Friday, 21 June 2024

Future Events

Any sf novel set at a future date implies a future history connecting the readers' present to that fictional future. See:

Unpacking A Future

How Spacemen Walk

These posts discuss Poul Anderson's Kith History and Tales Of The Flying Mountains. I made the same point somewhere else about his The Byworlder and The Long Way Home. 

I was reminded of this when James Blish's A Case Of Conscience sketched in a future history:

1945-1950 fission bomb race
1950-1955 fusion bomb race
1955-1960 IBM race
1960-1985 Shelter race
1993 Corridor Riots, leading to UN world government
2049-2050 Shelters and world government still in place
(Haertel and interstellar flight at unspecified intermediate dates)

10 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

The last thing I want is a UN world gov't! I have only contempt for the corrupt, futile, discredited UN.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

You have too much contempt! Presumably this is not Christian? Across the political spectrum, there must be some point at which contempt - even apparent hate - stops and mere disagreement starts?

Paul.

Jim Baerg said...

Sean:
Even in its current form the UN at least provides a somewhat useful diplomatic forum, for most of the countries even including the most disgustingly tyrannical.
I think a "United Democracies" to take over most of the functions of the UN would be better, with the diplomatic forum part being left to the UN. I suppose an expansion of NATO might be the most likely way to get a 'United Democracies'.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul and Jim!

Paul: It's because I often feel anger! But you are right to urge on me the need to be more temperate.

Jim: And that is one reason why I have such disdain for the UN, that it allows tyrannical regimes like that of China, Iran, Russia, et al, to sit in hypocritical judgment of vastly milder states.

I see no need for the UN even as a "diplomatic forum." The ordinary means by which even rival powers conduct relations with one another, as codified in the Vienna Convention, should be enough.

Because of how often it's been bandied about so carelessly and malignantly, I prefer to avoid using the word "democracy." I have repeatedly suggested that an "Anglosphere," an alliance of English speaking nations sharing many origins and values in common, is one way to go. It could begin with the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the smaller members of the British Commonwealth, and expand to include India (which is becoming English speaking), Japan, S Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc. Shades of the United Commonwealths and Inter-Being League of Anderson/Dickson's Hoka stories!

No, NATO is too limited for what you suggested, being meant as an alliance for restraining Soviet and Russian aggression.

Ad astra! Sean

Jim Baerg said...

"Because of how often it's been bandied about so carelessly and malignantly, I prefer to avoid using the word "democracy." "

For any word that denotes some actually good thing, there will be people who try to appropriate it.
Better to resist the appropriation.

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

I agree.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, to Both!

I disagree! Considering how "democracy" has been abused and corrupted by monsters and tyrants like Robespierre down to our times, or just by corrupt hack pols, I've come to dislike that word.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

Most people accept "democracy" and mean by it decisions taken by a majority vote. If you do not want to use this word, then you will endlessly have to explain why not.

Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

And I have, where I called what is vaguely described as "democracy" as meaning "limited gov't, despite the existence of things like "majoritarian autocracies." "Democracy" should be more accurately defined as meaning "meaning non-violent competitive politics," meaning the losers in disputes and conflicts accept defeat and don't oppose their opponents winning offices and power.

Ad astra! Sean

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I should have added one more setence: "And where the losers can try again to win office and power at a later time."

Ad astra! Sean