Early in the book I remember the mention of a slight tourism industry in Gilead. Specifically Japanese tourists trying to take photos of the handmaids and Offred saying they didn't like it so they all kept their heads down. Even though it never went into much detail I can imagine it would have been similar to the type of tourism North Korea has now. Isolated hotels, VERY planned tours and part of a propaganda machine..... Just a thought and observation of the world building
The same imagery that came to mind when I had first read the book and then the hulu series came out except they expanded on this specific scene with a Mexican trade delegation which also was the first mention that the birth rate is an issue in other countries too not just Gilead.
Well the geopolitical situation of the world would change significantly if a superpower like America were to become so draconian. There may not be tourism in a world like that.
I am from Philly and my aunt lives out in Lancaster where the Amish live. The Amish highly value women and they have a vote alongside men in church matters and own businesses, get an education (sometimes going even further because men need to work), etc.. they don’t treat women anything like Gildead (clothing aside, even though men have a “uniform “ also).
Wheat farmers beat hunter-gatherers all the damn time. The farmers greatly outnumber the hunters, have walls, more and better weapons Had Ancient Persian Industrialized the Scythians woukd have been cubstomped by Cyrus' Riflemen and Gatling Gun squadrons!
A few details you forgot to mention: It is often implied in the book that blacks and jews were in fact all killed. Also, the whole thing of Gilead is basically blaming women for the infertility rates (abortion, contraception, sinful way of life, etc), when in fact, it's the men who are sterile most of the time.
Willem Pasterkamp true. 1 man with 20 woman can effectively populate with hundreds or thousands of future descendants. Ghengis Khan has 18 million men who are descendants.
@@kaloyandraganov9462 I thought Conservatives were always complaining about welfare causing a high birthrate since poor people can support more children on welfare. You can't have welfare both increasing and decreasing birthrates.
Doesn’t it say in the book that many americans tried to flee to canada or mexico? I mean June (the main Character) and her child with her dad tried to cross through Maine but got caught. Shouldn’t that mean that both Canada and Mexico would have a great amount of american refugees?
@@gwenshin actually, the baptists are a known enemy of gilead both in the books and i think in the show. Especially the southern ones. im also from rural Appalachia, more Celtic agnostic than atheist, they would play nice til the handmaids and slavery became a thing.i grew up in a Baptist church. "Git yur guns!" Would be a rallying cry.
One of the things that the author has mentioned is that everything that happens in her fiction is reflected by something that actually happened in real life. Not necessarily everything in just one place, but a little bit here and a little bit there. One big parallel that you didn't bring up here is the transition of Iran from an almost Westernized educated state to a religious dominated nation that fully subjugated women in a very short period of time after the fall of the Shah.
Dwight Cook You need to brush up on your current events. Some of the instances paralled in the book haven't happened in large numbers within the last 100 years, however many of them happened in this last decade. Look at Chechnya, Nigeria, look at the war torn nations that America both incited and ignores; this stuff happens when society chooses to be complacent.
Feel the wrath of 1000 angry Canadians missing out on their hockey game. Hahaha, I’m Canadian and even though it’s a stereotype this is still hilarious to me.
for REAL though. People are acting like this would never happen but talking to people in Jordan was really eye opening, girls in the 60s/70s had much more freedom before US intervention/ religious law in the area. I lived there in 2010+ and nearly every woman in my village was dressed how Americans imagine the typical Muslim woman to look ( no shade to Muslims here, just observation).
Don't be. It's a ridiculous exaggeration. I've been to Iran and all my family is Iranian. There are ridiculous laws and you lack a lot of personal freedoms that you have in Europe/NA but it's not anything like Gilead. And there are already some countries in the world who are worse off than Iran even in terms of religious fanaticism.
Beeswax, like I'll admit the Middle East confounds me. But I had a feeling that people of Iran are probably a lot better off in a lot of these other countries in the Middle East. I think they remember what Freedom used to be like and want to get it back. But what do I know I've seen a couple documentaries. I could be totally wrong
Religion tends to wane in times of plenty, ease, and comfort, then wax when life mostly sucks. Also, hunger and thirst will cause upheaval, revolt, and revolution way faster than reproductive problems.
And seeing how birthrates have plummeted with increasing individual wealth and no one seems to mind (or are in fact scared of that trend reversing and causing overpopulation), I don't really see a drop in fertility rates causing such an extreme backlash. In today's world, a lot of people would probably be thankful. Less reason to need a condom...
Japan and parts of Eastern Europe have declining populations. There's not much changing. Then again, people can have children. They just choose not to. If humans actually faced extinction from being biologically unable tp concieve, it would be another matter.
The Handmaid’s Tale was written by Margaret Atwood in the mid 1980’s. During the late 1970’s and 80’s there was a crisis because of a drop in bird birth rates due to the use of pesticides and other chemicals. These chemicals prevented the eggshells of birds from forming which meant that many chicks did not hatch and the chicks that did hatch were likely to be severely deformed. This caused DDT, Agent Orange and many other pesticides to be banned. In the novel Americans live in a future where these pollutants have caused many women to be barren and for birth rates to plummet. The Handmaid’s Tale is Margaret Atwood’s way of showing the world what it would become if we stayed our path. Hopefully this provides some more context for the thought process behind the pollution-related infertility rates. I have studied this novel in depth and hope that this will peak your interest as it has peaked mine.
Stephanie Zawaduk My mom has been reading it and was explaining the plot to me and my brother, and it really interested me. As a guy who loves thinking about alternative history, and learning everything I can about the lore/world surrounding stories, Handmaid’s Tale greatly interest me. I’ll be picking it up at some point for sure.
There is a lot beneath the surface in The Handmaid's Tale. Everything and I mean everything relates back to the real world in some way.In essence, this is the idea that even in the worst of times it could be worse it is best summarized by these two quotes in the novel: “Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub you’d be boiled to death before you knew it.”(Pg.63) “Ordinary, said Aunt Lydia, is what you are used to. This may not seem ordinary to you now, but after a time it will. It will become ordinary.” (Pg. 38) What these two quotes summarize is the idea that even the most horrific and oppressive regimes or corrupt politicians can seem normal after a while. This is exemplified in the novel by characters especially women who accept their place in Gilead. Attwood uses this as a cautionary tale to her readers a warning that this world is not far from our own.
While excellent literature, however, Silent Spring was very poor science. Carson claimed that DDT was threatening many avian species with imminent extinction. Her evidence for this, however, was anecdotal and unfounded. In fact, during the period of widespread DDT use preceding the publication of Silent Spring, bird populations in the United States increased significantly, probably as a result of the pesticide’s suppression of their insect disease vectors and parasites.
6:37 As someone from Boston, we're basically just a melting pot of itallians and Irish. We are extremely Catholic and anti protestant, so this detail kind of makes me angry and confused
Yeah I'm also from Boston and a former Catholic and currently Orthodox. Much like catholic countries we simply put less religion in our daily lives. Sure some may go church on Sundays; but Protestants often read the bible everyday, know multiple translations and study books, have more interactive church ceremonies. When I was a catholic growing up I thought the bible was a book of songs.
@@grapes481 Didn't know there were Orthodox People outised of the Balkans, Eastern Europe and the Caucasus,nice to hear.If I may ask,why did you convert?
Yeah I mean MA wasn't much different in terms of demographics in the 80s either, I certainly can't see a state who elected Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey as their senators suddenly thinking a puritan white supremacist religious cult is a step in the right direction.
I really really doubt there would be any tension between France and the Uk on one hand and Germany on the other hand because of the fall of the US. By that time European economies were already codependant and franco-german relations were at their peak. Euro-scepticism wasn't a thing yet so on the contrary I would say that the fall of the US would have accelerated European integration. Without the US to keep Russia out of regional affairs, I would say that Russia would've been integrated into the European construction too. Putin and other big Russian political figures were pro-EU back in the 90's. With this new EU being built sort of in opposition to Gilead and its fanaticism I also think that would result in a socially more liberal Eastern Europe and we wouldn't have such a big East/west dichotomy as we have now.
Please. Russia is illiberal, even fascist. Its aggressive policy against Ukraine, Putin's goal of reincorporating lost Soviet territory, has nothing to do with the US. When Trump shamefully moved toward disengaging from Europe, the Europeans howled. Russia is unwelcome in the EU based on the EU's own values. And that has nothing to do with the US role.
@@danielsiegel1046 in 1985 Putin was a 33 years old soviet spy in East Germany, he was nowhere near being in charge. In 1985 the USSR was a little more than 5 years away from collapsing and finally opening to the rest of the world as the Russian Federation and at that time it was very much welcome and open to talk to end the cold war and establishing a long lasting peace, until Putin got to the top in the early 2000's that is
Reading this book in high school left me shook and desperate to know what happened to poor June. I'm so incredibly thankful for the show for some closure.
Atwood's idea was to make "speculative fiction " but in case anyone challenged her to say it was too far-fetched, she made sure to only use things that had actually already happened somewhere in human history. Said so a few times in interviews. That's what's chilling about the book. It may be prophetic or just very relevant now but it's all also old news.
Luis Condori harvey the show also mentions “the front” where Gilead is fighting what I assume to be American forces. Where’s that? To the south? To the west? I hope we get to see the Gilead armed forces and what’s left of the American military clash :)
Matt Kennedy It’s mentioned that the front is fighting in Chicago & Florida (Commander Waterford mentions there’s a resistance fighting them, but they took 1/2 of Florida, which is mentioned when Offred goes to the market & buys Florida oranges.) Also, I think California & the west coast were mentioned as becoming a separate nation that does trade with Gilead (I know on the show they said the strawberries were “imported” from California)
Dhi Bee ahhhh..... I remember Offred mentioning fighting in or around Chicago and you’re right about the “imported strawberries” line. Good ear. I still wanna see the fighting. Perhaps see what’s left of our boys giving the guardians hell maybe even capturing and interrogating Nick or another main character if they ever see action. That would be cool :)
Matt Kennedy Also, in the book the Baptists & Appalachian mountain regions are rebel groups against Gilead. Here’s an article that explains some things & includes the map of the previous USA newsamed.com/what-is-the-republic-of-gilead-in-the-handmaids-tale-is-it-a-real-place-where-are-the-colonies-and-will-offred-be-sent-there/ Note: If you google the Gilead map it’ll show slightly differently depending on the map illustrators vision. And yes I definitely wanna see American troops destroy the Gilead soldiers too. I think Nick is regretful while I have absolutely no sympathy at all for the Waterfords fate at all. They could be tortured to death for all I care!
If Gilead espouses Temperance in any way/ shape/ form then Boston is definitely not In. Nor would most of the rest of New England. Take our Packy's away? Them's Fightin' words . . .
@@tibolcb6446 Massachusetts promptly secured reproductive rights after the Gang Of Six ended Roe, while Texas--whom Margaret depicts as leading the insurrection--started paying out bounties to catch women getting abortions.
As a black American living in the Deep South, the concept of fleeing South for amnesty is mind boggling. I love the show and my mom bought the book and I’m definitely going to read it this summer.
I read that novel the year after it was published. I was a teenager at the time... 13 years old only. It was a very hard, bleak read. I wasn't ready for that. For some reason it was in the Sci-Fi section of the local library (!)
It happened in the west centuries ago in certain ways and it is happening in some countries which are extremely religious where the church and the state aren't separated yet or totalitarian regimes as in Afghanistan or Venezuela.
The main reason I think something like this is very very very unlikely especially in America is bc of how armed the American population is. We live in the safest time ever and yet are the most armed ever
@@VoyagerD but people won't get on board with this at all🤣 and even if there is a big militia 1 guy with a gun is a problem that takes like 6 militia guys to control, and every time they kill a person thier going to get more and more hated
The idea that China would be insignificant if not for capitalism is frankly absurd. The situation it would be in is almost exactly the same as the 1930s Soviet Union. An impoverished backwater, but with a centralized government able to leverage the nation's enormous size and resources, while everyone around them collapses. Combined with the collapse of the USSR to the north, China would be perfectly positioned to fill the power vacume in Asia.
I want to applaud this channel for the amazing amount of consistency and variety of the videos. Loved this one just like all the others. You always seem to go over ten minutes but it never feels like you're stretching out anything.
I always felt the book and the show underestimated the resistance the American people would put up to such a regime. despite the setup of the government being beheaded basically and the fertility issue. both Germany and Russia were somewhat used to oppressive and authoritarian governments (the Kaiser and tsar) when their revolutions occurred making the transition to both the Nazis and Soviets somewhat more palatable for the people. America on the other hand has never experienced such a regime and has had ideals like liberty, freedom, democracy ect pounded into our heads since we were young, this goes doubly for the military. Gilead also is much more then just a change of leadership but they basically upended society on a technological level. Americans are used to not only freedom but things like the internet, cellphones ect and to suddenly force the bulk of the population to go back a few hundred years and get excited about the new line of wooden ducks coming out rather then Call of Duty X would probably not sit well with some not to mention the multitude of corporations with considerable financial assets that will now be completely out of business. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great story and world but I just wish it was made a little more believable in some areas. Sure having the whole of the continental U.S.A. come under the sway of Gilead (which at least the TV show suggests with few exceptions), is quite shocking but I think giving the legitimate U.S. government more then just Hawaii and Alaska, say, maybe part of the west coast as well with an ongoing civil war would of made things a bit more realistic. Just MHO.
Perhaps you are right but you seem to forget that the US has always had some authoritarian features. In the past and even today in times of crisis the US turned into what could be described as a police state for example in the 1950 during McCarthyism when thousands of people where being spied on or being jailed. It was some sort of smooth totalitarian regime with no killing or deportations like the Nazis but it had some authoritarian features. Other examples in History are the camps for Americans of Japanese descent during WW2 or more recently with the war on terror the Patriot act or the NSA spying on US citizens. What Edward Snowden revealed (large and systematic spying of many Americans E-mails etc...) does not correspond with Liberty, Freedom and Democracy as you say. I’m not saying that the US is authoritarian or a dictatorship but some of the tendencies for such regimes are very well present and accepted in the US. The common denominator is fear. Each time that the US population fears something it goes to some extreme lengths to protect itself even if it means undermining some of its core ideals and beliefs. The fear of the Japanese after Pearl Harbour led them to lock into camps innocent men, women or children regardless of if they were guilty of anything, fear of communist infiltration led them into a state of hysteria and paranoia for a good decade going to the very limits of what a free democracy is and lately the fear of terrorism has launched a new era of fear and paranoia in which spying on your citizens is totally fine and justified. That military is also over represented in the US citizen’s daily life: media, movies etc.., veterans and soldiers are held in a very high much higher than most countries and have huge benefits compared to the normal population (health insurance, cheaper supermarkets, private lobbies in airports among other things...). Such a special treatment for soldiers is unheard of in most countries in the world even for those that are at war and gets the US closer to authoritarian values than what many people think. It’s normal to thank and respect your country’s soldiers but not at such a level it’s almost worship. Now if the US went into such extreme lengths for fear of a few commies or a handful of terrorist that have nowhere near enough power to bring down the country imagine what would happen if it was something as critical as the survival of the human species. People when scared enough and provided that a strong leader or group appears tend to follow them no matter how stupid or amoral their ideals are, no matter the country or the level of development. People are like that it’s natural and when enough people follow the rest goes with that like a wave that comes and take everything with it.
You make good points and examples but all of those examples, including McCarthyism only effected a very small portion of the population. Even if the Snowdens claims are true you didn't see some massive revolt against the government because it didn't really effect anyone's lives in a tangible way. McCarthyism didn't prevent the average Joe from living his life any different then how he was and Snowden didn't change anything about how the average American lives their lives either. whether that's good or bad I'm not sure but the examples are far cry from the complete religious, political, technological (regressive) and social changes Gilead enacted. Another point to remember is that, at least in the TV series, these changes took place very swiftly so it's obvious this wasn't a long term strategy of shifting society toward the ideals of Gilead. The military is well respected and maybe I'm being idealistic hear but I think some of that admiration is because they tend to represent the ideals of freedom ect. I think if the military turned on the civilian government that respect and admiration would go away pretty fast. The changes of Gilead don't effect just a minority or a handful of Hollywood elite but literally 100% of the population in just about every aspect of their lives and regardless of your wealth or social status. I'd be willing to suspend my disbelief to a point where the Sons of Jacob mostly had consolidated power under the guise of protecting against Islamic terrorists, especially if they suggested that once the "state of emergency" was over a civilian government was reinstated but I think once they started banning women from working, shooting unarmed protestors and/or confiscating legal firearms it would be a full blown civil war to an extent far greater then the book and TV series present and Gilead would have a far harder time holding onto power then presented. Also unlike most nations Americans are armed to the teeth and whether your for or against that the prevention of a state like Gilead is the whole idea behind that right. Like you said, fear can motivate people and fear of an oppressive, totalitarian government like Gilead is a large reason so many Americans hold the right to bear arms so fanatically. And no, I don't think the same people that "fanatically" defend the right to bear arms are the same people that would embrace Gilead simply because both are religious. I also question the videos assertion that the west coast and places like California would become hotbeds of the Sons. I see the point and that when there is an absence of religion it is easier for a new one to fill the vacuum but the hard core liberalism that permeates the area is practicly a religion itself. Again, this wasn't a slow process with the Sons "converting" people over decades in the area, it was swift. I could definitely see California succeeding from the Union fairly quickly once the sons intentions we made clear or becoming a foothold on the coast for the legitimate government forces.
Well the NSA spying concerns a vast part of the population and who knows what other programs might be in place. What I meant to say in my comment is that the US population is ready to put aside its ideals of freedom and liberty if they fear something enough. The fact that we didn't see some massive revolt against the government as you say is proof that people are ready to trade freedom for security. You are right in saying it doesn’t really affect people’s life (although I think people should really put more attention to it) but what happens in the book or the TV show does really affect people and probably terrifies them. I mean we are talking about extinction type of threat. So there is no way of knowing how people would react and what they will be willing to do but I’d say that they will probably willing to accept far more restrictions than what you seem to think. I don’t think it needs to be a long term strategy in order to be quickly adopted. I would say that in the early panic people where kind of lost and some people came up with the ideology that became the basis for the Sons of Jacob and then people looking for something to believe in followed them. Sometimes things happened without been planned for the long term. But then again it’s a TV/book so a work of fiction it’s not meant to be realistic or a prediction of what could happen. The author of the book had a point to make about the society of Gilead not how they came to power. I personally found that the movie “Children of Men” did a better job at portraying how our modern society would react to the fall of fertility even if in the movie it’s for all the women ( on a side note it’s a seriously good movie you might want to check it out). That’s how the military likes to portray itself anyway but maybe you are right. Even if it affects everyone the circumstances of this universe are so unique and apocalyptic that I think people would still follow whatever nonsense they are served and all the consequences/restrictions that go with them. The scenario that you have in mind sounds indeed much more realistic and believable than what is presented in the show/book. But I disagree that people having guns in the US being an issue for the rise of Gilead. Guns are efficient in protecting you from physical threats but they are useless to protect their owners mind from ideologies. If you convince people then it’s over not matter how armed they are. They might even have a nuke in their garage if they agree with the ideology and follow they won’t do anything to stop Gilead. The absence of religion could help with the rise of the Sons of Jacob. People need to believe in something and so Gilead could fill the void. In Europe several terrorist attacks where conducted by what is called “lone wolfs” very often those are young people who were not religious and had lost their roots (cultural, family or religion) and found in the extremist propaganda some sort of purpose. So I won’t rule out that this theory could work but I think it’s not only the absence of religion but also the absence of some type of ideology and of a strong cultural background that would make it work. Then again, if Liberalism is able to fill the void better than the Sons ideology then you are right and this theory fails.
I did see Children of men in theatre when it came out and I did quite like it. I think people are willing to give up a reasonable amount of security for a reasonable amount of freedom. I think part of the reason Americans had such a "ho-hum" reaction to the NSA spying situation was because the thought was "well I'm not a terrorist or important enough for the government to spy on me anyways so what do I care, only the bad guys are effected?". In the long term this is probably a bad way to think as it can result in a slow erosion of freedoms over time. Thers's a big difference though between that shade of grey and forcing free Americans to give up pretty much every convenience in their lives that they've known from a car to TV to the internet and even the cloths they wear, accept a religious theocracy more oppressive then the Nazies, possibly allow their loves ones to be ritually raped and their wives to become second class citizens and then rename their town as the cherry on the cake. And that's the thing, The Sons demand so much and creates such a drastic change it's hard to believe they receive so much support in the way the book/show is set up. Your asking me to believe one of the most free countries in the world is suddenly turned into the most oppressive in history more or less overnight and receives the level of support it does is a stretch. I'm not quite sure what you mean by a hopeless scenario. militarily I don't think fighting the Sons is hopeless at all, or at least it shouldn't be. I'm assuming what you mean is the apocalyptic scenario of low birth rates (60% drop?) creates a hopeless scenario but I have to disagree. Children of Men was a far more apocalyptic scenario with it's 0 birth rate but I think Handmaidens tale feels far less hopeless. Maybe I'm being idealistic again but I think far more people would feel a solution without the creation of a theocratic police state was preferable and would fight against it. As far as liberalism I would go so far to say that extreme thinking on the left and right in America has somewhat transformed as of late from something more benign and minor to, at least in certain groups a sort of "ism" which could fill the void of religion. If anyplace California is a hotbed of that thinking, most of which directly conflicts with the Sons thinking. Also figure in the racist attitudes of Gilead and the high percentage Hispanic population in California and the southwest and I think it would be a massive center of resistance. I would think the bay area around San Francisco to Los Angeles would be a complete warzone akin to what the show describes Chicago to be like with continuous fighting. regardless, being alternate history who knows who's correct and hopefully the scenario never plays out so we know but I still strongly disagree with the ease of Gileads success. I like the show, I really do but personally the scenario pulls me out of the show and I wish it was even just a little more realistic by tempering Gileads success but the show wasn't created just for me and I do acknowledge the book had a specific vision and message behind it.
Ah lucky you! I saw it on TV but I guess it would have been better in a theatre. I agree with you that the change is happening way too quickly as it would take at least a few years to fully become reality in the real world. But then again don’t underestimate the speed a witch things can change in certain situations. No you are right I meant the low birth situation. I do think that fighting the Sons is possible, you can fight against anything but being armed doesn’t necessary means that you will put up a fight maybe you will agree as so you won’t fight. The situation is kind of apocalyptic. Sure 60% down is better than 100% down but it’s pretty big imagine the average Joe thinking: what if it gets to a 100% ? If he wants children and can’t have them it’s like the world crumbles around him already and there is no way to say if things are going to get worst or not. You also have to take into account that in the story pollution and chemicals are responsible for the fall of fertility those things are due to the modern society we have (TV, internet etc...) Seeing how such a lifestyle harmed our species maybe people would be ready to go back to how things where before. Well the situation is indeed way worst in Children of Men but at least in the movie the problem concerns everyone and so there is some sort of resignation and hopelessness but in the Handmaid’s Tale some people still can procreate. To have children is very important need for humans as it is the way nature forces us to procreate and sustain the species. Humans who cannot have children are often looking for any conceivable way to have and if their partner is not the one responsible for the problem they often feel very guilty. Now imagine what would happen if some people could but not the majority. The people in the majority would get very envious and jealous of the others ability to have children and would partly put their guilt and frustration on them. They would then feel much more comfortable imposing very bad treatments to such individuals out of a mix of jealousy and frustration. In Children of Men nobody can have children so nobody gives a sh.t they either wait to die or go insane. But in Handmaid’s tale some can and that can attract the hatred of the majority. Hitler used the same tactic to cast out the Jews saying to the rest of the Germans that Jews where bad and a cancer for Germany, and they where rich while the Germans where poor due to the crisis.... In the end after years of brainwashing the Germans were far more comfortable casting out Jews from their jobs and social status than before. Making their life more and more difficult until the Nazis decided to exterminate them. What you are saying is sound but it’s a work of fiction so the author probably did not bother with the details of how things append to be and what kind of resistance there was in such or such place the original book was also wrote in the 1980’s so no exactly the same demographics at the time (even if it was similar) I agree that the success seems a bit too easy but still plausible when taking into account the situation. You a right they are many movies, books and other types of media that want to tell a specific story an invent an alternate reality that fits it but don’t bother to make it really plausible and realistic and that does pull me out of the show too but nothing is perfect if the story is good that what matters.
Well, knowing that United States government actually started and helped fascist dictatorships in Chile, Argentina and other South American countries in the 80s, United States turinig into Gilead is not something real crazy
I live in Alabama and here we consider being a Baptist and Methodist the same thing and all Christians would probably band together. Like you said we could not be able to reconquer the rest of America for a while but I think we could hold ourselves up. I mean, we have a great balance of everything. Our land is good for crops and we could probably be fine economically. I do think if Gillead formed in America, I don’t think any rebellious groups would be the fall of it. Sure they would help, but an uprise from within would spark it. I do think that Florida might be with Gillead? Not sure on that one tho. Anyways, that’s just my opinion. Feel free to comment and make suggestions.
Yeah, I honestly disagree with you on the EU. At this point the relationship between the members was fairly decent and the threat of a resurgent Russia, coupled with the withdrawal of U.S. troops, would force them to work together on a co-operative basis militarily. As for the west coast, I'm kind if split. It was already very culturally different from the rest of the country, and I have little doubt that they would have been faster to restrict the pollution that caused the infertility, so the sons of Jacob would likely have a harder time there. It would likely come down to how fast the state government cracks down on local sympathizers and how fast the sons can get their shit together. If California is quicker to the draw it'll probably nope out and that would be it. As for the Mormons, their fate lies with California's. California would probably aid the Mormons in order to create a buffer state, and the Mormons would benefit from having a powerful not-Gilead neighbor.
Whatifalthist, what you miss in your otherwise really good analysis is the what effect of private citizens owning firearms would have on the formation of a religious totalitarian government. I for one would not tolerate anyone forcing me to adopt any religion, especially one that would automatically make my wife, daughters and granddaughter effective slaves even if they didn't end up as sex slaves. Such a government would face armed opposition, asymmetric warfare, constant assignations of government officials and random ambushes of officials at any opportunity. The creation of a government like Gilead is exactly the reason the Founders of Untied States placed the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution. It is there to defend the other Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
You say that but the Nazis in Germany *were* the private gun owners in Germany. The people who supported the Nazi party as it came to power were often army veterans and the middle class, the people who owned guns in Weimar Germany, which is also what let them run paramilitary groups and commit extrajudicial violence and killing. The privilege of firearm ownership is just as capably abused to commit tyranny as it can be used to resist it. Any fascist or reactionary dictatorship that succeeds would likely appeal to the people who own guns. You might think this is impossible in the US because we have so many guns, but only 1/3rd of people in the US actually own guns - those who own guns just buy a fuck ton of them. Therefore you only really need to appeal to that 1/3rd of the US or at least a majority of those people to effectively be able to get away with a tyrannical system without the gun-owning crowd resisting you, which is not nearly as hard as you might think. There might still be a token few who do try to resist with their guns, but these would likely be cast as terrorists by the propaganda of this fledgling dictatorship and so the populace would turn against them anyways. People often forget that tyranny in a democracy is not forced upon people, it's voted in by people who willingly give in to it. You might be one actual gun owners who would do anything to resist tyranny no matter what form it's in, but the unfortunate truth is that you'd be swept away by the majority of those who would willingly give into it.
@@TheRedKing247 The National Socialists passed into law major gun control measures, people in Europe didn't have the tradition of self defence that is part and parcel to the identity of a vast number of Americans. Interestingly enough one of the gun control laws passed in Nazi Germany in the 1930 was copied nearly word for word about 30 years after it was passed in Germany. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was interpreted VERY differently here and then then it was in Germany. Further, I can state unequivocally as of today 11/21/20 I will NOT be complying with any new gun control laws or regulations passed by this new incoming Administration. Nor will millions of other Americans. I will also point out that all it takes is one person taking a stand against tyranny to bring it to public mind and inspire people to take a stand. Rosa Parks, I point at you Ma'am.
@@WonderingMind2750 The Nazi Gun control laws were only affected the people the Nazis considered lesser races like the Jews. Normal Germans were fine and still owned firearms. In fact gun regulations were loosened for members of the Nazi party. The simple fact of the matter is that the Nazis used their gun rights to establish the SA and SS which is one of the main reasons they were able to solidify control after taking the reigns of the government. The exact same thing is what would happen in the US if tyranny ever came to be. A tyrannical ruler would appeal to the gun crowd for control knowing they need their support to gain power, and use them to suppress others freedoms and rights. Having a gun does not make you immune to tyranny. It just means you'll either join them or get killed when you don't.
@@TheRedKing247 Only 3% of the German population were official members of the German National Socialist Worker's Party. THEY were the only ones who had official sanction to have firearms outside military and police. So no you're not correct. You are right in the respect that just owning a firearm doesn't make you immune to tyranny. Nor even just using it end that tyranny. What ends tyranny is a combination of having at hand the tools to fight, the willingness to fight and having the CULTURE to fight. That culture, the willingness to fight if necessary is something ingrained into the very fabric of most Americans. Yes, millions of us are on the other side, weak and willing to suffer any indignities just so long as the Powers that Be give them their bread and circuses. But it only takes one person to tie the entire west coast into knots, just as Chris Dorner. So when millions of Americans decide that a religious dictatorship or a philosophical dictatorship has offended their sensibilities just a bit too much, those dictators will find out exactly how it feels to be on the receiving end of 4th generation warfare.
I really think you’re underestimating the massive immigrant populations in CA, which are majority catholic. Not just Mexican immigrants either (though honestly even with just them I fail to see Gilead being able to crush that kind of resistance), many Filipino, Indian, and Japanese immigrant populations have a lot of catholic representation. What with CA’s penchant for Sanctuary Cities, I suspect the rise of Gilead would cause mass flight to the coast by immigrant and generally revolution-displaced) refugees to the coast, overwhelming the already strained infrastructure in LA, but at the same time bolstering the already robust religious immigrant populations.
Don’t forget the Sally Army, I heard when the Berlin Wall fell they found the Salvation Army had been functioning as a secret church throughout, I bet those guys would survive
I did enjoy a review of the television show I read admitting that when Atwood wrote the book, she acknowledged it was highly satirical and the events that occur within it quite ludicrous. Not that this has kept those without much history education or understanding of the world from getting tripped up with the, "it's all stuff that really happened before!" line. The more you know about the world, the more you know the book only works as satire.
I actually got the impression that it was more the West than the South where the remnant of the U.S. government was surviving. Also, you seem to focus exclusively on concurrent geopolitics in your analysis of the rest of the world without addressing the issue of how environmental problems would affect it, which I find to be more interesting.
This book cracks me up. It’s supposed to be some female empowerment story, yet the protagonist arguably does nothing of her own volition. Whatever big changing events happen are all caused by men either failing or taking charge. Except for maybe one situation, she is completely incapable of doing anything. The best part is feminists laud this book, yet it directly highlights the joke that is feminism.
I can't imagine the rest of the world would sit back and allow Gilead to form to begin with! There would be an immediate global coalition form to declare war on the Sons of Jacob and Gilead! The UK (and its Commonwealth) would certainly lead the way, especially placing massive military forces in Canada and Alaska! The EU would also contribute its forces too! Remember also that the USA has massive military force placed around the world! I'm sure much of this force would go against Gilead!
i always wanted a What if story of: what happen it the US and the USSR colapse at the same time?; i think this is very close of that idea, good video i give you a deserved like
It’s fascinating that what I read out of an interest in dystopian novels when it was first published, and which generated little popular interest at the time, has become a current obsession among some people. I remember finding the ideas interesting but the writing rather ho-hum. Rather like Dune when I first read it in the ‘60’s- was captivated by the universe-building, but nearly put off by the writing.
For your answer about the Intermountain West look up Buchanan's blunder. And that was peacefully executed. And the disruption techniques used less than 40 men.
I think you forgot the US forces stationed overseas. I'm basing this theory on the show The Last Ship season 3. The main event in the US in that show was that a coup d'etat in the US resulted in the USS Nathan James has to fight back against the new government. There could be a possibility that the forces that the US has in Europe, The Middle East, and Asia could rally in and take America back
I feel like armed civilian resistance to any such regime would be incredibly fierce and the Sons of Jacob would get their shit kicked in pretty brutally. Most people do not take well to the "the women in your life will be slaves" shit. Really think they'd have almost constant insurgency inside their borders, not to mention attacks from the outside.
It's definitely an alternate history, but the book is the only version to be set in the future. In the TV adaptation, the takeover happened in 2014, and it's 2017 by the time the series starts (which was the year it aired, too).
I loved that book. Very interesting analysis. When reading, I find myself getting sucked into whatever world the story is in. I think her lack of knowledge or desire to have knowledge of the war front is part of her character, but a better backstory would have been good too. Thanks for filling in the blanks.
There was a GREAT alt-history novel "the Guns of The South;" the SFricans use a time travel machine to go back and rearm the Confederates in 1864, with RPGs, automatic rifles and FOOD RATIONS, enabling the South to win the war in weeks, keep their slaves and expand slavery further. That was was/is a masterpiece.
Now we have a more precise idea of the TV show's' timeline. When June consults the files of her fellow Handmaids in Joseph's basement, a kid is mentioned to have been born of one of her as a Handmaid in 2017, so Gilead must have taken power then. In S4E7, we get a glimpse of a Sons of Jacob flyer calling for a March on Congress on 03/16/2011, so this must mean that the Gilead takeover took place between 2011 and 2016. Given the show was first aired in 2017, this made it alternate history from the get-go !
The US is the largest nuclear power in the world, the possibility of what would have happened to all this armament should have been better explored in the TV Series.
I'd live with the Mormons. The ones I met in AZ and E. WA were very welcoming, helpful, funny and generally just good people. And...the chicks are HOT!
The most successful way for a nerdy guy to get with a hot girl: Become Mormon, so long as you can deal with the weirdness. Being one for twenty years I can attest to this fact from observation.
If the south was independent from Gilad, then Utah would be the front of a guerrilla war. In fact, Gilad would be hard pressed to keep anything west of the St. Croix, basically Minnesota west. If there was any constitutional support, it would rise up as far from the center of power as possible, and the western US would be a lot more likely to resist. The fact that Appalachia continues to resist means that if rebellion rose up in the west it is unlikely that Gilad would be able to deal with it. In the books it says they control the Dakotas, but I’m not sure how under control anything else would be. At best, they’d be autonomous regions, more likely a place with constant unrest, with Gilad struggling to control the situation.
Under this assumption, would it not be logical to assume the teachings of the Sons of Jacob might spread to other nations? Especially as it is stats that Giliad had managed to raise the birth rate?
An invasion of Utah would be weird. The Book of Mormon gives two examples of how to deal with war. The first is the story of a group of pacifist who choose to die rather than break a covenant not to kill they had made with God and the other is the story of a general who chose to fight to defend his people’s right to worship. If both these examples were followed I think the cities would be relatively safe places while the deserts and mountains would be extremely dangerous. I would imagine it as their version of Afghanistan
More like Mormon Switzerland. It would not be logistically desirable to take Utah so Gilead would, just like Germany, focus on the larger enemy which in this case would be the confederacy
It’s pretty easy to convert people to what you want if your position is to convert or die. That’s how the natives in the America’s became Christian in the first place lol
@@sirsurnamethefirstofhisnam7986 Catholics tend to have a much lower conversion rate than other religions, almost all of America's shrinking religious population comes from converting to athiesm. The added benefit of the pope as a central figure who, probably, takes a stand against it compounds with it, while the Native Americans had a very weak religion without central authority or values
@@Spoon80085 not really England was a totally catholic country until Henry viii severed ties with the pope and by the time his daughter Elizabeth reigned most of the country had willingly converted to Protestantism even after years of persecution by the catholic queen Mary catholic’s are no more loyal than anyone else and the fact that majority “catholic” areas like Boston and California in the USA are the least religious places in the nation clearly disproves your thesis
The south would probably be allies with Brazil, Argentina, and other Latin American countries. Europe would probably trade with them and some nations would recognize the new Confederacy as t successor state to the US because the because the Government in exile would be seen as unfit to government and a weak puppet of Canada and Britain.
The lack of fertility is because of radioactive outbreaks in the middle of america and there are maps of gilead online - also this could be just in the series but i’ve read the book and watched the series and there seems to be wives and handmaids of all races
I really appreciate how your map of Canada is more detailed by province and capital. By the same measure, its too bad there are so many states that individual names and capitals wont fit legibly on the map. Canada for the geographic lesson win?
My only problem with this vid is that the Mormons would control most of the south west. When they were settling the area in the 1800s they spread into what is now Idaho, Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, California, and New Mexico; even reaching the coast in San Diego and LA (they played a large part in founding both cities). If the country breaks up due to a coup like this the Mormons would take the initiative and grab land while Gilead is consolidating its power in the east.
5:05 one guy has an eotech and the other guy doesnt even look like he has a rear sight post... truly a horrible dystopian society separated by the haves and have nots
Me, European and growing up during the 1990s: if this was the 1990s I had gone through - fuck me: I'd say unite Europe and arm ourselves to the fucking teeth ! If this is what we have on the other side of the Atlantic ? Better be ready.
This channel has come a long way. “I’m not an expert in social justice” to making a literal documentary about social justice. Hats off to you man, never stop what you do.
Yeah, it went from "I'm not an expert" to "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I'm going to pretend I do and get outraged over my own poor understanding"
