Imagine all the people

By the time you read this we've had the US presidential election, the bellwether of the direction the West is taking -- whether towards liberal & humanist values or a retreat into conspiracy theories, insular nationalism, and turkeys voting for Christmas. Not that the losing side turned out to exactly be paragons of incorruptible and dutiful good governance. One day maybe we'll appoint somebody who's fit to hold the office. (Other countries are doing better, but the overall liberty trend is downwards.)

You may have wondered what would happen if all the world's borders were open -- that is, the EU model of freedom of movement applied globally. According to one analysis it would make the planet nearly $80 trillion richer. That's ten thousand dollars a head if distributed evenly, so not to be sneezed at. Read about it in The Economist here (you can register to get free access to the article, or look at the archive.ph snapshot without the graphs here).

An additional benefit is we could stop spending money on war. The total cost of Putin's invasion of Ukraine to date, including reconstruction of Ukraine's damaged infrastructure, is now more than four times the entire amount spent on the Apollo programme after adjusting for inflation -- and before factoring in the spin-off tech benefits of the Moon landings. It's often said we shouldn't waste money on AI, or particle research, or space exploration, or whatever, until we've sorted out problems here on Earth. Well, start with national boundaries and then we can go to Mars and do the other things and still have trillions of dollars left to save the whale.

It happens I think the cultural benefits of full freedom of movement would be even greater than the financial ones. Intolerance thrives when people live in a racial and social bubble. The more you meet people from other walks of life the more you appreciate that our real identity is human, not national or religious or ethnic. And people from different societies bring different ways of looking at a problem. There are so many win-wins from international cooperation.

A criticism is that having open borders would be radically disruptive. So it would. But look at the inequality we have now, the division, the frothing hatred. When things build up to that kind of pressure you get wars and revolutions in which people are killed in the thousands or millions just for who they are. With the growing climate crisis the situation will only get worse. Isn't it worth looking for a soft revolution in how we live that could avoid all the atrocity and that after a decade or two of upheaval would yield a richer world for all?

It won't happen, of course. More likely the 21st century will go along the same lines as the 20th only with even more monstrous tech to fuel it all. There are plenty of dark clouds and few silver linings right at the moment. But don't let future generations say we never even tried. We only get a good future if we strive to bring it about. Here's Konstantin Kisin on that very point:

Onto more frivolous matters (which, the gods know, we're all going to need as a safety valve over the next few years) this is the 40th anniversary of the Dragon Warriors RPG. We didn't get The Cursed King in 2024 nor the English edition of Blood Sword 5e, but there's an online Dragon Warriors convention coming up in just over a week (sign up quick!) and lots of really amazing semi-pro content from Red Ruin Publishing on DriveThruRPG, most of it at pay-what-you-like prices. And there's still a hope of seeing Cursed King and Brymstone in 2025, or anyway before Donald Trump leaves office. If he ever does.

I'll try to make up for the lack of any actual pro publications with some scenarios and reminiscences here on the blog. Following a pre-Christmas chat with business consultant and gamer Tom Burton I keep wondering whether the best thing for DW would be to make the original core rulebooks available under Creative Commons. Here is Book One, which I just discovered is available as a free download. I can't truly sanction this sort of thing, as it's entirely unauthorized by the authors and publishers, but if you've never tried a Dragon Warriors game, now's your chance. Happy New Year!

The war against the future

Funny how things get dredged up. I recently got to thinking about a very old idea of mine. I’ll tell you a bit later what jogged my memory. A long while ago – must’ve been a couple of decades at least – I was watching an old Carol Reed movie called Odd Man Out, about an IRA man on the run in 1940s London. Thinking of spies having to lie low – soldiers, that is, but out of uniform – I got to imagining a society that waged war against its own future.

What kind of a war would that be? Well, one way to do it would be old Nazis plotting revenge against a modern, distinctly anti-fascist Germany, but that felt a bit tired. It hardly counts as a war when a bunch of OAPs set fire to a few shops or daub a swastika on a wall.

I was striving for something more jolting to the audience’s expectations, which probably meant more science fictional. A war against the future suggested society having reached an impasse that only time could break. So should it be sleeper agents in a literal sense, floating underground in suspended animation tanks until the moment came to rekindle the conflict?

Trouble with that, it’s a little like the core premise of Pyramids of Mars, only with a very different skin (or at any rate bitumen-soaked bandages) over the top. Nobody would notice, but I still felt like treating it that way would be wasting the idea. Obviously the best approach would be to have outright time travel, so that armies could pour out of the past to mow down their own descendents. Firing back could be a knotty problem. But then it’s not special. You wouldn’t notice that the interesting thing was a society at war with what it had become. The time travel business would overshadow all that.

Sometimes you just can’t see the way to make an idea work. Hitchcock wanted Cary Grant pursued by a tornado across Indiana. “But how can the heavies manufacture a tornado?” asked Ernest Lehman, who actually had to write the damned thing. Hitch settled for a crop-duster, but he wasn’t happy about it. I know how he feels. The war against the future got slung onto that subconscious junk heap of unworkable gems – or unpolishable you-know-whats. And then I came across a couple of brilliant tweets by Paul Cornell that bought it all back.

I lived through Thatcher, and I have to say, this coming General Election is the one, the future or the past.
— Paul_Cornell (@Paul_Cornell) May 27, 2014

So there you are. No need for a Tardis or a cryonic pod. No need even for superannuated reactionaries blowing up their hippy grandchildren to teach them a lesson. The war against the future is interesting when it happens (as it always does) between neighbours, within families, both sides lining up to decide whether civilization should point forwards or backwards. And I knew that. I’ve read about enough revolutions, hot and cold, throughout history. That’s how to write my story. The answer was staring me in the face all along. Maybe it was just too close for comfort.