Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Is the United States a hyperpower?


  • Please log in to reply
127 replies to this topic

Poll: Is the United States a hyperpower? (43 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you think the USA is a hyperpower?

  1. Yes (12 votes [27.91%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.91%

  2. Voted No (18 votes [41.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.86%

  3. Depends on what the qualifications of a hyperpower are.. (13 votes [30.23%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.23%

Do you think China will overtake the United States in importance throughout the world?

  1. Yes (25 votes [58.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 58.14%

  2. No (8 votes [18.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.60%

  3. Voted Possibly (10 votes [23.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.26%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#121
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,316 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

In my eyes, a hyperpower is something that simply can't exist (yet). That's actual world domination to a cartoonish extent. That's not just the USA not having to worry about China and Russia— that's the USA annexing China and Russia. 

A GDP ten times larger than it currently is, with a military budget in the tens of trillions, NASA budget in the hundreds of billions, pumping out super geniuses from studentry-style colleges, with anti-nuclear defenses that are airtight— while the rest of the world remains exactly where it is. 

 

Maybe in the immediate post-war period, you could classify USA as a hyperpower. But you'd still run into problems.


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#122
Erowind

Erowind

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 935 posts
What is a studentry-styled college?

Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#123
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,316 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

Oh, that's my own term that I've somehow deluded myself into thinking was more common. A "studentry" (not referring to a school's student body) is more of a dystopian thing, where you're taken from birth and raised by teachers. Because schooling can only go so far when you still have to go back to your parents who will always try to infuse into you their own beliefs and ways (plus, they get four to five years to do so, those years being the absolute most important in any person's development). 

It's been proven that you can turn any "average" person into a prodigy if you raise them in the correct manner, and your ability to learn languages also forms most quickly between ages 0 and 5. So if you are willing to go full totalitarian, the best way to get a high intellect population is to take newborns and put them into these studentries and then begin teaching them from the moment they arrive. Because they do learn even at this stage. They learn things in the womb, but it's when they're born that it kicks into high gear. 

 

Naturally, you can see how that might be troublesome because you can effectively mold a whole generation's entire reality if you can raise them from birth. Indoctrination at schools or from entertainment or from church is scattershot and tends to focus on when a child can actually understand these things. But a studentry is infinitely more focused. The only reason why we don't have studentries in real life is because they're technically impossible to pull off. One, the outcry you'd get from mothers would be legendary. Two, you're still raising them with other humans. We'd need machines to make them effective. You'd also need machines to keep the anguished mothers in their place.


  • Erowind, BasilBerylium and rennerpetey like this

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#124
Erowind

Erowind

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 935 posts
.

 

The idea reminds of Brave New World's schooling system. Studentries would be very effective from what you're describing, albeit extremely totalitarian.


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#125
BasilBerylium

BasilBerylium

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 734 posts

^ It reminds me of Spartan training, only that instead of creating supersoldiers they would create specialized(?) geniuses; or at least take brainwashing to a new level.

 

PD: you always have the most creative ideas Yuli


  • Unity likes this

This website has a magic that makes people draw back here like moths to light.


#126
Jakob

Jakob

    Groveling Goblin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,080 posts

Oh, that's my own term that I've somehow deluded myself into thinking was more common. A "studentry" (not referring to a school's student body) is more of a dystopian thing, where you're taken from birth and raised by teachers. Because schooling can only go so far when you still have to go back to your parents who will always try to infuse into you their own beliefs and ways (plus, they get four to five years to do so, those years being the absolute most important in any person's development). 

It's been proven that you can turn any "average" person into a prodigy if you raise them in the correct manner, and your ability to learn languages also forms most quickly between ages 0 and 5. So if you are willing to go full totalitarian, the best way to get a high intellect population is to take newborns and put them into these studentries and then begin teaching them from the moment they arrive. Because they do learn even at this stage. They learn things in the womb, but it's when they're born that it kicks into high gear. 

 

Naturally, you can see how that might be troublesome because you can effectively mold a whole generation's entire reality if you can raise them from birth. Indoctrination at schools or from entertainment or from church is scattershot and tends to focus on when a child can actually understand these things. But a studentry is infinitely more focused. The only reason why we don't have studentries in real life is because they're technically impossible to pull off. One, the outcry you'd get from mothers would be legendary. Two, you're still raising them with other humans. We'd need machines to make them effective. You'd also need machines to keep the anguished mothers in their place.

OK, so this has given me an idea for something called the Crucible. Will make a thread on that.



#127
Raklian

Raklian

    An Immortal In The Making

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,978 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Naturally, you can see how that might be troublesome because you can effectively mold a whole generation's entire reality if you can raise them from birth. Indoctrination at schools or from entertainment or from church is scattershot and tends to focus on when a child can actually understand these things. But a studentry is infinitely more focused. The only reason why we don't have studentries in real life is because they're technically impossible to pull off. One, the outcry you'd get from mothers would be legendary. Two, you're still raising them with other humans. We'd need machines to make them effective. You'd also need machines to keep the anguished mothers in their place.

 

Here's a solution both can compromise on - bring the educators, namely the machines, to the children's homes and have them reside there 24/7 and readily available to answer and guide their inquiring minds.


  • Unity likes this
What are you without the sum of your parts?

#128
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,215 posts

I just thought I would add to the list I started on the previous page of why I do not consider the United States to be a hyperpower.  It was only vaguely alluded to in my previous comments, and needs to be explicit.  That is in the field of nuclear weapons.  It matters little if the U.S. has "more sophisticated" nuclear weapons if Russia (or other nuclear powers) retain the ability to inflict unacceptable damage on the United States in the event of a nuclear war.  

 

I would think that is an obvious point, but needed to be said so that others don't think that I am naive on that subject.  


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users