| From: | Jens Hage <jhage@**.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Flame re; FASA world view |
| Date: | Sat, 9 Nov 1996 02:14:07 -0600 |
> Apologies for boring all of you stupid with this thread.
>
> > > All of these cultures ruled what was considered their world at one time
> > > or another, or at least had a big part in fighting over it. Now they are
> > > bit players in the scheme of things, with the exception of Germany.
> >
> > It also helps (historically at least) that most, if not all of those lost
> > some sort of war immediately prior to leaving the world stage. In the FASA
> > timeline, and, indeed, following the examples of war that seem to be more
> > common today, I do -not- foresee a large enough war to put the U.S.
> > economy in peril.
> >
>
> You mentioned the USSR in your reply. They did not technically lose any
> war. They suffered from being unable to effectively compete with the USA
> due to their style of Government. Competition is what it's all about
> these days. Right now, Japan is seriously cutting into world markets ad
> controlling them.... gives America serious competition.
Note here: The current "trade war" is company versus company, with minimal
(well, depends on the current idustrial situation) goverentment
involvement, especially in capital. The U.S./U.S.S.R. economic war (I call
it that at least) was much more heavily concerned with governmental
spending. GM may be important to the country as a whole, but it was
military spending (and also a couple of things like Afghanistan) that hurt
the most, not the industrial competition.
> It doesn't take a war to put an economy in peril. Natural disasters can
> do it, like the flurry of Hurricanes and storms that America has suffered
> in the past few years. What happens to the world market if Tokyo gets
> flattened by an 8.5 Earthquake?? I can guarantee you that the recession
> that would spark off would pull down much of the world with it.
I really don't see the impact of the hurricanes on the U.S. economy, but
maybe I'm not looking closely enough. As for Tokyo, I really would
disagree. Things are too diffuce, too intertwined for one city to control
the global economy that much.
> > > No culture stay on top of pile for ever, and historically the rate of
> > > turnover of dominance has been increasing (related to population growth
> > > throughout the ages) What happens when China starts to industrialise,
> > > or When India manages to do something about their underclass? God forbid.
> > >
> > > Even further in the future, what happens when Africa gets to the top of the
> > > pile? By that time they'll have increased their population relative to
> > > yours by a factor of ten. With that kind of population, they don't even
> > > have to reach the 'top'... Force of numbers will take care of it.
> >
> > -This- one I feel informed enough to comment on: Central Africa at least,
> > is in -deep- drek; AIDS is pandemic, and while a natural immunity probably
> > will spring up there first, it's still going to rip holy drek out of a
> > generation (I think; this is of course open to debate). If "force of
> > numbers" was an issue, the British empire never would have gotten past the
> > islands, IMHO. India seems to be a wonderful counterexample. Also take
> > into account the brain drain, effects of colonialism, corruption, debt,
> > and frequent tribalistion.
> >
> Blah blah. As a counter example, witness Japan in the late part of last
> century. They had absulutely no blue water navy to speak of, and within
> 50 years they had assembled the naval force capable of attacking Pearl
> Harbour.
Japan was in no way colonized. So comparing a country not crippled by the
economic principals of Imperialism to ones that were is a bit of a stretch
for me.
> > > The general egocentricity of believing that America will still be in
> > > command is unbelievable..... I'm not even accounting for the destructive
> > > events in the world timeline. Those kind of global catastrophes tend to
> > > hurt those at the top the most.
> >
> > I've yet to see America (or the UCAS) at the top of any SR heap. CAS, Cal
> > Free, the Tirs (both of 'em), Aztlan, all would like to talk to you about
> > that UCAS dominance. Relative to overseas (Europe, Asia and Africa
> > especially) there's no inclination that the UCAS does any weight throwing
> > in 2057. We've got Japanese troops in San Fran, and absolutely no mention
> > that I know of of American adventurism (see Grenada, Panama, etc.)
> >
> That's what the original poster was whinging about. I personally don't
> see any problem with the schism of America into component parts.... but
> he did.
His problem then. :)
> > > You may not know it, but America has quite a bad reputation worldwide,
> > > not the least because you are so righteous about how fantastic your own
> > > country is and how the rest of the world are second class countries.
> > > It's not something you decry loudly, but it shows in your cultures general
> > > arrogance, intolerance and ignorance of other cultures.
> > >
> > > (Please do keep in mind that I said your culture, not you personally)
> >
> > (Side note: I think you read too many of those "U.S. #1 LOSERS!!!!
> > threads. :)
> >
> Don't read them at all; I base my beliefs on a long and intimate
> knowledge of American cultural exchange students, and general observation of
> the behaviour of American tourists.
Ah well, maybe the smart ones don't get noticed. :)
> > > My advice regarding the fragmentation of America; Deal with it.
> >
> > Heck, I like it. But the "Ignorant American" sterotype is getting old,
and
> > has been for a while. While I'm no defender of real "american
tourists" I
> > don't really think there are so many as to perpetuate the stereotype. (Not
> > like I -know- of course.)
> >
> It's still often a true stereotype, though; apparently a significant
> number of high school grads in America, when asked where the Nile was,
> stated that it defined the border between Canada and the US.
I missed that one. Did you perhaps mean the border between the U.S. and
Mexico instead?
> Hell, I'm quite happy to leave this thread here. I've stated my views,
> you've stated yours. May we call a truce?
Sure thing. As for America breaking up, no problem. As for it collapsing
completely, I don't and wouldn't buy that. Simple and plain and I'll stop
doing my history freak thing in plain view and spooking the horses and
upsetting the womenfolk.
Jens "Almost a history major" Hage
