First, I am probably going off the topic of "Understanding World Domination"
Hello Carlos Web,
The sinking of the USS Maine in Cuba's Havana Harbor is not a lie, the rusting remains are still there. The lie is what caused the explosion that sank the ship. Of course back then there were a number of highly placed politicians and wealthy citizens that felt that to be a world player the USA needed to have colonies. The problem there weren't any profitable places open to be taken. IIRC the original investigation's, its been a while since I read books and saw some specials on three different television networks on the subject, findings were inconclusive, which played into the hands of certain newspaper editors hands and lead to the war between Spain and the United States. Over the last about ten years there have been several documentaries reviewing the sinking of the USS Maine and the evidence now points to a coal bunker explosion.
Watching other educational documentaries on different channels and reading different books there is speculation that war between the United States and Spain probably would have occurred at some point, without the yellow journalist jingoism of "Remember the Maine".
History usually has multiple viewpoints of historical events. One viewpoint is from the side that came out on top, another viewpoint from the side that, if anyone survived, got beat-up, and finally the viewpoints from those who watched as the parties fight each other. I came to this conclusion after being in the same world history college with exchange students from several different countries, one may have been from Spain and reading, with a lot of translating, the history texts they brought with them.
From, I think the second Star Wars Movie, there was the line about the truth is based on a certain point of view. Personally, I think both points of view then and now are incomplete truths, but then I could be and probably wrong.
Back to the topic, I hope, of "Understanding World Domination"
I do not have personal knowledge, though it is certainly possible, of a large group of people all agreeing on something. Not to mention the individuals that want a better deal or figure a way to take more shares form others. IIRC, not all of the indigenous people of the surrounding area agreed to the sale of Manhattan Island either, not that the detail mattered to the settlers.
I am sure that somewhere in history one side did pay the population to take over land belonging to another side. Unfortunately, most of the records show one side thumped the other side to get what they wanted.
Tom R
From: "carlos web" <xxxxxx@mail.de>
To: "TML" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2016 9:18:37 AM
Subject: Re: [TML] Understanding World Domination.
It's an interesting thought. Well, such things have happened, not buying the country but a possession thereof. Off the top of my head, I can remember two examples:
(1) The Lousiana Purchase in 1803, where the US bought it from France after Napoleon had stolen it from Spain three years before.
(2) After the US took the Spanish possessions in the 1898 war, Spain was practically bankrupt and had to sell the Mariana, Palaos, and Carolina islands to Germany.
I won't comment on the War of American Aggression (as we often call it in Spain) ot the Sinking of the Maine Lie. ;-p Please direct your flames elsewhere. (Although the Maine thing makes for an interesting plot.)
In Traveller Terms, however, how is it different from offering favorable conditions for a world to join the 3I? I imagine that in Milieu Zero there would be a lot of that, offering special deals to key worlds, e.g. in the intersection of trade routes. Specially in low population, democratic worlds, offering direct citizen payments in the new currency would be rather cost-effective (and lead to high local inflation later on...). I can easily imagine a couple of scenarios around the in-situ negotiations.
Another thought closer to the examples above would be the 3I buying planets from another interstellar polity. A clever Imperial governor might engineer a trade war bringing a pocket empire to the edge of bankruptcy, then offer a way out by buying a certain planet. In which, coincidentally, Lanthanum deposits will be discovered shortly thereafter. Now, negotiations are still under way, and the PCs are involved in an attempt to uncover the actual motives of the imperials...
Carlos
--
Carlos Alós-Ferrer
Chair of Microeconomics, University of Cologne
http://www.decisions.uni-koeln.de
Am 01-Feb-2016 14:30:33 +0100 schrieb xxxxxx@gmail.com:
OK, I was reading history about the USA. It seems we offered Spain a GREAT deal of money to buy Cuba from them but they said no. This got me to wondering why we don't buy other places. Why not just buy a country from its people? I mean go in and say to everyone in Cuba, we will give each person 20,000$ USD and the top people even more, if they agree to become a state of the United states. Why do the war thing? Why not just ask the people? They can vote on it or the top rules can make a choice. I could see this as being a good way to go for a lot of poor lands. Then the USA would grow and people would mostly be happy, much more happy than if we had bombed them or grabbed them like HI. So why is this not done? If it could be done then it seems like in traveller it might be a good way for an empire to acquire new planets. Just seems there must be some reason because I have never heard of it being done in real life.
--
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com
FreeMail powered by
mail.de -
mehr Sicherheit, Seriosität und Komfort -----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=zZOCJCw2BI9jPrGTB4OJoibiHbbTEiok