Alternate History

[Arturo]

There is a YouTube channel I subscribe to called "AlternateHistoryHub". The channel is as described, following different timelines after asking questions such as "What If America Had Nuked China?" There are also a couple geeky questions asked that are peppered through the video list but this one caught my eye in particular:

"What if the Internet Never Existed?"

Fairly interesting. I think if the internet never existed, for me, I would probably be playing video games and going outside when I was bored. I'm not sure what kind of job I would have or if I would even graduate High School as it seems both my Dad and my Sister dropped out so I would likely follow that tradition. I'd probably flaunt my Mexican heritage much more as I originally did in middle school. The one reason I stopped is because more people were going onto the internet and becoming different people than they would have originally have been. They has different views than I did since I did not have the internet, so it was difficult to connect to these people.

[Davin]

That's interesting. Though I think that either file transfers would have started happening without the internet (probably through the phones and cell towers), or maybe texting would not have happened as it is close to how the internet started.

[Arturo]

That's interesting. Though I think that either file transfers would have started happening without the internet (probably through the phones and cell towers), or maybe texting would not have happened as it is close to how the internet started.

Yeah, we would probably have a make shift internet through cell phone towers. There might have been a way to improve cell phone speed relative to our timeline but they probably would have a greater grip on finances and economics. Although that can't happen if we are talking about no internet or internet-like things.

[Dragonia]

Without the internet, I might still be a Christian....
Thank GOD for the internet. (Or Al Gore, depending on what you believe)

[Arturo]

Without the internet, I might still be a Christian....
Thank GOD for the internet. (Or Al Gore, depending on what you believe)

 

[Icarus]

Not alternate history is contained in a book that I just finished. The book: Fantasyland...by Kurt Adersen is a history of the United states beginning with the pilgrims of Plymouth rock fame. The book is a 500 year of of history. Subtitle; How America went haywire.


Andersen (not misspelled... I never could remember the difference between the spelling of Swedish names and Norwegian names....It appears that the difference is in the use of the letter e or a as the last vowel )  The author is an American of considerable achievement with numerous other best selling books to his his credit.

This is a book that details the history of the progression of cultural and religious postures that culminate in our present irrational madness.

Easy read. Near bulletproof observations of the social and religious trends as time went by.  Not the same sort of screed that we read in Dawkins, Hitchens, Harriss and so on.  These are historical accounts of what the puritans and their successors 500 years later came to embrace.  Fantasyland is an appropriate title.  I recommend this as a book that is fun and perhaps revealing about our history. Andersen never does say that he is of an atheist bent.

[Dave]

^
Well, I have always considered America as being to often controlled by men who live more in a dream world than the real one. "The American Dream" is, and always has been, fantasy. Ambition (within the bounds of possibility) is great, dreams are just wishful thinking in this context.

Kurt Andersen's Wiki page has all the signs of being autobiographical, nothing about his beliefs

[Arturo]

Reviving my dead thread because this is a cool topic. It's always been said that the past is in the past, and that things that our ancestors did are not the way we do things. That is true, but you can never outgrow your past. That's why it's good to look back at the past and not make the same mistakes our ancestors did.

This video is for context to the next video. "The Decision That Ruined The Middle East". If you think you know about this subject, I suggest you take a look at this video just to make sure you're on the right page for the following video. The answers may shock you.

This next video is the Alternate History. "What if the Middle East had Unified?" This is why you should watch the previous video so that you know what this is speaking about.

[Dave]

Almost every friggin' hustory is "alternate", written by the victors and, mostly, having no more than a nodding acquaintance with reality. People have made a lot of money re-writing "The True History of . . ." according, usually, to their agenda. Presidents have thrived on promoting some, maybe true, maybe not, maybe exagerated, maybe not, aspect of what the nasty colonials did way back when to boost support for his "reforms" (often to ensure the cash ends up in his pocket.) Whole countries gave been fucked this way by their leaders. Betcha Chump is reeling in some cash somehow, if only by hiring out his venues for state business. At a premium.

Anything written, even by proper scholars, should be viewed with at least a little scepticism. Great to review and analyse opposing perceptions of current events and come to a conclusion that fits things - as you have them, be sure something is geing kept hidden. Great when the 30 year rule applies and secret government documents are ooen to public gaze. Keeps 'em a bit honest but, since they are usually retired by that time, why should a politician give a shit? His or her history, their "heritage", has already been written to their advantage and the "people who count" will ignore the counter-history written by the opposition. Neither will be 100% accurate except where there are publicly available documents to check agsinst. Assuming those do not have ambiguous wording.

I think I have made my views on this before . . .

[Arturo]

^Even if the history is accurate to the time it is written, it doesn't keep it from being used and manipulated by future generations to fit their goals. Even the Bible has multiple translations and that's just the tip of the iceberg. It's written old English that nobody uses or understands at all anymore. It makes it perfectly ambiguous to fit almost any situation and open to manipulation.

[Dave]

^Even if the history is accurate to the time it is written, it doesn't keep it from being used and manipulated by future generations to fit their goals. Even the Bible has multiple translations and that's just the tip of the iceberg. It's written old English that nobody uses or understands at all anymore. It makes it perfectly ambiguous to fit almost any situation and open to manipulation.

"History is bunk."
Henry Ford.

Apart from just casual interest its only use is when you learn that doing certain things leads to distaster and not to do those things again. Politicians are incapable of learning this lesson if they seek personal power or gain. They always think they have a way round the problems, 'til they feel those teeth biting on their arse.

I like sone bits of past history, but prefer future history - or futurology. Where is Hari Seldon when we need him. Oh, shit, he got it wrong as well!

[No one]

History (n) An account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools.

AB

[Dave]

History (n) An account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools.

AB

Good old, Ambrose!

[Arturo]

I like some bits of past history, but prefer future history - or futurology.

Introducing AlternateFutureHub

[Arturo]

^Even if the history is accurate to the time it is written, it doesn't keep it from being used and manipulated by future generations to fit their goals. Even the Bible has multiple translations and that's just the tip of the iceberg. It's written old English that nobody uses or understands at all anymore. It makes it perfectly ambiguous to fit almost any situation and open to manipulation.

"History is bunk."
Henry Ford.

One of those things that bothers me about people quoting dead people who were successful in their time is that people treat them like they are an all knowing authority and should do, or should take into consideration, whatever it is that the person quoted has been quoted for. As if they are some infallible being that cannot be contradicted and still be safe, sane, correct, ect.

This is very common to be seen when people quote Einstein about his remarks for god or when Darwin said the thing he did about the eye. It's as if that is just how people's minds work and they don't want to think anything to the contrary.