Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Mar 28, 2019 17:20:24 GMT
Though these were developing in the years before this time, the 1960s saw a decisive boom in social and cultural change. The Civil Rights movement, opposition to the status quo, and the emergence of the permissive society--i.e. the Sexual Revolution--were turning points that took place in those ten fateful years. Moreover, the Cold War was in full swing as America and the Soviet Union flexed their muscles both at home and abroad, even coming close to global nuclear war during the thirteen day-long Cuban Missile Crisis.
So, how would the arrival of a liberal-democratic, technologically advanced 21st Century nation such as Canada--along with Alaska and Greenland--affect the period starting on January 1, 1961 (the last few weeks of Ike's presidency and shortly before JFK is sworn in)?
Thank you in advance, Zyobot
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Mar 28, 2019 20:39:21 GMT
For one thing, I wonder how the US--as well as the USSR--will react to being one-upped by Canada. By 1961, they're accustomed to being the top dogs of the world in terms of economic, military and technological might, which is obviously called into question by the arrival of a large, liberal-democratic power from the 21st Century.
Also, how would Alaska fare after the ISOT? I think it's reasonable to say that America will probably want it back, and Alaska disputing that would in large part stem from the fact that it has more in common with the places it was sent back along with than the country that it's supposedly meant to be a state of. Living under mid-20th Century laws--i.e. the prospect of handing over control of their television, internet and other means of communication to the downtimer FCC--would be rather...unwelcome to them.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,710
Likes: 45,793
|
Post by lordroel on Mar 28, 2019 21:58:22 GMT
Though these were developing in the years before this time, the 1960s saw a decisive boom in social and cultural change. The Civil Rights movement, opposition to the status quo, and the emergence of the permissive society--i.e. the Sexual Revolution--were turning points that took place in those ten fateful years. Moreover, the Cold War was in full swing as America and the Soviet Union flexed their muscles both at home and abroad, even coming close to global nuclear war during the thirteen day-long Cuban Missile Crisis. So, how would the arrival of a liberal-democratic, technologically advanced 21st Century nation such as Canada--along with Alaska and Greenland--affect the period starting on January 1, 1961 (the last few weeks of Ike's presidency and shortly before JFK is sworn in)? Thank you in advance, Zyobot Can we assume that 21st Century nation such as Canada annex Alaska and Greenland if not takes them under its protection.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,001
|
Post by stevep on Mar 29, 2019 0:16:48 GMT
Though these were developing in the years before this time, the 1960s saw a decisive boom in social and cultural change. The Civil Rights movement, opposition to the status quo, and the emergence of the permissive society--i.e. the Sexual Revolution--were turning points that took place in those ten fateful years. Moreover, the Cold War was in full swing as America and the Soviet Union flexed their muscles both at home and abroad, even coming close to global nuclear war during the thirteen day-long Cuban Missile Crisis. So, how would the arrival of a liberal-democratic, technologically advanced 21st Century nation such as Canada--along with Alaska and Greenland--affect the period starting on January 1, 1961 (the last few weeks of Ike's presidency and shortly before JFK is sworn in)? Thank you in advance, Zyobot Can we assume that 21st Century nation such as Canada annex Alaska and Greenland if not takes them under its protection.
I don't think it would go as far as annexing Alaska, while even taking it under its protection could well be seen as an act of war by the US. While it might be nearly 70 years behind Canada technologically its still a super-power with a sizeable army and a large nuclear force so Canada can't afford to upset it too much. Plus Canada will face all the problems of disruption with supplies, raw materials, electronic communications etc being lost so its going to have problems of its own.
Greenland could be a different matter as it was Danish at the time and still is to some degree. There are both Danish and some US bases there, or was in 1961 - still is checking Wiki for Thule Air Base, so they will have interests and the USAF will want to get its hands on the 2019 equipment and men there. However I don't think Denmark is [or was at the time] too proprietorial about Greenland and given the difference in culture a number of the US military and civilian personnel in Greenland may prefer relocating to Canada, especially if their black or female or both. This would be even more the case for Alaska but the US has a clear legal claim to it and a lot of Alaskans may, at first anyway, feel a lot of loyalty to the US.
A lot of 'history' is going to have big impacts on the 1916 world. The collapse of the Soviet empire, rise of China after Mao's death and political rise of the EEC into the EU. Also the decline of communism worldwide, but rise of reactionary Islam and massive social changes. JFK is going to be an interesting factor as up-timers will be able to tell the 1961ers both about his grand ideals and tragic death but also about his drugs problems and womanising. Also about the failure of the US to stop S Vietnam falling to communism. There are going to be repercussions all over the world, even without any technological leakage.
|
|
mullauna
Banned
Banned
Posts: 376
Likes: 40
|
Post by mullauna on Mar 31, 2019 11:36:52 GMT
I think with it's advantage tech etc, Canada and the others can save Saigon.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,001
|
Post by stevep on Mar 31, 2019 12:48:28 GMT
I think with it's advantage tech etc, Canada and the others can save Saigon.
With information they could make a war more winnable but: a) There is a common [but largely false] belief in the west that the northern invasions were justified and that the war was unwinable. As such its faces barrier among the up-timers about supporting actions to protect the south. How many people nowadays are aware of the massive abuse by the communists authorities after the conquest and the plight of the many hundreds of thousands if not millions who tried to flee the country, often at the cost of their lives?
b) While its been involved in UN peace-keeping operations and is an active member of NATO how willing would Canada, especially while struggling to adjust to what's happened to them, to commit Canadian forces to such a conflict. Its not going to be a UN mission as the Soviets will veto any such idea. Plus its going to be a long and costly operation and while far better than the brutality of the communists the government of the south was generally deeply corrupt.
Provided some agreement is made with the US and the latter doesn't take on the up-timers attitude that its a wrong or unwinnable war, the up-timers can give them a lot of valuable information. Mainly about what tactics to adopt and which to avoid and probably also in terms of some of the people to aid/use or not. However in the face of prolonged communist terror campaigns supported by both Russia and China and often corrupt and incompetent people in both S Vietnam and to a lesser degree the US military and leadership its not going to be an easy war for the US and other anti-communist forces. Don't forget that both S Korea and Taiwan, who sent troops were still functioning dictatorships at the time as well. As such adopting wiser tactics and getting them accepted by all military and political forces involved won't be that simple.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Mar 31, 2019 15:07:09 GMT
I think with it's advantage tech etc, Canada and the others can save Saigon. Speaking of uptimer tech, I wonder how downtimer governments and the general masses will react to the various innovations made between the 1960s and the 21st Century. Cell phones, computers and internet would be the most immediately obvious.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,001
|
Post by stevep on Mar 31, 2019 22:24:26 GMT
I think with it's advantage tech etc, Canada and the others can save Saigon. Speaking of uptimer tech, I wonder how downtimer governments and the general masses will react to the various innovations made between the 1960s and the 21st Century. Cell phones, computers and internet would be the most immediately obvious.
I suspect that they would find the amount of gossip and self-absorption that takes up much of it rather distasteful and repellent whereas the easy availability and nature of much of the porn available!
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Mar 31, 2019 22:45:43 GMT
Speaking of uptimer tech, I wonder how downtimer governments and the general masses will react to the various innovations made between the 1960s and the 21st Century. Cell phones, computers and internet would be the most immediately obvious.
I suspect that they would find the amount of gossip and self-absorption that takes up much of it rather distasteful and repellent whereas the easy availability and nature of much of the porn available! I don't necessarily doubt that, but I believe their opinions would be much more mixed. For starters, the idea of the internet and the endless and ever-growing swaths of apps, games, forums, news, videos, websites, general information access, etcetera that if affords to the Average Joe--who also has the means to contribute content to the web in the form of a personal computer and/or smart device--would strike most as pretty damn mind-blowing. However, their initial awe would soon be counterbalanced by the sentiments you just mentioned. Furthermore, in the case of '60s media giants, the competition posed by the likes of Youtube and Netflix would be something new, and all the fanworks and downright IP infringement that runs rampant on the WWW a rather unwelcome surprise, perhaps even to the point of lobbying for Article 13-esque regulations. Governments would view it as a potential national security hazard, while the moral guardians and demagogues of the time would also demand more restrictions on online content and usage if it were brought to their societies. One ought to wonder how '60s authorities would go about governing their portions of this global, 24/7 communications network where users can post just about whatever content. Another thing to note is that a great deal of web media nowadays is not just catered to, but in large driven by young people. That sort of pop culture influence would displease and perturb a great many mid-century adults, I'm sure. Especially the socially conservative, "respect your elders" types who have not yet become accustomed to the "permissive society" just yet.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,001
|
Post by stevep on Apr 1, 2019 8:53:25 GMT
I suspect that they would find the amount of gossip and self-absorption that takes up much of it rather distasteful and repellent whereas the easy availability and nature of much of the porn available! I don't necessarily doubt that, but I believe their opinions would be much more mixed. For starters, the idea of the internet and the endless and ever-growing swaths of apps, games, forums, news, videos, websites, general information access, etcetera that if affords to the Average Joe--who also has the means to contribute content to the web in the form of a personal computer and/or smart device--would strike most as pretty damn mind-blowing. However, their initial awe would soon be counterbalanced by the sentiments you just mentioned. Furthermore, in the case of '60s media giants, the competition posed by the likes of Youtube and Netflix would be something new, and all the fanworks and downright IP infringement that runs rampant on the WWW a rather unwelcome surprise, perhaps even to the point of lobbying for Article 13-esque regulations. Governments would view it as a potential national security hazard, while the moral guardians and demagogues of the time would also demand more restrictions on online content and usage if it were brought to their societies. One ought to wonder how '60s authorities would go about governing their portions of this global, 24/7 communications network where users can post just about whatever content. Another thing to note is that a great deal of web media nowadays is not just catered to, but in large driven by young people. That sort of pop culture influence would displease and perturb a great many mid-century adults, I'm sure. Especially the socially conservative, "respect your elders" types who have not yet become accustomed to the "permissive society" just yet.
Agree there's likely to be a generational gulf, which will increase the tension between teenagers especially and older adults compared to OTL. Also in terms of things like racial discrimination both reformers and reactionaries are likely to see it as a way to get their message across.
However how much of the WWW would be in existence? Does Canada have many servers and data centres and the ability to maintain such services in Canada, let alone making such information available to even the US let alone wider afield? Do they have the ability to manufacture the mobiles, let allow other infrastructure to re-establish the web? Don't think anyone has any ability at the moment to put satalites in space or produce a lot of towers on the ground?
As such its likely to be a few years before its a serious possibility even for western countries. This could give time for the struggle over use age/control/suppression to be at least partly resolved in many countries. Also come to think of it while some big interests will see it as a threat other companies will see opportunities for new markets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2019 10:12:45 GMT
For one thing, I wonder how the US--as well as the USSR--will react to being one-upped by Canada. Well, the USA won't be. How many nukes does Canada have? The US has 18,638. Also the US military will acquire whatever there is at Elmendorf-Richardson en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Base_Elmendorf–Richardson. The Soviet Missile gap has just got worse, as penetrating NORAD air space just got 100x worse. I suspect that the Canadian military won't be self-sufficient for very long. No more Avro Arrows, either!
|
|
mullauna
Banned
Banned
Posts: 376
Likes: 40
|
Post by mullauna on Apr 1, 2019 11:56:52 GMT
Will the USSR panic and launch a war or threaten war?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,710
Likes: 45,793
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 1, 2019 13:50:27 GMT
Will the USSR panic and launch a war or threaten war? Good question, does the United States part of Alaska have any nukes, doubt it.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,001
|
Post by stevep on Apr 1, 2019 14:41:14 GMT
Will the USSR panic and launch a war or threaten war? Good question, does the United States part of Alaska have any nukes, doubt it.
Might have some tactical ones with the forces there but no strategic ones, at least unless the ISOT includes coastal waters and a US boomer is caught up but that seems very unlikely as they normally head for deep water ASAP after leaving port.
However if the USSR were to attack or threaten any of the IDOT area then I can't see the US and also the UK not getting involved in opposing them. The US won't want any Soviet forces operating in N America even if its not on the best of terms with Ottawa and also Canada is also part of NATO - although we're talking about two different dates in different universes so the lawyers, among others, are going to have great fun with debates on that.
Not sure how the rest of NATO would react as they don't want even a conventional conflict with the Soviets but they can't really afford to let the Soviets make any gains either and Denmark technically is the colonial power in Greenland so it also have legal commitments.
The saving grace is that this is the USSR under Khrushchev who is markedly less belligerent than most Soviet leaders. However have they started installing nukes in Cuba yet? If not will they try it now, possibly while the US is distracted? Or given that he got replaced in the aftermath of the crisis does he avoid this, hoping to last longer, or possibly try and purge his opponents.
Which raises the question of what is the reaction of up-time embassies in Ottawa and foreigners throughout the affected areas? Many are going to find their country doesn't currently exist or is radically different to what their used to.
|
|
mullauna
Banned
Banned
Posts: 376
Likes: 40
|
Post by mullauna on Apr 1, 2019 14:49:48 GMT
And who will the German Embassy in Canada want to contact - probably Bonn, but they'll have to deal with East Berlin at some point.
|
|