PDA

View Full Version : Earth, 2174



bartmoss
06-14-2011, 10:09 PM
Wip#1

36543

Edit: Sorry for the lack of commentary when I posted this: Basically, this is the beginning of the map of Earth for my Sci Fi universe. I'm doing a lot of research and figuring-out-how-things-change while I am working on the map; I already have a fairly good history worked out for 2012-2174, but as I draw this, I am of course forced to give more thought to the details.

I'M tempted to just let the map stand on its own, and let you guys (and perhaps the guys on alternatehistory.com) figure out what happened in those 150 years. ;)

bartmoss
06-15-2011, 07:01 PM
Wip#2:

36563

I got tired of the dashed lines. I added all of the Americas, Greenland, Iceland and the UK. The borders in Central and South America are unchanged for now.

bartmoss
06-16-2011, 10:53 PM
WIP#3:

36575

Added more countries (should be hard to miss). "Fixed" some borders in the Americas, too.

bartmoss
06-19-2011, 03:28 AM
WIP #4:

36605

Added more countries; most of Africa is at current political boundaries (not all) and will change. Middle East I am fairly happy with, but Iraq probably needs some work.

Steel General
06-19-2011, 10:47 AM
Looking forward to seeing the final version.

bartmoss
06-24-2011, 05:13 AM
Thanks Mr General Sir. :)

Now that I'm done with the Collapsing World world map I returned to work on this one. I added a lot in this update, and changed the geopolitical situation too, by adding the Islamic Union. An Islamic super-state is a bit of a staple, but I think you'll find mine isn't quite what others usually predict. This was done partially for originality, but I figure that the usual contenders for such a state wouldn't really gain from it. Egypt is modern/moderate/western, afterall they are one of the few Israeli allies. The main Oil nations wouldn't be allowed to go too radical by the international community either.

China taking over Vietnam is probably more questionable, and I did it on a whim. ;)

36683

I still need to add Russia and central Asia, and I need to rework borders here and there, but I think this one is getting close to completition as well.

bartmoss
06-24-2011, 06:32 PM
Alright. I've added Russia and Central Asia. The map still needs a tiny bit of work - some fluff and decorations if nothing else - but the major part is now done.

36688

Hai-Etlik
06-25-2011, 05:32 AM
You really would have been better off with something other than Equidistant Cylindrical. It's not particularly useful for a reference map like this, and it's just not all that attractive. Winkel Tripel would be my choice, but Robinson, Mollweide, Aitoff, or even good old Mercator would all work well

Having used it though, you should be careful about your map extent. A Normal Equidistant Cylindrical STOPS at 90 N and S but yours doesn't appear to do so. It's also kind of bad form (though not unprecedented) to have features extend outside the extent, or to have an extent with rounded corners. If you want rounded corners, it'd be better to have them on a neatline around the whole map layout.

You might also find a Desktop GIS handy for things like this. The editing tools are specifically designed for this kind of editing (Splitting shapes, merging shapes, editing mutual boundaries between shapes) and you can deal with projections easily. OpenJUMP, uDig, and QuantumGIS are all free and AFAIK can all export to SVG when you are done so you can finish up in Inkscape. On the downside, it's more software to learn (Unless you consider that an up side) and it's a rather different environment from graphics.

bartmoss
06-25-2011, 05:44 AM
Thanks for the feedback. Projection is not something I worried much about, it's just what the base map I ended up using had. The ones with "better" projections I found (Wikimedia commons) were so huge that Inkscape didn't like to cope with them. And I do think this works well enough for the intended purpose - showing the overall political situation at a glance. People aren't supposed to use this for deep scientific projects, but rather to look at it and say "ah ok the US looks like this now" and "Oh so the Islamic Union dominates northern Africa", and so on.

GIS would be nice to use - especially for purely fantasitic worlds - but, meh, to be honest? I have a full time job and in my spare time I am trying to build worlds and write, it leaves preciously little time for mapping. ;) Between this and the Collapsed World map, I used up say 80% of my spare time over the past week. :-(

I can cut off the Aleutian islands on the left, it's not like they are a significant part of the world.

I did omit antarctica, I can either add it (probably should, come to think of it) or shrink the map's background. Looks a bit empty down south.

Steel General
06-25-2011, 08:57 AM
Poor, poor Mongolia... the unwanted meat between Russia & China.

It wouldn't be unplausible of to have some of the southernmost Philippines as part of the Islamic Union... just a thought.

Hawksguard
06-25-2011, 10:13 PM
Love the overall style. Very crisp & clean. Also very interesting to see some of the 'futurist' choices you made...like Cuba becoming part of the U.S. Also thought it was interesting how you made a huge chunk of Saharan Africa part of your Islamic superstate. What with global warming and desertification, you could just as easily have labeled it "Empty".

Very nice.

Juggernaut1981
06-26-2011, 01:43 AM
Politically and Socially Xinjiang is a highly Islamic-influenced society in China. It would make sense if it was an Islamic Union-aligned almost breakaway segment of China.

bartmoss
06-26-2011, 03:25 AM
Thanks for the feedback, guys.

Xinjiang is indeed a semi-breakaway segment of China, the 22nd Century version of Taiwan, in a way. Of course the details differ.

Hawksguard, for this setting it is necessary for me to assume that global warming is non-catastrophic, merely "problematic". But, yes, the Islamic Union is poor, hungry, and desperate, which is why it was able for them to put their squabbles aside and actually unify under a strong leader.

RogerStenning
06-26-2011, 06:09 AM
The way things are going over here with the EU at the moment, it's highly likely that a few governments wil fall out of the EU due to economic problems - just look at the trouble Greece is in right now, for example; others, like Great Britain (why on Earth do folks insist on calling us the "UK"? Fagh!), may well secede from the EU over the sovereignty question - there are still a lot of naysayers with regard to a 'federal' Europe, after all, particularly the Danes, from what I've read - just idle comments, but the map's looking good - more power to your drawing arm!

bartmoss
06-26-2011, 06:40 AM
Thanks for the input.

Well, the problem is: What is a short term fad, and what a true long term trend? It's really, really hard to say, and my Future History contains almost no short term predictions. Still, you got to make certain assumptions.

Like so: The recent trouble with Greece were solved, since the alternative was a framentation of the EU. All of Europe realized that it was probably better off with the EU than without it, and rolling back the Euro simply wasn't practical without causing a major economic meltdown. So the Europeans sat down, gritted their teeth, and did what was necessary. Part of that included more centralized power - and a unified fiscal policy. When riots by naysayers escalated and resulted in several deaths, the EU police forces began a "no tolerance" policy towards rioters. In the long term, the demonstrators were proven wrong: The measuers not only saved the European Union, it strengthened the Union. Eventually, as the EU emerged as a true economic, political and military superpowers, the last holdouts were forced to acknowledge that complete isolation was not sustainable. Even Great Britain, the last hold out, was forced to cede sovereignty to the EU in order to remain relevant in European and Global politics when the Briggs dictatorship made a continued alliance between London and Washington impossible.

RogerStenning
06-26-2011, 08:19 AM
No problem :)

Hmm... interesting NFH (Near-Future History) there; not sure I actually completely agree with it, but what the heck, always good to see other opinions on the topic, it being a movable feast, and all that http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/icon_smile_wink.gif

Briggs dictatorship? Ooooo... wanna hear more http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/icon_twisted.gif

Hai-Etlik
06-26-2011, 02:46 PM
why on Earth do folks insist on calling us the "UK"? Fagh!

"Great Britain" is physical geography (The name of the island). "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is political geography (The name of the state). And in this particular context, it's political (You're talking about the political entity, not the lump of rock) so "United Kingdom" is more appropriate.

bartmoss
06-26-2011, 04:33 PM
No problem :)

Hmm... interesting NFH (Near-Future History) there; not sure I actually completely agree with it, what the heck, always good to see other opinions on the topic, it being a movable feast, and all that http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/icon_smile_wink.gif

Well the moment you create a FH you create an AH, unless you are psychic :P So I figure, let's make it interesting. And I do have some specific design goals, I am not simulatiing simply to simulate; simulation is a means for me to get to where I want to go. If I make sense?


Briggs dictatorship? Ooooo... wanna hear more

Religious dictatorship under F. E. Briggs, United States of America, circa 2086 until 2101, ended by the 2nd American Civil War and resulting in the foundation of the Second American Republic. At least ~10 Mio dead, due to ruthlessness of belligerents and high population density in contested areas. "it could never happen here" was a popular theme used by pundits, analysts and reporters before the war. Liberation led to reforms in US political system, strict separation of state and church, a culture of Atheism and Rationalism, and a renewed awareness in the general populace that politics is serious business and must be treated as such. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

RogerStenning
06-26-2011, 07:04 PM
"Great Britain" is physical geography (The name of the island). "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is political geography (The name of the state). And in this particular context, it's political (You're talking about the political entity, not the lump of rock) so "United Kingdom" is more appropriate.

Hmm. And this demonstrates why I think so little of polititians and their "citizenship" ideas. We're blinkin' *subjects* lol http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/icon_smile_wink.gif


Well the moment you create a FH you create an AH, unless you are psychic :P So I figure, let's make it interesting. And I do have some specific design goals, I am not simulatiing simply to simulate; simulation is a means for me to get to where I want to go. If I make sense?

Yep, makes sense; I follow FH/AH and AW theory alright :)


Religious dictatorship under F. E. Briggs, United States of America, circa 2086 until 2101, ended by the 2nd American Civil War and resulting in the foundation of the Second American Republic. At least ~10 Mio dead, due to ruthlessness of belligerents and high population density in contested areas. "it could never happen here" was a popular theme used by pundits, analysts and reporters before the war. Liberation led to reforms in US political system, strict separation of state and church, a culture of Atheism and Rationalism, and a renewed awareness in the general populace that politics is serious business and must be treated as such. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

Wow. Messy. And rather... worryingly... plausible! http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/yikes.gif

Hai-Etlik
06-26-2011, 08:10 PM
Hmm. And this demonstrates why I think so little of polititians and their "citizenship" ideas. We're blinkin' *subjects* lol http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/icon_smile_wink.gif

So am I; Canada may not have "Kingdom" in its name, but it is one. I kinda like having a monarch though as long as she doesn't actually do anything but wear funny hats and wave at people (And admittedly, she doesn't actually live here). It really bothers a lot of Americans when they find out :D. One would think that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or the Queen's portrait on all our coins and our $20 bill would give it away but it still comes as a surprise to a lot of them.

bartmoss
06-27-2011, 05:34 AM
Wow. Messy. And rather... worryingly... plausible! http://www.practicalairsoft.co.uk/forums/yikes.gif

Yeah, and above all: Fun! It'll make for a few good stories, and exploring the changes to US society will be interesting as well.

RogerStenning
06-27-2011, 08:29 AM
So am I; Canada may not have "Kingdom" in its name, but it is one. I kinda like having a monarch though as long as she doesn't actually do anything but wear funny hats and wave at people (And admittedly, she doesn't actually live here).

Heh, have you read SS-GB by Len Deighton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-GB)? The novel postulates that the majority of the Royal Family actually made it to Canada before the Germans successfully invaded! Very good thriller, btw; good example of AU/AH as well, come to that ;)


It really bothers a lot of Americans when they find out :D. One would think that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or the Queen's portrait on all our coins and our $20 bill would give it away but it still comes as a surprise to a lot of them.

Ah, but we're talking obvious clues here, after all ;)

bartmoss
06-28-2011, 05:46 PM
Bonus: Active conflicts of 2174.

36740

Fluff at: http://enderra.com/2011/06/28/earth-2174-active-conflicts/

AlexTna
06-28-2011, 08:42 PM
A very good idea plus a nice and clean political map. I am a history enthusiast so this kind of world building gets me intrigued. You probably don't need any tips from me, but i will lay down some ideas i got just watching and reading your project:
1. India may have trouble maintaining its integrity over the next century, the hundreds off different ethnic groups may be hard to keep united
2. Papua New Guinea ( the south eastern half of the island) has a weak and decentralized government, its plausible Indonesia annexes it.
3. As you have said that global warming is problematic, but not catastrophic, it is plausible that in a century Greenland actually gets green, opening up vast resources and living space. It would make it the place to be.
4. Also plausible is the appearance of a "Polynesian Union" (similar to present day Micronesia). Most states in Polynesia are small and weak, but the inhabitants are related people with many common traditions and a common culture. New Zeeland could spear-head this coalition (thinking of the Maori, maybe a split up between the polynesians and germanic and also geographically of the 2 main islands) Tensions with US over Hawaii. Important states: New Zeeland, Tonga, Samoa, Tuvalu

bartmoss
06-29-2011, 12:34 AM
I always appreciate feedback, AlexTna, or I wouldn't be posting! Thanks for the ideas.

I actually did think about India, but then decided that it being a nuclear-armed nation is in the end a stabilizing factor; nobody would let it disintegrate into chaos. Greater autonomy for various regions may be possible, or of course orderly independence for some parts.

I haven't really thought about the Pacific islands, I'd have to look into - and decide - how much they are affected by global warming. Good idea though, especially since submarine mining is important for a while - until asteroid mining and the hyperdrive makes off-planet imports dirt cheap. So eventually this could be a region once more pushed to meaninglessness.

As for Papua New Guinea, good call. When the Chinese civil war destabilizes the region, Papua New Guinea may even welcome such annexation.

And Greenland, yes, I ignored Antarctica too. I guess I really ought to find out how quickly those glaciers will melt... and who would move in on the Greenlanders. Either EU or US I guess, maybe Canada offers a good deal.

- Nils

cfds
06-29-2011, 04:12 AM
I like how Switzerland still holds out against the pressure of the European Union. Seems like the Asteroid Belt does not yet provide adequate tax havens...

AlexTna
06-29-2011, 04:46 AM
About the Pacific islands : many are actually atolls (coral islands) and anyhow even normal islands will have a hard time battling rising sea levels. They do have some problems now, so it is plausible that in your time setting most of them don't even exist anymore.

Harrg
06-29-2011, 06:09 AM
cool. But why the structure of the Russia (Russian empire)))) doesn't include Ukraine and Belarus and Georgia and Armenia?

bartmoss
06-29-2011, 02:49 PM
Thanks for the feedback, guys! - Georgia would have to be taken over by force, for certain. Could happen, but I doubt it. Belarus and Georgia are part of the EU. Armenia and Azerbaijan are an oversight really. Both seem quite pro-EU so I guess it's not that big of a stretch to throw them into the EU camp.

Updated versions:

3675336754

PS: Meh, forgot Papua...

AlexTna
06-29-2011, 07:27 PM
Does a new British Empire/Commonwealth intrigue you? Thinking of Britain's many political and so on differences with the rest of the EU its plausible they split away. The rest of the former Commonwealth will feel the need for power in numbers (thinking about Canada, Australia, South Africa + the minor ones, on their own they can't do much against an Chinese/American/IU/Indonesian aggression ). Then again I was thinking about their current population to size ratio (very very low for Canada and Australia), but in a century they could even triple their population ( I know Canada is gaining in pop. due to good living conditions and immigration). Good Luck!

bartmoss
06-30-2011, 07:27 AM
It's an interesting thought and I had considered it; I decided against it.

I just really can't see any European country isolating itself from the EU unless something catastrophic happens to the European Union, especially in a situation like Earth-2174 where the EU not only covers Europe, but extends beyond it. I don't see the Commonwealth trade make up for losing easy access to the mainland.

Besides, it's not like ALL of UK is against the EU, there are also proponents, and polls on the subject are likely highly influenced by the politics of the day. So for example right now, I'd imagine you'd get an 80%+ majority against joining the Euro; but this will look vastly different once Oil becomes less of a key ressource, and thus oil-backed currencies (esp the US$) lose in value against other currencies. If the Euro can survive the current unpleasantness - and I predict it will - then it's "weathered" - it'll gain more confidence than it's currently losing.

If the UK ever becomes a "dictatorship" of some sort - or otherwise run by elected fringe groups - then of course all bets are off, but again I can't really see that happen except by whim of the world builder.

Now, as for aggressors:

Current Commonwealth members that are close to China: Malaysia, Papua New Guinea (which we had join Indonesia), Australia, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka. India and Pakistan are allies, and both are nuclear armed - they are unlikely to fear anything from China that the UK could protect them from.

Commonwealth members close to the US: A bunch of minor caribbean islands, and Canada. The US isn't going to pick a fight with Canada (not necessary), and even if - that's a situational problem, and not something that would fuse the Commonwealth together or even expand it.

Islamic Union expansion in Africa could be the most clear and present danger to the Commonwealth, but half of Nigeria already is in the IU, and again it's probably nothing that can't be dealt solely by expanding / renewing / strengthening the commonwealth.

So, long story short, I just don't see it happen :-)

Harrg
06-30-2011, 07:59 AM
Ukraine and Belorusija as a part of EU) So have joined three slavic people is a pity again that. How much I remember still Bismarck said that the Power of Russia to is undermined only by branch from her Ukraine it can be necessary not only to tear off, but also to oppose Ukraine to Russia, to pit two parts of the uniform people and to observe, how the brother will kill the brother. For this purpose it is necessary to find and grow only traitors among national elite and with their help to change consciousness of one part of the great people to such degree that he will hate all Russian, to hate the sort, without realizing it. All the rest time business. And it is better to make Russia not federation and an autocratic monarchy led by the new tsar who will begin a new dynasty)))))
Good luck:)

AlexTna
06-30-2011, 09:26 AM
Just remembered I had a project at the university about the export/import of a chosen country. I picked South Africa and as i developed the project found out that for a long time SA enjoyed and still does have good relations with fellow SACU (Souther African Customs Union) members (Namibia, Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland). In my opinion it is unlikely that the rest of Africa doesn't form some sort of coalition against the IU (Southern Africa does not have a high muslim population), at a given point in time they will feel the pressure from the IU's expansion and will need to group up if they don't want to be taken one by one. In addition to the states I mentioned earlier, other states in the proximity might want to join. They wont probably unite in a federal state, but a economic and defensive coalition is plausible, something similor to NATO or the EU. As I see your maps I get the feeling there is a trend of grouping up to put up with the other super-states.

bartmoss
06-30-2011, 09:27 AM
Actually, Russia-2174 is fairly authoritarian. They still call themselves "Russian Federation" though.

Whip It
06-30-2011, 10:16 AM
Hey, my apologies for not reading the entire thread (my time is limited at the moment, I'll probably read it at a later date) but I'm really interested in what you have in plan for Australia. Will it be its own country, or assimilated into a union/empire/etc.?

EDIT: Actually, just in response to what the person above me said - Australia's population is currently around the 21 million mark (there's a census this year however, so it'll probably be higher). I'm not sure what you've got in plan for population growth but tripling our current population is still only around 65 million people. I have no clue what the political environment will be like then and whether the Earth can support many more people but yeah, 65 million isn't that many people for 150 years into the future, especially when Australia's roughly the same size as USA.

AlexTna
06-30-2011, 10:36 AM
Problem is Australia does not have as much habitable land as US/Canada have, so there probably is a limit to how much people can live in the more hospitable areas like the coasts, east, n-east and s-east. And global warming is going to probably make things worst.

bartmoss
06-30-2011, 11:54 AM
I frankly haven't given Australia that much thought. It, and NZ, are geographically a little isolated. Anyway; yes, AU has comparatively little habitable land. Future technology might change that to some extent, and global warming may worsen this (it seems that there has been trouble already in recent years, but again it's difficult to spot long term trends from such short term events). On the other hand, Australia is a BIG country, and you can pack people quite densely without much problems. So a population of ~60 Mio doesn't sound too unrealistic without checking any sources.

As an aside, I am overall going with a VERY conservative population model, see: http://enderra.com/2011/06/09/future-history-update-on-population/ By 2174, it has been steadily in decline. Granted, much of that fluctuation is going to be in Asia and Africa, but in general Earth in the 22nd Century isn't going to be an overpopulated hell.

I think AU is going to stay a country much in its current form; some sort of economic union is possible but then there's really not that many neighbours to form unions with. It'll maintain good relations with Indonesia, probably be vary of China, and otherwise it's more or less business as usual. If I have any really original - and realistic - ideas I might change my mind of course. For example, fear of China might mean Australia keeps backing the US even in the times of the Briggs government; this could lead to some tightening of laws (much as Australia also seems to have aped the US Anti Terror laws, but then which country didn't), and it could mean that the Australians afterwards have to carry a bit of guilt around - "We supported WHAT NOW?". Briggs wasn't quite a Hitler, though, so in the big picture this doesn't seem too significant.

bartmoss
09-13-2011, 04:29 PM
Just a quick additional map in the series - the FN (yes, named after the Heinlein world government) members are:

38519

It's not 100% cast in stone. Discussion/Notes on my blog as well, as always - http://enderra.com/2011/09/13/earth-2174-membership-federated-nations/

arsheesh
09-13-2011, 05:56 PM
Very crisp and clean; and the colors really pop. Nice job so far Bart.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

Rhotherian
09-16-2011, 09:18 AM
What a plausible-looking future you have here. :)


I also have a "map of the future" for a sries of novels of fine that takes place between a hundred and two hundred years in the future. Earth is quite a bit more unified, though.

I think I posted it on here somewhere...

bartmoss
09-17-2011, 03:22 AM
Thanks guys.

Rhotherian, I personally do not believe in global unification within any kind of near-future timeframe. Not unless there is some kind of threat for force people's hands. I think it's mainly for economic reasons though, not so much for politics (tho that obviously also plays a part). I looked for your map but couldn't find it - let me know where you posted it, would love to see it!

Rhotherian
09-17-2011, 07:13 AM
Oh, turns out I didn't. My bad... ^^'

There's a tiny version of the map at the bottom of this post which links to the full map.

The largest federation (The United Earth Federation - blue) had its roots in the UN. The other two large federations are the Afro Eurasian Empire (red - sorta like a fusion of your Islamic and Chinese empires) and the Federation of Southeast Asia (green). All other countries are in random shades of grey.

This is my version of Earth in roughly two hundred years' time. :)

http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/ba05c52e46d0a780b7edd3dbd1515324aeff3639a5b4788abe 25eb546b1c38214g.jpg (http://www.mediafire.com/i/?af5t6ft5jginf8u)

Elpolloloco52
09-17-2011, 12:12 PM
Just a quick note about Africa, Nigeria's population is supposed to explode to 700 million people in the next century, according to UN reports. I'm not sure if the rest of that part of Africa will have a similar population boom as well, but regardless, I think this would affect the stability of the area in noticeable ways. In fact, now that I look at it, I see that Sub-Saharan Africa is, with the exception of states bordering the Islamic Union, almost entirely the same. To me, this seems unlikely, given the instability of the region and the hand corporations have in politics there.

Aside from that, however, this map is very plausible.

Edit: that was with regards to the OP, not the map above me.

Javert
09-17-2011, 04:03 PM
Very nice map! I agree on many of the details. However, I would agree with Elpolloloco in that Africa will see more change. Also, global warming will affect the political geography in a large way by this time.. so think of most countries pushing north! Canada and Russia and Antarctica are going to have big land rushes, so I like how you extended the USA. And Texas, too. But since at this point it will probably be 90-95% Mexican I don't know if they will keep the name.

There are a whole lot more probable scenarios -- like the shrinking in power of the EU due to immigrant problems, the desertification of the southern US and central Africa, and the loss of Coastal cities globally, that you might want to add into it, although as it is it is still very impressive. A good resource for this time would be Future Timeline.net (http://www.futuretimeline.net/index.htm). Look it up. I was hooked.

bartmoss
09-18-2011, 06:28 AM
Rhotherian, thanks for posting that map - always great to see what other people come up with, very inspiring. I do think I disagree with some of the border changes but if history has taught us one thing then it is that you can never tell what will happen over the course of two centuries.

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I didn't have any smart ideas for much of Africa and I didn't want to simply change borders at random.

In this setting/timeline I postulate that global warming is a problem, but not nearly as catastrophic as a lot of people think it will be. The reason here is pretty simple; I didn't want to create a "eco disaster" future. For Antarctica, it kinda depends on when exploitation begins, if it's in the 22nd Century then Antarctica will probably be FN administrated. If it's before, the FN might inherit administration from the UN, or there could be some sort of treaty in place. It won't actually be a place people want to live beyond having to work there.

Nigeria will certainly see a population increase, no doubt. No idea who predicts what exactly, but the precise numbers don't really matter that much. Again, my timeline is basically very optimistic, I went with the median UN projection and then lowered it, Discussion and graphs: http://enderra.com/2011/06/09/future-history-update-on-population/.

Basically I assume that increased education and higher cost of living will make large families much more unattractive globally. Earth population will top at 9 billion, and then stabilize around 8 billion in the long run. This might have to be revised over very long time periods, say beyond 3000AD, as I consider very advanced medicine and other technology. Earth can certainly support a huge number of people - if we build the right infrastructure.

As for the EU, I think there are really only two things that could happen. The entire thing could fail spectacularly, or it will become integrated and become more of a federal nation than an alliance. There's pretty much no way the European nations will let the EU fail if they can help it. There's almost no way that immigration could destabilize the EU, it could radicalize it a little if politicians continue to fail to deal with it constructively (integration of immigrants). Immigration can be a very powerful force to improve a nation's economy, power, and so on, if channeled properly.

And by the late 22nd Century, many emigrants will move off-world anyway.

Rhotherian
09-18-2011, 10:16 AM
Very interesting.

"Change borders at random..." That certainly sounds familiar. xD

And you're welcome and thanks. ^^

TheMeanestGuest
09-22-2011, 05:30 PM
Nice maps! Here's a question I don't think I've seen an answer to. How did Canada end up with Northern Michigan?

bartmoss
09-23-2011, 02:08 PM
Nice maps! Here's a question I don't think I've seen an answer to. How did Canada end up with Northern Michigan?

Mapmaker's error, I think. Looking into it.

bartmoss
09-23-2011, 02:40 PM
Fixed maps. I read up on various African nations again and there is simply nothing I can hook into. Perhaps Africa is really surprisingly quiet in the 21st/22nd Century. ;)

386963869438695