But remember the Brits had largely gone soft by the time of WW2. The Japanese During the few years they controlled the pacific were able to control the conquered populations far more completely than the British Could.
It's easy to control people for a while when one has murder as the sole motivator. But that wears thin, right?Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86
There's no nostalgia for Japanese occupation anywhere in the former Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Pbrower2a Since I have seen you write long replies before, I offer you a challenge: Give an outline of what you think the outcome of 4T would be if restorationism or similar type reform are implemented and if Restorationist-type leaders assume the decision making processes. Perhaps one could write a short story/historical essay from a partially in character perspective of let say a historian writing during a hypothetical next 3T or early 4T (probably 2070s to 2090s/2100s, even if we have an extended 4T, its not reasonable to expect the crisis to has beyond 2040). However there are several conditions.
1) Describe the Restorationist government
2) At some point in the 4T the vassalization of Latin America was implemented, the whole region would have to largely in American hands for at least 5 years in the story's canon, although Latin America may or may not be under American control during the Historian Character's Present Era.
3) At some point the 4T the general pacification of the middle east was implemented, again American forces must control large portions of the middle east and North African for at least several years although as before, the middle east may or may not be under American control at the time of the Historians Present (the following 3T).
4) If you use a historian type character, he does not have to be an American, He/she can be of any nationality. However the story/essay must heavily mention the preceding 4T.
5) How is Restorationism and Restorationist leaders regarded by history in the Future period.
6) How does popular culture regard Restorationism, In the recently completed 3T there were numerous representations of the preceding 4T such as Saving Private Ryan, Band of brothers, etc. What would their equivalents depict after a restorationist 4T.
7) What are the world powers and/or centers of trade in the future era. These do not have to mentioned directly in the essay but can be mentioned by passing reference if you choose.
Challenge accepted.
An elite would select prospective leaders early and place them in academies that hone the children's intellect in praetorian virtues -- hardness, conformity, nationalism,and physical courage. This would be the sole source of leaders. They would have a contempt for 'sissies' and free-thinkers of any kind. They would be good at mathematics and practical science -- and their language would be clear but limited to that suitable for command-and-control. But expect no subtlety of thought.1) Describe the Restorationist government
Students of such academies who falter in intellectual achievement or obedience would be cast off to proletarian life at its worst, consigned to suicide brigades, sent to penal servitude in horrible conditions for life, or killed.
But this is where the political, military, and economic leadership would come from. Economic? They would be the technocrats of monopolized private enterprise and the apparatus of Big Government, and talented youth from the academies would be the sole source of promising executives. For everyone else, career ladders would be very short. Even farmers will have largely been transformed into sharecroppers.
Children who miss out on this would be helots. Small business would no longer be an option because monopoly control of the economy ensures that even start-ups that might compete with the giant businesses would be crushed quickly. Although there would still be plutocrats, those would be a few rapacious, selfish, domineering brutes who draw the gigantic profits. Their children would largely be visible rakes infamous for boozing and whoring -- tolerated as rationales of the New Order as reasons to not tolerate free-wheeling capitalism.
Elections would be rigged . There is only one way to see the world - the Reconstructionist way.
Latin-American elites are overthrown and killed. Living standards have plummeted as the Reconstructionist occupiers sweat and starve the new helots. Underground resistance makes occupation duty dangerous in the extreme. Here come the suicide brigades dedicated to wiping out resistance while trying to avoid being wiped out themselves. Hostages are taken and killed. People with any sense and ability join the equivalent of a maquis in the jungle -- or make jungles of cities from Chihuahua to Buenos Aires.2) At some point in the 4T the vassalization of Latin America was implemented, the whole region would have to largely in American hands for at least 5 years in the story's canon, although Latin America may or may not be under American control during the Historian Character's Present Era.
Fraternization with occupied people will be prohibited. Such will create a sort of Apartheid, except that there might be "comfort women".
Even worse. Just think of the culling of people in 'labor' camps in which those unsuited to hard labor are quickly killed. There will be no peace except through extermination.3) At some point the 4T the general pacification of the middle east was implemented, again American forces must control large portions of the middle east and North African for at least several years although as before, the middle east may or may not be under American control at the time of the Historians Present (the following 3T).
Catastrophically-failed Crisis of 2020, one that fails to solve anything. The rentier elite is made even more powerful, and its easy money becomes the focus of all human activity. Plutocrats are treated as if gods. American workers are starved and sweated for very high profits of a few very rich people. America hemorrhages talent for a lack of opportunity for most people not born into the elite. If one has an IQ of 140, does one want to be a domestic servant?4) If you use a historian type character, he does not have to be an American, He/she can be of any nationality. However the story/essay must heavily mention the preceding 4T.
The 1T is simply a consolidation of economic and bureaucratic power without any semblance of collegiality across lines of class or ethnicity. The 2T is weak -- mostly the celebration of narcissism and low-brow religiosity. The 3T is as depraved as it can be. Populist sentiments rise, but the rentier elite finds a way to exploit nationalist sentiments and mass ignorance with promises of unprecedented opportunity for the talented who have been neglected. In the wake of economic collapse and mass poverty that sounds good.
Restorationism -- criminal enterprise. Restorationist leaders -- war criminals. Ordinarily the victors judge the losers harshly (the Nazis would have had Churchill and Tedder, among others, dangling by piano wire from meat hooks) -- but even a fair process would be merciless. The Japanese and Indians would judge American war criminals harshly even if they had the same sorts of government that they have now. Japan is a horrible place in which to be a criminal; India has harshly treated terrorism and war crimes of any kind.5) How is Restorationism and (how are) Restorationist leaders regarded by history in the Future period.
Try The Tin Drum, Mephisto, and Das Boot. These will be made in studios in Oregon (if it is not assigned to Canada, parts of Oregon have a hot-summer Mediterranean climate well suited for filming) or Virginia (the Shenandoah Valley is the sunniest part of the eastern United States, and the closest thing to a semidesert in America east of the Mississippi)-- because the Hollywood section of Los Angeles will be part of Mexico, where heroic stories of resistance and rebellion -- and final victory over the Reconstructionist State -- will be made.6) How does popular culture regard Restorationism, In the recently completed 3T there were numerous representations of the preceding 4T such as Saving Private Ryan, Band of brothers, etc. What would their equivalents depict after a restorationist 4T.
The EU. Brazil. Japan. China. Indonesia. India. A revived and expanded Mexico, which due to its annexation of coastlines of California and Texas will become one of the most formidable naval powers.7) What are the world powers and/or centers of trade in the future era. These do not have to mentioned directly in the essay but can be mentioned by passing reference if you choose.
But not the USA or its (official) Reconstructionist successor, for it will have been partitioned and splintered. The harsh treatment of Latinos will have violated terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and will be the pretext for re-incorporating much of the American Southwest into Mexico.
I hope that this enlightens while offering some grim entertainment.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 09-18-2015 at 12:07 AM.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
I will say one thing: I'll take Restorationism over the kind of Social Darwinism that has hijacked the GOP any day.
But maybe if the putative Robin Hoods stopped trying to take from law-abiding citizens and give to criminals, take from men and give to women, take from believers and give to anti-believers, take from citizens and give to "undocumented" immigrants, and take from heterosexuals and give to homosexuals, they might have a lot more success in taking from the rich and giving to everyone else.
Don't blame me - I'm a Baby Buster!
Controlled?
Are you again endorsing sex slavery and genocide, as you did when you recommended following the example of Genghis Kahn? The Japanese added biological warfare.
Here's a link to a Smithsonian article, The Untold Story of the Vengeful Japanese Attack After the Doolittle Raid.
Understatement.
That's a possible way of looking at SF, in so far as SFs are people-oriented and desire social harmony. ENTJ does sound more like your ideal. As a boomer I of course prefer a society dedicated to human rights and globalism. One thing is sure, your militarist approach of subjugating enemies would run the danger that other nations would rally against us and subjugate us in turn. Perpetual war is therefore what you advocate. It's the stated basis of the 1984 totalitarian society. I prefer peace. Your restorationism tends to be racist indeed, because you talk about subjugating entire groups.
Politically Correct Subjugation?
Does it make a difference if one wants to invade and subjugate South America and the Middle East rather than invade and subjugate Hispanics and Muslims? If he defines his targets in terms of maximizing profit and supposedly easy (until he tries it) conquest rather than cultural heritage, is this less objectionable?
Last edited by B Butler; 09-06-2015 at 07:38 AM.
But apparently it makes all the difference in the world if one is oppressed by fellow Muslims - the Hashemites and their Bedouin stooges - instead of by Jews. At least it does to the "Palestinians."
But maybe if the putative Robin Hoods stopped trying to take from law-abiding citizens and give to criminals, take from men and give to women, take from believers and give to anti-believers, take from citizens and give to "undocumented" immigrants, and take from heterosexuals and give to homosexuals, they might have a lot more success in taking from the rich and giving to everyone else.
Don't blame me - I'm a Baby Buster!
Are you blind? Consider the early war when Germany was bombing the shit out of GB. You call their reaction to that "soft?"
We like to congratulate ourselves on bailing out the world during WW-II. And sure, we did a great job of contributing, and maybe our contribution ultimately made the difference. Yet it seems to me that the roles of both Great Britain on the front end and the USSR later on are underestimated by us.
" ... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."
Ww ii
I suspect he was referring to how they treated the locals in their colonies. GB was treating them sorta, pretty, almost kind of like human. The regimes Cynic Hero favors implement sex slavery and genocide, like the Japanese in WW II or Genghis Kahn. Keep the natives in their place.
But having good relations with one's colonies has its upside. Canada, Australia, South Africa and other Commonwealth countries contributed significantly to the war effort while keeping hostile natives in their place requires troops that could otherwise be used in the war effort. The Japanese had to expend occupation troops all over the Pacific, while the Americans had to send troops to Australia as several Australian division were fighting in North Africa.
They might be underestimated by some, but I'm doubtful we would have come out ahead in Europe without either Britain or the Soviets.
Where would they have come out of it without us?
Chamberlain went pretty soft on Hitler's aggression's and conceded quite a bit hoping to appease him and avoid a war with Germany.
If he defined his target as Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan or Milosevic's Serbia then would his views be less objectionable and more understandable?
Hypothetical?
I can't see him picking on nations or cultures in a position to fight back. He seems to be advocating a return to colonial imperialism. Beat them into submission then steal their resources. I wouldn't pick Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan as 'soft targets' for such an attack. One could make a case that the the enemies of the Axis should have attacked preemptively before the Axis got the opportunity to fully arm, but that's not the sort of thinking I'd expect from Hero Cynic. His way seems to be invading weak countries, enslaving their people and stealing their resources.
Milosevic's Serbia? A week before Clinton 42 declared the Clinton Doctrine, I beat him to it. The developed countries should work together to stop major crimes against humanity. I defined such as genocide, political famine and organized rape. That's the only logic I can come up with for meddling with Milosevic's Serbia. This doesn't seem like Cynic Hero. He seems to be in favor of committing genocide or organizing rape. He quite often uses governments that commit war crimes as examples of the sort of government he would implement, such as his recent endorsement of Imperial Japan's methods of keeping conquered civilians subjugated. Governments that defend such things as human rights are defined as 'soft', as boomer led and weak.
You picked some awful countries / cultures / governments. Such governments have to be dealt with and should be dealt with, or at least so thinks this soft boomer. I would advocate use of force as a last resort after exhausting all other possibilities. If I'm following him correctly, he is looking to restore early Industrial Age war ethics, where the strong subjugated the weak and profited from doing so. I believe this era existed in a limited time window, when the Europeans had firearms, industrialized economies and ocean going ships while much of the world didn't. The playing field was way tilted for several centuries and the Europeans took advantage of it. That window is now closed. The ability of the haves to blatantly rape, kill and steal from the have nots is now far more limited.
He seems to disagree.
Anyway, I would have to hear his motives, timing and plan of attack for hitting those three targets before I could fully evaluate them. Thing is, that's not where he daydreams of attacking, so I think your question is way off base.
I'd recommend Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs and Steel as covering how Europe and Colonial Imperialism came to dominate the world for a time. One can then see more clearly why that time has past.
Last edited by B Butler; 09-08-2015 at 03:15 AM.
This is the popular narrative, but it is unfair to Chamberlain. Britain wasn't prepared for a war and Chamberlain was buying time.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
Where would we have come out of it without GB and the USSR?
" ... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."
Refighting WW II
Poorly. While not every ally might have been important enough to have turned the tide, I would think Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union were all essential.
Have you done any war gaming? There are several strategic simulations of the war that include production, supply, and conflict resolution down to the division / carrier group level. I've played a few. If one uses the historical strategies, the games play out fairly close to history. I did play a game where I pursued Japan's Pearl Harbor strike force too aggressively, lost the remnants of the Pacific Fleet, and was in absolutely no position to do anything in the Pacific until the Essex carrier groups started coming in. This left a massive build up of US land forces with nowhere to go. We pushed the supply rules somewhat beyond the point of reason and ended up with a large US land force successfully defending Leningrad and Moscow. (The Soviet player had also messed up.) In the same game the British player didn't leave a covering force in Egypt, and lost the Suez Canal. All players were new to the game and made some grand mistakes. In the end, though, the allied victory was more or less on historical schedule. In that particular game, it was about production. No matter that both sides were making not a few major blunders, the allies just had more armies to play with.
You might try playing a few of these and forming your own opinion.
