QuickTopic logo Create New TopicNew Topic My TopicsMy Topics News
Zarthani.net banner

H. Beam Piper Mailing List and Discussion Forum

Skip to Messages
Welcome to the H. Beam Piper mailing list and discussion forum. Initiated in October 2008 (after the demise of the original PIPER-L mailing list), this tool for shared communication among Piper fans provides an e-mail list and a discussion forum with on-line archives.
 
Membership in this moderated list/forum is by invitation only. (If you'd like an invitation please request one by sending an e-mail message to the Moderator.) In order for your messages to be approved for posting to the list you must be both registered with the QuickTopic site (click the "Sign In" link at the top-right of the page) and subscribed to receive messages from the list by e-mail (click the "Get email" button below).
 
Moderation will focus on keeping the discussion related to H. Beam Piper in a broadly interpreted sense. Off-topic posts or ad hominem comments will not be approved for posting and repeat offenders may be banned from posting to the list.
 
There is an annual subscription fee required to keep this list/forum free of advertisements and to provide expanded functionality such as the capability to post images. You can support the continued ad-free availability of this shared resource by making a contribution using the PayPal Donate link at the top of the page. (You don't need a PayPal account to make a donation, just a credit card.) Thank you for whatever level of support you can afford.
^     All messages            1770-1785 of 1785  1754-1769 >>
1785
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
10-04-2017
04:10 UT
~
Dale Ridder wrote:

> For that matter, being an historian, you would
> be surprised on how much of what you read is
> slanted in one direction or another, and how
> the approach to any given event changes over
> time.

The interesting thing is, I think we can see evidence of Beam doing this purposely in the Terra-human Future History. Consider, for example, how pitiless Trask and the Sword-Worlders--putting aside the Space Vikings themselves--are toward the hapless people in the Old Federation. These attitudes place them well outside what passed for "polite society" at the time Beam was writing. But these are folks, Beam is showing us, who are the descendants not only of those who lived through the Atomic Wars--which destroyed civilization on half of Terra--but also of those who managed to escape the collapse of interstellar civilization itself and the devastation of several entire worlds. What seems, at first, to be an "error"--or at least an odd, unsettling characterization--turns out to be some rather subtle story-telling.

> As for the problem of Niflheim's location, I
> suspect that he simply moved the star to make
> the story work better, given the speed at which
> he was using for his hyperdrive in Uller Uprising.

I think there may have been several unusual things going on in this early "shared world" yarn. For example, while he sticks with Nu Puppis as Nifflheim's system, Beam moves his Uller from Clark's Beta Hydri, in the southern constellation Hydrus, to Beta Hydrae, in the northern constellation Hydra. That seems an odd mistake for him _and_ his editor to make--especially if it was Fletcher Pratt doing the editing for ~The Petrified Planet~. (Pratt's "The Long View" doesn't seem to mention the system its Uller is in, but its original publication in ~Startling Stories~ also included Clark's essay with the Beta Hydri reference.) On the other hand, there is no obvious dramatic reason why Beam might have made this shift.

I think you're right that Beam's primary focus was writing yarns that sold and therefore that his universe-building took a backseat to the dramatic needs he believed best-suited his interests in selling his work. On the other hand, I don't think we should be too quick to dismiss what seem to be errors or contradictions. I'm sure Beam made errors, yes, and at other times deliberately contradicted himself in a later work because that fit his dramatic needs at the time. But it's also clear that he often wrote with great care and that sometimes what seem to be inconsistencies--like the seemingly "six months to everywhere" phenomenon--can actually be understood in ways that reveal socio-political aspects of the universe he was constructing.

Znidd suddabit!

David
--
"It is not . . . the business of an author of fiction to improve or inspire or educate his reader, or to save the world from fascism, communism, racism, capitalism, socialism, or anything else. [The author's] main objective is to purvey entertainment of the sort his reader wants. If he has done this, by writing interestingly about interesting people, human or otherwise, doing interesting things, he has discharged his duty and earned his check." - H. Beam Piper, "Double: Bill Symposium" interview
~
1784
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
10-04-2017
03:04 UT
~
Jon Crocker wrote:

> Obviously Piper's ideas changed and grew, so some
> things from early on were left by the wayside.

Yep. I think Dale's right too that the source of this "growth" may often have been simply his desire to make a sale.

> It's too bad he never got a chance to compile a final,
> definitive version.

I agree it's a shame he didn't produce more work but I suspect that had his life not been cut short he still would never have lived long enough to do this (and that had he done so and tried, we'd be arguing now about many of the choices he made to "reconcile" bits here and there).

Cheers,

David
--
"Why Walt Disney bought the movie rights to ['Rebel Raider'], I've never figured out. Will Colonel Mosby be played by Mickey Mouse, and General Phil Sheridan by Donald Duck? It's baffling. However, I was glad to get the check." -- H. Beam Piper, The Pennsy interview, 1953
~
1783
Jon CrockerPerson was signed in when posted
10-04-2017
02:55 UT
"A little under six months to Terra from Uller, and then a couple of paragraphs later, six months from Niflheim to Uller."

Those aren't mutually exclusive.
1782
Dale RidderPerson was signed in when posted
10-04-2017
01:50 UT
I am not sure if Piper really view his Terran Future History in that light of having a final, definitive version, as he kept changing things. If you go through his books, his hyperdrive travel times are all over the map, sometimes in the same book. Then in Little Fuzzy making mention of time dilation effects just adds to the confusion. He was writing stories to sell, not history books. For that matter, being an historian, you would be surprised on how much of what you read is slanted in one direction or another, and how the approach to any given event changes over time. How many history books covering World War 2 are out there that start with either Pearl Harbor or the invasion of Poland, with no coverage of any of the wars going on in other places?

As for the problem of Niflheim's location, I suspect that he simply moved the star to make the story work better, given the speed at which he was using for his hyperdrive in Uller Uprising. Remember that this appears in Uller Uprising. "Oh, Orgzild wouldn't be crazy enough to try anything like that," Commander Dirk Prinsloo, of the Aldebaran, declared. "He'd get away with it for just twelve months—the time it would take to get the news to Terra and for a Federation Space Navy task-force to get here. And then, there'd be little bits of radioactive geek floating around this system as far out as the orbit of Beta Hydrae VII."

A little under six months to Terra from Uller, and then a couple of paragraphs later, six months from Niflheim to Uller. As I said, he was writing a story and wanted to have the communications lag in there, similar to what existed between India and Great Britain during the Indian Mutiny, which clearly is what Uller Uprising is based on.
1781
Jon CrockerPerson was signed in when posted
10-04-2017
00:00 UT
Obviously Piper's ideas changed and grew, so some things from early on were left by the wayside. It's too bad he never got a chance to compile a final, definitive version.
1780
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
10-02-2017
03:30 UT
~
Gregg Levine wrote:

> Little Fuzzy, and in there a question looms
> regarding the lowest known sapient race,
> and someone mentioned the Yggdrasill one.

It's interesting that while the Khooghras are mentioned in the Fuzzy novels they don't seem to be mentioned, by name, in any other Terro-human Future History yarns. Even the epithet "son of a Khooghra" only seems to appear in the Fuzzy novels.

The Yggdrasil native sophonts are also mentioned in ~Uller Uprising~ (though not in the abridged "Ullr Uprising") and in "When in the Course--" but we don't get details in either of those yarns which tell us much about the relative intelligence of the Khooghras as compared to other sapient races.

What we do get in the Fuzzy novels about the Khoogras is wide-ranging enough to suggests that their "just barely sapient" character is more than simply the subjective opinion of one or two folks like Holloway or Van Riebeek. It seems reasonable to conclude the Khooghras of Yggdrasil are indeed the least intelligent of known sapient races, at least at the time of the Fuzzy yarns.

Yeek.

David
--
"I saw a man shot once on Mimir, for calling another man a son of a Khooghra. The man who shot him had been on Yggdrasil and knew what he was being called." - Jack Holloway (H. Beam Piper), ~Little Fuzzy~
~
1779
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
10-01-2017
19:28 UT
~
Gregg Levine wrote:

> It would be interesting to find out if anyone
> did map out the entire region of space that
> the Terran Federation inhabits.

Nils Jeppe is your guy:

http://www.enderra.com/2011/11/17/mapping-h-beam-piper-part-1/

He has some thoughts about Niflheim too:

http://www.enderra.com/2011/11/24/mapping-...er-part-3-niflheim/

Enjoy,

David
--
". . . in one of the big hollow buildings that had stood since Khepera had been a Member Republic of the Terran Federation." - Lucas Trask (H. Beam Piper), ~Space Viking~
~
1778
Gregg LevinePerson was signed in when posted
10-01-2017
17:53 UT
I agree too! (To quote an oft used phrase.)
Everytime I read my copy of Uller Uprising, or the e-book version, depending on which one I've got available, that phrase pops up and naturally I end up musing on it. Heck! my first book in the TF series of stories, was in fact Little Fuzzy, and in there a question looms regarding the lowest known sapient race, and someone mentioned the Yggdrasill one. It would be interesting to find out if anyone did map out the entire region of space that the Terran Federation inhabits.
"YEEK!"
1777
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
10-01-2017
16:17 UT
~
Are Yggdrasil and Loki in the same system?

"Once, on a three-months' reaction-drive voyage from Yggdrasill to Loki, he had taught a couple of professors of extraterrestrial zoology to play _kriegspiel_. . . ."

That's Carlos von Schlichten musing about his time on Yggdrasil in ~Uller Uprising~ as Paula Quinton is moving forces around on her makeshift situation-map. (In this scene Quinton is being a bit ruthless; it's cut from the shorter "Ullr Uprising.") A "reaction-drive" (or "reaction drive") seems to be mentioned only one other time in the Terro-human Future History. In "Graveyard of Dreams" it seems to be some sort of normal-space drive. (In the slightly different, corresponding scene in ~Junkyard Planet~, Beam actually uses the term "normal-space drive" rather than "reaction drive.")

If Von Schlichten traveled from Yggdrasil to Loki in three months on a normal-space drive ship that would suggest the two planets are in the same system. Yggdrasil and Loki, which are mentioned in several Terro-human Future History yarns as planets with their own, respective native sophont races, don't ever seem to be explicitly described as being in the same system. In particular, when the ~Stellex~ explorers on Freya establish a trading relationship with Yggdrasil there is no mention of Loki being in the same system (even though the Loki Company is mentioned in the yarn). I suppose it's possible that Loki was in the same system but wasn't mentioned because ~Stellex~ is sent to Yggdrasil specifically to trade for nitrates. Perhaps Loki wasn't mentioned simply because it wasn't considered.

Still, it seems unlikely that there would be two planets with native sophont races in the same system. A Loki-Yggdrasil system would have to have a rather substantial habitable zone!

It's possible, of course, that the "reaction-drive" Von Schlichten described in ~Uller Uprising~ was simply a "slower-than-hyperdrive-but-still-faster-than-light drive." This was, after all, Beam's first Terro-human Future History yarn and it should not surprise us that he had not yet worked out all of the technology yet.

Znidd suddabit!

David
--
"I believe the first one, also a General von Schlichten, was what was then known as a war-criminal." - Carlos von Schlichten (H. Beam Piper), ~Uller Uprising~
~
1776
Tanith in OzPerson was signed in when posted
09-27-2017
13:03 UT
~
David "PiperFan" Johnson wrote:

> If I were Australia in the years after the Thirty Days' War I might cut some sort of deal with Britain (and
> France?) and those Occupied Eastern Axis parts of what had formerly been the Commonwealth (and perhaps
> former French colonies) in southern Asia: the opportunity to settle in these "northern reaches" in exchange > for defending them from others fleeing the rest of Eurasia. . . .

What a brilliant idea. I must admit that is so glaringly obvious that I'm ashamed I did not think of that. If this were to be adopted then not only does it allow for the growth of the Northern Cities, but it might also explain why we hear nothing about other cultures escaping to Australia (except for the Brits).

I like this idea very much. Good one.

Let's print that.

Lol

Terry
1775
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
09-27-2017
04:13 UT
~
Terry "Tanith in Oz" Glouftsis wrote:

> I have only been trying to advocate based
> on what Piper might have imagined from a
> 1950s position, based on what the world
> was like at his time.

Sounds like a sound approach to me!

> If the entire Northern Hemisphere was to
> be destroyed in a catastrophic nuclear war
> then it's straining plausibility to suggest
> that any kind of migration from the fallout
> would be civilized.

Agreed. Things will look markedly different in the aftermath of the Fourth World War than they did after the Thirty Days' War seventy or eighty years earlier.

> Except for the Americans in Antarctica and
> perhaps the British going to Melbourne any
> survivors would be desperate.

If the Americans evacuate to Antarctica--and the British to Australia--that will be after the Thirty Days' War. With planet-busters falling down from orbit in the Fourth World War I don't believe there will be any formal evacuations--though I suppose it's possible the British (or perhaps the Commonwealth, if that becomes an organization more like the first Terran Federation) Government might move to Melbourne during the course of the War. . . . (I'm guessing the Americans move their capital to Antarctica at some point too.)

> So called "safe" countries really wouldn't be
> in a position to stop thousands of refugees
> from flooding their borders.

Again, with orbital bombardment--or interplanetary attacks by Abbot-drive warships--there likely won't be many refugees from the North, other than the sort of haphazard--and lucky--small groups Jon has mentioned.

> The Northern parts of
> the country are therefore very sparsely settled,
> and besides a few cities there are really only
> three of note.

Even though there won't be many folks arriving in these areas of Australia in the aftermath of the Fourth World War it's possible these regions might get a fair number of folks fleeing former Commonwealth nations (including, possibly, Occupied, former Eastern Axis India) in the decades between the Thirty Days' War and the Fourth World War.

> It is an island continent. There are no
> borders to fence and patrol. Therefore
> Australia would not be able to stop
> thousands of people coming ashore in Far
> North Queensland, the Northern Territory
> or North Western Australia, it's just not
> possible.

If I were Australia in the years after the Thirty Days' War I might cut some sort of deal with Britain (and France?) and those Occupied Eastern Axis parts of what had formerly been the Commonwealth (and perhaps former French colonies) in southern Asia: the opportunity to settle in these "northern reaches" in exchange for defending them from others fleeing the rest of Eurasia. . . .

> I also think this might happen too in
> places like Brazil,

I'm guessing cooperative efforts to hold off North and Central American refugees go a long way toward building the South American solidarity Beam suggests is a key part of the formation of the (second) Terran Federation.

> Mocambique and Rhodesia.

I agree southern Africa will be the most tumultuous place in the years after the Thirty Days' War. The difference, of course, is that both the (first) Terran Federation and the British may have reasonably strong footholds there (and may even cooperate to "hold the line"
against other refugees trying to make their way down from northern Africa). That might also be what gives South Africa--still in the Commonwealth until late in the period when Beam was writing--itself breathing room to maintain its independence . . . and thus go on to help found the (second) Terran Federation.

> This leads me to believe that you would
> end up with much larger Northern cities
> than is currently the case in Australia.

I think that's likely too, and that these settlements will be substantial even before the Fourth World War breaks out.

> But I'm not convinced the victors in any
> war that destroys a hemisphere would
> really be capable of stopping refugees
> fleeing in any direction.

I don't think there are any victors in the Fourth World War (unless, perhaps, those folks on Mars and Venus who "revolted"). Beam tells us the Southerners were, mostly, on the sidelines in the Fourth World War.

> I think chaos would rule and in that
> situation it would be dog eat dog. Sheer
> numerical superiority would reign, and
> though there would be some isolated
> areas on the planet that would resist as
> a whole I don't see much of a co-ordinated
> effort.

I agree it will be brutal but I don't think there will be many refugees. The Fourth World War--the First Interplanetary War--will leave the North devastated in much they way Dale has described: the infrastructure necessary for any mass evacuations will have been destroyed.

That will prove, in its way, a godsend for the folks in the South.

> I think Piper was vague on this because
> he may not wanted to have become
> bogged down in the sheer logistics of it.

Agreed. (It also wasn't the sort of thing you sold yarns about to American pulp editors when he was writing either.)

> It's clear he thought the Americans would
> survive (and that is due to himself being
> American)

Actually, he shows us that American "civilization" _doesn't_ survive. From the political structure of the (second) Terran Federation to small details like the insignia of its military forces Beam abandoned the markers that would suggest a robust American presence in the Federation era. (Sure, the social culture seems "American" but that's because that was the culture of the marketplace he was selling into.)

> But I haven't seen anywhere where he
> states all the enemy powers were
> completely destroyed in the process.

We don't even know who the _adversaries_ were in the Fourth World War. What we know is that the Americans don't survive. . . .

> Nor does he say that everyone in the
> North died, so we cannot assume that
> with a pen he blinked out a majority of
> the human population.

He's pretty clear that Northern "civilization" is destroyed. There are plenty of Northern "barbarians" who nevertheless "survive."

> So I guess the question then becomes do
> we speculate based on what he wrote or
> do we apply what might be likely in the
> real world if something like this were to
> happen?

Because Beam was writing in a fictional world--there is no contragravity or hyperdrive in the "real world" (and no one in the "real world" has any idea how either of those things might possibly work)--I prefer to speculate on the basis of what he wrote (and the "real world" as he might have understood it at the time he was writing).

Others' MMV. ;)

David
--
"That's probably why the Southern Hemisphere managed to stay out of the Third and Fourth World Wars" - Carlos von Schlichten (H. Beam Piper), ~Uller Uprising~
~
1774
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
09-27-2017
00:47 UT
~
Jon Crocker wrote:

> If there were people able to refugee out
> from WW4, great - a few tens of thousands
> grabbed whatever ships were in the
> harbour, drove south on the Pan-American
> Highway, probably a few places got
> overrrun with refugees before the local
> governments were able to hold the line
> at some point. A few hundred years later,
> either they had assimilated or become one
> of those irreconcilable minority-groups
> that were mentioned earlier.

Agreed. As Beam told us with Von Schlichten's Nazi ancestors, some folks will always manage to escape. But as you suggest these folks won't play significant roles in the socio-political or cultural evolution of the Federation era.

> More seriously, in a world as big as ours,
> a writer could make a case for an enclave
> of pretty much any group he wanted
> transplanted somewhere else.

Agreed again. A great yarn might be crafted around such individuals but if we're looking to larger future-historical trends in the Federation era we have to look mostly to Southern Hemisphere folks (including those Northerners who evacuated after the Thirty Days' War) and the interplanetary colonists scattered across the Solar system when Northern civilization was destroyed in the Fourth World War.

> Icelanders on an epic sea voyage in small
> fishing boats, a Soviet 'fishing trawler'
> that was grabbed by panicky fishermen
> outside a NATO port, comandeered to
> take their families to safety. The 'Little
> Okinawa' quarter in Canberra.

After the Thirty Days' War perhaps. After the Fourth World War it will be folks like, say, the rebels who held out at Wellstown on Mars or maybe the Free Antarcticans who escaped to Callisto. . . .

Tchau,

David
--
"The Quintons had to leave France about the same time; they were what was known as collaborationists." - Paula Quinton (H. Beam Piper), ~Uller Uprising~
~
1773
Tanith in OzPerson was signed in when posted
09-26-2017
13:02 UT
Ok. That's understandable. I have only been trying to advocate based on what Piper might have imagined from a 1950s position, based on what the world was like at his time. However having said that Australian attitudes to refugees didn't really change until maybe 5-10 years ago, so I think it's still an accurate view.

But if we are actually going to go into real world, then let's do that. If the entire Northern Hemisphere was to be destroyed in a catastrophic nuclear war then it's straining plausibility to suggest that any kind of migration from the fallout would be civilized. Except for the Americans in Antarctica and perhaps the British going to Melbourne any survivors would be desperate. So called "safe" countries really wouldn't be in a position to stop thousands of refugees from flooding their borders. So let's consider Australia.

The majority of the Australian population resides in the South east corner of the continent from Adelaide to Brisbane (with a small group on the South West Australian coast around Perth). The Northern parts of the country are therefore very sparsely settled, and besides a few cities there are really only three of note. Darwin has about 100 thousand residents today, and Cairns and Townsville have around 150 K. All three cities are separated by thousands of miles of distance. So there is a lot of room there to sneak in. Also you have to factor in that Australia does not have a coast guard, nor do we have a large enough navy to interdict the Torres Straight or the Arafura Sea.

It is an island continent. There are no borders to fence and patrol. Therefore Australia would not be able to stop thousands of people coming ashore in Far North Queensland, the Northern Territory or North Western Australia, it's just not possible. There might be an opportunity to stop one location, but not multiple ones. In a nuclear holocaust Australia would be totally unequipped to actually do anything to stop from being swamped. I also think this might happen too in places like Brazil, Mocambique and Rhodesia.

Now would Australians like this. Of course not. There would be opposition. However having said that given the devastation would they really do anything to stop it? I don't think so. There might be claims there aren't enough resources, but this isn't completely accurate. Australia is capable of sustaining a much larger population but people would have to accept living in hotter climes.

So I don't think this is matter of Australia wanting to do anything, I think it's more a question of having no real other choice. I think it's logical to suggest that emergency camps could then be set up in the outback to cope with the influx. And once everything settled down and the Second Federation really got rolling then some of these people might be resettled elsewhere around the planet. But there is a good chance that some of these people might choose to stay and settle in placed like Cairns, Townsville, Darwin or even Alice Springs where more population might be desired. This leads me to believe that you would end up with much larger Northern cities than is currently the case in Australia.

I completely accept that Piper never wrote this, or alluded to it. But I'm not convinced the victors in any war that destroys a hemisphere would really be capable of stopping refugees fleeing in any direction. I think chaos would rule and in that situation it would be dog eat dog. Sheer numerical superiority would reign, and though there would be some isolated areas on the planet that would resist as a whole I don't see much of a co-ordinated effort.

You need an example? Ok let's use the same example of Germany mentioned previously. We've seen just how ineffective European governments have been with Syrian refugees, they just can't stop large numbers. Why? Because who wants to shoot civilians fleeing from war atrocities. I see the same happening with the aftermath of the 4th world war, but this time on an enormous scale. Nowhere on the planet would be immune.

I think Piper was vague on this because he may not wanted to have become bogged down in the sheer logistics of it. It's clear he thought the Americans would survive (and that is due to himself being American) but he says not much else about the aftermath because destroying an entire hemisphere comes with problems.

For example modern atmospheric models have show that if the North became toxic, then equatorial winds would eventually spread that planet wide (much like On the Beach explores). Piper said that didn't happen so we must take him at his word and accept that the North became uninhabitable. But I haven't seen anywhere where he states all the enemy powers were completely destroyed in the process. Nor does he say that everyone in the North died, so we cannot assume that with a pen he blinked out a majority of the human population. Because he doesn't say that, then we are left to ask what actually happened? We know about some survivors who became barbarous, and some others who fled but we don't know the fate of them all. So where did they go? This is where his death robbed us of answers.

We can only speculate.

So I guess the question then becomes do we speculate based on what he wrote or do we apply what might be likely in the real world if something like this were to happen? This is where the debate is.

Regards

Terry
1772
Jon CrockerPerson was signed in when posted
09-26-2017
04:42 UT
I don't know if an exact accounting matters, frankly. If there were people able to refugee out from WW4, great - a few tens of thousands grabbed whatever ships were in the harbour, drove south on the Pan-American Highway, probably a few places got overrrun with refugees before the local governments were able to hold the line at some point. A few hundred years later, either they had assimilated or become one of those irreconcilable minority-groups that were mentioned earlier.

When I parse it like that, I realize that those "irreconcilable minority-groups" could include descendants of people who just happened to be at sea when the balloon went up. Say a family-friendly cruise ship. Would the 'Dizz-knee Cruze' planet have a bad reputation?

More seriously, in a world as big as ours, a writer could make a case for an enclave of pretty much any group he wanted transplanted somewhere else. Icelanders on an epic sea voyage in small fishing boats, a Soviet 'fishing trawler' that was grabbed by panicky fishermen outside a NATO port, comandeered to take their families to safety. The 'Little Okinawa' quarter in Canberra.
1771
David SoobyPerson was signed in when posted
09-26-2017
01:07 UT
David Johnson wrote:

> I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to look at 1950s
> attitudes--or any actual ones since--in any part of the
> South to try to assess this. The horrors of the Thirty
> Days' War--and thus the scale of the refugee challenges
> --will be unprecedented in Terro-human history.

Right.

If we need a current example, just look at what has happened in Germany over the past few years. Germans were initially very welcoming of refugees from Syria and other ares of "Arab spring" unrest, but public opinion quickly shifted against a massive influx of refugees as the reality sunk in of what happens when you try to crowd a lot more people into the same space where people are already living.

And that's not even in a nation trying to deal with the aftermath of a major war! There are going to be shortages and rationing in such a situation, as happened in England during and after WW II... or worse. Faced with such widespread shortages, the inhabitants of the remaining few nations which haven't collapsed are not going to be feeling very generous about letting in even more mouths to feed.

This is another of those things that I thought was self-evident, but with all the posts here lately of what countries were accepting large numbers of refugees from where, I guess it needs to be stated. In the aftermath of a world war so devastating that the entire Northern hemisphere has been rendered largely uninhabitable, it's hard to believe that any remaining stable nation *anywhere* is going to be accepting large numbers of refugees.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear ether!
David "Lensman" Sooby
1770
David "PiperFan" JohnsonPerson was signed in when posted
09-25-2017
15:08 UT
~
Terry "Tanith in Oz" Glouftsis wrote:

> and even defeated "Nuclear" Axis powers might
> have difficulty getting their refugees accepted.

Here, I think is the key point. Because there will be more refugees than there are habitable refuges--why else would Glenn Murell's ancestors settle in Antarctica--it will largely be post-War international relations which determine which refugees end up where.

That leads me to believe it's likely Eastern Axis refugees from the Thirty Days' War will be rare. The (first) Terran Federation (and its allies) will prevent them from fleeing because they will want any attractive refuges for themselves. At the same time, nations in the South will determine who gets in based upon their own international relations. That leaves America and its (first) Terran Federation allies with few obvious choices while Britain and its allies will already enjoy stronger, more favorable relationships in southern Africa and in Australia and New Zealand.

I'm guessing that here is an origin of the _Fourth_ World War. . . .

> but given the West is able to go to Mars and
> Venus not long afterward

Ah, but it's not "the West." We know the (first) Terran Federation sends the first colony to Mars and can reasonably assume that they will enjoy an advantage there. But we also know that Britain is _not_ a member of the (first) Terran Federation (at least not in this period because there is not yet a worldwide government on Terra). Britain may have been _allied_ with the (first) Terran Federation in the Thirty Days' War but it _won't_ be allied with the (first) Terran Federation in the post-War scramble for habitable territory in the South and, perhaps, for colonies on other planets in the Sol system.

I'm guessing that here is _another_ origin of the Fourth World War. . . .

> Therefore using Piper's own writing, and taking
> account of the world at that time I think it's very
> likely Australia would have continued accepting
> British and European refugees. This is probably
> why the London Times flees to Melbourne after
> the Fourth World War.

Yes, it seems Beam tells us that, in subtle ways, though Australia (and New Zealand) may have avoided the conflicts of the Northern Hemisphere--like the other major nations in the South--there may have been a tilt toward the British, and thus, _from_ the American-led (first) Terran Federation, in post-Thirty Days' War period.

> So I'm not sure I'd agree with the premise that
> Australia would have been hostile to refugees.

I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to look at 1950s attitudes--or any actual ones since--in any part of the South to try to assess this. The horrors of the Thirty Days' War--and thus the scale of the refugee challenges--will be unprecedented in Terro-human history. Thus, I think that what will prevail will be a general reluctance to accept refugees _across_ the South, tempered by the _realpolitik_ of the era.

Tchau,

David
--
"Britain was a great nation, once; the last nation to join the Terran Federation. . . ." - Lord "Dranigo" Dranigrastan (H. Beam Piper), "The Keeper"
~
^     All messages            1770-1785 of 1785  1754-1769 >>

Print | RSS Views: 23621 (Unique: 5710 ) / Subscribers: 23 | What's this?