Could an empire control the whole planet with today's comunication methods? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara The network's official Twitter account is up and running again. What content…How would the Anglo-French empire arise?How might an inter-planetary confederation turn into a highly centralized empire?City state with a direct democracy turns into an empire?How large could an empire with WWII-era tech become on a very large world?How does my critter communicate across the liquid/air barrier?Could a Roman Empire style civilization exist without slavery?Can a single empire rule the world if all the landmass is part of one supercontinent?Could an empire like this survive?Time Travellers And The Roman Empire, Part 1: Transport and ControlHow likely is it that an interplanetary empire could exist in the future?

Identify 80s or 90s comics with ripped creatures (not dwarves)

What was the last x86 CPU that did not have the x87 floating-point unit built in?

Working through the single responsibility principle (SRP) in Python when calls are expensive

Am I ethically obligated to go into work on an off day if the reason is sudden?

Deal with toxic manager when you can't quit

"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?

What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?

Do working physicists consider Newtonian mechanics to be "falsified"?

Did the new image of black hole confirm the general theory of relativity?

Is 'stolen' appropriate word?

Are spiders unable to hurt humans, especially very small spiders?

How to handle characters who are more educated than the author?

how can a perfect fourth interval be considered either consonant or dissonant?

Is this wall load bearing? Blueprints and photos attached

Is every episode of "Where are my Pants?" identical?

What aspect of planet Earth must be changed to prevent the industrial revolution?

Can we generate random numbers using irrational numbers like π and e?

How to politely respond to generic emails requesting a PhD/job in my lab? Without wasting too much time

Keeping a retro style to sci-fi spaceships?

Button changing its text & action. Good or terrible?

60's-70's movie: home appliances revolting against the owners

Why don't hard Brexiteers insist on a hard border to prevent illegal immigration after Brexit?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

My body leaves; my core can stay



Could an empire control the whole planet with today's comunication methods?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
The network's official Twitter account is up and running again. What content…How would the Anglo-French empire arise?How might an inter-planetary confederation turn into a highly centralized empire?City state with a direct democracy turns into an empire?How large could an empire with WWII-era tech become on a very large world?How does my critter communicate across the liquid/air barrier?Could a Roman Empire style civilization exist without slavery?Can a single empire rule the world if all the landmass is part of one supercontinent?Could an empire like this survive?Time Travellers And The Roman Empire, Part 1: Transport and ControlHow likely is it that an interplanetary empire could exist in the future?










8












$begingroup$


I remember watching a documentary some time ago and at one point they were talking how empires were limited to a certain size since there was no way to communicate across the empire fast and reliably. The best method they had was courier by horse and to that was a limited size, also empires in America would have an even smaller max size since they had no horses and had to communicate sending people running from courier post to courier post. Also transport by sea doesn't really help, colonial empires did control vast areas so far apart, but they did't get much inland control.
I imagine sea then horse would cause a lot of different problems.



So with today's reliable and fast communication could an empire rule over the whole planet? (Taking in consideration only this fact about communication)










share|improve this question







New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
    $endgroup$
    – nzaman
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
    $endgroup$
    – BKlassen
    8 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    3 hours ago
















8












$begingroup$


I remember watching a documentary some time ago and at one point they were talking how empires were limited to a certain size since there was no way to communicate across the empire fast and reliably. The best method they had was courier by horse and to that was a limited size, also empires in America would have an even smaller max size since they had no horses and had to communicate sending people running from courier post to courier post. Also transport by sea doesn't really help, colonial empires did control vast areas so far apart, but they did't get much inland control.
I imagine sea then horse would cause a lot of different problems.



So with today's reliable and fast communication could an empire rule over the whole planet? (Taking in consideration only this fact about communication)










share|improve this question







New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
    $endgroup$
    – nzaman
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
    $endgroup$
    – BKlassen
    8 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    3 hours ago














8












8








8


1



$begingroup$


I remember watching a documentary some time ago and at one point they were talking how empires were limited to a certain size since there was no way to communicate across the empire fast and reliably. The best method they had was courier by horse and to that was a limited size, also empires in America would have an even smaller max size since they had no horses and had to communicate sending people running from courier post to courier post. Also transport by sea doesn't really help, colonial empires did control vast areas so far apart, but they did't get much inland control.
I imagine sea then horse would cause a lot of different problems.



So with today's reliable and fast communication could an empire rule over the whole planet? (Taking in consideration only this fact about communication)










share|improve this question







New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I remember watching a documentary some time ago and at one point they were talking how empires were limited to a certain size since there was no way to communicate across the empire fast and reliably. The best method they had was courier by horse and to that was a limited size, also empires in America would have an even smaller max size since they had no horses and had to communicate sending people running from courier post to courier post. Also transport by sea doesn't really help, colonial empires did control vast areas so far apart, but they did't get much inland control.
I imagine sea then horse would cause a lot of different problems.



So with today's reliable and fast communication could an empire rule over the whole planet? (Taking in consideration only this fact about communication)







communication transportation empire-building






share|improve this question







New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 9 hours ago









DanielDaniel

414




414




New contributor




Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Daniel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
    $endgroup$
    – nzaman
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
    $endgroup$
    – BKlassen
    8 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    3 hours ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
    $endgroup$
    – nzaman
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
    $endgroup$
    – BKlassen
    8 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    7 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    3 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
$endgroup$
– genesis
9 hours ago





$begingroup$
I am not convinced by the hypothesis in the first place. Large empires existed and they didn't fail because of a lack of communication but for political reasons which would have existed either way.
$endgroup$
– genesis
9 hours ago













$begingroup$
Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
$endgroup$
– nzaman
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
Well, Rupert Murdoch does have a global empire...
$endgroup$
– nzaman
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
$endgroup$
– BKlassen
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
from my experience working in an international company, while communication technologies may be instant, the people you want to connect with may not be. Due to time zones and our yet unresolved need for sleep and care for our mental health long term communications from one side of the planet to the other are still not 100% efficient
$endgroup$
– BKlassen
8 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
$endgroup$
– JBH
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
Didn't get much inland control? Here's a map of the British empire if all the land they controlled was controlled at the same moment.. That's a honking lot of inland space.
$endgroup$
– JBH
7 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
$endgroup$
– Mazura
3 hours ago





$begingroup$
You mean like how it is controlled by the banking industry?
$endgroup$
– Mazura
3 hours ago











6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















14












$begingroup$

Yes... and no...



Is today's communication fast enough and capable enough to manage a planetary empire? Absolutely. The Internet alone could do it.



That's not your problem. Let me suggest a frame challenge:



Your problem is establishing such an empire in a believable way, because the technology that allows massive, instantaneous communication also allows for considerable freedoms involving transportation, weaponry, housing, and (not surprisingly) communication against the empire.



When you consider the various near-worldwide colonial/empire periods of Earth, you discover that people were (relatively) easily controlled because the conqueror had tremendous advantage in firepower and manpower. Genghis Khan was attacking, predominantly, villages that were loosely organized at best. England, Spain, and the Netherlands brought overwhelming firepower and organization to bear against the many lands they conquered and controlled. The same can be said about the U.S. westward expansion.



You don't have that advantage today.



It seems like you do. You have tanks and planes and aircraft carriers — and they're all very impressive — but while you may logistically control the entire planet, you would be constantly fighting rebellions and resistances. Well-armed rebellions and resistances. And history has proven that they could fight against tanks, etc. in the past.



Technology is a great equalizer (well... for bad, if not for good). Consider the various difficulties in Africa today — difficulties made simple because arming yourself with automatic weaponry that can eliminate whole villages in minutes is trivial. Why can't the villages do the same? They're poor.



Which is probably the only way a planetary empire could stay in control — poverty. But then, what's the point of the empire?






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    35 mins ago


















4












$begingroup$

Yes.



Many large corporations and organizations already operate on a global scale just fine. Just add some local and regional governments such as nearly all governments already do and you have a functioning global empire.



It is unlikely to happen with a democratic government without an alien invasion or some other reason to have world government but a fascist or communist government might go for world domination. Their legitimacy comes from a unifying ideology and works just as well (or badly) for a planet as it does for a single commune.



A theocratic government would also work. An Islamic caliphate for example would actually have perfectly valid reasons to seek to unite the world under its power. A Christian or Hindu version of the same would work just fine.



And manufacturing a reason for a democratic government to go for it isn't really that hard. Any kind of global event that threatens the extinction or subjugation of entire human species would work. Or people could just get really tired of pointless wars. The European Union largely exists because people figured that an economic union between France and Germany really would save lots of bother.



EDIT:
Since I started by pointing out that corporations work on a global scale, I probably should mention that it has required some adaptations to how they operate. This is because the "working hours" happen at different times in different parts of the world. Typically (a simplified general model) you'd split the world into three operational zones (24/8 = 3) and have active operational control cycle between these. Typically these are the Americas, Europe and Africa (or EMEA), and Asia and Oceania.



A global empire would probably copy this solution and essentially have three administrative centers. Say, Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Depends on how the empire came to be. The central government could be in one of these or cycle between them or even be divided between the three. The EU has split its functions between multiple locations for political reasons and it kind of works with fast travel and telecommunications.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago


















2












$begingroup$

Yes. I'll break it into two parts, communication relating to Empire Citizens, and Communications within the powers that be.



My first thoughts go to China and their citizen points system being worked into place. The first step would be to pull as many people into the cities as possible, having most of your population in sight of you cameras and tracking technology would be crucial. Monitoring any internet/ media usage of a population is a common occurrence today, and would be extended to make sure nobody is forming a group to go against your reign. We have the technology to track the whereabouts of every citizen, so we would be able to tell who is meeting up with who, where people are going and what they are doing. With no privacy, people cannot create a revolution.



Communication between generals, media controllers, the world leader, and everyone else is instant. People are able to make a snap decision and have millions of people respond and react to it, I don't see why that couldn't be scaled up to billions. For example if a curfew was implemented suddenly, the police/ military could immediately respond to the situation without having to take the step of waiting for a courier.



Most of these solutions are dystopic, but I think world government and control over the whole planet causes those situations to arise. You would need to squash all attempts at disruption, and you would be able to do so quickly.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
    $endgroup$
    – Alex
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago


















1












$begingroup$

This is the bare minimum needed for an empire to control the whole planet: Optical telegraph, trains, mirror-based telescope, masts, airplane wings, fans (of any kind) and hot air balloons (to mix them to get an airship), and reduction gears. Extra points for steam engines, stirling engines and windmills, waterwheels and aerial ropeways.



  • The optical telegraphs are used to send and receive messages.

  • Mirror-based telescopes are used to check on other nearby settlements, to see if -something is wrong, and for mapping.

  • Airships powered by pedals or treadles for mapping and traveling without having to use roads, or to change from carts to ships and back. Reduction gears would be used for moving the fans at the wanted speed.

    • Trains powered by pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels and using human or animal power to move, and aerial ropeways to help it move uphill or accelerate faster when leaving the station. Reduction gears would be used for moving the wheels at the wanted speed.


  • Steam engines for ships and airships (not necessary airplanes), for when the masts are not delivering enough power, or when you would rather hurry.

  • Stirling engines are for mechanical power generation, and for refrigeration if you run them in reverse, feeding them movement and moving heat instead of feeding them temperature difference and receiving movement.

Using tall towers for the optical telegraphs, you can increase the distance you can talk with both fixed and moving targets. Usually, the fixed targets will be talked with by using strong lights and mirrors to blink/flash towards the target, and the target will use a telescope to look at you and see the signal. For that reason, it is likely that different towers or different coordinates will be used, often with some space nearby to make sure the target is not thinking you sent a message when in fact it was a different tower.



The optical telegraphs would be first used for mapping, and next would be using airships for mapping. Due to the danger of airborne attacks, the medieval castles will evolve to oversized ziggurat cities, with mirrors sending a lot of sunlight to the underground, since using torches would be rather dangerous.



With airships, you can get a better picture of the continents, also useful for maps, and also travel for long distances without worrying about mountains and water currents, but instead worrying about wind currents.



We had bearings, both plain and roller and ball bearings since around the time Roma was born. There were also trains used for a short time period around that time, too. Even without steam and stirling engines, just with wind power, water power and pedaling, we can have an empire span the whole globe.



The trains would be used for moving things on a long distance using windmills, waterwheels and pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels.



Stirling engines can be used instead of steam engines and watermills and windmills for a distributed mechanical power generation network, probably using mechanical tension on ropes to move the power around. Alternative ways to move power would be compressed air, compressed water (tap water) from a water tower (or more water towers) used as storage and compression chambers. The energy can be supplemented with wind power and/or water power, if needed or wanted.



That's it. That's all one would need. And that is still a bit much.



Edit: You can use pedal/treadle powered vehicles to move faster with either human power or animal power. Just get an animal or human on an oversized hamster wheel (like those thread wheels used in medieval times to move heavy things up in elevation), and you can use their output to achieve high speeds. With or without rails. During the US's Great Depression, people tried using pedal-powered cars, but shortly after that there was a lowering in fuel price, which caused the idea to be abandoned by most people.



There is a lot more which can be done with that, so ask me if you want to know more.



Edit 2: It would also be useful to have a technological advantage over the rest of the world, to be able to give important gifts to the taken over people, to win them over and ensure rebellions will not happen. Since papyrus can be made, and wax and resin were used to waterproof things, there can be an empire which uses waterproofed papyrus paper boards for greenhouses, which might be cheaper and require lower tech than glass does, plus that you would use glass for the mirrors needed for the telescopes for the optical telegraph. Greenhouses will also keep your existing people fed and give them cheaper condiments. For growing temperate plants in the desert, you would likely need some way to cool the air, like through pipes going underground for tens of meters, before getting into the greenhouses where the amount of light is limited by having a few small windows allowing a lot less sunlight inside, which paired with the colder air can sustain temperate-climate plants. The humidity would still be an issue, though. Being able to get spices and grow temperate plants in colder and hotter climates surely does make up for that.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    32 mins ago


















0












$begingroup$

Yes, absolutely. It will be easy to control the entire world, once dominance is established. And rebels will not be as strong as they were, in the past. Yes, rebels do use modern technology at combat, but because the tech today is massively destructive, and the army uses modern means of control, science and logic in reasoning and deducing strategies, it is quite unlikely that any rebel team would succeed at outsmarting the empire. They would be better off working from within the empire to betray the emperor, but that will also be quite risky.



Why is that? In the past, people never dynamically employed scientific and logical strategies in combat, as much as we do today. Most kingdoms and empires in the past were taken down by outsmarting the emperor's army. But today, the military has R&D, and thus creates advanced weapons. They have heavily funded teams of brilliant minds who would work towards taking down their enemy. Today, the rebels do not have enough space to hide, as every part of the earth is measured and mapped. Even if they hide, it will not be possible for them to grow big and become dangerous: because they will need a lot of R&D and training, thus must have a well funded team of scientists, strategists and other people skilled in combat.



If someone had already managed to become an emperor (which is highly unlikely) it will literally be impossible to take that person down. Because, he will have the best minds on the planet (literally on the planet, as he controls the entire world), and as long as they work for him, and as long as he is in good terms with people who are immediately below his rank, nothing will stop him.



There is a new emerging psychology called the cyber-psychology. The same methods used by the game industry and the social networking sites can be used to massively control people. It is possible to psychologically control people by socially reward them for certain task while punishing them for the others. Imagine using a social networking site in a imperial world. If the emperor hates certain kind of topics, it is unimaginable to think that he wouldn't socially punish citizens who engaging in such topics. A simple way to do this is by improving the visibility of their content (which involves their personal profile or anything else they post) among people who would genuinely despise the topic and decrease the visibility of the content among people who may have the same views. Actions like hearts, likes, up-votes or points etc can be used as the incentive here. This could also go further- to jobs and credit scores. Soon, most content in the social network will be in favor of the emperor. And massive surveillance can be used to study people and respond almost spontaneously, to "fix issues". In this situation, there is no room for rebels. For rebels to exist, you need a mob of angry people, not zombies controlled by social networks. Also, even if you have angry people, what chance will they have against heavily funded experts working for the emperor?



Thus, I believe today is the right time for someone to be the world's emperor, as he could do more than just "communicate very fast". He could literally condition the psychology of the world to his needs. But it is highly unlikely that someone would grow powerful enough to conquer the world.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
    $endgroup$
    – Sreram
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
    $endgroup$
    – Andrey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
    $endgroup$
    – Muuski
    3 hours ago


















0












$begingroup$

Yes



The limitation you provide has been overcome for centuries. The British Empire was globe-spanning, and could keep itself together, project force, deal with insurrections, etc.



It had sigificant ability to project force inland -- British India is not a coastal nation. It even fought wars in Afghanistan, one of the least navaly-accessible regions of the world.



More recently, both the American and Russian empires where globe spanning. Both ruled through proxy or puppet states, with the Russians being a bit more heavy handed.



The Russian empire crossed Asia, and included states in the Middle East and Cuba. It even fought wars in SE Asia; the logistics of having a semi-hostile China between it and the region, and American naval dominance, was more of a problem than communication delay.



The American empire included naval and military bases scattered over the world (which still exist), and "allied" puppet democracies, dictatorships, and kingdoms. They had allied empires (the old European ones), and could project force around the world in response to insurrection (such as Vietnam, an insurrection against the old French empire).



The 3 large Empires left -- America, the fragments of the cold war Russian, and the Chinese -- have different approaches.



The Russian Empire is at this point honestly too weak to project force much outside its borders.



The Chinese and American are mostly trade-based empires. Chinese conquest of Tibet/Mongolia and the South China Sea, and its threatened conquest of Taiwan, are relatively local geopolitical concerns; it lacks the ability to reliably project force past an American naval screen. It may or may not become more openly imperial as its economic and military strength grows.



American's traditional approach has been to use trade to expand its imperial influence. So long as you allow US companies in to reap profits, it leaves you alone. If you do go protectionist and you are relatively small and you align with regional or global foes and there is something the US could profit from in your territory, you are basically placed on a "oh well" list, and the next time an American president needs a poll boost they start talking about an "axis of evil" or whatever excuse and replace your government.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    2 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Daniel is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143859%2fcould-an-empire-control-the-whole-planet-with-todays-comunication-methods%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes








6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









14












$begingroup$

Yes... and no...



Is today's communication fast enough and capable enough to manage a planetary empire? Absolutely. The Internet alone could do it.



That's not your problem. Let me suggest a frame challenge:



Your problem is establishing such an empire in a believable way, because the technology that allows massive, instantaneous communication also allows for considerable freedoms involving transportation, weaponry, housing, and (not surprisingly) communication against the empire.



When you consider the various near-worldwide colonial/empire periods of Earth, you discover that people were (relatively) easily controlled because the conqueror had tremendous advantage in firepower and manpower. Genghis Khan was attacking, predominantly, villages that were loosely organized at best. England, Spain, and the Netherlands brought overwhelming firepower and organization to bear against the many lands they conquered and controlled. The same can be said about the U.S. westward expansion.



You don't have that advantage today.



It seems like you do. You have tanks and planes and aircraft carriers — and they're all very impressive — but while you may logistically control the entire planet, you would be constantly fighting rebellions and resistances. Well-armed rebellions and resistances. And history has proven that they could fight against tanks, etc. in the past.



Technology is a great equalizer (well... for bad, if not for good). Consider the various difficulties in Africa today — difficulties made simple because arming yourself with automatic weaponry that can eliminate whole villages in minutes is trivial. Why can't the villages do the same? They're poor.



Which is probably the only way a planetary empire could stay in control — poverty. But then, what's the point of the empire?






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    35 mins ago















14












$begingroup$

Yes... and no...



Is today's communication fast enough and capable enough to manage a planetary empire? Absolutely. The Internet alone could do it.



That's not your problem. Let me suggest a frame challenge:



Your problem is establishing such an empire in a believable way, because the technology that allows massive, instantaneous communication also allows for considerable freedoms involving transportation, weaponry, housing, and (not surprisingly) communication against the empire.



When you consider the various near-worldwide colonial/empire periods of Earth, you discover that people were (relatively) easily controlled because the conqueror had tremendous advantage in firepower and manpower. Genghis Khan was attacking, predominantly, villages that were loosely organized at best. England, Spain, and the Netherlands brought overwhelming firepower and organization to bear against the many lands they conquered and controlled. The same can be said about the U.S. westward expansion.



You don't have that advantage today.



It seems like you do. You have tanks and planes and aircraft carriers — and they're all very impressive — but while you may logistically control the entire planet, you would be constantly fighting rebellions and resistances. Well-armed rebellions and resistances. And history has proven that they could fight against tanks, etc. in the past.



Technology is a great equalizer (well... for bad, if not for good). Consider the various difficulties in Africa today — difficulties made simple because arming yourself with automatic weaponry that can eliminate whole villages in minutes is trivial. Why can't the villages do the same? They're poor.



Which is probably the only way a planetary empire could stay in control — poverty. But then, what's the point of the empire?






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    35 mins ago













14












14








14





$begingroup$

Yes... and no...



Is today's communication fast enough and capable enough to manage a planetary empire? Absolutely. The Internet alone could do it.



That's not your problem. Let me suggest a frame challenge:



Your problem is establishing such an empire in a believable way, because the technology that allows massive, instantaneous communication also allows for considerable freedoms involving transportation, weaponry, housing, and (not surprisingly) communication against the empire.



When you consider the various near-worldwide colonial/empire periods of Earth, you discover that people were (relatively) easily controlled because the conqueror had tremendous advantage in firepower and manpower. Genghis Khan was attacking, predominantly, villages that were loosely organized at best. England, Spain, and the Netherlands brought overwhelming firepower and organization to bear against the many lands they conquered and controlled. The same can be said about the U.S. westward expansion.



You don't have that advantage today.



It seems like you do. You have tanks and planes and aircraft carriers — and they're all very impressive — but while you may logistically control the entire planet, you would be constantly fighting rebellions and resistances. Well-armed rebellions and resistances. And history has proven that they could fight against tanks, etc. in the past.



Technology is a great equalizer (well... for bad, if not for good). Consider the various difficulties in Africa today — difficulties made simple because arming yourself with automatic weaponry that can eliminate whole villages in minutes is trivial. Why can't the villages do the same? They're poor.



Which is probably the only way a planetary empire could stay in control — poverty. But then, what's the point of the empire?






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Yes... and no...



Is today's communication fast enough and capable enough to manage a planetary empire? Absolutely. The Internet alone could do it.



That's not your problem. Let me suggest a frame challenge:



Your problem is establishing such an empire in a believable way, because the technology that allows massive, instantaneous communication also allows for considerable freedoms involving transportation, weaponry, housing, and (not surprisingly) communication against the empire.



When you consider the various near-worldwide colonial/empire periods of Earth, you discover that people were (relatively) easily controlled because the conqueror had tremendous advantage in firepower and manpower. Genghis Khan was attacking, predominantly, villages that were loosely organized at best. England, Spain, and the Netherlands brought overwhelming firepower and organization to bear against the many lands they conquered and controlled. The same can be said about the U.S. westward expansion.



You don't have that advantage today.



It seems like you do. You have tanks and planes and aircraft carriers — and they're all very impressive — but while you may logistically control the entire planet, you would be constantly fighting rebellions and resistances. Well-armed rebellions and resistances. And history has proven that they could fight against tanks, etc. in the past.



Technology is a great equalizer (well... for bad, if not for good). Consider the various difficulties in Africa today — difficulties made simple because arming yourself with automatic weaponry that can eliminate whole villages in minutes is trivial. Why can't the villages do the same? They're poor.



Which is probably the only way a planetary empire could stay in control — poverty. But then, what's the point of the empire?







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 35 mins ago

























answered 7 hours ago









JBHJBH

48.2k699228




48.2k699228











  • $begingroup$
    that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    35 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    6 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
    $endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    35 mins ago















$begingroup$
that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
that is a very interesting answer. Maybe I have misunderstood, but do you think that the only way we would have a planetary empire is only by unions and alliances like the ones today and we would never be truly unified as one?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
7 hours ago












$begingroup$
Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
$endgroup$
– elemtilas
6 hours ago





$begingroup$
Note that the query is not asking how to grow such an empire, nor whether such an empire is plausible --- the existence of the empire is a condition of the question.
$endgroup$
– elemtilas
6 hours ago





1




1




$begingroup$
@JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago




$begingroup$
@JBH It was my fault for not being clear enough. The communication would be one of the big factors, not the main reason.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
@elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
$endgroup$
– JBH
35 mins ago




$begingroup$
@elemtilas, fair enough. I should have done that (and it would make a good question, if scoped to not be too broad).
$endgroup$
– JBH
35 mins ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
$endgroup$
– elemtilas
35 mins ago




$begingroup$
Otherwise I concur: empires fall, almost always, from internal failures. Moral, political, social. It's happening in the West (Europe & the US) now, for example. History never stands still!
$endgroup$
– elemtilas
35 mins ago











4












$begingroup$

Yes.



Many large corporations and organizations already operate on a global scale just fine. Just add some local and regional governments such as nearly all governments already do and you have a functioning global empire.



It is unlikely to happen with a democratic government without an alien invasion or some other reason to have world government but a fascist or communist government might go for world domination. Their legitimacy comes from a unifying ideology and works just as well (or badly) for a planet as it does for a single commune.



A theocratic government would also work. An Islamic caliphate for example would actually have perfectly valid reasons to seek to unite the world under its power. A Christian or Hindu version of the same would work just fine.



And manufacturing a reason for a democratic government to go for it isn't really that hard. Any kind of global event that threatens the extinction or subjugation of entire human species would work. Or people could just get really tired of pointless wars. The European Union largely exists because people figured that an economic union between France and Germany really would save lots of bother.



EDIT:
Since I started by pointing out that corporations work on a global scale, I probably should mention that it has required some adaptations to how they operate. This is because the "working hours" happen at different times in different parts of the world. Typically (a simplified general model) you'd split the world into three operational zones (24/8 = 3) and have active operational control cycle between these. Typically these are the Americas, Europe and Africa (or EMEA), and Asia and Oceania.



A global empire would probably copy this solution and essentially have three administrative centers. Say, Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Depends on how the empire came to be. The central government could be in one of these or cycle between them or even be divided between the three. The EU has split its functions between multiple locations for political reasons and it kind of works with fast travel and telecommunications.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago















4












$begingroup$

Yes.



Many large corporations and organizations already operate on a global scale just fine. Just add some local and regional governments such as nearly all governments already do and you have a functioning global empire.



It is unlikely to happen with a democratic government without an alien invasion or some other reason to have world government but a fascist or communist government might go for world domination. Their legitimacy comes from a unifying ideology and works just as well (or badly) for a planet as it does for a single commune.



A theocratic government would also work. An Islamic caliphate for example would actually have perfectly valid reasons to seek to unite the world under its power. A Christian or Hindu version of the same would work just fine.



And manufacturing a reason for a democratic government to go for it isn't really that hard. Any kind of global event that threatens the extinction or subjugation of entire human species would work. Or people could just get really tired of pointless wars. The European Union largely exists because people figured that an economic union between France and Germany really would save lots of bother.



EDIT:
Since I started by pointing out that corporations work on a global scale, I probably should mention that it has required some adaptations to how they operate. This is because the "working hours" happen at different times in different parts of the world. Typically (a simplified general model) you'd split the world into three operational zones (24/8 = 3) and have active operational control cycle between these. Typically these are the Americas, Europe and Africa (or EMEA), and Asia and Oceania.



A global empire would probably copy this solution and essentially have three administrative centers. Say, Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Depends on how the empire came to be. The central government could be in one of these or cycle between them or even be divided between the three. The EU has split its functions between multiple locations for political reasons and it kind of works with fast travel and telecommunications.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago













4












4








4





$begingroup$

Yes.



Many large corporations and organizations already operate on a global scale just fine. Just add some local and regional governments such as nearly all governments already do and you have a functioning global empire.



It is unlikely to happen with a democratic government without an alien invasion or some other reason to have world government but a fascist or communist government might go for world domination. Their legitimacy comes from a unifying ideology and works just as well (or badly) for a planet as it does for a single commune.



A theocratic government would also work. An Islamic caliphate for example would actually have perfectly valid reasons to seek to unite the world under its power. A Christian or Hindu version of the same would work just fine.



And manufacturing a reason for a democratic government to go for it isn't really that hard. Any kind of global event that threatens the extinction or subjugation of entire human species would work. Or people could just get really tired of pointless wars. The European Union largely exists because people figured that an economic union between France and Germany really would save lots of bother.



EDIT:
Since I started by pointing out that corporations work on a global scale, I probably should mention that it has required some adaptations to how they operate. This is because the "working hours" happen at different times in different parts of the world. Typically (a simplified general model) you'd split the world into three operational zones (24/8 = 3) and have active operational control cycle between these. Typically these are the Americas, Europe and Africa (or EMEA), and Asia and Oceania.



A global empire would probably copy this solution and essentially have three administrative centers. Say, Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Depends on how the empire came to be. The central government could be in one of these or cycle between them or even be divided between the three. The EU has split its functions between multiple locations for political reasons and it kind of works with fast travel and telecommunications.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Yes.



Many large corporations and organizations already operate on a global scale just fine. Just add some local and regional governments such as nearly all governments already do and you have a functioning global empire.



It is unlikely to happen with a democratic government without an alien invasion or some other reason to have world government but a fascist or communist government might go for world domination. Their legitimacy comes from a unifying ideology and works just as well (or badly) for a planet as it does for a single commune.



A theocratic government would also work. An Islamic caliphate for example would actually have perfectly valid reasons to seek to unite the world under its power. A Christian or Hindu version of the same would work just fine.



And manufacturing a reason for a democratic government to go for it isn't really that hard. Any kind of global event that threatens the extinction or subjugation of entire human species would work. Or people could just get really tired of pointless wars. The European Union largely exists because people figured that an economic union between France and Germany really would save lots of bother.



EDIT:
Since I started by pointing out that corporations work on a global scale, I probably should mention that it has required some adaptations to how they operate. This is because the "working hours" happen at different times in different parts of the world. Typically (a simplified general model) you'd split the world into three operational zones (24/8 = 3) and have active operational control cycle between these. Typically these are the Americas, Europe and Africa (or EMEA), and Asia and Oceania.



A global empire would probably copy this solution and essentially have three administrative centers. Say, Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Depends on how the empire came to be. The central government could be in one of these or cycle between them or even be divided between the three. The EU has split its functions between multiple locations for political reasons and it kind of works with fast travel and telecommunications.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 6 hours ago

























answered 6 hours ago









Ville NiemiVille Niemi

35.2k260120




35.2k260120











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago















$begingroup$
Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago




$begingroup$
Thanks for the answer, interesting point of view.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago











2












$begingroup$

Yes. I'll break it into two parts, communication relating to Empire Citizens, and Communications within the powers that be.



My first thoughts go to China and their citizen points system being worked into place. The first step would be to pull as many people into the cities as possible, having most of your population in sight of you cameras and tracking technology would be crucial. Monitoring any internet/ media usage of a population is a common occurrence today, and would be extended to make sure nobody is forming a group to go against your reign. We have the technology to track the whereabouts of every citizen, so we would be able to tell who is meeting up with who, where people are going and what they are doing. With no privacy, people cannot create a revolution.



Communication between generals, media controllers, the world leader, and everyone else is instant. People are able to make a snap decision and have millions of people respond and react to it, I don't see why that couldn't be scaled up to billions. For example if a curfew was implemented suddenly, the police/ military could immediately respond to the situation without having to take the step of waiting for a courier.



Most of these solutions are dystopic, but I think world government and control over the whole planet causes those situations to arise. You would need to squash all attempts at disruption, and you would be able to do so quickly.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
    $endgroup$
    – Alex
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago















2












$begingroup$

Yes. I'll break it into two parts, communication relating to Empire Citizens, and Communications within the powers that be.



My first thoughts go to China and their citizen points system being worked into place. The first step would be to pull as many people into the cities as possible, having most of your population in sight of you cameras and tracking technology would be crucial. Monitoring any internet/ media usage of a population is a common occurrence today, and would be extended to make sure nobody is forming a group to go against your reign. We have the technology to track the whereabouts of every citizen, so we would be able to tell who is meeting up with who, where people are going and what they are doing. With no privacy, people cannot create a revolution.



Communication between generals, media controllers, the world leader, and everyone else is instant. People are able to make a snap decision and have millions of people respond and react to it, I don't see why that couldn't be scaled up to billions. For example if a curfew was implemented suddenly, the police/ military could immediately respond to the situation without having to take the step of waiting for a courier.



Most of these solutions are dystopic, but I think world government and control over the whole planet causes those situations to arise. You would need to squash all attempts at disruption, and you would be able to do so quickly.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
    $endgroup$
    – Alex
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$

Yes. I'll break it into two parts, communication relating to Empire Citizens, and Communications within the powers that be.



My first thoughts go to China and their citizen points system being worked into place. The first step would be to pull as many people into the cities as possible, having most of your population in sight of you cameras and tracking technology would be crucial. Monitoring any internet/ media usage of a population is a common occurrence today, and would be extended to make sure nobody is forming a group to go against your reign. We have the technology to track the whereabouts of every citizen, so we would be able to tell who is meeting up with who, where people are going and what they are doing. With no privacy, people cannot create a revolution.



Communication between generals, media controllers, the world leader, and everyone else is instant. People are able to make a snap decision and have millions of people respond and react to it, I don't see why that couldn't be scaled up to billions. For example if a curfew was implemented suddenly, the police/ military could immediately respond to the situation without having to take the step of waiting for a courier.



Most of these solutions are dystopic, but I think world government and control over the whole planet causes those situations to arise. You would need to squash all attempts at disruption, and you would be able to do so quickly.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Yes. I'll break it into two parts, communication relating to Empire Citizens, and Communications within the powers that be.



My first thoughts go to China and their citizen points system being worked into place. The first step would be to pull as many people into the cities as possible, having most of your population in sight of you cameras and tracking technology would be crucial. Monitoring any internet/ media usage of a population is a common occurrence today, and would be extended to make sure nobody is forming a group to go against your reign. We have the technology to track the whereabouts of every citizen, so we would be able to tell who is meeting up with who, where people are going and what they are doing. With no privacy, people cannot create a revolution.



Communication between generals, media controllers, the world leader, and everyone else is instant. People are able to make a snap decision and have millions of people respond and react to it, I don't see why that couldn't be scaled up to billions. For example if a curfew was implemented suddenly, the police/ military could immediately respond to the situation without having to take the step of waiting for a courier.



Most of these solutions are dystopic, but I think world government and control over the whole planet causes those situations to arise. You would need to squash all attempts at disruption, and you would be able to do so quickly.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 9 hours ago









AlexAlex

414




414











  • $begingroup$
    How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
    $endgroup$
    – Alex
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
    $endgroup$
    – genesis
    9 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
    $endgroup$
    – Alex
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    7 hours ago















$begingroup$
How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
9 hours ago




$begingroup$
How do you think they would handle rebellions outside the city, in forests, caves and stuff like that. I would give a gullible example, today's ISIS and Taliban and what not( I say gullible since you can say that people don't want to stop them) are still on the loose even if the people who fight against them should in theory have superior resources and technology. I imagine absolute control would only work if the Empire had superior secret technology that the revolutionaries couldn't figure out what it is or how it works and would have to be far superior to what we have today.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
9 hours ago












$begingroup$
I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
$endgroup$
– genesis
9 hours ago




$begingroup$
I think guerrilla warfare is actually much more plausible with today's technology because smaller groups of people can do more damage. If all you have is a stick the best you can do is start a fire...
$endgroup$
– genesis
9 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
$endgroup$
– Alex
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Daniel i could see systematic implementation of bio-tracking devices at birth. Sure, some people would slip through the cracks, but if your government controls all food, water, fuel, etc they can choose who receives it. Also there will be a stage where a terrorist is just a kid who wants to eat. Again, very dark, but only allowing those that follow your policies to receive care would make sure your rules are followed and every citizen is accounted for. I'd mask the purpose of the tracker by implementing it in every day life (a wallet you cannot lose, how to travel through any security point)
$endgroup$
– Alex
8 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Alex that is a very interesting point of view, but we changed the subject haha, I appreciate your answers.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
7 hours ago











1












$begingroup$

This is the bare minimum needed for an empire to control the whole planet: Optical telegraph, trains, mirror-based telescope, masts, airplane wings, fans (of any kind) and hot air balloons (to mix them to get an airship), and reduction gears. Extra points for steam engines, stirling engines and windmills, waterwheels and aerial ropeways.



  • The optical telegraphs are used to send and receive messages.

  • Mirror-based telescopes are used to check on other nearby settlements, to see if -something is wrong, and for mapping.

  • Airships powered by pedals or treadles for mapping and traveling without having to use roads, or to change from carts to ships and back. Reduction gears would be used for moving the fans at the wanted speed.

    • Trains powered by pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels and using human or animal power to move, and aerial ropeways to help it move uphill or accelerate faster when leaving the station. Reduction gears would be used for moving the wheels at the wanted speed.


  • Steam engines for ships and airships (not necessary airplanes), for when the masts are not delivering enough power, or when you would rather hurry.

  • Stirling engines are for mechanical power generation, and for refrigeration if you run them in reverse, feeding them movement and moving heat instead of feeding them temperature difference and receiving movement.

Using tall towers for the optical telegraphs, you can increase the distance you can talk with both fixed and moving targets. Usually, the fixed targets will be talked with by using strong lights and mirrors to blink/flash towards the target, and the target will use a telescope to look at you and see the signal. For that reason, it is likely that different towers or different coordinates will be used, often with some space nearby to make sure the target is not thinking you sent a message when in fact it was a different tower.



The optical telegraphs would be first used for mapping, and next would be using airships for mapping. Due to the danger of airborne attacks, the medieval castles will evolve to oversized ziggurat cities, with mirrors sending a lot of sunlight to the underground, since using torches would be rather dangerous.



With airships, you can get a better picture of the continents, also useful for maps, and also travel for long distances without worrying about mountains and water currents, but instead worrying about wind currents.



We had bearings, both plain and roller and ball bearings since around the time Roma was born. There were also trains used for a short time period around that time, too. Even without steam and stirling engines, just with wind power, water power and pedaling, we can have an empire span the whole globe.



The trains would be used for moving things on a long distance using windmills, waterwheels and pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels.



Stirling engines can be used instead of steam engines and watermills and windmills for a distributed mechanical power generation network, probably using mechanical tension on ropes to move the power around. Alternative ways to move power would be compressed air, compressed water (tap water) from a water tower (or more water towers) used as storage and compression chambers. The energy can be supplemented with wind power and/or water power, if needed or wanted.



That's it. That's all one would need. And that is still a bit much.



Edit: You can use pedal/treadle powered vehicles to move faster with either human power or animal power. Just get an animal or human on an oversized hamster wheel (like those thread wheels used in medieval times to move heavy things up in elevation), and you can use their output to achieve high speeds. With or without rails. During the US's Great Depression, people tried using pedal-powered cars, but shortly after that there was a lowering in fuel price, which caused the idea to be abandoned by most people.



There is a lot more which can be done with that, so ask me if you want to know more.



Edit 2: It would also be useful to have a technological advantage over the rest of the world, to be able to give important gifts to the taken over people, to win them over and ensure rebellions will not happen. Since papyrus can be made, and wax and resin were used to waterproof things, there can be an empire which uses waterproofed papyrus paper boards for greenhouses, which might be cheaper and require lower tech than glass does, plus that you would use glass for the mirrors needed for the telescopes for the optical telegraph. Greenhouses will also keep your existing people fed and give them cheaper condiments. For growing temperate plants in the desert, you would likely need some way to cool the air, like through pipes going underground for tens of meters, before getting into the greenhouses where the amount of light is limited by having a few small windows allowing a lot less sunlight inside, which paired with the colder air can sustain temperate-climate plants. The humidity would still be an issue, though. Being able to get spices and grow temperate plants in colder and hotter climates surely does make up for that.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    32 mins ago















1












$begingroup$

This is the bare minimum needed for an empire to control the whole planet: Optical telegraph, trains, mirror-based telescope, masts, airplane wings, fans (of any kind) and hot air balloons (to mix them to get an airship), and reduction gears. Extra points for steam engines, stirling engines and windmills, waterwheels and aerial ropeways.



  • The optical telegraphs are used to send and receive messages.

  • Mirror-based telescopes are used to check on other nearby settlements, to see if -something is wrong, and for mapping.

  • Airships powered by pedals or treadles for mapping and traveling without having to use roads, or to change from carts to ships and back. Reduction gears would be used for moving the fans at the wanted speed.

    • Trains powered by pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels and using human or animal power to move, and aerial ropeways to help it move uphill or accelerate faster when leaving the station. Reduction gears would be used for moving the wheels at the wanted speed.


  • Steam engines for ships and airships (not necessary airplanes), for when the masts are not delivering enough power, or when you would rather hurry.

  • Stirling engines are for mechanical power generation, and for refrigeration if you run them in reverse, feeding them movement and moving heat instead of feeding them temperature difference and receiving movement.

Using tall towers for the optical telegraphs, you can increase the distance you can talk with both fixed and moving targets. Usually, the fixed targets will be talked with by using strong lights and mirrors to blink/flash towards the target, and the target will use a telescope to look at you and see the signal. For that reason, it is likely that different towers or different coordinates will be used, often with some space nearby to make sure the target is not thinking you sent a message when in fact it was a different tower.



The optical telegraphs would be first used for mapping, and next would be using airships for mapping. Due to the danger of airborne attacks, the medieval castles will evolve to oversized ziggurat cities, with mirrors sending a lot of sunlight to the underground, since using torches would be rather dangerous.



With airships, you can get a better picture of the continents, also useful for maps, and also travel for long distances without worrying about mountains and water currents, but instead worrying about wind currents.



We had bearings, both plain and roller and ball bearings since around the time Roma was born. There were also trains used for a short time period around that time, too. Even without steam and stirling engines, just with wind power, water power and pedaling, we can have an empire span the whole globe.



The trains would be used for moving things on a long distance using windmills, waterwheels and pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels.



Stirling engines can be used instead of steam engines and watermills and windmills for a distributed mechanical power generation network, probably using mechanical tension on ropes to move the power around. Alternative ways to move power would be compressed air, compressed water (tap water) from a water tower (or more water towers) used as storage and compression chambers. The energy can be supplemented with wind power and/or water power, if needed or wanted.



That's it. That's all one would need. And that is still a bit much.



Edit: You can use pedal/treadle powered vehicles to move faster with either human power or animal power. Just get an animal or human on an oversized hamster wheel (like those thread wheels used in medieval times to move heavy things up in elevation), and you can use their output to achieve high speeds. With or without rails. During the US's Great Depression, people tried using pedal-powered cars, but shortly after that there was a lowering in fuel price, which caused the idea to be abandoned by most people.



There is a lot more which can be done with that, so ask me if you want to know more.



Edit 2: It would also be useful to have a technological advantage over the rest of the world, to be able to give important gifts to the taken over people, to win them over and ensure rebellions will not happen. Since papyrus can be made, and wax and resin were used to waterproof things, there can be an empire which uses waterproofed papyrus paper boards for greenhouses, which might be cheaper and require lower tech than glass does, plus that you would use glass for the mirrors needed for the telescopes for the optical telegraph. Greenhouses will also keep your existing people fed and give them cheaper condiments. For growing temperate plants in the desert, you would likely need some way to cool the air, like through pipes going underground for tens of meters, before getting into the greenhouses where the amount of light is limited by having a few small windows allowing a lot less sunlight inside, which paired with the colder air can sustain temperate-climate plants. The humidity would still be an issue, though. Being able to get spices and grow temperate plants in colder and hotter climates surely does make up for that.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    32 mins ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$

This is the bare minimum needed for an empire to control the whole planet: Optical telegraph, trains, mirror-based telescope, masts, airplane wings, fans (of any kind) and hot air balloons (to mix them to get an airship), and reduction gears. Extra points for steam engines, stirling engines and windmills, waterwheels and aerial ropeways.



  • The optical telegraphs are used to send and receive messages.

  • Mirror-based telescopes are used to check on other nearby settlements, to see if -something is wrong, and for mapping.

  • Airships powered by pedals or treadles for mapping and traveling without having to use roads, or to change from carts to ships and back. Reduction gears would be used for moving the fans at the wanted speed.

    • Trains powered by pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels and using human or animal power to move, and aerial ropeways to help it move uphill or accelerate faster when leaving the station. Reduction gears would be used for moving the wheels at the wanted speed.


  • Steam engines for ships and airships (not necessary airplanes), for when the masts are not delivering enough power, or when you would rather hurry.

  • Stirling engines are for mechanical power generation, and for refrigeration if you run them in reverse, feeding them movement and moving heat instead of feeding them temperature difference and receiving movement.

Using tall towers for the optical telegraphs, you can increase the distance you can talk with both fixed and moving targets. Usually, the fixed targets will be talked with by using strong lights and mirrors to blink/flash towards the target, and the target will use a telescope to look at you and see the signal. For that reason, it is likely that different towers or different coordinates will be used, often with some space nearby to make sure the target is not thinking you sent a message when in fact it was a different tower.



The optical telegraphs would be first used for mapping, and next would be using airships for mapping. Due to the danger of airborne attacks, the medieval castles will evolve to oversized ziggurat cities, with mirrors sending a lot of sunlight to the underground, since using torches would be rather dangerous.



With airships, you can get a better picture of the continents, also useful for maps, and also travel for long distances without worrying about mountains and water currents, but instead worrying about wind currents.



We had bearings, both plain and roller and ball bearings since around the time Roma was born. There were also trains used for a short time period around that time, too. Even without steam and stirling engines, just with wind power, water power and pedaling, we can have an empire span the whole globe.



The trains would be used for moving things on a long distance using windmills, waterwheels and pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels.



Stirling engines can be used instead of steam engines and watermills and windmills for a distributed mechanical power generation network, probably using mechanical tension on ropes to move the power around. Alternative ways to move power would be compressed air, compressed water (tap water) from a water tower (or more water towers) used as storage and compression chambers. The energy can be supplemented with wind power and/or water power, if needed or wanted.



That's it. That's all one would need. And that is still a bit much.



Edit: You can use pedal/treadle powered vehicles to move faster with either human power or animal power. Just get an animal or human on an oversized hamster wheel (like those thread wheels used in medieval times to move heavy things up in elevation), and you can use their output to achieve high speeds. With or without rails. During the US's Great Depression, people tried using pedal-powered cars, but shortly after that there was a lowering in fuel price, which caused the idea to be abandoned by most people.



There is a lot more which can be done with that, so ask me if you want to know more.



Edit 2: It would also be useful to have a technological advantage over the rest of the world, to be able to give important gifts to the taken over people, to win them over and ensure rebellions will not happen. Since papyrus can be made, and wax and resin were used to waterproof things, there can be an empire which uses waterproofed papyrus paper boards for greenhouses, which might be cheaper and require lower tech than glass does, plus that you would use glass for the mirrors needed for the telescopes for the optical telegraph. Greenhouses will also keep your existing people fed and give them cheaper condiments. For growing temperate plants in the desert, you would likely need some way to cool the air, like through pipes going underground for tens of meters, before getting into the greenhouses where the amount of light is limited by having a few small windows allowing a lot less sunlight inside, which paired with the colder air can sustain temperate-climate plants. The humidity would still be an issue, though. Being able to get spices and grow temperate plants in colder and hotter climates surely does make up for that.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



This is the bare minimum needed for an empire to control the whole planet: Optical telegraph, trains, mirror-based telescope, masts, airplane wings, fans (of any kind) and hot air balloons (to mix them to get an airship), and reduction gears. Extra points for steam engines, stirling engines and windmills, waterwheels and aerial ropeways.



  • The optical telegraphs are used to send and receive messages.

  • Mirror-based telescopes are used to check on other nearby settlements, to see if -something is wrong, and for mapping.

  • Airships powered by pedals or treadles for mapping and traveling without having to use roads, or to change from carts to ships and back. Reduction gears would be used for moving the fans at the wanted speed.

    • Trains powered by pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels and using human or animal power to move, and aerial ropeways to help it move uphill or accelerate faster when leaving the station. Reduction gears would be used for moving the wheels at the wanted speed.


  • Steam engines for ships and airships (not necessary airplanes), for when the masts are not delivering enough power, or when you would rather hurry.

  • Stirling engines are for mechanical power generation, and for refrigeration if you run them in reverse, feeding them movement and moving heat instead of feeding them temperature difference and receiving movement.

Using tall towers for the optical telegraphs, you can increase the distance you can talk with both fixed and moving targets. Usually, the fixed targets will be talked with by using strong lights and mirrors to blink/flash towards the target, and the target will use a telescope to look at you and see the signal. For that reason, it is likely that different towers or different coordinates will be used, often with some space nearby to make sure the target is not thinking you sent a message when in fact it was a different tower.



The optical telegraphs would be first used for mapping, and next would be using airships for mapping. Due to the danger of airborne attacks, the medieval castles will evolve to oversized ziggurat cities, with mirrors sending a lot of sunlight to the underground, since using torches would be rather dangerous.



With airships, you can get a better picture of the continents, also useful for maps, and also travel for long distances without worrying about mountains and water currents, but instead worrying about wind currents.



We had bearings, both plain and roller and ball bearings since around the time Roma was born. There were also trains used for a short time period around that time, too. Even without steam and stirling engines, just with wind power, water power and pedaling, we can have an empire span the whole globe.



The trains would be used for moving things on a long distance using windmills, waterwheels and pedals/treadles/hamster_wheels.



Stirling engines can be used instead of steam engines and watermills and windmills for a distributed mechanical power generation network, probably using mechanical tension on ropes to move the power around. Alternative ways to move power would be compressed air, compressed water (tap water) from a water tower (or more water towers) used as storage and compression chambers. The energy can be supplemented with wind power and/or water power, if needed or wanted.



That's it. That's all one would need. And that is still a bit much.



Edit: You can use pedal/treadle powered vehicles to move faster with either human power or animal power. Just get an animal or human on an oversized hamster wheel (like those thread wheels used in medieval times to move heavy things up in elevation), and you can use their output to achieve high speeds. With or without rails. During the US's Great Depression, people tried using pedal-powered cars, but shortly after that there was a lowering in fuel price, which caused the idea to be abandoned by most people.



There is a lot more which can be done with that, so ask me if you want to know more.



Edit 2: It would also be useful to have a technological advantage over the rest of the world, to be able to give important gifts to the taken over people, to win them over and ensure rebellions will not happen. Since papyrus can be made, and wax and resin were used to waterproof things, there can be an empire which uses waterproofed papyrus paper boards for greenhouses, which might be cheaper and require lower tech than glass does, plus that you would use glass for the mirrors needed for the telescopes for the optical telegraph. Greenhouses will also keep your existing people fed and give them cheaper condiments. For growing temperate plants in the desert, you would likely need some way to cool the air, like through pipes going underground for tens of meters, before getting into the greenhouses where the amount of light is limited by having a few small windows allowing a lot less sunlight inside, which paired with the colder air can sustain temperate-climate plants. The humidity would still be an issue, though. Being able to get spices and grow temperate plants in colder and hotter climates surely does make up for that.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 16 mins ago





















New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 1 hour ago









SapioiTSapioiT

113




113




New contributor




SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






SapioiT is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    32 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
    $endgroup$
    – Agrajag
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
    $endgroup$
    – SapioiT
    32 mins ago















$begingroup$
Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
$endgroup$
– Agrajag
1 hour ago





$begingroup$
Welcome SapioiT, please take the tour and read up in our help centre about how we work in the help center. Pretty good first post here (From review). +1
$endgroup$
– Agrajag
1 hour ago













$begingroup$
Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
$endgroup$
– SapioiT
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Thanks, @Agrajag . This is a topic I'm familiar with, often having asked myself how something like what was asked would be possible. I have so many ideas, I have to edit my post multiple times, to add thing I thought of after publishing the post.
$endgroup$
– SapioiT
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
$endgroup$
– Agrajag
59 mins ago




$begingroup$
Editing wise you sound just like me, it's slightly obsessional. You'll fit in just fine here.
$endgroup$
– Agrajag
59 mins ago












$begingroup$
Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
$endgroup$
– SapioiT
32 mins ago




$begingroup$
Thanks! ^^ I got that from using discord and reddit and being a blogger.
$endgroup$
– SapioiT
32 mins ago











0












$begingroup$

Yes, absolutely. It will be easy to control the entire world, once dominance is established. And rebels will not be as strong as they were, in the past. Yes, rebels do use modern technology at combat, but because the tech today is massively destructive, and the army uses modern means of control, science and logic in reasoning and deducing strategies, it is quite unlikely that any rebel team would succeed at outsmarting the empire. They would be better off working from within the empire to betray the emperor, but that will also be quite risky.



Why is that? In the past, people never dynamically employed scientific and logical strategies in combat, as much as we do today. Most kingdoms and empires in the past were taken down by outsmarting the emperor's army. But today, the military has R&D, and thus creates advanced weapons. They have heavily funded teams of brilliant minds who would work towards taking down their enemy. Today, the rebels do not have enough space to hide, as every part of the earth is measured and mapped. Even if they hide, it will not be possible for them to grow big and become dangerous: because they will need a lot of R&D and training, thus must have a well funded team of scientists, strategists and other people skilled in combat.



If someone had already managed to become an emperor (which is highly unlikely) it will literally be impossible to take that person down. Because, he will have the best minds on the planet (literally on the planet, as he controls the entire world), and as long as they work for him, and as long as he is in good terms with people who are immediately below his rank, nothing will stop him.



There is a new emerging psychology called the cyber-psychology. The same methods used by the game industry and the social networking sites can be used to massively control people. It is possible to psychologically control people by socially reward them for certain task while punishing them for the others. Imagine using a social networking site in a imperial world. If the emperor hates certain kind of topics, it is unimaginable to think that he wouldn't socially punish citizens who engaging in such topics. A simple way to do this is by improving the visibility of their content (which involves their personal profile or anything else they post) among people who would genuinely despise the topic and decrease the visibility of the content among people who may have the same views. Actions like hearts, likes, up-votes or points etc can be used as the incentive here. This could also go further- to jobs and credit scores. Soon, most content in the social network will be in favor of the emperor. And massive surveillance can be used to study people and respond almost spontaneously, to "fix issues". In this situation, there is no room for rebels. For rebels to exist, you need a mob of angry people, not zombies controlled by social networks. Also, even if you have angry people, what chance will they have against heavily funded experts working for the emperor?



Thus, I believe today is the right time for someone to be the world's emperor, as he could do more than just "communicate very fast". He could literally condition the psychology of the world to his needs. But it is highly unlikely that someone would grow powerful enough to conquer the world.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
    $endgroup$
    – Sreram
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
    $endgroup$
    – Andrey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
    $endgroup$
    – Muuski
    3 hours ago















0












$begingroup$

Yes, absolutely. It will be easy to control the entire world, once dominance is established. And rebels will not be as strong as they were, in the past. Yes, rebels do use modern technology at combat, but because the tech today is massively destructive, and the army uses modern means of control, science and logic in reasoning and deducing strategies, it is quite unlikely that any rebel team would succeed at outsmarting the empire. They would be better off working from within the empire to betray the emperor, but that will also be quite risky.



Why is that? In the past, people never dynamically employed scientific and logical strategies in combat, as much as we do today. Most kingdoms and empires in the past were taken down by outsmarting the emperor's army. But today, the military has R&D, and thus creates advanced weapons. They have heavily funded teams of brilliant minds who would work towards taking down their enemy. Today, the rebels do not have enough space to hide, as every part of the earth is measured and mapped. Even if they hide, it will not be possible for them to grow big and become dangerous: because they will need a lot of R&D and training, thus must have a well funded team of scientists, strategists and other people skilled in combat.



If someone had already managed to become an emperor (which is highly unlikely) it will literally be impossible to take that person down. Because, he will have the best minds on the planet (literally on the planet, as he controls the entire world), and as long as they work for him, and as long as he is in good terms with people who are immediately below his rank, nothing will stop him.



There is a new emerging psychology called the cyber-psychology. The same methods used by the game industry and the social networking sites can be used to massively control people. It is possible to psychologically control people by socially reward them for certain task while punishing them for the others. Imagine using a social networking site in a imperial world. If the emperor hates certain kind of topics, it is unimaginable to think that he wouldn't socially punish citizens who engaging in such topics. A simple way to do this is by improving the visibility of their content (which involves their personal profile or anything else they post) among people who would genuinely despise the topic and decrease the visibility of the content among people who may have the same views. Actions like hearts, likes, up-votes or points etc can be used as the incentive here. This could also go further- to jobs and credit scores. Soon, most content in the social network will be in favor of the emperor. And massive surveillance can be used to study people and respond almost spontaneously, to "fix issues". In this situation, there is no room for rebels. For rebels to exist, you need a mob of angry people, not zombies controlled by social networks. Also, even if you have angry people, what chance will they have against heavily funded experts working for the emperor?



Thus, I believe today is the right time for someone to be the world's emperor, as he could do more than just "communicate very fast". He could literally condition the psychology of the world to his needs. But it is highly unlikely that someone would grow powerful enough to conquer the world.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
    $endgroup$
    – Sreram
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
    $endgroup$
    – Andrey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
    $endgroup$
    – Muuski
    3 hours ago













0












0








0





$begingroup$

Yes, absolutely. It will be easy to control the entire world, once dominance is established. And rebels will not be as strong as they were, in the past. Yes, rebels do use modern technology at combat, but because the tech today is massively destructive, and the army uses modern means of control, science and logic in reasoning and deducing strategies, it is quite unlikely that any rebel team would succeed at outsmarting the empire. They would be better off working from within the empire to betray the emperor, but that will also be quite risky.



Why is that? In the past, people never dynamically employed scientific and logical strategies in combat, as much as we do today. Most kingdoms and empires in the past were taken down by outsmarting the emperor's army. But today, the military has R&D, and thus creates advanced weapons. They have heavily funded teams of brilliant minds who would work towards taking down their enemy. Today, the rebels do not have enough space to hide, as every part of the earth is measured and mapped. Even if they hide, it will not be possible for them to grow big and become dangerous: because they will need a lot of R&D and training, thus must have a well funded team of scientists, strategists and other people skilled in combat.



If someone had already managed to become an emperor (which is highly unlikely) it will literally be impossible to take that person down. Because, he will have the best minds on the planet (literally on the planet, as he controls the entire world), and as long as they work for him, and as long as he is in good terms with people who are immediately below his rank, nothing will stop him.



There is a new emerging psychology called the cyber-psychology. The same methods used by the game industry and the social networking sites can be used to massively control people. It is possible to psychologically control people by socially reward them for certain task while punishing them for the others. Imagine using a social networking site in a imperial world. If the emperor hates certain kind of topics, it is unimaginable to think that he wouldn't socially punish citizens who engaging in such topics. A simple way to do this is by improving the visibility of their content (which involves their personal profile or anything else they post) among people who would genuinely despise the topic and decrease the visibility of the content among people who may have the same views. Actions like hearts, likes, up-votes or points etc can be used as the incentive here. This could also go further- to jobs and credit scores. Soon, most content in the social network will be in favor of the emperor. And massive surveillance can be used to study people and respond almost spontaneously, to "fix issues". In this situation, there is no room for rebels. For rebels to exist, you need a mob of angry people, not zombies controlled by social networks. Also, even if you have angry people, what chance will they have against heavily funded experts working for the emperor?



Thus, I believe today is the right time for someone to be the world's emperor, as he could do more than just "communicate very fast". He could literally condition the psychology of the world to his needs. But it is highly unlikely that someone would grow powerful enough to conquer the world.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Yes, absolutely. It will be easy to control the entire world, once dominance is established. And rebels will not be as strong as they were, in the past. Yes, rebels do use modern technology at combat, but because the tech today is massively destructive, and the army uses modern means of control, science and logic in reasoning and deducing strategies, it is quite unlikely that any rebel team would succeed at outsmarting the empire. They would be better off working from within the empire to betray the emperor, but that will also be quite risky.



Why is that? In the past, people never dynamically employed scientific and logical strategies in combat, as much as we do today. Most kingdoms and empires in the past were taken down by outsmarting the emperor's army. But today, the military has R&D, and thus creates advanced weapons. They have heavily funded teams of brilliant minds who would work towards taking down their enemy. Today, the rebels do not have enough space to hide, as every part of the earth is measured and mapped. Even if they hide, it will not be possible for them to grow big and become dangerous: because they will need a lot of R&D and training, thus must have a well funded team of scientists, strategists and other people skilled in combat.



If someone had already managed to become an emperor (which is highly unlikely) it will literally be impossible to take that person down. Because, he will have the best minds on the planet (literally on the planet, as he controls the entire world), and as long as they work for him, and as long as he is in good terms with people who are immediately below his rank, nothing will stop him.



There is a new emerging psychology called the cyber-psychology. The same methods used by the game industry and the social networking sites can be used to massively control people. It is possible to psychologically control people by socially reward them for certain task while punishing them for the others. Imagine using a social networking site in a imperial world. If the emperor hates certain kind of topics, it is unimaginable to think that he wouldn't socially punish citizens who engaging in such topics. A simple way to do this is by improving the visibility of their content (which involves their personal profile or anything else they post) among people who would genuinely despise the topic and decrease the visibility of the content among people who may have the same views. Actions like hearts, likes, up-votes or points etc can be used as the incentive here. This could also go further- to jobs and credit scores. Soon, most content in the social network will be in favor of the emperor. And massive surveillance can be used to study people and respond almost spontaneously, to "fix issues". In this situation, there is no room for rebels. For rebels to exist, you need a mob of angry people, not zombies controlled by social networks. Also, even if you have angry people, what chance will they have against heavily funded experts working for the emperor?



Thus, I believe today is the right time for someone to be the world's emperor, as he could do more than just "communicate very fast". He could literally condition the psychology of the world to his needs. But it is highly unlikely that someone would grow powerful enough to conquer the world.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 5 hours ago

























answered 6 hours ago









SreramSreram

10519




10519







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
    $endgroup$
    – Sreram
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
    $endgroup$
    – Andrey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
    $endgroup$
    – Muuski
    3 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    6 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
    $endgroup$
    – Sreram
    5 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
    $endgroup$
    – Andrey
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
    $endgroup$
    – Muuski
    3 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago




$begingroup$
That is an interesting point of view. Also I think the Trojan Horse is a myth and not a thing just fyi.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
6 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
$endgroup$
– Sreram
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Daniel, thanks for pointing out. I removed the mention about Trojan horse.
$endgroup$
– Sreram
5 hours ago












$begingroup$
I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
$endgroup$
– Andrey
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
I would like to disagree with you ont he massive destructive aspect. It's hard to use destructive weapons on rebels, they hide in populations. It's easy to use destructive weapons on the government forces, they wear uniforms and hang out together. So modern technology is very pro rebels
$endgroup$
– Andrey
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
$endgroup$
– Muuski
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
So if I'm loyal to the emperor my social media feed gets blasted with whiny people speaking out? Doesn't sound fun at all...
$endgroup$
– Muuski
3 hours ago











0












$begingroup$

Yes



The limitation you provide has been overcome for centuries. The British Empire was globe-spanning, and could keep itself together, project force, deal with insurrections, etc.



It had sigificant ability to project force inland -- British India is not a coastal nation. It even fought wars in Afghanistan, one of the least navaly-accessible regions of the world.



More recently, both the American and Russian empires where globe spanning. Both ruled through proxy or puppet states, with the Russians being a bit more heavy handed.



The Russian empire crossed Asia, and included states in the Middle East and Cuba. It even fought wars in SE Asia; the logistics of having a semi-hostile China between it and the region, and American naval dominance, was more of a problem than communication delay.



The American empire included naval and military bases scattered over the world (which still exist), and "allied" puppet democracies, dictatorships, and kingdoms. They had allied empires (the old European ones), and could project force around the world in response to insurrection (such as Vietnam, an insurrection against the old French empire).



The 3 large Empires left -- America, the fragments of the cold war Russian, and the Chinese -- have different approaches.



The Russian Empire is at this point honestly too weak to project force much outside its borders.



The Chinese and American are mostly trade-based empires. Chinese conquest of Tibet/Mongolia and the South China Sea, and its threatened conquest of Taiwan, are relatively local geopolitical concerns; it lacks the ability to reliably project force past an American naval screen. It may or may not become more openly imperial as its economic and military strength grows.



American's traditional approach has been to use trade to expand its imperial influence. So long as you allow US companies in to reap profits, it leaves you alone. If you do go protectionist and you are relatively small and you align with regional or global foes and there is something the US could profit from in your territory, you are basically placed on a "oh well" list, and the next time an American president needs a poll boost they start talking about an "axis of evil" or whatever excuse and replace your government.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    2 hours ago















0












$begingroup$

Yes



The limitation you provide has been overcome for centuries. The British Empire was globe-spanning, and could keep itself together, project force, deal with insurrections, etc.



It had sigificant ability to project force inland -- British India is not a coastal nation. It even fought wars in Afghanistan, one of the least navaly-accessible regions of the world.



More recently, both the American and Russian empires where globe spanning. Both ruled through proxy or puppet states, with the Russians being a bit more heavy handed.



The Russian empire crossed Asia, and included states in the Middle East and Cuba. It even fought wars in SE Asia; the logistics of having a semi-hostile China between it and the region, and American naval dominance, was more of a problem than communication delay.



The American empire included naval and military bases scattered over the world (which still exist), and "allied" puppet democracies, dictatorships, and kingdoms. They had allied empires (the old European ones), and could project force around the world in response to insurrection (such as Vietnam, an insurrection against the old French empire).



The 3 large Empires left -- America, the fragments of the cold war Russian, and the Chinese -- have different approaches.



The Russian Empire is at this point honestly too weak to project force much outside its borders.



The Chinese and American are mostly trade-based empires. Chinese conquest of Tibet/Mongolia and the South China Sea, and its threatened conquest of Taiwan, are relatively local geopolitical concerns; it lacks the ability to reliably project force past an American naval screen. It may or may not become more openly imperial as its economic and military strength grows.



American's traditional approach has been to use trade to expand its imperial influence. So long as you allow US companies in to reap profits, it leaves you alone. If you do go protectionist and you are relatively small and you align with regional or global foes and there is something the US could profit from in your territory, you are basically placed on a "oh well" list, and the next time an American president needs a poll boost they start talking about an "axis of evil" or whatever excuse and replace your government.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    2 hours ago













0












0








0





$begingroup$

Yes



The limitation you provide has been overcome for centuries. The British Empire was globe-spanning, and could keep itself together, project force, deal with insurrections, etc.



It had sigificant ability to project force inland -- British India is not a coastal nation. It even fought wars in Afghanistan, one of the least navaly-accessible regions of the world.



More recently, both the American and Russian empires where globe spanning. Both ruled through proxy or puppet states, with the Russians being a bit more heavy handed.



The Russian empire crossed Asia, and included states in the Middle East and Cuba. It even fought wars in SE Asia; the logistics of having a semi-hostile China between it and the region, and American naval dominance, was more of a problem than communication delay.



The American empire included naval and military bases scattered over the world (which still exist), and "allied" puppet democracies, dictatorships, and kingdoms. They had allied empires (the old European ones), and could project force around the world in response to insurrection (such as Vietnam, an insurrection against the old French empire).



The 3 large Empires left -- America, the fragments of the cold war Russian, and the Chinese -- have different approaches.



The Russian Empire is at this point honestly too weak to project force much outside its borders.



The Chinese and American are mostly trade-based empires. Chinese conquest of Tibet/Mongolia and the South China Sea, and its threatened conquest of Taiwan, are relatively local geopolitical concerns; it lacks the ability to reliably project force past an American naval screen. It may or may not become more openly imperial as its economic and military strength grows.



American's traditional approach has been to use trade to expand its imperial influence. So long as you allow US companies in to reap profits, it leaves you alone. If you do go protectionist and you are relatively small and you align with regional or global foes and there is something the US could profit from in your territory, you are basically placed on a "oh well" list, and the next time an American president needs a poll boost they start talking about an "axis of evil" or whatever excuse and replace your government.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Yes



The limitation you provide has been overcome for centuries. The British Empire was globe-spanning, and could keep itself together, project force, deal with insurrections, etc.



It had sigificant ability to project force inland -- British India is not a coastal nation. It even fought wars in Afghanistan, one of the least navaly-accessible regions of the world.



More recently, both the American and Russian empires where globe spanning. Both ruled through proxy or puppet states, with the Russians being a bit more heavy handed.



The Russian empire crossed Asia, and included states in the Middle East and Cuba. It even fought wars in SE Asia; the logistics of having a semi-hostile China between it and the region, and American naval dominance, was more of a problem than communication delay.



The American empire included naval and military bases scattered over the world (which still exist), and "allied" puppet democracies, dictatorships, and kingdoms. They had allied empires (the old European ones), and could project force around the world in response to insurrection (such as Vietnam, an insurrection against the old French empire).



The 3 large Empires left -- America, the fragments of the cold war Russian, and the Chinese -- have different approaches.



The Russian Empire is at this point honestly too weak to project force much outside its borders.



The Chinese and American are mostly trade-based empires. Chinese conquest of Tibet/Mongolia and the South China Sea, and its threatened conquest of Taiwan, are relatively local geopolitical concerns; it lacks the ability to reliably project force past an American naval screen. It may or may not become more openly imperial as its economic and military strength grows.



American's traditional approach has been to use trade to expand its imperial influence. So long as you allow US companies in to reap profits, it leaves you alone. If you do go protectionist and you are relatively small and you align with regional or global foes and there is something the US could profit from in your territory, you are basically placed on a "oh well" list, and the next time an American president needs a poll boost they start talking about an "axis of evil" or whatever excuse and replace your government.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 3 hours ago









YakkYakk

9,04111238




9,04111238











  • $begingroup$
    Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
    $endgroup$
    – Daniel
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Nice arguments, makes sense what you are saying.
$endgroup$
– Daniel
2 hours ago










Daniel is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















Daniel is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Daniel is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Daniel is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f143859%2fcould-an-empire-control-the-whole-planet-with-todays-comunication-methods%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

How to create a command for the “strange m” symbol in latex? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)How do you make your own symbol when Detexify fails?Writing bold small caps with mathpazo packageplus-minus symbol with parenthesis around the minus signGreek character in Beamer document titleHow to create dashed right arrow over symbol?Currency symbol: Turkish LiraDouble prec as a single symbol?Plus Sign Too Big; How to Call adfbullet?Is there a TeX macro for three-legged pi?How do I get my integral-like symbol to align like the integral?How to selectively substitute a letter with another symbol representing the same letterHow do I generate a less than symbol and vertical bar that are the same height?

Българска екзархия Съдържание История | Български екзарси | Вижте също | Външни препратки | Литература | Бележки | НавигацияУстав за управлението на българската екзархия. Цариград, 1870Слово на Ловешкия митрополит Иларион при откриването на Българския народен събор в Цариград на 23. II. 1870 г.Българската правда и гръцката кривда. От С. М. (= Софийски Мелетий). Цариград, 1872Предстоятели на Българската екзархияПодмененият ВеликденИнформационна агенция „Фокус“Димитър Ризов. Българите в техните исторически, етнографически и политически граници (Атлас съдържащ 40 карти). Berlin, Königliche Hoflithographie, Hof-Buch- und -Steindruckerei Wilhelm Greve, 1917Report of the International Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars

Чепеларе Съдържание География | История | Население | Спортни и природни забележителности | Културни и исторически обекти | Религии | Обществени институции | Известни личности | Редовни събития | Галерия | Източници | Литература | Външни препратки | Навигация41°43′23.99″ с. ш. 24°41′09.99″ и. д. / 41.723333° с. ш. 24.686111° и. д.*ЧепелареЧепеларски Linux fest 2002Начало на Зимен сезон 2005/06Национални хайдушки празници „Капитан Петко Войвода“Град ЧепелареЧепеларе – народният ски курортbgrod.orgwww.terranatura.hit.bgСправка за населението на гр. Исперих, общ. Исперих, обл. РазградМузей на родопския карстМузей на спорта и скитеЧепеларебългарскибългарскианглийскитукИстория на градаСки писти в ЧепелареВремето в ЧепелареРадио и телевизия в ЧепелареЧепеларе мами с родопски чар и добри пистиЕвтин туризъм и снежни атракции в ЧепелареМестоположениеИнформация и снимки от музея на родопския карст3D панорами от ЧепелареЧепелареррр