Worldbuilding without the post-WW/WWII/Cold War glasses (TL, CR etc.)

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Al Capone and his ilk were the cause of the restriction on submachine guns in the United States in 1934, but Britain of course started on it much earlier. In 1870 it became illegal to carry a gun off of one's property without a license.

Hrm, Dr Watson never bothered with that (or was bothered about that).

Anyway, the relationship between crime and gun control is the US is that crime causes gun control. The first wave was in cities like New York with its' "Sullivan Act". This followed the "Gangs of New York" period and was designed to take guns out of the hands of the urban poor.

Then came the gangsters. Not just Capone but the spree bank robbers of the midwest like Dillinger and Bonnie and Clyde. This begat the Act of 1934. Before that almost everything was legal outside of specific municipaiities (order a BAR direct from the manufacturer and get it delivered by US Mail).

The next wave came in 1968 driven by the assassinations of that year and some stuff (like guns by mail) from the first Kennedy shooting.

Nothing twas done that would have effected James Earl Ray' rifle or simply made Oswald buy his in person but this and alter measures weren't really that well connected to the events whose publicity energized them.

Nothing new really. The 34 Act didn't help much with Clyde Barrow stealing autoweapons from police stations and National Guard armories.

A general rule for the US at least is probaly until something was explictly forbidden it was permitted.

[Ulzgoroth]

I find David Drake books very interesting on the 'worlds lacking modern organization' level. I think it draws on old Rome quite a bit, though I doubt that's the only influence. I don't know how much of it fits into the early 20th century stuff of the previous thread, but if you go back further, or into less orderly regions...


One that's probably got a history as old as cities, if not older, is important people usually packing a personal warband when going about. If the local law doesn't allow an outright private army (which, often, it does) or you don't happen to own one, a gang of slaves, clients, employees, or extended family members can substitute. Some of the very elite still do something like this today, but my impression is that it was much more broadly practiced in the past.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

What preconceptions and ideas should be 'unlearned' when designing a world (with TL, CRs, Statuses, Stigmas and other features) which hasn't experienced WW-/ColdWar-equivalents?

Gun Control has been mentioned. Passports are another one (passport/border checks were extremely mild/non-existent pre-WWI by modern standards).

What else?

A lot of the things Adolph Hitler did or supported, such as eugenics, and just general racism, would not be as extremely and absolutely vilified, if it hadn't been for him.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

A lot of the things Adolph Hitler did or supported, such as eugenics, and just general racism, would not be as extremely and absolutely vilified, if it hadn't been for him.

That is a good point. Even language has been affected. The Germans don't like using the word Fuhrer any more, and back in 1940 Canadian newspapers could write sentences like the following in their editorial sections: “Some authorities predict that this war will bring the final solution to Canada’s bilingual problem.” (The idea, roughly, was that all the Francophones would join the military, be forced to learn English, and give up French after the war).

[Lord Carnifex]

Without the world wars, there's probably no concept of "total war" that involves attempting to destroy the enemy's industrial, transportation, and agricultural base as a means of impairing their abilty to continue making war. Without that basic idea, war becomes more about capturing such things rather than wiping them off the map.

Without total war, there's less targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure. War stays slightly less horrific and WMD's are less common and more tactical. As such, there's less popular support for peace and disarmament movements (which probably more closely resemble the isolationist movements of the pre-WWI and II U.S.). And so, many fewer hippies.

Without total war, there might be less of a drive for unconditional complete surrender of the enemy nation, particularily for ideological motives. Once you've taken whatever territory you've set out to take (or repelled the invaders), you make peace with the enemy nation. Keeping the war going until you defeat them completely, and then remaking their internal politics probably happens less often. So less nation building and resources spent on nation building.

Probably without the World Wars and Cold War, there might be less of a bilateral world. Two nations may go to war without dragging in all of the other major players, and times of relative peace without a complete, bi-polar, us-against-them "pick a side" attitude may be possible and occur more often.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Lord Carnifex

Without the world wars, there's probably no concept of "total war" that involves attempting to destroy the enemy's industrial, transportation, and agricultural base as a means of impairing their abilty to continue making war. Without that basic idea, war becomes more about capturing such things rather than wiping them off the map.

I don't believe this. The ideological heavy lifting had already been done by Clausewitx.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Asta Kask

I don't believe this. The ideological heavy lifting had already been done by Clausewitx.

Also see Sherman's March to The Sea as well as numerous attacks on the railroad systems of both sides in the US Civil War.

[Lord Carnifex]

Originally Posted by Asta Kask

I don't believe this. The ideological heavy lifting had already been done by Clausewitx.

I suppose, but if the world wars hadn't demonstrated the concept, and made it acceptable to nations that otherwise consider themselves "civilized", Clausewitz might now be regarded as a crackpot or a psychopath or otherwise ignored.