HOME | DD

QuantumBranching — Fascist Australia

Published: 2013-01-15 08:44:14 +0000 UTC; Views: 18208; Favourites: 68; Downloads: 116
Redirect to original
Description FASCIST AUSTRALIA WORLD (A BRUCE M. /TORMSEN PRODUCTION)

This is my version of a scenario by Tormsen, one of the regulars of ah.com.

In this world, a delayed invention of the atom bomb led to a devastating invasion of Japan, which left all of Korea in Soviet hands as well as Hokkaido. (Germany was occupied and divided into zones well before the invasion of Japan, so no change there). With Japan a wreck and Korea in Soviet hands, the US needed other cockpits in Asia. Taiwan was a major base from early on, and Australia also found itself playing a larger role in US Far East strategy – especially after most of Indonesia went Red. (This led to a more right-wing and Asian-Hordes paranoid Australia than OTL). The Australians, with US help, built up their military, and by the 1970s Australia had its own nuclear deterrent and Aussie troops were helping out the US in “Free Indonesia”, Vietnam, and Sarawak…

The British-Australian-US strategy of ATL was more successful, and there still was a wobbly South Vietnam in 1983, when the balloon went up after an overzealous Soviet officer failed to realize his radar system had been assembled by someone who had been hitting the vodka a little too hard that day at Radar Unit Assembly Factory 7. Australia got nuked at a couple places hosting US bases, but overall the majority of Australia’s population and infrastructure survived, and it found itself in a position of strength post-war.

Not that things weren’t unpleasant (economic collapse, resource shortage, rationing and hunger, loads of miserable refugees…) and before long things had gone from “emergency measures” to outright military dictatorship. And the new regime, once it had consolidated its rule, was quick to expand its resource and manpower pool by alliance or conquest: New Zealand and various Pacific isles were annexed, most of “free Indonesia” ended up as puppets or directly ruled by Australia, and the Australian navy joined forces with exiled fleets from the north to join forces with the desperate Israelis to make a grab for the vitally important oil fields.

27 years after Doomsday, the world is dominated by four or five “great powers.” The most technologically developed (having largely managed to maintain or regain 1983 levels of tech, in spite of the greatly shrunken pool of talent) is the Australian alliance, which has expanded around the globe. Thanks in part to heavy emigration from devastated lands Australia and New Zealand proper have more people than OTL 2010, and with its Indonesian, Pacific and American territories, the new capital at Newcastle runs either directly or through puppet regimes the lives of almost 90 million people. With the largest remaining nuclear arsenal and an aging although still powerful fleet (Australian shipyards aren’t up to cranking out aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines), Australia and its major allies (Argentina, Israel, and Thailand) are the closest of the Powers to having a “global reach”, although in practice lacking the human and material resources to project much power outside of SE Asia – Pacific region.

The Capetown Alliance is fairly friendly to Australia, although it has its own interests. South Africa and Portugal didn’t received much hurt in WWIII, although the horrid famines brought about by nuclear winter brought about an exile of Portuguese to its remaining African possessions (still in Portuguese hands in this ATL). Nowadays, emigration from devastated Europe and North America and commie-plagued South America has allowed the South Africans and the Portuguese to consolidate and maintain white dominance in Africa, and an alliance exists to keep the black man down. South Africa is the dominant partner in the relationship, although the Portuguese Junta has some friends of its own among the more conservative (nay, reactionary) Catholic, Latin states of the Med. South Africa is one of the few remaining democracies – albeit for whites (and, lately, Asians) only.

Taiwan, which got a couple nukes but managed to survive as a society (being far enough south to avoid the worst of the nuclear winter helped), is only moderately friendly with Australia nowadays: they both see the other as a competitor for influence and power in the region. Although Taiwan managed to conquer quite a bit of south China during the worst of the pre-war chaos, regional warlords – former Red Army folks – have managed to consolidate enough control in the interior to make further expansion difficult, although the warlord tech kit is not developed enough as yet to build jet planes or tanks better than 1945 issue. Taiwan is usually considered the least of the great powers, and some don’t count it so at all.

If Australia is the most high-tech, India is by far the most populous. Even with a substantial die-off from famine and radiation poisoning, there are still over three quarters of a billion inhabitants of the Republic of India, which has reabsorbed the Punjab after the collapse of Pakistan. India’s leftist, authoritarian government has so far managed to hold off calls for a restoration of democracy with mumbles about Islamicist terror and unrest, not to mention the Siberian or possibly the Australian menace. Technology, which dropped back to an essentially 19th century level for a while, is gaining fast on the 1950s, and a revived nuclear program gave them a Deterrent in the late 90s.

The universally disliked Power is the People’s Republic of Brazil: with economic collapse, fallout, etc. a Junta of more than customary incompetence established itself in Brasilia, and managed to so thoroughly alienate the population in a mere decade than in 1995 the revolutionary movement were willing to let the radical left take the head. The radicals, once in power, shortened their partners in power by their heads, and established a nastily Stalinist regime which is, admittedly, rather more efficient than the Junta that preceded it, and which, in a gentlemanly manner, never starves people to death unintentionally. As yet Brazil isn’t developed enough to have much power projection (although the Argentines are grateful indeed for Australian nuclear munitions), but they have plans. Multiple five-year ones, in fact.

OTHER STATES
The US, after almost three decades, is only now congealing into something resembling a unified nation, the Reunited States of America. It is very unhappy with Australia, which moved into particularly devastated California to “give aid” and then never left, not to mention the Cubans and traitorous Virginians and Mormons, but there isn’t much that can be done right now: there are less than 25 million Americans left in the new states and territories, and the standard of living and industrial development is generally rather poorer than Australia: aside from some old warheads which may or may not work, the US is no longer a nuclear military power (although there are still a few working power plants), and much of the country is still struggling to get back out of the 19th century. The radioactive mess of the heartlands is a no-man’s-land where government writ is nonexistent and there roam various odd groups and sects and crazed survivalists who don’t care about the still-high radiation levels in so much of the region. For now the big issue is reconstruction, and trying to attract immigrants from areas equally or even worse screwed up.

To keep what they took in the aftermath, the Israelis have brought in a great many European immigrants, who don’t like the idea of being overrun by angry Muslims, but like staying in the radioactive hellholes of their homelands even less: between them and Israel’s Muslim subjects, Jews are now a minority in their own country, and a crazy jumpy genocide-spooked bunch they are. To the north, things are fairly chaotic: the Israelis were perhaps a bit quick on the nuclear gun when the Arab leaders (trying to distract their hungry, radioactive, out-of-jobs subjects) started on the business about Allah punishing Israel for its sins and leaving it vulnerable. (At least the Israelis were polite enough to set off one of their nukes near the Aswan Dam as a warning, rather than actually hitting it).

The Russian Republic (not so much post-Communist as highly pragmatic) survives along the north edge of the Black sea, where nuclear winter wasn’t quite so bad: they have some scraps of remaining tech, but are a purely regional player, as is the other “heir to the USSR”, the Soviet Republic of Siberia, an oddball pseudo-Communist dictatorship inhabited mostly by Mongols and other ridiculously tough Siberian people who survived on a diet of frozen animal parts, Vodka, and, it is rumored, by moving into depopulated N. China in the winter to eat anything – and anyone – they can find. The present Supreme Commissar-Khan is a man of reputed Von Sternberg-ish awfulness, and although there aren’t many Siberians, they are all armed to the teeth and reputedly batshit insane. (A reputation, admittedly, they work rather hard on cultivating).

Although the collapse of trade and civilization throughout much of the globe was bad indeed for Sub-Saharan Africa, in the subsequent chaos a certain amount of Darwinian competition set in: sans outside aid and food and fuel and electronics, a warlord had to have some competence to rule over an area larger than a few days march. As a result of this, plus the revival of world trade after the first horrible decade, and the “tech support” provided by Europeans seeking a less cancer-y environment, although much of the continent is still flea-bite warlords hoarding their shrinking bullet supply, some functional, albeit mostly pre-industrial states exist. Most important are the English-speaking Kenyan-Tanzanian East African Federation, now closely allied to India, lest S. Africa kick it in like an egg carton, and the French-speaking and rather unwieldy anti-S.African, anti-Portugal Union of Free Africa, which has reestablished close ties with the French states and with the RSA, which although no longer a Power, is still an industrial nation with an influential African minority.

The Italians don’t like the Swiss: the Swiss didn’t get nuked (although the fallout was bad), but the weather was rather horrible in their mountains when Nuclear Winter set in, and the whole Swiss-march-to-the-sea-and-still-marginally-productive-farmland displaced a lot of Italians. The whole “they would have starved anyway thanks to your inferior Italian farming technique” argument somehow does not placate many Italians.

Un-nuked, the neutral Swedes fished and did a remarkable industrial job of extracting nutrition from such unlike sources as tree-trunks and clothing, and their egalitarian society meant that only a minority fully starved while everyone else almost starved to death, but survived. Colder Finland and nuked Norway did rather worse, which is why the new Scandinavian Union is dominated by Sweden (the Danes had some problems themselves when the cows and the butter ran out).

Japan, given that both sides wanted it united under their leadership, wasn’t nuked as badly as some other northern hemisphere states, but it was bad enough that along with the bloody invasion from Hokkaido there was a considerable breakdown, and there was no hope of doing as well as the Swedes. Currently, what is left of Japan is divided into two hostile regimes, one a dictatorship, the other rather worse. Japanese immigrants form a sizeable minority in Taiwan and a smaller but still influential one in Australia.
Related content
Comments: 23

Eheucaius17 [2015-07-30 06:41:06 +0000 UTC]

OnlyTheGhosts, the surrender of Japan is not the main focus of this. If you are going to accuse someone of being a biased moron, please make sure you are not acting like a biased moron when you are doing so.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

OnlyTheGhosts [2015-07-01 10:02:13 +0000 UTC]

It's unfortunate that this AH scenario suffers the flaw of erroneous assumptions, as if the original creator of it was unaware that the Japanese government had been offering surrender for at least 11 months before the dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to OnlyTheGhosts [2015-07-01 22:59:29 +0000 UTC]

Not on terms of unconditional surrender. 

👍: 2 ⏩: 1

OnlyTheGhosts In reply to QuantumBranching [2015-07-02 02:01:01 +0000 UTC]

The claim of "unconditional surrender" was a wartime and post-war propaganda myth provided to the American public to excuse the use of a horror weapon.

The Japanese offer of surrender required only that the Emperor remain, and only that as the condition. The conditional surrender was honoured. The Emperor remained.

Actions always speak louder than any words later given to excuse them.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to OnlyTheGhosts [2015-07-11 23:51:08 +0000 UTC]

They were looking for rather more in concessions  _before_ the nukes were dropped. Drop the silly-ass "poor put upon Japan" shit. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

OnlyTheGhosts In reply to QuantumBranching [2015-07-11 23:54:42 +0000 UTC]

That "concession" claim is not supported by any Japanese wartime documentation; it was a propaganda fiction spread AFTER the rest of the world reacted badly to the news of the USA dropping atomic bombs on cities.

Neither does the "concession" claim make any kind of logical sense when the same condition for surrender was the exact same condition which was honoured. Proving by the act, regardless of the words used to portray the situation by the victor (to their own public), that a conditional surrender was the only real requirement, refuting the claim of unconditional surrender since that's not what happened.

Internationally, most media of the time reflected horror and shock that the Americans would commit such an act against civilians. Read the newspapers in Australia, Europe, and the rest of the world in the days following the bombing.

I wasn't insulting to you, but apparently you want to insult me. Is this your version of debate when logic isn't able to be shoehorned into an assertion?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to OnlyTheGhosts [2015-07-28 09:57:02 +0000 UTC]

How people reacted is beside the point, and you aren't bothering to read what I actually said, aside from the insult part. People with axes to grind annoy me, especially when they spout revisionist crap. historynewsnetwork.org/article…  Begone, be off, and never dirty my towels again. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

OnlyTheGhosts In reply to QuantumBranching [2015-07-28 13:13:32 +0000 UTC]

Your link never mentions Mamoru Shigemitsu, the Japanese diplomat who'd been offering official surrender for 11 months. Why do they ignore his role? He didn't just disappear. It's akin to making a claim that the 3rd Reich was terrible at propaganda then backing this assertion on the basis of completely ignoring Goebbels' existence. That kind of avoidance could be evidence of either intent to mislead or lack of research. The linked article is also very obviously a promotional piece of one author's book, which added together with the lack of any mention of Shigemitsu, and the 3 well supported surrender overtures doesn't look so good.


The comments by others on that same article you linked to, also provide evidence which refutes the premises of the article. Many commentators aren't buying the claims in that article, and can cite evidence which contradicts the article's premise. Not looking good there.


When anyone mentions evidence which contradicts the long held beliefs of official history, they are called "historical revisionists" as if revising the history books to reflect later discovery of evidence that contradicts the "official" government-approved version of history IN YOUR COUNTRY is somehow a horrible crime. Every nation does this, and the pretence that the USA government is the exception is simply hiding in denial, like sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "Lalala, I can't hear you!"


The Japanese first offered surrender straight after the Potsdam declaration. The only condition they attached to their surrender was that the emperor would be protected. The USA refused to accept the Japanese offer of surrender. The Japanese tried again at least 3 times, two of those times via the Russians. The Japanese government also offered surrender by radio broadcasts, but again the leaders of the government of the USA refused to talk about it and pretended that they only wanted an unconditional surrender.


In the final result, the single and only condition that the Japanese had asked for in their surrender (protection of the emperor) was in fact honoured by the USA anyway. On Aug. 10, the day after the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, a message came from Tokyo accepting the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, but ''with the understanding that the said declaration does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a sovereign ruler.''


They mention this “understanding” because they'd already been offering surrender for months despite the USA leadership's refusal to accept it.


The Japanese surrendered on the condition that they keep Emperor Hirohito. That is a condition. "Unconditional" means no conditions.


There are two versions of the official Instrument of Surrender document. The public one that is most often cited in support of the claim that the surrender was unconditional also is illegitimate; it lacks the Seal of the Emperor, which means it's not the actual surrender document.


"On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to Secretary Stimson on what I had learned from Tokyo – they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and their constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people."

~ Allen Dulles, The Secret Surrender (1966)


Norman Cousins was a consultant to General MacArthur during the American occupation of Japan. Cousins wrote of his conversations with MacArthur, clearly referring to MacArthur knowing that the Japanese government had already offered surrender “MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed." He continues, "When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.”

- Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power


Admiral William Leahy, President Truman's wartime chief of staff, who chaired the Joint Chiefs, also knew of the Japanese government offering surrender when he said “the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender ... in being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”


Very clear that the USA president could've accepted the Japanese offer of surrender weeks earlier, and so equally clear that he didn't want to. Mass murder is nothing new, nor is it a new action for the USA government.


But go ahead, stick your fingers in your ears and keep shouting "lalala"


I'm done. You don't care about evidence anyway. Which is sad, because your AH concepts would be so much better if they weren't half-informed by propaganda versions of history and your overt racism.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

ytherrien In reply to OnlyTheGhosts [2016-01-12 04:12:30 +0000 UTC]

I find it hilarious that you accuse Quantum of not caring about evidence when he's the only one out of you two who provided a reference to his claim. Your quotes aren't based on any sources. You can whine all you want, but he's the only one here that backed his claims with a source. Plus it goes without saying that revisionist historians are usually people without any scholarly authority, or that base their claims on sources with a questionnable or subjective approach.

You also seem to forget that this is a thread about Alternate History. This is fiction, a source of entertainment. What is valued here is the appeal of the back story, the map, the sense of humour, not its fidelity to historical event or circumstances to said event.

Besides with events shrouded in controversy such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we will never completely know the real stories behind them. Want evidence to that claim? Look at the quotes you used. You quoted two sentient humans who were directly involved in the war, and they both had their own beliefs on this matter. You're not stating facts, you're stating opinions. There's no evidence, just witnesses from parties emotionally invested in the matter.

The fact is this: the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were carried out against Japan after the Japanese government refused to surrender unconditionally at the United State's request. The decision of releasing the two nuclear bombs were made after Truman realized that an amphibious invasion of Japan would cost millions in lives and much more in material. Plus there was an urgency to broker peace with Japan as the USSR were themselves were getting ready to take action against Japan. The effects of the bombing were tragic, no doubt, but it destroyed the Japanese war effort and shattered the nation's morale, permitting a swift amistrice and hence stopping the war from prolonging much longer than it had to, and preventing a much higher civilian mortality rate in the forms of an American amphibious assault. These are the most accepted views to the general public and scholars for not only the United States, but the majority of the world. 

You disagree with that view, fine, but it's the people who have scholarly authority that you need to convince that they're in the wrong, not us! Why would we listen to you? You're a nobody from the Internet who took this specific alternate history scenario way to seriously, and who's trying to lead some type of crusade against so-called post-war American propaganda without any confirmed, tangible sources while missing the entire point of altenate history as a concept in general!

Swallow your pride and move on. You want to talk about revisionist history, join a debate in a history forum, but for the love of all that is holy, don't spoil this form of entertainement with your self-righteous crap about "proper history".

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ytherrien In reply to ytherrien [2016-01-12 17:16:08 +0000 UTC]

The following comment is a response to OnlyTheGhost's personal message that he sent to me prior to my above comment responding to his flawed arguments. He believes he's clever because he rabidly attacked me via personal message and then blocked me. Little does he know that, there are ways of getting around his childish behaviour. Here's his post:

I find it hilarious that you have merely ONE comment in 10 months, and that you used that single comment to TROLL me with bullshit. I posted plentiful references (with quotes!) you lyinglittle turd. QuantumBranching was such a coward that he blocked me rather than discuss the issue fully, I thereafter chose to add his name to my blocklists in return. I suspect you're actually a sock-puppet account of QuantumBranching, therefore I'm blocking this account of yours too.

Apart from the facts that I gave which just happen to be true, and well researched, there are plenty more references and sources here:
onlytheghosts.deviantart.com/a…

Consider your crap debunked, regardless of whatever bullshit you were taught in school.

You haven't done the research to properly debate the subject, and you're too much of a coward as well (evidenced by your use of a sock-puppet account to troll people out of the blue MONTHS LATER!)

Get a life and grow the fuck up, arsewipe.

------------------------------------------------------

And now for the response:

Are you really that paranoid to think that I'm a sock puppet of QuantumBranching? Does it seem that improbable that other people won't tolerate your BS, no matter the time gap in between your post and the response, without them being affiliated to the person you unjustly attempted? Are you that engrossed with your beliefs and yourself?

The very fact that you cannot give me the sources to your quotes means to things to me: a) you manipulated the quotes to fit your ideals, and the quotes are either taken out of context or edited by you to fit your ideals; or b) those quotes don't exist and were made up entirely by you.

Why would I refer to your own account to find references proving your point? It's your responsibility to back up your own claims by providing the sources on request, not mine. Plus I did visit your profile for fun, and your profile is blatantly pro-japanese biased. I don't believe any of the sources there have any credibility. Simply put, unless you can provide sources coming from either a well-respected and known expert or professional historian, or that you provide the original sources to said quotes, your quotes are devoid of any credibility and rejected as evidence to anything.

Hence I don't believe my "crap" has been "debunked".

Furthermore, I must of done one hell of a good job with my research and debates if you are unable to adress my arguments further, and have to instead attack me personaly via a provate message, and then block me to prevent me from further defending my views.

So I'll take your insults as a compliment that acknowledges my superior arguments, thanks

I need to grow up? That's funny because I could swear that this entire response that you sent to me is childish in nature. Lol and calling QuantumBranching and I cowards is like the cauldron calling the kettle black. Next time, accuse us of having a behavior that you yourself don't have so you don't sound like a hypocrite.

As for QuantumBranching, I believe he rightly did block you. He's creating maps and timelines for his fanbase, for people to enjoy. He didn't create his maps for morons like you to push your questionable beliefs down our collective throats and then to insult him. 

There are ways to share constructive criticism with someone. What you did was utterly degrading and he doesn't need to tolerate you. If you would of shared your views in a polite manner, I'm sure he would of been happy to discuss the details and his research process with you.

You won't to be a moron, go be a moron in your own posts, not other's.

----------------

Thanks for your time, Deviant Art public. I'm sorry for having to make this issue public, but I find it unfortunate that people think they can just say what they want without consequence.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Eluxivo In reply to OnlyTheGhosts [2015-08-12 17:23:03 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Jeckl [2013-04-13 05:25:32 +0000 UTC]

Just noticed, there re two 7s in Americas. What's up with Porto Rico?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to Jeckl [2013-04-17 06:45:38 +0000 UTC]

Huh. I'm rather poor at proofing my work: it's an old enough map that at this point I have no idea what goes on with Puerto Rico, although the color seems to indicate close relations with the Reunited States...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CyberPhoenix001 [2013-02-27 11:02:27 +0000 UTC]

Hah! Suck it RSA! We Aussies can kick your arse from here to eternity!

Seriously though, the only thing I don't like about this map is the fact that now I'm no longer the top result when you search for "Fascist Australia" on DA.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to CyberPhoenix001 [2013-02-28 02:57:53 +0000 UTC]

Sorry!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

kyuzoaoi [2013-02-01 04:40:14 +0000 UTC]

Evil Australian Empire!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

mdc01957 [2013-01-31 15:36:29 +0000 UTC]

This does make for a darker version of 1983: Doomsday.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Todyo1798 [2013-01-15 19:24:08 +0000 UTC]

Is it just me, or can anyone else make out the original borders in America and Europe/Siberia?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AmongTheSatanic In reply to Todyo1798 [2013-01-16 03:51:29 +0000 UTC]

Can also see.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to AmongTheSatanic [2013-01-16 09:52:50 +0000 UTC]

Huh. I vaguely remember that happening and wondering how I had done that, and then thinking "looks kinda cool. I'll leave it." I suppose I should have redone the map before posting it here, but I completely forgot.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AmongTheSatanic In reply to QuantumBranching [2013-01-17 02:38:07 +0000 UTC]

Perhaps your subconscious took over because you should make a sequel

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

husk55 [2013-01-15 15:01:29 +0000 UTC]

Your own version of Doomsday '83? I'm also reminded of the 'Kraka' idea.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

QuantumBranching In reply to husk55 [2013-01-16 09:53:48 +0000 UTC]

As I said, the basic scenario was Tormsen, but I'd be lying if I said "Doomsday '83" didn't provide some inspiration in filling in post-nuclear details.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0