Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Patine

2048 Hypothetical Future Scenarios Revisited

Recommended Posts

JDrakeify @willpaddyg @daons @LegolasRedbard @Prussian1871 @wolves @SirLagsalott @michaelsdiamonds @victorraiders @Patine @Falcon @jnewt @President Garrett Walker @Reagan04 @Conservative Elector 2 @SeanFKennedy @vcczar @jvikings1 @harveyrayson2 @lizarraba @TheMiddlePolitical @CalebsParadox @MrPrez @msc123123 @NYrepublican  @RI Democrat @servo75  @Presidentinsertname  @ThePotatoWalrus @Sunnymentoaddict @TheLiberalKitten @Quebecois @avatarmushi @Sami @WVProgressive @Kingthero @Lyly @President Trenton Adams @FrancisXKennedy @MBDemSoc

So, as I've mostly toyed with various ideas lately, and all my most desirable projects have hit one snag or another for the time being (all of which I hope to resolve one day), I was looking over the ideas I had for this fictional layout of a hypothetical future. I had decided that, if I revisited it, I would start with each relevant nation or other major polity's 2048 election (or the closest thereto). Of course, as with today, not every nation in the geopolitical scheme of my envisioned future can be called democratic enough for a contested, free-and-fair election - the scheme has just changed. There are also the Lunar elections (I already have a thread with ideas regarding that, people might recall), Martian elections (which are of a different tenor), and a few other additions here, as well as the borders, politics, and balance having changed internationally. More to come shortly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDrakeify @willpaddyg @daons @LegolasRedbard @Prussian1871 @wolves @SirLagsalott @michaelsdiamonds @victorraiders @Patine @Falcon @jnewt @President Garrett Walker @Reagan04 @Conservative Elector 2 @SeanFKennedy @vcczar @jvikings1 @harveyrayson2 @lizarraba @TheMiddlePolitical @CalebsParadox @MrPrez @msc123123 @NYrepublican  @RI Democrat @servo75  @Presidentinsertname  @ThePotatoWalrus @Sunnymentoaddict @TheLiberalKitten @Quebecois @avatarmushi @Sami @WVProgressive @Kingthero @Lyly @President Trenton Adams @FrancisXKennedy @MBDemSoc

The scheme of nations that I currently have at the moment is as follows:

Nations with Contested, Free-and-Fair Elections (Full Scenario Material):

-United States of America (only includes the New England, Mid-Atlantic, and Rust Belt States, plus Iowa, Maryland, Delaware, and the District of Columbia, as well as the current Canadian Provinces of Ontario and the Maritime Provinces)

-Western North American Federation (includes Washington State, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas, Colorado, Wyoming, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, the Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Alaska)

-Christian States of America (includes the original Confederate States of 1861 plus Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia)

-Republic of Quebec

-Nunavut (also includes Greenland)

-Caribbean Federation (all current sovereign nations in the Caribbean plus all current British, French, Dutch, and American dependencies in the Caribbean)

-Republic of Peru

-Republic of Bolivia

-Republic of Chile

-Argentine Republic

-Federal Republic of Brazil

-Union of the Guianas

-United Kingdom of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland

-Republic of Scotland

-Republic of Iceland

-Saami Sovereignty

-Kingdom of Norway

-Kingdom of Sweden

-Kingdom of Denmark

-Republic of Finland

-Republic of Portugal

-Kingdom of Spain

-Republic of Catalonia

-Free Basque State

-Republic of Italy

-Swiss Confederation

-Federal Republic of Germany

-Hellenic Republic

-Republic of Tunisia

-State of Israel

-Republic of India

-Republic of South Africa

-Malagasy Republic

-United Southeast Asian Federation

-Japan

-Federation of Australasia (includes the current nations of Australia, New Zealand, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, East Timor, Malaysia, and Singapore)

-Lunar Assembly

-Martian Polities (only some are truly democratic, electoral systems)

-Antarctic Colonies (only some are truly democratic, electoral systems)

There is no standing European Parliament by the year 2048 in this timeline. For one reason or another, all other polities have limited or no contested free-and-fair elections. As I have a fairly good idea of the timeline, but there's a lot of it, if anyone has a question about an above polity, how it got to it's current borders, or why a certain isn't included, I'm happy to answer at this stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just noticed I'd forgotten the Republic of California (which I did a whole thread on in this timeline) and a few other smaller polities with viable electoral politices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

JDrakeify @willpaddyg @daons @LegolasRedbard @Prussian1871 @wolves @SirLagsalott @michaelsdiamonds @victorraiders @Patine @Falcon @jnewt @President Garrett Walker @Reagan04 @Conservative Elector 2 @SeanFKennedy @vcczar @jvikings1 @harveyrayson2 @lizarraba @TheMiddlePolitical @CalebsParadox @MrPrez @msc123123 @NYrepublican  @RI Democrat @servo75  @Presidentinsertname  @ThePotatoWalrus @Sunnymentoaddict @TheLiberalKitten @Quebecois @avatarmushi @Sami @WVProgressive @Kingthero @Lyly @President Trenton Adams @FrancisXKennedy @MBDemSoc

The scheme of nations that I currently have at the moment is as follows:

Nations with Contested, Free-and-Fair Elections (Full Scenario Material):

-United States of America (only includes the New England, Mid-Atlantic, and Rust Belt States, plus Iowa, Maryland, Delaware, and the District of Columbia, as well as the current Canadian Provinces of Ontario and the Maritime Provinces)

-Western North American Federation (includes Washington State, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas, Colorado, Wyoming, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, the Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Alaska)

-Christian States of America (includes the original Confederate States of 1861 plus Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia)

-Republic of Quebec

-Nunavut (also includes Greenland)

-Caribbean Federation (all current sovereign nations in the Caribbean plus all current British, French, Dutch, and American dependencies in the Caribbean)

-Republic of Peru

-Republic of Bolivia

-Republic of Chile

-Argentine Republic

-Federal Republic of Brazil

-Union of the Guianas

-United Kingdom of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland

-Republic of Scotland

-Republic of Iceland

-Saami Sovereignty

-Kingdom of Norway

-Kingdom of Sweden

-Kingdom of Denmark

-Republic of Finland

-Republic of Portugal

-Kingdom of Spain

-Republic of Catalonia

-Free Basque State

-Republic of Italy

-Swiss Confederation

-Federal Republic of Germany

-Hellenic Republic

-Republic of Tunisia

-State of Israel

-Republic of India

-Republic of South Africa

-Malagasy Republic

-United Southeast Asian Federation

-Japan

-Federation of Australasia (includes the current nations of Australia, New Zealand, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, East Timor, Malaysia, and Singapore)

-Lunar Assembly

-Martian Polities (only some are truly democratic, electoral systems)

-Antarctic Colonies (only some are truly democratic, electoral systems)

There is no standing European Parliament by the year 2048 in this timeline. For one reason or another, all other polities have limited or no contested free-and-fair elections. As I have a fairly good idea of the timeline, but there's a lot of it, if anyone has a question about an above polity, how it got to it's current borders, or why a certain isn't included, I'm happy to answer at this stage.

I like the idea of breakoff states (split US, Catalonia and Basque being independent, Scotland) with no EU.  I don't know if you'd thought about this but support for Irish reunification has gone up slightly since the Brexit vote (with a very close poll in the case of a hard Brexit).  What would be going on in that region?

Also where would Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada go?

One last thing, with the EU gone, would the Northern League go back to being a separationist party in Italy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

I like the idea of breakoff states (split US, Catalonia and Basque being independent, Scotland) with no EU.  I don't know if you'd thought about this but support for Irish reunification has gone up slightly since the Brexit vote (with a very close poll in the case of a hard Brexit).  What would be going on in that region?

Also where would Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada go?

One last thing, with the EU gone, would the Northern League go back to being a separationist party in Italy?

Nevada is part of California (originally because the of the two States' strong economic co-dependence, especially around the tourist industry), but the Republic of California has a Nevada regional interest party ranging all the way up to separatist members (at your suggestion, in fact, when I first put up the Republic of California thread).

Utah will become it's own nation in the shuffle of the U.S. split, and it's politics become polarized largely between those who want to reestablish a Brigham Young-style theocracy and a more secular, but still "soft conservative" party. Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and New Mexico are somewhat up in the air and I'm open to suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

I like the idea of breakoff states (split US, Catalonia and Basque being independent, Scotland) with no EU.  I don't know if you'd thought about this but support for Irish reunification has gone up slightly since the Brexit vote (with a very close poll in the case of a hard Brexit).  What would be going on in that region?

Also where would Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada go?

One last thing, with the EU gone, would the Northern League go back to being a separationist party in Italy?

Also, Ireland and Northern Italy (as well as the Low Countries and a few others) have big problem, which is the reason France isn't on the list. In response to the issues of immigration, the EU (which was still standing, but on it's deathbed, at the time), an economic crisis from the Petroleum Market Crash in the very early 2030's, and feeling by many French citizens that law and order, French culture, and France's were being extinguished, a VERY extreme populist party that broke off the FN as an extreme schism came to power and, using many classic pretexts, gained more authority, but promoted a neo-Napoleonic/neo-Gaullist sentiment in the country and, an act considered the very death knell, invaded Belgium on a trumped-up casus belli and the EU failed to act with any decisive ability. Since then, the other two low countries and Ireland were successfully invaded and inconclusive conflicts with Italy and Spain were had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

Nevada is part of California (originally because the of the two States' strong economic co-dependence, especially around the tourist industry), but the Republic of California has a Nevada regional interest party ranging all the way up to separatist members (at your suggestion, in fact, when I first put up the Republic of California thread).

Utah will become it's own nation in the shuffle of the U.S. split, and it's politics become polarized largely between those who want to reestablish a Brigham Young-style theocracy and a more secular, but still "soft conservative" party. Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and New Mexico are somewhat up in the air and I'm open to suggestions.

I'd put Oklahoma with the south and Nebraska with the Western North American Federation.  Kansas could go with either of them, but I'd lean towards the south.  New Mexico and Arizona are kind of interesting in this situation and difficult to place.

1 hour ago, Patine said:

Also, Ireland and Northern Italy (as well as the Low Countries and a few others) have big problem, which is the reason France isn't on the list. In response to the issues of immigration, the EU (which was still standing, but on it's deathbed, at the time), an economic crisis from the Petroleum Market Crash in the very early 2030's, and feeling by many French citizens that law and order, French culture, and France's were being extinguished, a VERY extreme populist party that broke off the FN as an extreme schism came to power and, using many classic pretexts, gained more authority, but promoted a neo-Napoleonic/neo-Gaullist sentiment in the country and, an act considered the very death knell, invaded Belgium on a trumped-up casus belli and the EU failed to act with any decisive ability. Since then, the other two low countries and Ireland were successfully invaded and inconclusive conflicts with Italy and Spain were had.

I like this scenario.  Is this faction more in line with how the party was when Jean-Marie Le Pen was leader?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

I'd put Oklahoma with the south and Nebraska with the Western North American Federation.  Kansas could go with either of them, but I'd lean towards the south.  New Mexico and Arizona are kind of interesting in this situation and difficult to place.

I like this scenario.  Is this faction more in line with how the party was when Jean-Marie Le Pen was leader?

Yes, very much like Jean-Marie Le Pen's FN, with even some elements of Boulangism revived into a modern form (not so much monarchialism or antisemitism, specifically, but the hyper-French nationalism, language, and identity ideal and strong return to Catholicism religiously without Papal political power in France and the idea of political legalism and such).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDrakeify @willpaddyg @daons @LegolasRedbard @Prussian1871 @wolves @SirLagsalott @michaelsdiamonds @victorraiders @Patine @Falcon @jnewt @President Garrett Walker @Reagan04 @Conservative Elector 2 @SeanFKennedy @vcczar @jvikings1 @harveyrayson2 @lizarraba @TheMiddlePolitical @CalebsParadox @MrPrez @msc123123 @NYrepublican  @RI Democrat @servo75  @Presidentinsertname  @ThePotatoWalrus @Sunnymentoaddict @TheLiberalKitten @Quebecois @avatarmushi @Sami @WVProgressive @Kingthero @Lyly @President Trenton Adams @FrancisXKennedy @MBDemSoc

Also, some nations I had forgotten on the above list (other than Utah and the Republic of California, which are corrected above) that could have viable electoral scenarios are:

-Malta

-Cyprus

-Turkey

-Iran

-Armenia

-Georgia (the Caucasus Republic)

-Kurdistan

-Ethiopia

-Kenya

-South Atlantic Federation (independent union of the current British Overseas Dependencies of the Falkland Islands, Ascension Island, Tristan de Cunha, Saint Helena, and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands)

-Sri Lanka

-Bangladesh

-Indian Ocean Collectivity (current nations of Mauritius, the Comoros, Seychelles, and the Maldives, the French Overseas Departments of Mayotte and Reunion, and the British Indian Ocean Territory - becoming the Chagos Islands)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious on what the backstory for the Moon, Martian, and Antarctic colonies would be.  Was it a country that started them, a joint effort (like NATO don't something), or private entities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

I'm curious on what the backstory for the Moon, Martian, and Antarctic colonies would be.  Was it a country that started them, a joint effort (like NATO don't something), or private entities?

They were started by several nations separately, a private corporate entity (in the case of the Moon), and two independent non-national, but non-corporate entities on Mars, but detachment and distance from the home colonial founders, more difficult environments to survive and flourish in, and historically-attested "colonial attitudes" developed stronger ties (among some, there remained loyalists to the home founding nations, and inter-colonial rival sentiments, as well) and solidarity amongst themselves in each of those three "entities" (for lack of a better unifying term for a continent, a satellite, and a planet collectively).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is whether we'll even have the technology to make living on the Moon and Mars possible by this point in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wiw said:

My question is whether we'll even have the technology to make living on the Moon and Mars possible by this point in time.

Living, yes. Not terraforming into lush, Genesis-effect worlds, no. And, as I said, survival is more difficult, than on Earth. And we'd be talking about sealed life-support biosphere environments, hydroponic crops on the Moon and greenhouse farming on Mars, and recycled water and air, etc. But theoretically livable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×