ISOT MAGA to the 70s.

[Buba]

Ice age?

That too, I didn't even go into it, e.g. Detroit being either under a glacier or underwater

More importantly - these are mostly city folk. The farms and mines are gone. Power sources are gone. Imports are not available. There are no roads between the enclaves. No canals/aqueducts/waterpipes. No food. No water. No electricity. No raw materials or components for manufacture.

Most of this has been covered in @Bear Ribs post #5 in this thread. The 2020 Democrats to 1970 would be hard enough, but 2020 Democrats to 22KYA is a Vlad Tepes Award

BTW - I forgot that the ISOT is in winter (late autumn if you are likely; or unlucky - then the agony lasts longer) hence with no heating almost everybody is indeed dead inside a few days, let alone a week. Even with food!

 

[Agent23]

That too, I didn't even go into it, e.g. Detroit being either under a glacier or underwater

More importantly - these are mostly city folk. The farms and mines are gone. Power sources are gone. Imports are not available. There are no roads between the enclaves. No canals/aqueducts/waterpipes. No food. No water. No electricity. No raw materials or components for manufacture.

Most of this has been covered in @Bear Ribs post #5 in this thread. The 2020 Democrats to 1970 would be hard enough, but 2020 Democrats to 22KYA is a Vlad Tepes Award

BTW - I forgot that the ISOT is in winter (late autumn if you are likely; or unlucky - then the agony lasts longer) hence with no heating almost everybody is indeed dead inside a few days, let alone a week. Even with food!

Umm ok, there is some form of misunderstanding, we are not sending the equivalent of the current democrat-run areas back to the time when the USA was unihabited, if the swap @ATP is talking about basically the 1970s geographic equivalents of 2020's MAGA counties moves back in time.
That is now, and IIRC still would be back them, lots of Rural land that takes up a major portion of the USA's geography as well as a lot of the industrial capacity and the roads.
I think that they would have a decent chance, but they weren't the focus of this ISOT as I mentioned.

 

[Buba]

I'm good - I'm aware of the swap between 2020 and 1970.
I was referring to the hypothesised 3rd scenario - 2020 Dems to "virgin Earth/sometime in the dim past". 2020 Dems to 1970 will survive , in spite of the initial hardships.

 

[Agent23]

Um, mkay!
I think I specified that the MAGA regions of 2020 are replaced with their pre-habitation Americas equivalents.
The democrat areas from 2020 are going nowhere, the 1970s maga area equivalents were probably assumed to be moved or something?

 

[bintananth]

Um, mkay!
I think I specified that the MAGA regions of 2020 are replaced with their pre-habitation Americas equivalents.
The democrat areas from 2020 are going nowhere, the 1970s maga area equivalents were probably assumed to be moved or something?

Our ancestors weren't stupid. They didn't have access to the kinds of things we have and couldn't build the kinds of things we take for granted.

Take indoor plumbing for example. That's older than the New Testament and a Roman Legion would either use a paved road or build one when told go somewhere or do something.

The most important part of a Legionare's equipment wasn't the sword, the javelin, the shield, or the armour.

It was the shovel.

 

[Agent23]

Our ancestors weren't stupid. They didn't have access to the kinds of things we have and couldn't build the kinds of things we take for granted.

Take indoor plumbing for example. That's older than the New Testament and a Roman Legion would either use a paved road or build one when told go somewhere or do something.

The most important part of a Legionare's equipment wasn't the sword, the javelin, the shield, or the armour.

It was the shovel.

I am pretty sure that they have lots of shovels.
As well as at least some stocks of fertilizer, fuel, and spare parts for tractors.The 70s was a time before the JIT craze took over the world.

 

[ATP]

Actually those people do not rule over anything - they are dead inside a fortnight (most earlier). The grandchildren of a very few survivors - the most ruthless and blessed with access to weapons with ample ammunition - are stone age hunters and gatherers.

Shit,i forget about ice age.So,maybe 50.000 BC instead ? They could still meet Neandertals then/in Europe,of course/

 

[Zyobot]

We’ve touched on it before, but since it’s an important question that hasn’t received much attention, what happens to the leftover downtimers? Again, they’ve been reduced to a minority in their own country by the MAGA base, and that’s a recipe for social alienation and resentment, so I’m guessing they’ll have to be granted something in return (e.g., more local autonomy) to be placated.

Never mind what the downtimers themselves actually make of their new situation, given that the world of tomorrow has literally been transplanted into their backyard. They’ll hotly contest a lot of it, as @Abhorsen and others have noted, though the fact they’re now vastly outnumbered by uptimers means they’ll have to cope or adapt to some extent (e.g., adopting home internet and such).

 

[Agent23]

We’ve touched on it before, but since it’s an important question that hasn’t received much attention, what happens to the leftover downtimers? Again, they’ve been reduced to a minority in their own country by the MAGA base, and that’s a recipe for social alienation and resentment, so I’m guessing they’ll have to be granted something in return (e.g., more local autonomy) to be placated.

Never mind what the downtimers themselves actually make of their new situation, given that the world of tomorrow has literally been transplanted into their backyard. They’ll hotly contest a lot of it, as @Abhorsen and others have noted, though the fact they’re now vastly outnumbered by uptimers means they’ll have to cope or adapt to some extent (e.g., adopting home internet and such).

I think a lot of downtimers will actually like the new situation, some porto-Establishmentarian conservatives like Nelson Rockefeller will likely be left behind, but IMO a number of downtime boomers will embrace the social reforms and a lot of early libertarians like the people around Ayn Rand, Barry Goldwater and the Chicago School will be happy with the small l libertarian sentiments of many of the MAGA coalition.Also, I am sure a number of unions will be happy with the anti-globalism and side with the uptimers.
IMHO there is more than enough stimuli that can make the MAGA coalition grow into a new broad consensus.

 

[Zyobot]

I think a lot of downtimers will actually like the new situation, some porto-Establishmentarian conservatives like Nelson Rockefeller will likely be left behind, but IMO a number of downtime boomers will embrace the social reforms and a lot of early libertarians like the people around Ayn Rand, Barry Goldwater and the Chicago School will be happy with the small l libertarian sentiments of many of the MAGA coalition.Also, I am sure a number of unions will be happy with the anti-globalism and side with the uptimers.
IMHO there is more than enough stimuli that can make the MAGA coalition grow into a new broad consensus.

So, Rockefeller (and the leftover Eastern Elite) basically becomes Seventies Romney? Okay, fair enough, though I also think a decent number of downtimers would be turned off by Trump's boorishness, even if not so much his actual policy positions.

I don't know as much about Rand, but I'm not so sure Goldwater would be as placated as you imagine? For one, he was pro-choice, and his openness to deploying tactical nukes in Vietnam wouldn't win him many friends amongst uptimers who've grown wary of foreign adventurism. (Of course, it's also true the Reds are back, so perhaps MAGA uptimers would prove more receptive to crushing communism abroad than they might've been to pointless forever wars in the Middle East. )

 

[Agent23]

So, Rockefeller (and the leftover Eastern Elite) basically becomes Seventies Romney? Okay, fair enough, though I also think a decent number of downtimers would be turned off by Trump's boorishness, even if not so much his actual policy positions.

I don't know as much about Rand, but I'm not so sure Goldwater would be as placated as you imagine? For one, he was pro-choice, and his openness to deploying tactical nukes in Vietnam wouldn't win him many friends amongst uptimers who've grown wary of foreign adventurism. (Of course, it's also true the Reds are back, so perhaps they'd be more receptive to crushing communism abroad than they might've been to pointless forever wars in the Middle East. )

The thing with the Vietnam war is that the Elites, or part of them, in any case, started turning away from it long before the masses did.
Check out George F. Kennan's biography, for example.
At that point the war party/MIC was less powerful, and Vietnam actually made it grow.
LBJ for instance was very chummy with what later became Haliburton's owners.

 

[Zyobot]

The thing with the Vietnam war is that the Elites, or part of them, in any case, started turning away from it long before the masses did.
Check out George F. Kennan's biography, for example.
At that point the war party/MIC was less powerful, and Vietnam actually made it grow.
LBJ for instance was very chummy with what later became Haliburton's owners.

Alright, duly noted.

Something else that occurred to me is uptimers' openness to drug legalization? Nixon's yet to declare the War on Drugs, and given how word will spread of his corruption overnight, odds are he won't have anywhere near the time (or political capital) to do so ITTL.

 

[Abhorsen]

a lot of early libertarians like the people around Ayn Rand, Barry Goldwater and the Chicago School will be happy with the small l libertarian sentiments of many of the MAGA coalition.Also, I am sure a number of unions will be happy with the anti-globalism and side with the uptimers.

These two are in direct contrast. 'Globalism' to the extent it means free trade, is something all the early libertarians agree with. It's also something unions hate.

It was also a vital part of the US strategy to defeat the USSR, and is a definite good. So this could cause some harm.

Again, they’ve been reduced to a minority in their own country by the MAGA base

See, I don't know that they will. A lot of the densly populous regions voted democrat, so I don't know how many uptimers vs how many downtimers there will be.

 

[Zyobot]

These two are in direct contrast. 'Globalism' to the extent it means free trade, is something all the early libertarians agree with. It's also something unions hate.

It was also a vital part of the US strategy to defeat the USSR, and is a definite good. So this could cause some harm.

Problem is, the trade agreements in place right now aren't free trade, at all. Seriously, just look through the TPP or USMCA, seeing as that labyrinth of legalese and regulatory bloat is precisely what libertarians will want to avoid, as I'm sure you know.

See, I don't know that they will. A lot of the densly populous regions voted democrat, so I don't know how many uptimers vs how many downtimers there will be.

Hmm.

In that case, maybe having some 1970 census data would help here? Haven't had the chance to look much up yet, but I can "fish" for something given time. But in any case , there's still a gap to bridge between uptimer and downtimer sensibilities and pop culture. Heck, I'm not even sure most of them would get what the point of memes or emojis are, and Netspeak that's leaked out into the real world (i.e., "FYI" or "copy-paste") wouldn't make sense without the proper, digitally acquainted context.

 

[Abhorsen]

Problem is, the trade agreements in place right now aren't free trade, at all. Seriously, just look through the TPP or USMCA, seeing as that labyrinth of legalese and regulatory bloat is precisely what libertarians will want to avoid, as I'm sure you know.

The USMCA is pretty good, TPP was eh, but would have been great geopolitically (it was fuck China, the treaty). But I'm talking America's general lack of tariffs vs. Trumps constant use of them, which has definitely harmed the economy (basically, he would have done even better without them). If Biden wanted to actually work on inflation, getting rid of the tariffs would be a great start.

 

[Zyobot]

The USMCA is pretty good, TPP was eh, but would have been great geopolitically (it was fuck China, the treaty). But I'm talking America's general lack of tariffs vs. Trumps constant use of them, which has definitely harmed the economy (basically, he would have done even better without them). If Biden wanted to actually work on inflation, getting rid of the tariffs would be a great start.

I'm just saying, calling what we have now "free trade" is a misnomer that gives people the wrong idea, which is a distinction libertarians seeking to make inroads with the MAGA majority and anti-globalist downtimers will have to explain to their audience. At best, it's cumbersomely statist "managed trade", though I suppose that doesn't roll off the tongue as easily.

Having said that, I think a (more or less) permanent embargo on China and restoration of America's native manufacturing sector is right on the mark, though they may consider taking a page from the British Empire's playbook and becoming an exporter of uptimer goods to US allies. Which, due to comparative advantage and the US's near-term monopoly on high tech, will put America in a position of power relative to everyone else.

 

[Agent23]

These two are in direct contrast. 'Globalism' to the extent it means free trade, is something all the early libertarians agree with. It's also something unions hate.

It was also a vital part of the US strategy to defeat the USSR, and is a definite good. So this could cause some harm.

I think that the uptimer MAGA people and the downtimers can agree on some form of "Capitalism in a single country".

 

[Zyobot]

I think that the uptimer MAGA people and the downtimers can agree on some form of "Capitalism in a single country".

Given the MAGA base's more nativist outlook and downtimer alarm at how so much manufacturing has moved overseas, I suppose a return to Old Right-style "business nationalism" makes sense.

Personally, I still think having the US set up a gigantic free-trade zone with its allies that capitalizes on comparative advantage—namely, by exporting manufactured goods that are cheaper for its trade partners to import than to produce themselves—to remain industrially dominant has merit in principle, though I'm not sure that'd occur to enough people or have sufficient political capital to get going.

 

[Abhorsen]

I'm just saying, calling what we have now "free trade" is a misnomer that gives people the wrong idea, which is a distinction libertarians seeking to make inroads with the MAGA majority and anti-globalist downtimers will have to explain to their audience. At best, it's cumbersomely statist "managed trade", though I suppose that doesn't roll off the tongue as easily.

They are significantly better than not having them. That's the point: the lack of free trade and the presence of tariffs is stopping people from trading. That's anti-libertarianism. Free trade agreements, while not perfect, improve freedom overall.

It's not statist to allow people to trade. Yes, there is an issue about standardization, but overall it's a benefit. The TPP probably fell below that benefit though.

restoration of America's native manufacturing sector is right on the mark

This, however? This is likely statism. If you use the government to do this, then this is classic anti-capitalism.

I think that the uptimer MAGA people and the downtimers can agree on some form of "Capitalism in a single country".

No. Literally that's tossing away one of the USA's biggest advantage: it's free trade with allies. The US beat the USSR by the power of international trade and capitalism in many countries.

 

[Agent23]

Given the MAGA base's more nativist outlook and downtimer alarm at how so much manufacturing has moved overseas, I suppose a return to Old Right-style "business nationalism" makes sense.

Personally, I still think having the US set up a gigantic free-trade zone with its allies that capitalizes on comparative advantage—namely, by exporting manufactured goods that are cheaper for its trade partners to import than to produce themselves—to remain industrially dominant has merit in principle, though I'm not sure that'd occur to enough people or have sufficient political capital to get going.

It is not just that, the Europeans and Japan for example were abusing the Gold Window heavily, putting protectionist tariffs in, and dumping their currency to sell to the USA.
TBH I think that capitalism has to have some form of Prime Directive at times.

Something along the lines of "you need to respect human rights and implement some degree of democracy, keep your budget balanced and not print money like crazy and have REAL ECONOMIC FREEDOM to get investment from us and sell us non-essentials..."