The World Crime League

[peterw...@hotmail.com]

According to a foreign policy commentator, several of our adversaries,
among them Russia, Iran, and the Syrian regime, have formed a loose
alliance. Their interests differ: Russia wants to return to a position
of power in the world, Iran’s rulers want to continue the Islamic
revolution, and the Alawites in Syria want to remain in power.
However, they have a common interest in remaining authoritarian,
and they are very much aware of how quickly an authoritarian
regime can collapse, or how a group of them can fall like dominoes.

Thus, Russia and Iran have been supporting the Assad regime in
Syria. This is somewhat of a win-win situation for them since
both countries also have an interest in being seen to be
influential in that region and in the larger world.

Has this scenario, of a set of countries or non-state actors fighting
to make the world safe for autocracy, been used in science fiction or
fantasy? One possible example might be the alliance between the
Eich and the Overlords of Delgon in Edward E. Smith’s _Grey Lensman_,
although in that case they were also motivated by a very intense
hatred of the Galactic Patrol and, in particular, Kimball Kinnison.

Any others?

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

[johnny1...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 8:51:02 PM UTC-5, peterw...@hotmail.com wrote:

>
> Has this scenario, of a set of countries or non-state actors fighting
> to make the world safe for autocracy, been used in science fiction or
> fantasy? One possible example might be the alliance between the
> Eich and the Overlords of Delgon in Edward E. Smith’s _Grey Lensman_,
> although in that case they were also motivated by a very intense
> hatred of the Galactic Patrol and, in particular, Kimball Kinnison.
>
> Any others?
>
> Peter Wezeman
> anti-social Darwinist

I can recall some examples that fall into the general area of that, but there's a tendency to portray the alliances as unstable, usually one backstabs one of the others fairly quickly.

In Doc Smith's "Subspace Explorers", most of the Communist states have ended up under the overall rule of a single tyrant after the mold of Stalin, the whole thing is called 'Easthem' as a general term but it's not clear if this is a formal union or more along the lines of what we used to call 'the East' during the Cold War.

But then again, the remaining 'democratic' countries are similarly organized into 'Westhem' (they don't actually line up along hemispheric lines, it's just an approximation), but the Westhem governments are corrupt to the core and many of their officials are in the pocket of the Tyrant of Easthem, so it doesn't exactly fit the scenario.

In versions of the _Star Trek_ franchise, the Klingons and the Romulans had an alliance in Kirk's time against the Federation.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

peterw...@hotmail.com wrote in
news:07418f4b-2888-4e16...@googlegroups.com:

Falkenberg's Legion's Codominium comes to mind. And there are
elements of that in the Sten books.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Greg Goss]

peterw...@hotmail.com wrote:

>
>Has this scenario, of a set of countries or non-state actors fighting
>to make the world safe for autocracy, been used in science fiction or
>fantasy? One possible example might be the alliance between the
>Eich and the Overlords of Delgon in Edward E. Smith’s _Grey Lensman_,
>although in that case they were also motivated by a very intense
>hatred of the Galactic Patrol and, in particular, Kimball Kinnison.
>
>Any others?

In 1984, there were three power blocks in the world. Two of them had
"always" been united against the stronger one.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Greg Goss]

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:


>Falkenberg's Legion's Codominium comes to mind. And there are
>elements of that in the Sten books.

Pournelle's Co-dominium runs much longer than his Falkenberg series.
I think his "future history" of it has the union between the US and
the Soviets before our time.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in
news:eluic5...@mid.individual.net:

> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Falkenberg's Legion's Codominium comes to mind. And there are
>>elements of that in the Sten books.
>
> Pournelle's Co-dominium runs much longer than his Falkenberg
> series.

Yeah, it does. But the subject of this thread is most overt in the
Falkenberg's Legion stuff.

Nnow that I think about it, Blish's Cith In Flight is nearly
identical in the poltiical set up of the earlier stories (in internal
chronology, that is).

And now that I think about it, in the later Sten books, the Eternal
Emperor is conspiring with his own people against . . . himself. Not
exatly what OP was talking about, but close.

> I think his "future history" of it has the union between
> the US and the Soviets before our time.

Yeah. It get a little weird in places.

[Don Kuenz]

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> peterw...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>>Has this scenario, of a set of countries or non-state actors fighting
>>to make the world safe for autocracy, been used in science fiction or
>>fantasy? One possible example might be the alliance between the

>>Eich and the Overlords of Delgon in Edward E. Smith?s _Grey Lensman_,

>>although in that case they were also motivated by a very intense
>>hatred of the Galactic Patrol and, in particular, Kimball Kinnison.
>>
>>Any others?
>
> In 1984, there were three power blocks in the world. Two of them had
> "always" been united against the stronger one.

*spoiler space*



West-world and Sov-world work together in _Sweet Dreams, Sweet Princes_
(Reynolds) to maintain a superficial status-quo. Society is a nominal
meritocracy stratified into Lowers, Middles, and Uppers.

Subversives pepper the ranks of Upper-Middles. Lowers are Marxist lumpen
proletariat who sate themselves on bread and circuses from above.

Upper-Middle subversives conspire to operate a shadow government. Their
shadow government only promotes useful idiots into an Upper caste,
which is already brimming with useful idiots. Most Uppers were born into
their caste and have limited knowledge of how the real world works.
Upper caste ignorance facilitates the Upper-Middle's shadow government.

Thank you,

--
Don Kuenz KB7RPU

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <XnsA75E5E508D6...@69.16.179.43>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in
>news:eluic5...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Falkenberg's Legion's Codominium comes to mind. And there are
>>>elements of that in the Sten books.
>>
>> Pournelle's Co-dominium runs much longer than his Falkenberg
>> series.
>
>Yeah, it does. But the subject of this thread is most overt in the
>Falkenberg's Legion stuff.
>
>Nnow that I think about it, Blish's Cith In Flight is nearly
>identical in the poltiical set up of the earlier stories (in internal
>chronology, that is).
>
>And now that I think about it, in the later Sten books, the Eternal
>Emperor is conspiring with his own people against . . . himself. Not
>exatly what OP was talking about, but close.
>
>> I think his "future history" of it has the union between
>> the US and the Soviets before our time.
>
>Yeah. It get a little weird in places.
>

That alway struck me as odd (in retrospect admittedly) in that
I wouldn't have expected Pournelle to be bullish on the SU longterm.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[Harold Hill]

On Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 9:51:02 PM UTC-4, peterw...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Has this scenario, of a set of countries or non-state actors fighting
> to make the world safe for autocracy, been used in science fiction or
> fantasy? One possible example might be the alliance between the

Your subject drew me in for a different reason.

"Paging Dr. Banzai ..."

--
-Harold Hill

[James Nicoll]

In article <eluqkl...@mid.individual.net>,

Well, he did used to be a card-carrying red. Also, one of the odder
defining characteristics of the American far right is their conviction
the enemy of the day is far stronger than the US, even when their
ideology should convince them the Big Bad is self-doomed.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Livejournal at http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
news:eluqkl...@mid.individual.net:

The idea of "the east and the west both act more and more like the
other as the conflict continues, until nobody can tell them apart
and they merge" isn't unique to Pournelle. It goes back decades
(Blish was writing in the 50s, wasn't he?) And it's certainly a
justifiable (if not entirely accurate) idea if one looks at the
history of the cold war.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote in
news:oddjq8$64u$1...@reader1.panix.com:

Examining the trove of declassified Soviet documents has shown that
they suffered from the same delusion, only with, perhaps, a bit
more reason. But only a bit.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Harold Hill <kyle.pel...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:2fbdfb54-18e5-44a2...@googlegroups.com:

That was my first thought, too. I'm a little disappointed.

[Kevrob]

James Burnham called his column in NATIONAL REVIEW "The Protracted
Struggle." The ethic was "we aren't going to be caught napping the
way Free Europe was when the Fascists and Nazis gained power. We will
stand watch against the new barbarians, even if we are doomed to lose
the long battle." and many of the Cold Warriors thought they were on
the losing side, Whittaker Chambers, for one. Most of the ex-lefties
who switched sides to become Cold Warriors traded in Marxism for religion.
Conversion to Catholicism or High Church Anglicanism was popular,
a la C S Lewis. Frank Meyer, a W F Buckley Jr mentor moved from the CP
through libertarianism to traditionalism and then became an RC. The
hope of victory there is more in the afterlife. There was no promise
from the ghodz that "the good guys" would win in the end, excepting
the battle of Armageddon

ObSF: Wilson and Shea took WFB's slogan version of Eric Vogelin's
warning, "Don't immanentize the eschaton!" and ran with it. YAFers
used to wear that on pin-back buttons. Nancy Lebov would probably
have sold them to fen at cons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Voegelin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanentize_the_eschaton

People who predicted the inevitable downfall of the USSR were
often derided by mid-20th century conservatives and Cold Warriors
as foolishly optimistic types, unwilling to come to grips with the
fallen nature of humanity. Isildur had effed up by not destroying
the Ring, and the West was screwed. You still had to rage against
the dying of the light, so no stinting on the defense budget and
if you had to waste X-thousand soldiers lives before the East Bloc
swallowed another chunk of real estate, so be it.

Pournelle extrapolating the continuance of the CCCP, in an era
when "convergence theory" was the rage isn't strange. The first
story, "A Spaceship for the King," expanded into King David's
Spaceship" was from 1973. "Rollback" of Soviet and Chinese
advances wasn't on the table in those days of Vietnamization
of the Indo-China war,Brandt's Ostpolitik and the feared Findlandization
of Western Europe. Not losing any more ground to the Red Horde
would have been taken as progress. It wasn't until the 1983
US invasion of Grenada that any rollback happened.

Kevin R

A political science student in the second half of the 1970s and a bit
of the 80s.

[Quadibloc]

On Friday, April 21, 2017 at 2:31:29 PM UTC-6, Kevrob wrote:

> James Burnham called his column in NATIONAL REVIEW "The Protracted
> Struggle." The ethic was "we aren't going to be caught napping the
> way Free Europe was when the Fascists and Nazis gained power. We will
> stand watch against the new barbarians, even if we are doomed to lose
> the long battle." and many of the Cold Warriors thought they were on
> the losing side, Whittaker Chambers, for one. Most of the ex-lefties
> who switched sides to become Cold Warriors traded in Marxism for religion.
> Conversion to Catholicism or High Church Anglicanism was popular,
> a la C S Lewis. Frank Meyer, a W F Buckley Jr mentor moved from the CP
> through libertarianism to traditionalism and then became an RC. The
> hope of victory there is more in the afterlife. There was no promise
> from the ghodz that "the good guys" would win in the end, excepting
> the battle of Armageddon

Well, after all, the Atom Bomb meant that a war would destroy everything that
made life worth living.

And so in the *democracies*, where the *ordinary people* run the government,
eventually they would be too afraid to stand firm, to risk annihilation to
preserve their political system. Whereas the dictatorships didn't have to
consult the people, and so the tyrants could go ahead and push ahead and take
risks.

So little by little they would nibble away the world - it did seem inevitable.

Of course, Chernobyl and what happened after _glasnost_ showed that Andrei
Amalrik was right - the Soviet Union was ready to collapse at the touch of "one
word of truth".

But that was luck - and we threw it away by not taking measures to prevent the
rise of someone like Putin in Russia in the future.

John Savard

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <eluqkl...@mid.individual.net>,
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:

>In article <XnsA75E5E508D6...@69.16.179.43>,
>Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in

>>> I think (Pournelle's) "future history" of it has the union

>>> between the US and the Soviets before our time.
>>
>>Yeah. It get a little weird in places.
>
>That alway struck me as odd (in retrospect admittedly) in that
>I wouldn't have expected Pournelle to be bullish on the SU longterm.

Well, the CoDominium does collapse eventually.

However, I think the "CoDominium" future history first appeared
in the late 70s and early 80s. By the late 80s, Pournelle was
saying that the microcomputer doomed the Soviet system. When
you didn't have to distribute samizdat by typing up copies with
multiple sheets of carbon paper, you could hide them in
thousands of floppy disks of this week's Five Year Plan, the
Soviet Union could not maintain its tight monopoly on
communication.

The Soviets' options were either to die of loss of control of
information, or ban microcomputers and wither away from falling
behind the free world.

Or just blow it all up. I recall him saying at a con panel
that the next ten years were going to be the most dangerous.

--
"The urge to save humanity is almost | Mike Van Pelt
always a false front for the urge to rule." | mvp at calweb.com
-- H.L. Mencken | KE6BVH

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <XnsA75E864EA67...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The idea of "the east and the west both act more and more like the
>other as the conflict continues, until nobody can tell them apart
>and they merge" isn't unique to Pournelle.

Like the Russian guy in "The President's Analyst".

"Every day, you get more socialist, and we get more capitalist.
Pretty soon, we meet in the middle and shake hands."

[Cryptoengineer]

m...@web1.calweb.com (Mike Van Pelt) wrote in news:_NwKA.7706$e61.1526
@fx23.iad:

> In article <XnsA75E864EA67...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>The idea of "the east and the west both act more and more like the
>>other as the conflict continues, until nobody can tell them apart
>>and they merge" isn't unique to Pournelle.
>
> Like the Russian guy in "The President's Analyst".
>
> "Every day, you get more socialist, and we get more capitalist.
> Pretty soon, we meet in the middle and shake hands."
>

A wonderful and vastly underappreciated movie. James Coburn
was wonderful. Of course, TPC was the *real* enemy of the both
there.

pt

[Greg Goss]

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:


>Of course, Chernobyl and what happened after _glasnost_ showed that Andrei
>Amalrik was right - the Soviet Union was ready to collapse at the touch of "one
>word of truth".

Didn't Heinlein's write-up of his early visit (late fifties? Early
sixties) show that Moscow, and by extension the USSR, was far less
powerful than their claims?

[Quadibloc]

On Friday, April 21, 2017 at 2:14:11 PM UTC-6, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> Harold Hill <kyle.pel...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:2fbdfb54-18e5-44a2...@googlegroups.com:

> > Your subject drew me in for a different reason.

> > "Paging Dr. Banzai ..."

> That was my first thought, too. I'm a little disappointed.

I remember the movie "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai in the Fifth Dimension"
with affection myself.

John Savard

[johnny1...@gmail.com]

He wasn't, exactly. He was a lapsed Communist in his youth himself, IIRC, but in later life he didn't think the USSR had a grand future, he was afraid the West would let it pull us down with them, one way or another. I doubt if JP believed that a USSR that conquered/destroyed the West would last very long as we knew it...but in that case it would still have conquered/destroyed the West.

In the CoDominium stories, that more or less is what happens, at least in the original ones before the later ones that he tried to adapt to post 1989 times. The USA and the USSR became sufficiently corrupt and societally rotten that they began to look like mere rivals for power, with no ideological or social or moral difference remaining. They form the CoDominium to keep other rivals down and restrain their own rivalry, which works...for a while.

By the time just before the nuclear wars that tear apart the CD and wreck the Earth, it's hard to tell a lot of difference between the USA and the USSR. Both have extensive secret police apparats, both have little in the way of free speech of tolerance of opposition.

[johnny1...@gmail.com]

On Friday, April 21, 2017 at 1:42:18 PM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:

>
> Well, he did used to be a card-carrying red. Also, one of the odder
> defining characteristics of the American far right is their conviction
> the enemy of the day is far stronger than the US, even when their
> ideology should convince them the Big Bad is self-doomed.

You can be self-doomed and still very dangerous. There's no particular conflict between those two sets of views. It doesn't do me a bit of good if the drug-addicted, strung out thug is on track to come a bad end next year, if he kills me this year. Nor does it do me any good that my job prospects, relationship prospects, my house, or my car are nicer than the thug, if he puts a bullet in me before he fries himself.

The metaphor extends upward.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
news:dcb3eee0-516c-4484...@googlegroups.com:

"Across the eight dimension."

[peterw...@hotmail.com]

"Laugh while you can, monkey boy!"

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

[mcdow...@sky.com]

I can't add to the list of fictional conspiracies, but I was listening (again) to the excellent History of Rome Podcast at http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/ when I stumbled across a reference to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Conspiracy

In the winter of 367, the Roman garrison on Hadrian's Wall rebelled, and allowed Picts from Caledonia to enter Britannia. Simultaneously, Attacotti, the Scotti from Hibernia, and Saxons from Germania landed in what might have been coordinated and pre-arranged[citation needed] waves on the island's mid-western and southeastern borders, respectively. Franks and Saxons also landed in northern Gaul.
...
The miles areani or local Roman agents that provided intelligence on barbarian movements seem to have betrayed their paymasters for bribes, making the attacks completely unexpected. Deserting soldiers and escaped slaves roamed the countryside and turned to robbery to support themselves. Although the chaos was widespread and initially concerted, the aims of the rebels were simply personal enrichment and they worked as small bands rather than larger armies.
(end quote)

Given the time, this seems a remarkably widespread crime league to me.

[Dan Tilque]

I'm not sure it would have been possible to prevent an autocrat from
taking control of Russia. It takes a while for a country to truly
embrace democracy, and Russia has not had sufficient time to do that.

--
Dan Tilque

[Quadibloc]

Oh, certainly it was, but it's not clear that Boris Yeltsin would have agreed to the necessary measures.