Did someone mention eariler, the reason that the NAC & Japan have such close
relations is because if a link between the monarchies by marriage?
Bizarre, but really interesting. Would this have to be a marriage of the
monarchs themselves, or of close relations (kids, siblings, etc)? If we
are going to go monarchs, it'd have to be an Anglian Queen marrying a Japanese
Emperor. I can't see Nihon being ruled at anytime in the future by an Empress.
Well, maybe.
How about a Maggie Thatcher-type marrying an Akihito-type?
She's a force of nature, he's a nice guy. Just a thought.
As for sources of terrorism/revolution circa 2185, look at each
bloc's
conquered/assimilated territories:
NAC: Central & South America FSE:? Dunno. ESU: India, Korea, Nepal, Tibet,
Islamic areas NSL: Eastern Europe, Balkans, PAU: northern Islamic areas
IF: non-Islamic african areas
IC: Indochina, various island states OU:? Dunno
I would also assume that everybody has some splinter groups at home, too. Some
more than others. i could see a whole lot of unpleasantness going on
in both Central/South America and India. Divergent cultures, conquered
by force, racial differences, etc. The NAC & ESU would have to sit on them
pretty hard, I'd bet.
I also have to agree with an earlier observation: These
super-states are
really giant, closely-knit power blocs. Their wars are unlikely to
change the power balance much. There has been a lot of conquering in the
recent past, and everybody wants some measure of stability. After a few big
campaigns, the 3rd Solar War seemed to degenerate to the level of a 'Phony
War' with just a few strikes here & there, with a bunch of commerce raiding to
liven things up. Both were probably gearing up for the 'Big Push', but the KV
seemed to have beaten them to the punch.
> You wrote:
No, that was a hypothetical 'what it would take to get the Japanese into the
NAC rather than closely affiliated'.
> NAC: Central & South America
Which have a long history of bandi^H^H^H^H^H revolutionary movements. Nothing
else to do on weekends in countries as poorly developed. Of course, one
wonders how much infrastructure investment the NAC has been able to dump into
that area to bring it up to civilized standards (little things like safe and
reliable transportation, safe drinking water, electricity outside the major
cities) and educational levels. With proper development they have potential to
be as well off as any other part of the NAC, which would cut down on unrest
greatly.
> FSE: ? Dunno.
Didn't they bite chunks off of Germany or something?
> You wrote:
> are not likely to be shifted) including all of Samoa and Hiawii (its 1
You can have Bikini, Guam, Samoa, and Midway. The only reason the various
powers snapped up those sort of islands was for coaling stations back when
this was the limiting factor for naval operations. But Hawaii we ought to
keep. Or at least partition with the Japanese.
> At 12:56 12/08/98 -0500, you wrote:
> in >the morning ok). If this upsets you Americans (those of you not
One point. How important is Earth really? Apart from cultural reasons. The
LLAR seems to do OK with no territories on Earth. Israel too.
> You wrote:
> One point. How important is Earth really? Apart from cultural
Depends on how fast you want to assume industrial development occours on
colony worlds. But given that in the official time line only recently did
Albion equal England in population, and it's apparently
the most heavily populated non-Core planet, I'd say that a significant
fraction of humans still live here, with some incredibly dense industrial
infrastructures.
Tony spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> for all nations, territory on Earth would have major
And there is the old 'no place like home' theory. Earth will probably always
occupy some nich in religion, politics, economics, and culture due to its
size, economic power, ancient age, significance to religion and culture, and
due to our basic need to recognize someplace as 'home' for mankind. Now I'm
sure as each generation of colonists goes by, the colonies will feel less ties
and responsibility to Earth, but emigres from Earth will still feel the ties,
and Earth's pop has to be such that even all the colonies combined probably
can't touch it. So for the next while, even from 2185, the place of Earth in
popular culture, politics, and economics will be quite apparent to all.
Tom.
Los spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> A great example of this can be seen right here in the US every day.
And let us not forget that Earth probably has the most advanced Labs (some of
them anyway), lots of corporate HQs, plus the best educational institutions
(all the Old Universities) and Colonists would tend to send their kids back
(if they could afford it, but FTL looks reasonably cheap in the GZG background
for an individual, no worse than sending an American to School in England in
the 1900s) to get a 'good' education and that would tend to underscore Earth's
importance - under the theory the education would probably be
Earth-centric and focus on the impact of Earth and its importance.
:) Tom.
> Thomas Barclay wrote:
> TAnd there is the old 'no place like home' theory. Earth will probably
A great example of this can be seen right here in the US every day. Since it
seems we have always had a large number of immigrants (my floks were back in
the fifties). Especially nowadays, immigrants send a lot of their income back
toteh old country and help support families there. Also colonists woudl be apt
to "send" for more family members once they've established themselves on the
new planet. I think the importance of Earth would remain high for these
reason. Not that anyone actually wants to be ruled by earth though. You may
have left Russia in the seventies and hated their government but still be in
love with Russia.
> At 19:33 12/08/98 +0100, you wrote:
My feeling is that Earth still has a major role to play. The populations for
off world colonies might not be that large yet but because of this some might
be intensively developed, particularly with industry if there aint much in the
way of native life about (nothing for thr Greenies to complain about. Besides
the onlt native lifeform might be a slug which is pretty hard to get all sorry
about when compared to a baby seal). For the smaller nations who probably
haven't had the money to move much industry off Earth. Earth then remains for
them a major producer. (Polynesia probably aint gonna do much for the OU in
that respect unless we can get the locals to give up their minerals peacefully
unlike Bouganville where the poor bastards got cheated). In all cases, for all
nations,
territory on Earth would have major political/kudos value.
> A great example of this can be seen right here in the US every day.
It goes beyond that; there's often a residual feeling that the 'old country'
was better in many ways. This hold true today in the US, even after 200 years
of independance. Consider in advertising, when a product is looking to seem
elegant, refined, or otherwise 'better', advertisers often attempt to portray
it as somehow 'European'. Cars, food, and wine are cases in point.
> ---- noah wrote:
> close relations is because if a link between the monarchies by
there is, somewhere in the GZG canon, a reference to someone with the
surname Smythe-Takashiki or something close; the reporter in the
interview at the start of DS2? and admiral in FT2? this seems to
indicate anglo-japanese intermarriage, and at the level of the nobility.
this might be a widespread phenomenon.
> Bizarre, but really interesting. Would this have to be a marriage of
perhaps not so bizzarre. there are some strong (superficial) resemblances
between England and Japan:
- constitutional monarchy with parliament
- served/serving as a base for the US in ww2 and cold war
- drink a lot of tea
- traditionally place a premium on honour, politeness etc ("I say, Naka,
what the devil do you think you're playing at, speaking to a lady like that?
you, sir, are a cad.")
- major centres for financial industry
my uncle (highly anglicised Welshman) married a Japanese woman. i think it
will take another 50ish years of culttural (more acceptance if
internethnic marriage), political (cloer UK-Japan ties) and technolgical
(cheap UK-Japan travel) development before this sort of thing becomes
common.
> monarchs themselves, or of close relations (kids, siblings, etc)? If
for the royal line to wear the Japanese and English and Scottish) crowns, they
would have to be the issue of the monarchs. if harry (or is it william? i'm
not much of a daily mail reader) has a daughter, it could happen.
and, of course, one of my posts wouldn't be complete without a useless URL!
this is a list of Japanese names which sound like western names; useful for
bicultural families:
http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/smhawkin/names/japanbicult.html
> s for sources of terrorism/revolution circa 2185, look at each bloc's
> SE: ? Dunno.
current euro-terrorism:
there are Corsican seperatists who kill French officials from time to time.
there are Basque seperatists who kill Spanish people of all types from time to
time. there are northern Italian seperatists who have not yet (AFAIK) killed
anyone
if i remember the timeline correctly, Spain has Gibraltar (in fact, this is
why the UK left the EU), so: there will be English seperatists who kill any
european in sight from time to time if Ireland gets Ulster: there will by
protestant terrorists who kill any catholic in sight
> ¨U: ? Dunno
kiwis will not like rule by an aussie-dominated parliament.
(note to americans and other aliens: aussies = australians, kiwis = new
zealanders) also, there is the possibility of aborigine or maori seperatists,
although it seems that only european seperatists turn into terrorists.
> ¢ also have to agree with an earlier observation: These super-states
if we can have the free dutch, why not the free norwegians? the free
bulgarians? whilst such nations might be loosely allied/aligned with
major powers, they would not be part of them, and would have their own navy,
foreign policy, etc. there's still plenty of room for those who want their own
state!
i understand (from a semi-norwegian friend) that the norwegian and
swedish populations would rather eat rocks than reunite. and the finns are a
different ethnic group altogether (finnish is not even an
indo-european language; it is finno-ugric, along with hungarian). i
think a scandinavian union would be impractical. turkey is currently doing its
best (despite greek efforts) to join the EU. might they still be in the FSE?
or might they go with the NSL to spite the greeks? or even vice versa?