relocated to Porto and the Spanish government, still firmly under the control of Franco after a few uprisings which had attempted to take advantage of the confusion after the destruction of Madrid not realizing that Franco had fled on the 29th as soon as the Russians sunk two American ships blockading Cuba, had come to an agreement to send refugees to Angola and Mozambique. The plan will afford both Portuguese colonies greater autonomy while simultaneously tying them closer to both Spain and Portugal. Thousands of these refugees will die in refugee camps before they can be relocated to settlements, but more will survive establishing a massive European minority in the two regions.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Angola and Mozambique will not be the only two regions of Africa that will be seeing a massive influx of Europeans. South Africa, the Federation of Rhodesia, and Bechuanaland will accept tens of thousands of European refugees as long as they measure up to a few standards. The main standard of course being that they White. With the Germany ceasing to exist as functioning state many survivors flock to the Baltic to escape the hellish nightmare that is central Europe. Though many are left behind those that meet the standards of the African governments are given escape from the refugee camps of Northern Ireland, the Free Republic of Poland, the Scandinavian nations, and the newly formed Baltic Republic. The fridged temperatures that characterized the global temperatures after the Last War made the conditions of the refugee camps in Northern Ireland and Scotland not exactly the most conducive environments for keeping people alive. With the resignation of British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, Rhodesian Prime Minister Sir Roy Welensky saw a chance to use the situation to his advantage. The New British Government and the Rhodesian government were able to create their own streamlined policy of refugee evacuation. Unlike South Africa’s policy of only allowing White refugees into the nation, the progressive Welensky allowed for broader standards of admission into the country. Though educated whites were of course preferred by the government, Rhodesia would accept thousands of educated Indians, Blacks, and Asians along with the less educated white laborers. Many of these British refugees would be settled in Northern Rhodesia and of course (perhaps more tragically Nyasaland). This move was made by the Welensky to stave off Black rule in the regions, and would lead to decades of endemic war between the Europeans and the more radical African Nationalists. As part of his agreement with the British government to streamline the movement of refugees into the Federation, Welensky ensured British diplomatic support for the movement of Rhodesian troops into Katanga to aid President Moise Tshombe’s attempt to ensure Katangan independence. With UN troops having already pulled out of the region to return to their devastated homelands, the Rhodisians walked over the Congolese troops and grabbed victory out of the jaws of defeat. Katangan President Moise Tshombe would prove to be an ardent supporter of the Federation and would seek to ensure continued support from the Federation and Europe by offering safe haven for thousands of Belgians escaping their now dead nation. These new immigrants along with the return of most Belgians, who had fled to Southern Rhodesia after the withdrawal of the Belgian troops from the Congo, would make the Katangan-Belgians the largest European ethnic minority in any single African Nation.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Back in Europe Southern Germans and Austrians would flee from their homeland to Hungary and Yugoslavia. Hungary had survived the Last war with only Budapest being partially destroyed (the nuclear missile the targeted the city went off course and landed too far away to destroy the city in its entirety). With the war’s end and the surviving Warsaw Pact members have surrendered unconditionally the Communist government in Hungary hadn’t lasted very long and popular unrest unseated the surviving government. The new government allowed for an influx of German and Austrian refugees at first but would soon be forced to close its borders after the refugee crisis became too great. Yugoslavia would likewise accept refugees from, Romania, Austria, and Bulgaria for a time, but was forced close its borders to the refugees and began using extreme force to maintain border security. This would also be true with Switzerland, Poland, and the Baltic Republic who would close their borders at around the same time.

--

[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
yep intriguing.
lots of people moving long distances very quickly how does this happen?
It's not exactly quickly, its a process that takes several years and refugees will still continue to trickle out of what is left of Europe. As for the means that would be commercial freighters and cruise ships commandeered by governments as well as naval elements. The conditions aren't great in most cases (they are down right terrible a lot of the time).
 
Whats so bad about the Anti-War Bill and Nuclear Proliferation Ban.

When you enforce these lovely pieces of legislation with the use of your own nuclear arms. They are more or less treaties between the United States and the surviving NATO states to maintain a nuclear monopoly by force if need be. The ideas of making war against the law and preventing evil states from gaining atomic weapons are wonderful until you realize that the states enforcing these ideas are willing to kill the belligerant state as an existing entity in order to maintain peace.
 
This is all great apart from this paragraph.

[FONT=&quot]A land of Ashen Waste[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Last War burnt much of Europe to the ground, millions were dead, and vast swaths of land were heavily contaminated by nuclear fallout. This war ravaged continent where black snow and poison rain fall to the earth to further destroy the land was no longer a hospitable place for much of its populous. France, like the United States, instated brutal martial law and forcible silenced leftists within their nation (though many were either killed in the war or by private citizens). By 1964 De Gaulle will pull all French troops from Algeria as they are needed to assist in France proper to deal with the massive refugee crisis. The French will not leave Algeria in one piece though; they will enact a brutal policy of scorched earth that would horrify anyone not already emotionally torn asunder by the Last War. There is a vow upon the lips of many French generals that they will return to retake what they had lost; the Algerians will eventually find out that the French were not lying. [/FONT]


Algeria became independent three months before the Cuban War (assuming that this is the POD we are talking about). By October, most of the Pieds Noirs will have left anyways as will have most of the Army.

Anarchy in Algeria is however possible to a degree since all of its patrons will be gone.

Depending on how hard France has ben hit and how intact command and control is. I could expect especially with De Gaulle in power, an occupation of the left bank of the Rhine in order to deal with the refugee crisis by creating a buffer zone of some kind.

If only Paris has been hit and not obliterated (as it would be in 1984) and if the refugee inflow is managed properly, France could end up with about the same populatio as it had at the begining of the war. De Gaulle has a unique opportunity to make France the preeminent European power by accepting millions of refugees, in order to rebuild the country and to expand production capabilities everywhere.

Austral Africa will become a huge mess with the incoming European inflow. But by TTL 2012 I can see very prosperous multiracial nations emerging. The refugees wil be fueled by despair and they are probably the best settler material any country could hope to have to maintain durable rule. If Portugal reforms itself into a Lusitanian Union where Portugal, Angola and Mozambique would be equal partners and constituents states. It could become great power by TTL 2012.
 
This is all great apart from this paragraph.




Algeria became independent three months before the Cuban War (assuming that this is the POD we are talking about). By October, most of the Pieds Noirs will have left anyways as will have most of the Army.

Anarchy in Algeria is however possible to a degree since all of its patrons will be gone.

Depending on how hard France has ben hit and how intact command and control is. I could expect especially with De Gaulle in power, an occupation of the left bank of the Rhine in order to deal with the refugee crisis by creating a buffer zone of some kind.

If only Paris has been hit and not obliterated (as it would be in 1984) and if the refugee inflow is managed properly, France could end up with about the same populatio as it had at the begining of the war. De Gaulle has a unique opportunity to make France the preeminent European power by accepting millions of refugees, in order to rebuild the country and to expand production capabilities everywhere.

Though Algeria had gone independent three months before the Pod French troops would not leave the nation completely until 1967. So when they got pulled out by De Gaulle they F'ed up Algeria as best as they could and made sure none of their toys could be used by the Algerians.
Northern France got peppered with Atomic weapons, most heavily in Alsace, Lorraine, (South western) Champgangne-Ardenne, Ile-de-France, Picardy, and Nord-Pas de Calais. The Left Bank of the Rhine (especially the area not far across the border) isn't in the best shape to turn into an occupation zone. It isn't as bad as northern France, but it isn't great. Even De Gaulle sees that he has to concentrate on maintaining the structural integrity of France before he sends troops to occupy part of Germany. The French will in time find the need to do this, but right now they must focus on France.
 
Though Algeria had gone independent three months before the Pod French troops would not leave the nation completely until 1967. So when they got pulled out by De Gaulle they F'ed up Algeria as best as they could and made sure none of their toys could be used by the Algerians.


I don't disagree with that, but the French presence once Algeria became independent was rather small and on a steady decline. In the grand scheme of things, bases like Mers el Kebir were useless to the French armed forces once Algeria was independent. As for the Pied Noirs most will have left by the time of the POD.

I doubt that De Gaulle would give orders to scorch Algeria, since he had no interest in keeping it by 1962 and much less in regaining it. The generals won't care either, especially since most of the pro OAS and pro French Algeria generals had been assigned elsewhere by then.
Algeria will be a mess, but a mess of its own doing. It got some amount of French help OTL and also Soviet help, but neither will happen here.

Northern France got peppered with Atomic weapons, most heavily in Alsace, Lorraine, (South western) Champgangne-Ardenne, Ile-de-France, Picardy, and Nord-Pas de Calais. The Left Bank of the Rhine (especially the area not far across the border) isn't in the best shape to turn into an occupation zone. It isn't as bad as northern France, but it isn't great. Even De Gaulle sees that he has to concentrate on maintaining the structural integrity of France before he sends troops to occupy part of Germany. The French will in time find the need to do this, but right now they must focus on France.

I think that a very important thing to remember for a war in 1962 is that the Soviet Union capabilities are not exactly brilliant. Just look by yourself:
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab2.asp

http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/datab10.asp

That's only 552 usable strategic weapons, of which a significant proportion if not a majority will be used against targets in the United States.

Targetting Paris twice makes sense with one bomb for the Rocquencourt NATO headquarters and one for central Paris to destroy command and control. But unlike in Protect and Survive, the Parisian urban area won't be utterly obliterated. In fact there is a not so small chance that facilities like Orly airport, some of the circular bypass railways and some railway yards like Villeneuve St Georges will survive the strike in a usable condition.

The airfields and especially the NATO airfields of northeastern France will be attacked by conventional and non conventional weapons. But as the Soviets can only rely on about 800 warheads, assuming some resupply. I don't see large civilian towns like Lille, Arras and such being targets per se, whereas they will be in Protect and Survive. The military installations close by will suffer but not the towns themselves and this is the crucial element.

If the damage to the civilian infrastructure of the Nord Pas de Calais region have been light. Coal production, steel production and chemical production will carry on and this a huge factor when considering the reconstruction tasks ahead.

As opposed to Protect and Survive, we can also safely assume here that places like Bordeaux, Toulouse and even Lyon and Marseilles have not been hit. Save perhaps Marseille's harbour installations. This is something of crucial importance, since it means that a majority of the French refining capability will have survived the war intact. If Rouen and Le Havre have not been hit (50/50 I would say), then nearly all of the refining capabilities will be intact.

There is also one crucial thing to be taken in account here for France. The previous war will only be twenty years away in most people's minds and people will remember what the privations were like then and be far more willing to tolerate strict rationing and such for a while. Order won't break down apart from perhaps in the northeast and around Paris and this a huge thing. It simply means that agricultural production won't be impacted very much, couple that to the fact that the 1962 harvest will be done and there won't be a famine in France. Rationing yes, but a famine no.

The army will have been mobilised for the duration of the war and this means over a million of mens in arms ready to restore order. It won't be an easy task, especially with millions of refugees flowing in. But the truth of the matter is that France is in a very strong position to actually gain from the war in terms of raw power.

The situation in Britain will be harsher but certainly not on a Protect and Survive level. More towns and more places will be unbombed and some outlying parts of London might even weather the storm okay. I would be surprised if Britain loses more than 15 million people there.

Germany is gone but that's a poetic justice for the previous two wars in a way.

I doubt that Spain or Portugal will have been hit, Spain is a maybe but Lisbon is a no in my opinion. Portugal importance is negligible, so why waste a weapon on them?
They will stand to gain an hell of a lot from this war however, especially if Angola is settled with millions of refugees. A white majority is a possibility in parts of Angola in my opinion, if the influx is large enough.
 
Top