• Square Singer
    link
    fedilink
    158 months ago

    Take the current highest-yield nuclear bomb and destroy England right before the begin of their collonial era.

    Generally speaking, I believe removing a global superpower just before they do their world-changing thing is probably going to have the biggest effect on the timeline.

    • Devi
      link
      fedilink
      88 months ago

      Everyone was building empires at the time and fighting over who got what. All that nuking England would do is to mean France, the netherlands, germany, spain etc would get more bits

      • Square Singer
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Of course it wouldn’t stop colonialization, but it would change the future quite a lot.

        • No English-speaking superpowers/English as lingua franca
        • No Commonwealth
        • No wide-spread anglo common law based legal systems
        • Superpowers/alliances would be totally mixed up up to now.
        • China could have developed totally different due to them not constantly losing against the English.
        • No colonialization of the Welsh, Scots, Irish by the English

        I think that should shake up the timeline quite a bit.

        • Devi
          link
          fedilink
          78 months ago

          No, you’d just have the exact same thing but with another nationality. France had like half of Africa so they’d definitely be bigger.

          • Square Singer
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            And wouldn’t that completely shift worldwide powerbalanes for centuries to come?

            For example, would WW2 have happened if France had been a global superpower instead of a pushover?

            Would the american revolution have happened with another colonial ruler?

            Without that example, would the french revolution have happened?

            Without both revolutions, would democracy be a thing by now, or would we still have totalitarian monarchies?

            You know the butterfly effect? It’s the same except we aren’t killing a butterfly but instead one of the superpower nations of that time.

            • I Cast Fist
              link
              fedilink
              58 months ago

              France wasn’t a pushover around WW2. They had enough manpower to fight nazi Germany toe to toe. What they did, however, was underestimate how fast they could advance. France also ignored a warning that the germans were amassing to push through the Ardennes, which allowed the nazis to face little resistance on that front. Apparently, if they took immediate action, they could’ve mobilized an air raid to completely destroy that nazi battalion, which would royally fuck up the rest of Hitler’s plans

            • Devi
              link
              fedilink
              48 months ago

              France was never a pushover. The idea that being invaded by a bigger stronger army was their fault is weird and one I’ve only heard in the US.

              Most countries that are colonies eventually seek independence, including most that France had.

    • @tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      58 months ago

      It would only be a deterrent for empire building if there’s a pattern (probably 3 or 4 similar events), otherwise people would consider it a random hateful act of god, of which there are many, and of which have been interpreted many different ways

      • Square Singer
        link
        fedilink
        48 months ago

        I was focussing on changing the timeline, not on deterring nations from doing something. Without English colonializers, there would have certainly been other colonizers, but e.g. the whole China situation would have likely been very different. There would not be a dominant anglo culture right now. No English-speaking USA, no English-speaking Australia, no large countries with an anglo common law-based legal system.

        It would change the timeline quite a bit.