Wonder if you're much older considering a decade ago I was a teendecade
Honestly? RelatableEdit: yeah I was being an edgelord and was just trying to make a ridiculously ridiculous level of ridiculousness for the Raj
Wonder if you're much older considering a decade ago I was a teendecade
Honestly? RelatableEdit: yeah I was being an edgelord and was just trying to make a ridiculously ridiculous level of ridiculousness for the Raj
Also joint protectorates are generally rare@B_Munro made an alternate version of Decades of Darkness with a British-French-Italian-Japan-NE-US vs. Germany-Russia alliance where the non-US parts of alliance win and his map had Asia basically entirely colonized except for Japan
His Burr Goes West
I mean it’s very important for understanding the development of race relations and political development in the current most powerful country in the world. Think it might just be a cut above the Ragamuffin Rebellion or whatever.Outside the US, US Civil War is just a regular civil war. And people not interested in history, never heard of it. Americans tend to think, specially when thinking of AH, that's a popular subject as Nazi Germany worldwide.
LMAO.Can confirm, the Mongrel Mob use the swastika as their emblem. Asked a former patchee of theirs I used to work with, like, why? And he said they weren't the most well educated bunch; all they really know is that NZ fought the Nazis in WWII, therefore, Nazis= anti-government.
TBF I honestly do think if literally anybody else had been in charge of Germany during WW2 other than Mustache Man and his fan club(Doesn’t really matter Von Scheliher, Thalmann, My pet rabbit, Kaiser Willies half rotting corpse) , than Uncle Joe would have been fucking toast.As @boredviewer1234 pointed out, the main reason for this is that the authors buy into Hitler's rotten building theory.
Basically it is assumed that all you have to do is deal a few big blows to Russia and sit back and watch it collapse in on itself into a civil war.
This while half the country suddenly decides that they now want to be their own countries and are going to ally themselves with the invader (literally even if the invader's stated goal is to exterminate them).
My scenario supposed a Superpower Brazil, so no it isntThink it might just be a cut above the Ragamuffin Rebellion
Fair! Fair amigo! I was just explaining why the American Civil War is such a popular target for Alternate History TL’s on here in this particular universe.My scenario supposed a Superpower Brazil, so no it isnt
And if we were to slap the US in the same position Brazil currently possesses the Civil War would likewise be seen as nothing more than a pathetic racist insurrection
Indeed indeed my fellow kiwiFair! Fair amigo! I was just explaining why the American Civil War is such a popular target for Alternate History TL’s on here in this particular universe.
I was born June 14th, 1991. So if you're younger than that....Wonder if you're much older considering a decade ago I was a teen
Honestly? Relatable
Oh!I was born June 14th, 1991. So if you're younger than that....
20th of December '99 for me.Oh!
December 19th 97 for me
I should remember to wish you a happy birthday AlumaOh!
December 19th 97 for me
I feel like a baby lol...Oh!
December 19th 97 for me
Fair! Fair amigo! I was just explaining why the American Civil War is such a popular target for Alternate History TL’s on here in this particular universe.
Male Rising has an interesting take on this trope. On one hand, a stronger Ottoman Empire and less internal divisions among the locals result in the creation of a united TurkistanBy the way, got a odd trope I've started noticing that I think was created by kaiserreich? Central Asia in 1918 manages to break away from the Russian empire easily. You might say this is also a bit of explanation for why Central Asia remained apart of the USSR than break away in the chaos of the Russian civil war.
Now I don't mean to deny it's impossible, but recent events have not been good to the region , the 1916 rebellions despite how weak the Empire was at the time were crushed harshly killing hundreds of thousands at least, in 1917 October the local Bolshevik party made up nearly entirely of colonists took power even before November revolution. They rapidly decided to forbid Muslims locals from having any government positions in a move beyond even the Tzarist empire that was opposed by the Kokand autonomy who was crushed in February 1918 when said colonialists alongside some workers, ex army soldiers and Armenian Dashnaks massacred fourteen thousand people in a couple of days. The general chaos and food grabbing of this soviet soon caused a famine that may have killed nearly a million people and caused hundreds of thousands to flee into China and Afghanistan.
Note, it's a bit hard to get a accurate death toll, given how events tend to be overlapped together or not counted and so minimised example the 1916 revolts is sometimes counted as part of the deaths in 1917 and things like the Basmachi movement conflict who joined the whites at times from 1917 onwards is sometimes counted but it is known the Kyrgyz for example lost 40% of their population before 1920.
My point is that the local colonists and Russian army had a vote and will of their own and the result was horrific violence on a scale that still scars some of the people of Central Asia to this day. I don't think it's possible for a client/independent state to happen easily given by March 1918 a large chunk of the local population was broken into submission, dead or displaced two years after large scale conflict began in 1916 unless events are changed and even then would expect it more a brutal slog given for a lot of reasons the Russian empire avoided having Central Asians as part of it's military, exempting the Muslims there from conscription till 1916.
That also in itself is part of the reason when the ''actual''' Soviets showed up they find a surprisingly large audience willing to listen to them despite all the bloodshed that occurred. The previous local leadership relied on the Russian army to keep them in power and protect them from their own people as while they enabled the colonisation of their land so when a stronger, less racist Soviet Union gave a offer many of the intellectual reforms known as the Jadid movement who were fighting defected as well many others in part because of cautious hope and desire to live.
I think a good comparison for this trope is Balkanised India, as in the Russian empire fragments into loads of states that's map pointed.
That said a trope can be be well used and I think Central Asia does have a interesting history during this period and portraying a white/red and various powers struggle for influence would be fascinating.
Since it has mentioned the Confederate thread (thanks @JohnBull ), I've continued reading it and another trope that I've seen very often has been mentioned in it... and that is very annoying and a backward projection of modern trends.
I think I've talked about this trope before, which for lack of a better name I could call "the cowardly, lying leader."
I suppose you all remember that almost all of the Confederate leaders during the war (that is, the guys who would be in charge in a Victorious Confederacy if such a thing happened) were firmly committed to the cause of slavery, right?
And that Confederate leaders were not committed to slavery simply because they made economic profits, but because it fit with their vision of the world built around racial and social hierarchies, ordained by God himself, in which they are at the top, right?
This trope posits that this is just the mask they hide behind. That this commitment to slavery and white supremacy is just all fanfare and spectacle, bread and circuses, smoke and mirrors to hide their true intentions and beliefs.
A show intended solely for the consumption of the masses and which the Confederate leaders themselves do not take seriously... other than to mock "for the love of God, how can those commoners be so stupid as to believe all this nonsense."
The reality, always according to this trope, would be that Confederate leaders know FULL WELL that white supremacy is stupid, CSAS slavery is absolutely evil and immoral, the Union was the right side in every way in the American Civil War, and Confederate leaders possibily could not be more fractally wrong in their professed beliefs.
Plus, of course, NONE of them believes in ANYTHING they profess.
Which, of course, raises the interesting question of "If Confederate leaders are so sure that everything they profess to believe is wrong, why the fuck do they keep up this masquerade?"
The answer, of course, is the same one that is repeatedly repeated when it comes to analyzing why supposedly educated and politically literate populations of the 20th and 21st centuries support dictators of all stripes:
"the leader is desperately spouting lie after lie, attempting to distract the population to avoid them questioning the sanity of leadership' economic decisions. This is because the leader knows full well that the outbreak of a revolution against his government is imminent. And that will happen as soon as the population begins to question what their leaders are doing."
This is the main, but not the only, point that demonstrates that attributing this idea to Confederate leaders is only a backward projection of the analysis of modern dictators.
Always according to the analysis made by the trope, the sole purpose of white supremacy would not only be to keep Africans exploited as slave labor... but to distract white people so that they stop questioning their very low standard of living and thus prevent them from organizing a red revolution.
Because of course the assumption here is the Confederate leaders were, in reality, shitting themselves out of fear that the (white) population would decide to lynch them instead of African Americans.
This, of course, requires assuming that Confederate whites ALSO believed the entire system was a huge piece of nonsense full of BS and lies. Just as they were boiling with rage beneath the surface and eager to find an excuse, no matter how small, to take to the streets waving red flags and seeking to hang all the members of the Confederate elite from the nearest lamppost before they began. to beg the Union to please annex the former Confederation in order to save their wounded economy.
All of which, although as a story it could be very good, is still a pure fantasy based on projections and economism that requires assuming that people from the 19th century would follow the same thought processes as someone from the 21st century despite lacking the context of the 21st century.
You see things that I never do and I'm starting to wonder if it's because you have a fundamentally different way of analyzing everything you observe in your life or if I'm not reading quite as much on this website as I think I do (and this website is all that I read when time allows it).Since it has mentioned the Confederate thread (thanks @JohnBull ), I've continued reading it and another trope that I've seen very often has been mentioned in it... and that is very annoying and a backward projection of modern trends.
I think I've talked about this trope before, which for lack of a better name I could call "the cowardly, lying leader."
I suppose you all remember that almost all of the Confederate leaders during the war (that is, the guys who would be in charge in a Victorious Confederacy if such a thing happened) were firmly committed to the cause of slavery, right?
And that Confederate leaders were not committed to slavery simply because they made economic profits, but because it fit with their vision of the world built around racial and social hierarchies, ordained by God himself, in which they are at the top, right?
This trope posits that this is just the mask they hide behind. That this commitment to slavery and white supremacy is just all fanfare and spectacle, bread and circuses, smoke and mirrors to hide their true intentions and beliefs.
A show intended solely for the consumption of the masses and which the Confederate leaders themselves do not take seriously... other than to mock "for the love of God, how can those commoners be so stupid as to believe all this nonsense."
The reality, always according to this trope, would be that Confederate leaders know FULL WELL that white supremacy is stupid, CSAS slavery is absolutely evil and immoral, the Union was the right side in every way in the American Civil War, and Confederate leaders possibily could not be more fractally wrong in their professed beliefs.
Plus, of course, NONE of them believes in ANYTHING they profess.
Which, of course, raises the interesting question of "If Confederate leaders are so sure that everything they profess to believe is wrong, why the fuck do they keep up this masquerade?"
The answer, of course, is the same one that is repeatedly repeated when it comes to analyzing why supposedly educated and politically literate populations of the 20th and 21st centuries support dictators of all stripes:
"the leader is desperately spouting lie after lie, attempting to distract the population to avoid them questioning the sanity of leadership' economic decisions. This is because the leader knows full well that the outbreak of a revolution against his government is imminent. And that will happen as soon as the population begins to question what their leaders are doing."
This is the main, but not the only, point that demonstrates that attributing this idea to Confederate leaders is only a backward projection of the analysis of modern dictators.
Always according to the analysis made by the trope, the sole purpose of white supremacy would not only be to keep Africans exploited as slave labor... but to distract white people so that they stop questioning their very low standard of living and thus prevent them from organizing a red revolution.
Because of course the assumption here is the Confederate leaders were, in reality, shitting themselves out of fear that the (white) population would decide to lynch them instead of African Americans.
This, of course, requires assuming that Confederate whites ALSO believed the entire system was a huge piece of nonsense full of BS and lies. Just as they were boiling with rage beneath the surface and eager to find an excuse, no matter how small, to take to the streets waving red flags and seeking to hang all the members of the Confederate elite from the nearest lamppost before they began. to beg the Union to please annex the former Confederation in order to save their wounded economy.
All of which, although as a story it could be very good, is still a pure fantasy based on projections and economism that requires assuming that people from the 19th century would follow the same thought processes as someone from the 21st century despite lacking the context of the 21st century.
Yes, plus this tends to remove all agency from people of the period and assume that they are simple cartoon antagonists whose only motivations are "I'm evil because of evulz"... while ignoring the fact that people who commit horrible or stupid acts usually do them because they believes they make sense in his very distorted view of the world.It's the god-like elite. That's obviously an absurd as the elite is human and as human they can indulge themselves on all kinds of fantasies, prejudicies and self-destructive behaviours. It's so weird as something so obvious for anyone past childhood/adolescence but we always see that coming.
My own guess is that is just I simply try to look beyond and contrast the assumptions that are stated as true with what I observe in the real and historical behavior of the people we are talking about.You see things that I never do and I'm starting to wonder if it's because you have a fundamentally different way of analyzing everything you observe in your life or if I'm not reading quite as much on this website as I think I do (and this website is all that I read when time allows it).