Geopolitical goals are the restrictive personality traits that dominate the geopolitical policies of any large nation, from OTL's Uganda to the ATL Japanese Shogunate. Though the existence of geopolitical goals is debatable, if they are real the political landscape is far easier to comprehend and predict. Its primary tenets are that national entities have certain traits that have ingrained in their governments and peoples, and these affect the ways the countries react to national and international events. Based on this theory, a weak or strong leader can affect the proficiency by which a nation is governed but the government will always tend towards certain priorities and policies.
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Geopolitical Goals (Superpowers)
|
| rdfs:comment
| - Geopolitical goals are the restrictive personality traits that dominate the geopolitical policies of any large nation, from OTL's Uganda to the ATL Japanese Shogunate. Though the existence of geopolitical goals is debatable, if they are real the political landscape is far easier to comprehend and predict. Its primary tenets are that national entities have certain traits that have ingrained in their governments and peoples, and these affect the ways the countries react to national and international events. Based on this theory, a weak or strong leader can affect the proficiency by which a nation is governed but the government will always tend towards certain priorities and policies.
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| dbkwik:alt-history...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dbkwik:althistory/...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| abstract
| - Geopolitical goals are the restrictive personality traits that dominate the geopolitical policies of any large nation, from OTL's Uganda to the ATL Japanese Shogunate. Though the existence of geopolitical goals is debatable, if they are real the political landscape is far easier to comprehend and predict. Its primary tenets are that national entities have certain traits that have ingrained in their governments and peoples, and these affect the ways the countries react to national and international events. Based on this theory, a weak or strong leader can affect the proficiency by which a nation is governed but the government will always tend towards certain priorities and policies. A real world example is the United States of America. Regardless of who was in power in the States following the September 11 attacks, the reaction would have always been to invade the Middle East and enact a law that would resemble the USA PATRIOT Act. Though a different administration may not have "declared a war on terror" or invaded in the same way or at precisely the same time as the Bush administration did, the major action would have always been the same. The strategic goals of the US would be the same. While this may make it appear that history is set in stone from the beginning, that is a gross misunderstanding of the theory. Small events - events that are affected by human or natural intervention - have a cumulative effect on historical events. Something such as the Terreur of Robespierre had nothing to do with France's geopolitical goals, and was completely the product of independent human desires and fears. Additionally, well-supported leaders can make reforms that can not only ignore the geopolitical goals of a nation but even alter the current ones. Furthermore, traumatic events such as revolutions or foreign interventions can completely change a nation's ideals and therefore create new goals. The invasion of Washington DC through the Chesapeake and its influence on American naval policy is just one example of this kind of alteration. Despite its shortcomings, the study of geopolitical goals is a useful tool that can help make short-term predictions of future geopolitics and give a rough idea of what the world could look like in the future. A mainstream example of their use in this way is George Friedman's book, "The Next 100 Years".
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)