|
|
Post by american2006 on Oct 16, 2020 15:15:15 GMT
Perhaps Denmark could become a major player as arctic ice clears and there’s a quick trade route from Europe to Asia or North America. Same applies to Norway and Iceland. Maybe Scotland takes more significance |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 17, 2020 9:29:38 GMT
Assuming we don't get control of climatic change - which unfortunately is looking more and more certain - and that it doesn't get toward Venus levels - no bets on that - if Canada can avoid being swamped by neighours it could emerge as a new great/super power as while daylight is limited in northern areas there's a hell of a lot of land up there and temperature will be less of a problem for them. Plus they would be buffeted from some of the worst aspects of climate change by their northern location and continental size.
Russia has similar prospects and a higher population but suffers from its appalling leadership crippling it. China lacks real access to the area and possibly faces a serious demographic problem so it depends on if it maintains its current growth in power status or suffers problems. The US is going to see a lot of problems in its southern states especially but is probably better positioned if it avoids too many internal problems.
All this assuming that major wars or other environmental problems doesn't send everything to hell in the proverbial hand-basket of course.  |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 17, 2020 9:33:49 GMT
Perhaps Denmark could become a major player as arctic ice clears and there’s a quick trade route from Europe to Asia or North America. Same applies to Norway and Iceland. Maybe Scotland takes more significance
That might depend on how strong its links with Greenland remain and also how much of Denmark remains above water. To quote from wiki
As with many developed coastal states the bulk of its cities are coastal ones so are likely to face flooding.
Sweden and possibly Norway, although the small population and limited agricultural land are problems here. Again both will suffer flooding but have upland areas to which population can withdraw.
|
|
|
|
Post by american2006 on Oct 17, 2020 13:07:11 GMT
Perhaps Denmark could become a major player as arctic ice clears and there’s a quick trade route from Europe to Asia or North America. Same applies to Norway and Iceland. Maybe Scotland takes more significance
That might depend on how strong its links with Greenland remain and also how much of Denmark remains above water. To quote from wiki
As with many developed coastal states the bulk of its cities are coastal ones so are likely to face flooding.
Sweden and possibly Norway, although the small population and limited agricultural land are problems here. Again both will suffer flooding but have upland areas to which population can withdraw.
Your assuming people do nothing about it, which isn’t nessessarily true. Who says they can’t pull a Netherlands and gain land while everyone loses it! |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 18, 2020 11:36:05 GMT
That might depend on how strong its links with Greenland remain and also how much of Denmark remains above water. To quote from wiki
As with many developed coastal states the bulk of its cities are coastal ones so are likely to face flooding.
Sweden and possibly Norway, although the small population and limited agricultural land are problems here. Again both will suffer flooding but have upland areas to which population can withdraw.
Your assuming people do nothing about it, which isn’t nessessarily true. Who says they can’t pull a Netherlands and gain land while everyone loses it!
Basically we are doing very little about it and a lot to make matters worse as well. If nothing else sea level rises will continue for decade/generations as the warmer temperatures penetrate into deeper waters - meaning those waters expand. Furthermore with the continued acceleration of ice-melt and evidence of methane release from permafrost even if governments got really serious about climate change it might already be too late.
The Netherlands are likely to be big losers simply because so much of their land is very low level and in many cases below sea level. Walls can only get so high and if/when they fail the greater the height of water held back the worst it will be. Similarly with the part of England I come from, the Fens which is largely drained marshlands and where the problem has been worsened by land erosion and peat shrinking as it dries. The small town I was brought up in is based around the ruins of an ancient abbey which was initially established by a hermit monk on an island in the marches. Its quite possible before I die that this could be marshland again, especially with less concern paid to coastal defences in recent decades as well as climatic problems.
As I say its not that we're doing nothing. Its that we're doing very little good and also a fair bit of bad. Not just with idiots like Trump in the west but China for instance has been building a lot more coal fired power stations which won't help.
Coupled with other environmental problems such as habitat destruction and plastic build-up to name only two which could seriously impact humanity and hence reduce our resources and the attention on global warming there is a lot of doubt about whether we will do enough in time.
I know from personal experience how much my country has warmed up in the last few decades. As well as all the evidence from around the world.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by american2006 on Oct 18, 2020 13:14:43 GMT
Your assuming people do nothing about it, which isn’t nessessarily true. Who says they can’t pull a Netherlands and gain land while everyone loses it!
Basically we are doing very little about it and a lot to make matters worse as well. If nothing else sea level rises will continue for decade/generations as the warmer temperatures penetrate into deeper waters - meaning those waters expand. Furthermore with the continued acceleration of ice-melt and evidence of methane release from permafrost even if governments got really serious about climate change it might already be too late.
The Netherlands are likely to be big losers simply because so much of their land is very low level and in many cases below sea level. Walls can only get so high and if/when they fail the greater the height of water held back the worst it will be. Similarly with the part of England I come from, the Fens which is largely drained marshlands and where the problem has been worsened by land erosion and peat shrinking as it dries. The small town I was brought up in is based around the ruins of an ancient abbey which was initially established by a hermit monk on an island in the marches. Its quite possible before I die that this could be marshland again, especially with less concern paid to coastal defences in recent decades as well as climatic problems.
As I say its not that we're doing nothing. Its that we're doing very little good and also a fair bit of bad. Not just with idiots like Trump in the west but China for instance has been building a lot more coal fired power stations which won't help.
Coupled with other environmental problems such as habitat destruction and plastic build-up to name only two which could seriously impact humanity and hence reduce our resources and the attention on global warming there is a lot of doubt about whether we will do enough in time.
I know from personal experience how much my country has warmed up in the last few decades. As well as all the evidence from around the world.
Steve
What I said about the Netherlands is that historically, they’ve expanded outward. I can see what you mean about the earth getting warmer and the evidences of it, but one, I don’t think we will get to the point where everyone dies very soon, and two, people are very resilient and I would not be surprised if someone like Elon Musk just figures out a way to pull carbon from the atmosphere. Additionally, some regions (such as my own) are showing signs of temperatures falling, which I enjoy because the area I live in is usually very hot. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 18, 2020 16:29:16 GMT
Basically we are doing very little about it and a lot to make matters worse as well. If nothing else sea level rises will continue for decade/generations as the warmer temperatures penetrate into deeper waters - meaning those waters expand. Furthermore with the continued acceleration of ice-melt and evidence of methane release from permafrost even if governments got really serious about climate change it might already be too late.
The Netherlands are likely to be big losers simply because so much of their land is very low level and in many cases below sea level. Walls can only get so high and if/when they fail the greater the height of water held back the worst it will be. Similarly with the part of England I come from, the Fens which is largely drained marshlands and where the problem has been worsened by land erosion and peat shrinking as it dries. The small town I was brought up in is based around the ruins of an ancient abbey which was initially established by a hermit monk on an island in the marches. Its quite possible before I die that this could be marshland again, especially with less concern paid to coastal defences in recent decades as well as climatic problems.
As I say its not that we're doing nothing. Its that we're doing very little good and also a fair bit of bad. Not just with idiots like Trump in the west but China for instance has been building a lot more coal fired power stations which won't help.
Coupled with other environmental problems such as habitat destruction and plastic build-up to name only two which could seriously impact humanity and hence reduce our resources and the attention on global warming there is a lot of doubt about whether we will do enough in time.
I know from personal experience how much my country has warmed up in the last few decades. As well as all the evidence from around the world.
Steve
What I said about the Netherlands is that historically, they’ve expanded outward. I can see what you mean about the earth getting warmer and the evidences of it, but one, I don’t think we will get to the point where everyone dies very soon, and two, people are very resilient and I would not be surprised if someone like Elon Musk just figures out a way to pull carbon from the atmosphere. Additionally, some regions (such as my own) are showing signs of temperatures falling, which I enjoy because the area I live in is usually very hot.
There will be variants simply for statistical reasons. We are unlikely to get to the point where everybody dies soon - or at all I hope - but things are happening worryingly fast for serious environmental changes. You might get a quick tech fix but doing that on a massive scale is going to be expensive if possible at all and would also need measures to reduce the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases being added to the atmosphere. Neither of those are likely while too many groups are still in denial that we have a serious problem. We're talking decades [hopefully] before it becomes significant for much of the current developed world. Although problems in the poorer parts of the world could impact on everybody sooner.
The big problem too many are ignoring is that this process is under way and there is a lot of momentum already. Its not just a case of stopping future increases in pollutants but doing something about the damage being done by what's in the atmosphere already.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Oct 27, 2020 22:18:49 GMT
There are certainly some interesting dialogue concerning climate change going on here, which I'm not opposed to (even though I've a great deal to learn about the issue myself). However, I've also been hoping to see subjects of a more macrohistorical nature discussed here as well. Namely, something akin to what's been bandied about here. The third post down is where things start to become interesting, I think. Although, as one criticism of mine, it doesn't take into account the role that climate change could play in determining which "side" wins out and which one(s) end up discredited. In fairness, however, perhaps the user who authored it would be able to respond to my nitpick if they were in a position to reply to me directly. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 27, 2020 23:07:00 GMT
There are certainly some interesting dialogue concerning climate change going on here, which I'm not opposed to (even though I've a great deal to learn about the issue myself). However, I've also been hoping to see subjects of a more macrohistorical nature discussed here as well. Namely, something akin to what's been bandied about here. The third post down is where things start to become interesting, I think. Although, as one criticism of mine, it doesn't take into account the role that climate change could play in determining which "side" wins out and which one(s) end up discredited. In fairness, however, perhaps the user who authored it would be able to respond to my nitpick if they were in a position to reply to me directly.
Interesting thread and I see what you mean about macro-historical ideas. As I said in my reply in that thread I'm mistrustful of systems that are too deterministic. However the core of the western nations, i.e. Europe and N America definitely need some reforming and reality checks to secure their economic and social future, even if we can escape other macro events such as climate change. Unfortunately so far too many look towards easy solutions, I fear because it avoids them having to actually thinking about the problems and making difficult choices. That's one reason why I'm unhappy with mega-states like the EU is seeking to come. Not only do they tend to be more autocratic and closed minded when it comes to new ideas there's simply less test-beds from which such ideas can develop.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by american2006 on Oct 27, 2020 23:08:22 GMT
There are certainly some interesting dialogue concerning climate change going on here, which I'm not opposed to (even though I've a great deal to learn about the issue myself). However, I've also been hoping to see subjects of a more macrohistorical nature discussed here as well. Namely, something akin to what's been bandied about here. The third post down is where things start to become interesting, I think. Although, as one criticism of mine, it doesn't take into account the role that climate change could play in determining which "side" wins out and which one(s) end up discredited. In fairness, however, perhaps the user who authored it would be able to respond to my nitpick if they were in a position to reply to me directly. Well, climate aside, I think that as the third world develops India is going to become a major power, which will inevitably start a rivalry between China and India, pushing Pakistan to China. As the US stagnates and/or declines, it will likely grow more connected with rising South American powers, chiefly Argentina and Brazil. Africa could go a number of ways. The worst case scenario for Africa is that it degenerates into tribal states.The best case is it unified mostly into a federal state and becomes a major world player. Europe is probably going to see Eastern Europe follow Britain but the West will federalize. |
|
ukron
Commander
"Beware of the French"
Posts: 1,433
Likes: 2,383
|
Post by ukron on Oct 29, 2020 8:58:36 GMT
India will still need a long time and recent developments concerning religious tensions and the inevitable Covid pandemic do not work in the favor of the said country.
same thing for Africa where I do not think that the situation will deteriorate more, but rather stabilize around strong and authoritarian states, if that is so that these have good economic results.
I'm more inclined towards Australia as the next superpower, probably with an alliance with New Zealand, Vietnam, and maybe the Philippines.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 29, 2020 9:31:57 GMT
India will still need a long time and recent developments concerning religious tensions and the inevitable Covid pandemic do not work in the favor of the said country. same thing for Africa where I do not think that the situation will deteriorate more, but rather stabilize around strong and authoritarian states, if that is so that these have good economic results. I'm more inclined towards Australia as the next superpower, probably with an alliance with New Zealand, Vietnam, and maybe the Philippines.
Australia could be a significant regional power but I doubt, without major change allowing a markedly larger population, it would qualify as a real superpower. There are some arguments its population is already larger than it can really support in terms of water supplies and the like.
|
|
ukron
Commander
"Beware of the French"
Posts: 1,433
Likes: 2,383
|
Post by ukron on Oct 30, 2020 8:32:34 GMT
Indonesia will become a focal point of geopolitics in the next few years, as it is evident that China will surely achieve its goals in the South China Sea, as soon as it is accomplished, it will turn its attention to the Straits of Lombock and Sunda bottlenecks essential for trade but also for the deployment of a war fleet, given that the Chinese provided the Bengalis and the Burmese in arms and bases, I can imagine small Chinese fleets operating from these territories but if there is a confrontation with a major power (United States) in the Indian Ocean, the Chinese will run out of ships and logistics.
Hence the importance of Indonesia, if China expands the country to its area of influence, I am willing to bet that Australia will not let it go.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 30, 2020 13:26:00 GMT
Indonesia will become a focal point of geopolitics in the next few years, as it is evident that China will surely achieve its goals in the South China Sea, as soon as it is accomplished, it will turn its attention to the Straits of Lombock and Sunda bottlenecks essential for trade but also for the deployment of a war fleet, given that the Chinese provided the Bengalis and the Burmese in arms and bases, I can imagine small Chinese fleets operating from these territories but if there is a confrontation with a major power (United States) in the Indian Ocean, the Chinese will run out of ships and logistics. Hence the importance of Indonesia, if China expands the country to its area of influence, I am willing to bet that Australia will not let it go.
There's the possibility of a defensive alliance if the US ceased to be a factor in the region but Indonesia is too late, both geographically and demographically to be dominated by Australia and I think Australia is more concerned about Indonesian expansion than vice versa. As such facing an aggressive China I could see the two as allies against it but it wouldn't make Australia a super-power.
|
|
|
|
Post by alternatehistoryfox on Nov 25, 2020 2:50:43 GMT
The geopolitical paradigm heavily depends on the events unfolding this century, and if reality keeps using my future-history setting as a blueprint, well, have fun in the most sarcastic sense as it would have nuclear and bioterrorism as a thing, privacy killed entirely (because, well, having the ability to cook potent synth-plagues from your basement to fit whatever ideology the idiot wants to further is detrimental to the health of civilization), information and news will get hefty amounts of restrictions and regulations (thanks to things like DeepFakes and memetic weapons becoming so commonplace that its part of the background at times), the ocean levels rising two meters over the next two centuries (only stopped by a complex system of climate stabilizers), terraforming tech becoming a thing, and there is only war across the solar system.
That is if the current US-backed 'trade or else' paradigm falls apart. Remember, historically what can't be achieved by trade is almost always achieved by force of arms.
|
|
