What if the Soviet Union Never Formed? | Alternate History
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 чер 2024
- In this video I talk about the formation of the Soviet Union, its immediate consequences, and what might have been had the October revolution or coup that resulted in the Bolshevik lead Soviet Union never happened.
In this scenario the Soviet Union never exists, as the provisional government in Moscow survives, making Russia a democracy in the early 20th century with only a reformist socialist movement.
Wouldn't Canada, Australia, New Zealand and *perhaps* South Africa and even less likely India still be in the british sphere of influence? Without the second World War, Britain would be much better off and would remain somewhat distant from the USA so the dominions would still look to the UK as their "protector" and india would take longer to declare independence. Also Without the soviet union's funding and supply, the rebellions in africa would take a lot longer to reach what they did in our timeline. So if managed properly, the UK and France would be able to hold onto africa even if its just as a sphere of influence. Plus Portugal would be able to crush the communist revolts in Mozambique and Angola, Castro would also be toppled or never gain power in the first place. Obviously there were more reasons for decolonization other than "angry communists" but without WW2 many of these reasons would be much weaker.
honestly, yes. while i stated in a comment i posted that ww2 still happens anyway, if it hypothetically didn't happen, france and britain would keep their empires. In our timeline they mainly lost them due to being broke from the war, exhausted from fighting, the united states becoming a global power and thus forcing the europeans to decolonize, and a general public distaste for colonization. That last one and the fact that they were broke were the 2 main reasons, and the only reason those two causes exist is because of ww2.
so yes, tl;dr: without ww2 the europeans would be stronger, usa would be *slightly* weaker and less prominent on the world stage, and the public wouldn't urge the governments to decolonize at least as much.
Although if you look at the population growth of these colonies, and the population growth of the europeans, there's no way they could've held on past maybe 2000-2005 anyway.
@@_MrOtto perhaps with the colonies remaining in the british sphere of influence they would be able to reform into functional democracies and successfully half their birth rates to keep a stable population unlike I our timeline were corrupt governments in africa have led to the social aspects of procreation remaining while the infant mortality rate plummets, which has led to the immense population growth in africa.
More white settlers in africa
Yes. Colonialism would take a lot longer to die in this timeline, and it's doubtful the British would give up their standing with the dominions the same way they did in our world. As Winston Churchill saw it, the world's powers would be the United States of America, the United States of Europe and the British Empire, and Russia and China would be in this timeline as well.
The Dominions already had a lot of autonomy and huge credibility from their outsized efforts in the Great War.
Three things about Italy: 1/4th of Libya was Italian in 1940, Italy had the highest birth rate in the 1930s of all European powers, Libya has huge Oil supply, so I see an economic miracle happening in the late 1940s.
Maybe, but we're talking about Italy here. They always find a way to f*ck up
yea i woudlnt be surprised if italy holds on to a part of libya instead of independence
I feel like there would still be a number of wars leading up until one power utilized atomic weapons. Russia would always seek to reconquer Constantinople either under their own banner or that of an orthodox power in Bulgaria or Greece. This would certainly cause strife amongst the western powers trying to not let Russia grow in strength.
I go for Russia taking Constantinople 🇷🇺
Not to mention, Hitler wasn't the sole reason Germany went to war, so they would still likely start or join something.
@@CevicheGato Ataturk OTW to "Troll" Russians
@sonny po Bruh. This is after a War that killed like Millions of Russians.
Even Then, Ataturk did that to Greece, Italy, Britian and France. So what is Different Now?
@@sussyamogusregent5680 What is different? Freaking Russia, which has a massive population and a direct border with Turkey, the cossacks would have crushed any Turkish revolution in a matter of days
We truly are living in the worst timeline.
Thats the only reason we make up alternate ones!
@@winterinvictait's no fun when they are unrealistic though
@@thenoodletiger1869 depends on your perspective
@@chadbrad8100 Any perspective where the commies win are the bad timelines.
Blame the Hebrews
There's a reason I've always said the best timeline is if Roosevelt won in 1912 and brought America into WW1 early. No WW2, no Cold War, a better world.
That's not the best timeline.
The best timeline is britian and the us stays neutral in ww1. Germany would have overrun France in 1914 (the allies barley stopped them irl) and the Russians couldn't have won alone and would likely sue for peace late 1914 or early 1915, we know the German peace offers and war goals and before 1916 they and the austrians had no one sion of changing European borders, outside creating a small indepdant Poland and giving North Macedonia to Bulgaria. And they wanted to make Russia an ally post war.
So what you would get is a short ww1, which was relatively bloodless, with non-punishing peace deals. So very little grievances.
No Russian Civil war (war too quick to do that), only pressure to reform from inside and out (which before ww1 was already gradually working to turn them into a constitutional monarchy), Austria-Hungary would go trialism-unitedstates of austria ruite (kaiser Karl's plan) meaning no bloody balkan wars.
At worst you might get a french and spainish civil wars, and even if these 2 go radical like Spain and italy irl, they are unlikely to start ww2 as they would lack industry.
Japan was a British ally then, only falling out due to decisions at versailes and so would remain a British ally. They were also quite democratic until the 1930s,with the army taking over which it only did so due to the civilians government feeling isolated, which won't happen if they are still strong allies with the British. Meaning no pacific war (at most anglo-japanese intervension in the on going Chinese civil war, and purhaps a Korean revolt against Japan, although a peaceful decolonisation is just as likely)
Decolonisation would likely happen, just alittle later, as it was already losing popularity before ww1 due to colonies costing more wealth than it created, made only for prestige and secure wartime resources. Combined with the Austrian president the pressure from capitalists to reduce costs, nationalists for self-determination of people's, socialists to spend more on own people and classic liberals/libertarians for small government would eventually cause colonialism to end.
No major wars, no Cold War, less death (and it's resulting social depression and loss of faith in tradition, but also no radical counter movements to the radical anti-traditionalists, so a more moderate world), less radical pushes for decolonisation, so while slower it's also likely less bloody. Europe doesn't lose faith I self and destroy their own people and economies, plus increased tradition means no population collapse. Etc etc.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 This all depends on how much the Germans win. If they destroy France, I could easily see France swinging into some revenge-filled regime, be it far right or communist, just as Germany felt after they lost. If the Germans also defeat the Russians, I could still easily see a civil war there occuring due to simple starvation. In such a case, the Germans would still have interest for a Brest-Litovsk-like treaty, where they eat up most of Russia's rich west which, if they kept, would also lead to Russian resentment against them. The Germans at least wanted to get the Baltics and Finland, due to their German upper class, which is what they were pushing for before Brest-Litovsk, which happened because Trotsky thought the Germans would just leave them alone if they stopped fighting, and the Germans took more. I could easily see France and Russia allying to stop Germany from becoming Europe's hegemon, which would lead to a WW2 regardless of if the British get involved.
Also, while Japan didn't like that Britain and America wouldn't include a racial equality clause in the League of Nations, their alliance ended due to the Washington Naval Treaty, which barred them from expanding their navy as much as they wanted. The Depression still would most likely happen, and one of the main reasons the Japanese army got control of the government is that they wanted to conquer land to help their hurting economy (not only was Japan badly hit by the Depression, but they blamed the lack of trade from America as racism and exclusionary, although that claim was an exaggeration on their part), meaning I see Japan becoming militant and eventually starting a Pacific War anyway. So long as the Washington Naval Treaty and Depression happen, I don't see them going down any other path.
Overall, I certainly think your timeline would be a happier outcome, but I think it relies on too many assumptions going the perfect way. These are just fun thought experiments though.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 2 questions
would the us be as powerful as they are now?
and would austria hungary collapse?
If Communism never rises, would the Spanish Civil War still have initiated OTL? The war in our timeline essentially ended up as Communists vs Nationalists with democrats largely pushed to the wayside - without such an important militant leftist group (granted, unions and anarchists would still exist) the initial coup might have been successful enough to avert a large-scale Civil War entirely.
or posibli becose there is no USSR the Comunists wouth not have that mutch support as irl
Well, yeah, that's exactly what I'm making my point off of.
I dont think so. Thats was war between more between church and latifundyst vs anticlericals, workers and peasants than facism vs communist.
Well one thing that doesn't change is that it's happening in Spain and as we all know they love their civil wars
Actually contrary to popular belief, no, the Spanish Civil War wasn't communists vs nationalists, that's just the story Franco sold to make his fight seem legitimate. Many people fighting on the republican side in Catalonia for instance were: Liberals, Catalan nationalists, Carlist traditionalists who wanted a decentralized Spain. In fact, the anarcho-communists in Catalonia were mainly the murcian migrants who joined the CNT, most actual catalans supported ERC or Lliga Catalana, both of which also fought in the war. I'm sure outside of Catalonia the same was true. So yes, the Civil War would have still happened, because the 1934 coup would have still happened, if not by leftists, by all others who opposed CEDA at a time when CEDA was sympathizing with the NatSocs and wanting to centralize Spain, which has always been a big no no for the non-castilian nations of Spain
Many of the most influential Russian and Polish inteligencia and famous engineers like Sikorsky would have probably stayed in Russia. Many of these people immigrated to the US and were very important in our growth.
Great video - in all honesty I think Italy would be able to keep Libya or/and Eritrea. Mussolini had plans to italianize Eritrea greatly and Libya already had a huge Italian population. Considering that many Italian Tunisians would move in combined with the Italian birthrate at the time (and libyas oil attracting immigration and commerce) I think Italy wouldn’t fall to revolution. However, I do think a Franco like fall would occur, where after Mussolini’s death it embraces some form of democracy (although I can honestly see the regime lasting longer).
Sorry for formatting, mobile.
i agree completely
Glad that you’re back
The legend is back
Amazing scenario! Keep up the good work!
What could also help is the Russian empire having a stronger alliance with the united states of America due to the two having dislike of the British empire during the 1800s.
With the Spanish civil war, if it still has the same Leftist groups as it did in our timeline, I don’t see the republic winning, especially without Soviet support. The secular reforms didn’t go over well with the very religious population from what I understand, and the martyrdom of civilians at the hands of Republic forces during the war only further villainised the government.
Well am I glad to see you did post a video this month, congrats on your work friend!
P.S. you think you gonna make the second video on time or will we have to wait till new year?
I'm currently also finishing up an exam project, so no guarantees.
But I have several partially written scripts, so I'm definitely going forward with one sometime before Christmas. There's a good chance I manage to have a video ready before the end of the month, but worst-case you'll see it in January. I'll update you on the members tab.
@@Neatling Absolutely lovely Man, don't feel pressured and focus on the exams, the video can be posted in January.
I was just thinking it had been awhile since I'd seen a video from you. Welcome back, King.
Till now, for months ever since I started watching your videos I thought you were a big youtuber, until today when I finally looked at the views and subs that you were pretty small. You are greatly underrated in my opinion, I enjoy everything you make. You deserve many more subscribers and I hope you grow and get gifted by the yt algorithm.
the better timeline we never had
How tf its „better” 💀💀💀🔥
I'm wondering, what would the alternate history of the world be like if Yaroslav the wise kept the Kievan Rus united at his death. Can you please look into this. Thank you. I love your alternative history, gives me something to think about.
Honestly the better ending
The best ending imo
Nope! Tsarist Feudalism was not good.
This reminds me of what Europe would be like if the French revolution never happened
I think Napoleon still would have become emperor. He just work his way up the military. And charm his way into the Royal Family.
Even with the military genius of Kemal, the Russians REALLY wanted Constantinople so they could claim to be the third Rome, and with soviet aid he already only had like a 0.1% chance of winning and I doubt that he could beat the Armenians, French, British (who would likely join the war with Russian and French support, as the reason they didn’t was lack of allied supports) Greeks, and do this with little to no aid, I’m sorry but I just don’t see a scenario where Turkey wins there, great video though, keep up the good work
Seconded, kemel only barley succeeded against Greece with soviet support, now replace soviet support of turkey with Russian support of Greece and Armenia and you should get a Turkish defeat, even without franco-british involvement.
Would the government have a dual power structure between Soviets (worker councils) and the duma like in our timeline before Lenin?
Honestly, I think this timeline could work really well with a successful Imperial Federation Plan within the British Empire, considering how much more this timeline's present-day already feels like the pre-WW1 world already, with there still being the Weimar Republic, the Russian Provisional Government and potentially even still a French Algeria due to no WW2, I feel like there still being a British Empire (Albeit reformed) would just fit in really well with this timeline. Anyways really cool timeline nice job on it!
Here are some additional thoughts I have:
2:47, how would the Bolsheviks die or be prevented from entering Russia? Were their any historical events that occurred that could've made either of these events a serious possibility?
4:18 it is possible that Finland would regain some sort of autonomy, but it is hard to say how much
4:26, was there a plan in place, or a plan that was executed by the provisional government to allow the Baltic states and poland to have this autonomy, or is this just your prediction?
4:33 idk if Poland would have a choice on independence or how much autonomy it would be given since Russia might be in a stronger position, post WWI
4:40, definitely not. It had been Britain's main foreign policy objective (and later, France's) to keep Russia out of the Mediterranean. Just look at how Russia's puppet, Bulgaria, was made smaller and cut off from the coast, following the 1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War, after Russia had enlarged Bulgaria and had planned on making Bulgaria house Russian naval bases following the Treaty of Berlin 1878. We can even look at the Bosnian Crisis in 1908 and see that at a conference of the European great powers, Russia demanded the opening of the Dardanelles to their Black Sea Fleet. The decision was ultimately Britain's. Britain only agreed if the Dardanelles could be open to the warships of all nations, which Russia wouldn't agree to. I believe that Britain and Frnace made plans to carve up the Ottoman Empire, with Russia getting the Dardanelles and a large chunk of Eastern Turkey during WWI, but I seriously doubt that B+ F would've given that to them, given their track record of lying, like they did to Italy and the Arabian fighters.
6:08 Hitler and Mussolini would still come to power. Even with the loss of East Prussia, Germany still had the Rhineland and Silesia, meaning that Germany had what it needed to launch WWII in terms of industry and certain resources.
6:20 Nazis Germany and Facist Italy would still support Franco, who'd win
6:24 Italy would still ally w Germany
6:53Italy would lose its colonies post WWII, like it did in our timeline
7:23 I still think that the West would oppose Serbian oppression and wouldn't allow Russia to have puppets or militarily intervene in the Balkans like u think they would
7:57 Russia might not be the military juggernaut that defeated the Germans and the Japanese like in our timeline. This wasn't the same Soviet nation under Stalin that launched the aggressive 5-year plan. Also, would Russia allow China to reannex Mongolia?
8:22 I hope ur right. Russia's had a tough time under authoritarian dictators, and so has the world that's had to interact w them. A democratic, capitalistic Russia would be interesting and perhaps welcoming
11:10 What do u think Sino-Russian relations would look like?
@princemoresby6782 stalin's 5 year plans were only nessiary because of the destruction of the Russian ecconomy caused first by the civil war and made worse by the mass execution, exile and imprisonment of intellectuals, skilled labour and successful buisness men aswell as the shunning of foreign businesses and their investments.
Tsarist Russia was industrialising faster and improveing education at a greater rate than the Ussr came to, even during the 5 year plans. Without the physical and idieological set backs Russia would have not only been the same juggernaut, it would have been bigger (with both a bigger ecconomy, bigger population (less death to civil war and famine), more educated population and more industrialised) and that's if it managed to remained autocratic monarchist without a civil war. If it liberalised more (as in the timeline of the video, and pro ably would have even if it remained monarchist, similar to day the uk) it would be an even more favourable investment for foreign businesses which would further increase those involvement further increasing the rate of Russian developement.
This comment is extremely underrated
How I wished we all lived in this timeline, sigh........
Yeah everything would be perfect. No North Korea, no nuclear weapons, heck even decolonization of Africa and Asia might go smoother than in our timeline. There would also been less wars and revolutions as they would most likely get no backing.
All because of one dumass known as Lenin
@@winterinvicta As the video stated, there would still be nukes and maybe they could have been used way more extensively than our timeline, decolonization was not only backed by USSR/communists but also by the USA who wanted to weaken European powers despite not being communists and having similar political system as the US, there were already less wars in our timeline due to WW2 and knowing the effects of nukes, hence the name "cold war" instead of "hot war", before communism western countries were already using divide and conquer or backing separatism to dismantle Austria-Hungary and Ottoman empire, the USA remain the country having backed the most wars and revolutions (more than 90% of their entire short existence), since birth they were already fighting wars and making the American continent their backyard. At least, North Korea can only be dangerous to North Koreans, whereas the whole world can be invaded, coup or controlled by the USA.
The map in the end looks frighteningly like that of 1984.
Considering that America doesn't own all of the Americas, and Russian isn't completely dominating Europe, I would say it doesn't look like that at all, otherwise your standard cold war map would look like that. Plus the only reason it looks the way it does was because the author used the most powerful nations at the time, and given those three have many reasons to be superpowers, so there would be quite a few scenarios where their all superpowers.
Also we were born in the wrong timeline. This world is too closer towards a utopia.
no it doesnt
Are you blind?
I wonder how Computers would develop in this timeline. Since i know in our timeline, it was during WW2 when the first computer was made.
So i wonder how WW2 not happening would effect that.
@NEATLING. please make a 2 part alternate Anglo-American economy.
what if Britain successfully implanted Clifford Hugh Douglass's social credit system.
and
what if America never exported its industry.
I think Poland would have become independent in this scenario, although smaller than it was.
Part of Russia with Roman Dmowski as a head of the state.
I wish this would be the world in which we live
Same
Yeah, same
But technology won't exist....
Me too
@@Supraem actually technology may be invented in this world
awesome video
Poderia fazer um vídeo sobre a Cornélia do norte!
Does anyone know where his video that detailed Russia owning Manchuria went? First video of his I watched and loved. It would be a shame if he took it down.
I think he took it down, could you try to find it for me maybe re-uploaded or something
Note: If Italy was isolated and was struggling, I would doubt they would be able to conquer or even occupy Ethiopia as they did in WW2, as their military would be struggling to even be consistently funded, Ethiopia would possibly be funded by the West
Hahaha Ethiopia lost before ww2
@@polishrepublic5055 ???
good video but not fully accurate
for one, communist/ socialists would never gain any significant power in russia without conducting a revolution to force a change in government. even during the october revolution, they were an extreme fringe party. the bolsheviks only held ~5% of the russian duma, and even the more popular mensheviks were small compared to kerenskys liberal kadets and the social democrats. and the majority of the lefts sway in russia came from the immense hardships imposed by WW1, so expect the menshevik and bolshevik movements to die down even further in coming years.
to be frank the aftermath of the war would most likely see a resurgence in nationalism, particularly due to russia being denied tzargrad it had been promised during ww1, and most russians avidly supporting the tzar until living standards degraded significantly during ww1. pan slavists in particular would gain influence due to russia now having all slavs other than bohemians under its influence.
in a weird way land reform could still be implemented in this russia, by taking land away from central asians and distributing unused land in southern siberia, however to say soviet reforms still get implemented is completley misleading. neither social democrats, nor liberals, nor nationalists would force industrialisation so fast it destroys russia long term, deport the kulaks or do the number of idiotic things the soviet union did.
also there is no way nationalist china immitates the russian republic or becomes a "democracy". Chiang kai shek was a dictator in all but name, even in our world he was president for life on taiwan. i see no reason why china would drift away from authoritarianism after his death, the only reason it did in our world is because it became more or less a western ally and so immitated south korea and japan. however without maos sheer idiocy things like the great leap forward never happen. also chiang kai shek hated the west and democracy as much as he hated socialism.
china would be similar to how it grew in our world economically, but with a 30 year headstart. today chinas economy would be simply monsterous and its standards of living would be first world.
tl;dr russia isnt socialist in this world, if anything it becomes more nationalist. also china is still a dictatorship but it is a first world country economically
@NEATLING.
please make a video on a few topics with your specific and well detailed alternate histories make me prefer you to all other's.
what if America won the war of 1812 and a treaty was signed between them and Britain and through purchased everything west of Rupert's land. in Canada.
what if America annexed Baja California and the Yucatan peninsula's. during the Mexican American war.
what if America purchased Greenland in 1949.
what if America made Puerto Rico. a state during the cold war.
this is a 4 part alternate history idea that i have always thought America could have been without changing America in any major way.
Nice scenario. Can you do scenario where Bolsheviks still win the civil war but the Soviet Union never forms instead remains Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic?
Fuck comunsim
I support a video of this scenario
This scenario assumes that people would just be down with capitalism and accept social inequality. As if they were promised a high standard of living if they could just hang in there, while for most people at the beginning of the century everyday life was pure hell.
Reforms exist, you don't need an October Revolution for the establishment to realize it is needs to appease it's subject.
They go with the European style socialism like France, GB, Scandinavia.
I think it is a bit wishful thinking that without the soviet union Russia would just be a liberal demcoracy, a more regressive dictatorship could still have occured whether under Kolchak, the Tsar or the army
Another great video! Hope they will be more frequent in the future :)
Thanks now I just want to know why you deleted your video( What if the Russian Revolution Never Happened? - Alternate history of Russia) from 2020 and if you upload it again.
I think either because UA-cam doesn't like videos about the Russian revolution or what happened on 2022 February 24
@@Taxolia Yes, but there are enough other channels like Monsieur Z who also made videos about this topic and they weren't deleted, but their videos have different names, maybe that's because of that, but then he could have changed the name of his video.
@@mediapeter4913 UA-cam's strange sometimes It is a possibility that the video got taken down by accident
@@Taxolia maybe we'll probably never know.
I've really liked the videos I've seen from this channel so far so I felt it'd only be right of me to speak up when I saw this video, as there's one main thing in particular that bothers me here.
In this video, the implication is that the presence of "extreme socialism" in the Soviet Union is what prompted the rise of fascism in Weimar Germany. This outright ignores the many other aspects that lead to the rise of fascism, such as anti-semitism and a revanchist attitude from the national socialists, specifically aimed towards the western powers and the many conspiracies about how jews controlled the western democracies.
There's a lot more one could go into here but suffice to say, I think you dropped the ball on this video and specifically on that part of this alternate scenario.
I am inclined to agree with you, although i must say that it was not fascism wich took power in Germany, it was nazism.
That's fair, good thing there are more videos to come, as I gain more experience doing this whole thing the general trend will hopefully be towards improvement, even if there are hiccups along the way.
You could be right, there were certainly many other factors. But the rise of facism in Europe was definitely in-part a reactionary response to the rise of revolutionary socialism and communism.
@@mikkelbjerring2914 nazism is a fascist ideology
Nazism is a variant of Fascism.
I would say it was result of revolutionary socialism. It's only the threat of the communists that lead germans to vote for the Nazis specifically.
The Conservative monarchists (who wanted a return to the kaiser style democratic-constitional monarchism, or soemthing close) would have taken all but the most radical pro-nazi vote without the threat of communism. And they had no interest in going to war with the west, although they were revanchist, but appeasement would have gotten what they wanted, and unlike Hitler they didn't want all of the Czechs. As for Danzig there was irl negotiation with the Poles for it that broke down due to the breaking of the Munich agreement (a proposal in 1938),which likely wouldn't be refused in this alterative Germany as they didn't take the Czechs. So you actually get German-polish alliance including international rail agreements and other trade deals.
There would instead be nazi rioters as the radicals (those voting for them for anti-semetic reasons) would be angry/etc. But they wouldn't be likely to change German opinion without a legitimate exerstential ideological threat.
name of into music?
The Petrograd (St. Petersburg, Leningrad) soviet did not challege the Provisional government in Moscow. The latter was also in Petrograd.
What if more Constitutional Monarchies survived? Also what if Market Socialism was more popular?? Finally what if Elective Monarchism was more popular in history?
What if Wilsonian Armenia as created and survived till today?
Why would Hitler not come to power? Wouldn't France still be butt-hurt about WW1 and the Franco-Prussian War and want to punish Germany? Wouldn't this + the Great Depression lead to Hitler rising in popularity and trying to conquer Russia despite it not being Communist?
Hang on, why do the other various european powers lose their colonies or rather what happens to them?
The biggest reason for Decolonization was because of WWII Propelling the US (which was the biggest proposer and enforcer of the movement) into Super Power Status as well as leaving the UK and France (which were the biggest empires at the time sans the Soviet Union) financially broken and fully dependant of the US to survive and rebuild
So, with the Soviets never reaching power, Socialism (Communism is a Over-radical branch of Socialism just like Nazism and Facism also are) never rises as radically as it did in our timeline (instead opting for a moderate and never as powerful minority position in the political spectrum) which also means that Nazis never rise to power either which, as result, WWII would never happen, which also means that the US never rises as a Super Power as it did which also means the Decolonization Movement will take even longer to happen if it does (in fact it's more likely that the US would be more open to fully annex Philipines and Cuba and would be even more inclined to Keep the United Korea and Japan in a tighter leash than in our timeline)
You are completely wrong about Fascism being a variant of Socialism.
This wildly optimistic for the Russians and Germans. I'm from Lithuania and know the hatred towards Russia generated by brutal Russian rule would never have allowed any of the former Swedish or Commonwealth areas to agree to continued Russian rule. Central and Eastern Europe was also not that favourable to Russia. Once Austro-Hungary was knocked out they would turn on the Russians. Seeing them as just trying to supersede the Austrians as imperial rulers.
The proposition here also shows Germany maintaining power over Polish and Czech regions. I know that many of the supposed German majority regions were fictional majorities. Low German speaking Oellerder people who did not see themselves as German in any way. Mixed with Polish, Wendish, Kashubian etc. German authorites simply marked as German any entire family where the father spoke an approximately German sounding language. Even if he was the only one, even if it was as a second language, even if at home no German was spoken. It also ignored the "Irish" comparison. Just because a population spoke German did not mean they saw themselves as not Polish. As in Lithuania were upper class Lithuanians spoke Polish but still strongly identified as Lithuanian. Bi-lingual and even tri-lingual populations existed such as in Prussia. Where the main German population existed just around Konigsburg and some towns. In the South and West of Prussia the population was Baltic and Polish.
The territorial losses suffered by Germany after WW2 were not just inventions. They were real representations of the facts on the ground. Even if the expelled German minorities had remained in Westrn Poland after WW2 they would have been only strong in a few Cities and towns like PosenPoznan. The Soviets used the expulsions of Germans, Oellanders, Wends, German speaking Poles, Protestant Lithuanians and any non-German forced into the German army, as an excuse to expel Poles from Eastern Poland/Belarus. Claiming they were being moved to a region emptied of Germans.
In the West of Germany are regions that the population did not identify as German. Frisian, Dutch, Wallonian, Danish, and Switz speaker like those in Alsace, Bavaria and Baden. Quite a lot of territory along the edges of Lower Saxony, the Rheinlands etc, were areas pushed into German control after the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Trapped by Prussian expansion then German unification.
I would go further to say that there is no good reason other than forcing payment of reparations for Germany to even continue. The Western Lander would have been better on their own. They were always more advanced, liberal, democratic and far less aristocratic than the poor agricultural East dominated by aristocrats ruling over landed estates and sometimes majority non German populations. Even now Eastern Germany simply does not have the capacity to develop to match the West. Quite a few Germans now feel regret they ever reunified only to have the East pick their pockets via taxes to the federal German government.
German unification came after the German states developed industry it did not create it. Prussia essentially conquered the rest of Germany. Sometimes using massive bribery and campaigns of assassination to do it. The Prussian Army always remained separate from the rest of the Germany Army for a reason. The German General Staff was a Prussian creation via which Prussian Generals controlled the rest of the German Army. Clearly they felt some concern the rest of the Germans might rebel against Prussian rule. In a way that did happen at the tail end of WW1 and the early post war period.
The Allies missed an opportunity to play the Western German states against Prussia and the East. Break up German and draw the Western Germans into a Western democratic Block. But demands for reparation required a continued centralised German state to collect the money.
Do more videos !
One thing is for sure. The world would be a better place if the Soviet Union never formed. No Soviet Union means no Leninism, no Stalinism, no Maoism, no Korean War, no Vietnam War, no Cuban Missile Crisis, no August Coup, no Yeltsin, no Lukashenko, no Putin, no War. It's that simple.
Italy would keep Libya and Eritrea in this world since Italy had plans to migrate large groups of Italians in our world meaning we would have some form of Greater Italy made by the fascists. So I think Fascists in Western Europe would gain power and influence without the stigma of our 1930s.
Italy losing the wars in Africa before WW2 started.
The real demographic crisis in Russia happened in the 30s during collectivization, in just 5 years the fertility rate fell from 7 to 3.4. Without the civil war, famine of the 20s and 30s and collectivization, the population of Russia would most likely have grown many times by the end of the 20th century, approximately like in Turkey where the population grew 5 times for the 20th century.
An industrialized Russia with a population of about 300-350 million by the middle of the 20th century would most likely have started a struggle for influence around the world, for sales markets and resources. I think in such a scenario, a cold war would be inevitable. And it would have been much more competitive, because the Bolsheviks in fact used the legacy of tsarist Russia in the form of a powerful scientific school, deliberately destroying it, without the Bolsheviks, tens of thousands of scientists and engineers would not have migrated, tens of thousands would not have died in the Gulag. And not those who lick the ass of officials better, but those who are competent, would advance in their careers. In such conditions, Russia would be much stronger in science.
7:00 Italy Would probably be able to maintain Libya and would still influence Ethiopia greatly spreading Christianity in Somalia and eritrea.
7:04 also Slavs wouldn't be able to unify with Yugoslavia, Italy would have a lot of claims at Yugoslavia and maybe even albania
I consider this scenario unrealistic for at least one reason, since the Russian front line would have been moving, by October 1917 the Russian Army was a pitiful sight, and probably Germany had launched a massive offensive with all its might earlier (since in reality the Bolsheviks delayed them with negotiations), in general, probably Germany would have reached Petrograd, well and she installed a pro-German government there, or something like that, which would hardly have saved them from losing.
No happy timelines allowed.
The one dark side I'm seeing might be with colonialism and eugenics. WW2 is prevented by this timeline and what killed support for both of those things, as well as much of the capacity for colonialism. Lots of colonies might never get independence and eugenics programs be carried out, like the ones that happened in the USA (no, really. There was a movement for it that actually succeeded at getting a lot of people sterilized across 32 states) but continued way further and more globally.
A lot of current culture and politics can be traced back to just desire to be as opposite to WW2 Germany (I know wrong terminology but dodging youtube censorship) as possible. I'm not gonna argue about which of these are good or bad but culturally things may not be as far along by our time.
Eugenics here doesn't just include trying to make people healthier, more attractive or more intelligent. It also includes racial stuff aka genocide. Also genetic science not being very advanced at the time (DNA wasn't discovered until 1953) means a lot of pointless sterilizations, matchups and so on because of things where genes really weren't the issue, or things that were just very subjective.
Imagine having to avoid getting medical or psychological treatment because there's a risk of you being sterilized for whatever you have.
Then again all this sounds like stuff people could get sick of pretty quickly and there was some movement for greater compassion already, and I'm being too pessimistic. Maybe increased interest in genetics leads to better studying of it, and this is the timeline where I achieve my lifelong goal of making a Labrador who can play basketball.
The only happy ending is in the Bible, this world is at the tremble.
There was no Provisional government in Moscow. It was the Bolsheviks who moved the government to Moscow.
Более того, московское восстание было быстро локализовано и было бы подавлено, если бы большевики не прислали подкреплений. Бои в Москве произошли с 31 окт по 2 ноя.
How would East Prussia be part of Russia in this timeline? If there’s no WW2 there’s no expulsion of it’s native German population.
I was the 1000th like ;)
Europe would still have the empire you forgot to include
not now honey, neatling uploaded
Why Constantinople and Carpathia is not Russian?
russia should give back bukovina and besserabia to romania imo
@@kareemabdul1 Do you speak Russian?
I guess because they aren’t. And don’t be nationalistic now
Because they still performed horribly in WW1 and aren't in any position to demand them.
I would guess because even in our own timeline Britain was not really keen on Russia getting a warm water port in such a strategic place
I have another scenario. Before WW1, an asteroid blowns up over Tunguska. But is no ordinary asteroid. Russia cuts off all communications with the outside world, and builds a wall called the Red Curtain. A cold front develops over Russia and spreads. Suddenly a menacing Alien force called the Chimera breaches the wall, and overruns Europe.
as i recall, there was a plan that, after the war, the entente would've let austria hungary stay instact, still loses a lot of land for sure but the empire is not forcefully disolved, this was so that russia would still have a counterbalance in the balkans and eastern europe, however this didn't come to light as they saw a russia embroiled in civil war wasn't much of a threat. in this timeline though, it would certainly be a possibility, potentially making the russian sphere of influence in the balkans look much different
Also, nazism would still rise in germany, so long as the jews and hitler exist, there was a humiliating peace treaty after the great war, and the great depression happens, hitler will rise.
If he would then with hostile Russia and France with their sprehes of influence wouuld successfully unable him from attacking
nazism would not rise because there is no bolshevist power that wants to destroy capitalism and western civilisation, that was one of the main fears of german people at the time
Germany would definitely still elect a nationalist considering that Germany lost Königsburg which was a mayor historical city
Lore of What if the Soviet Union Never Formed? Momentum 100
I don't think after WW1 Hungary would have such a hard peace treaty
Don’t agree with italian territory being lost, it really doesn’t make since since by the eighties, like in our timeline, South Tyrol basically became italian and Istria had always been Italian and likewise would probably not have voted to leave Italy
Italy would have kept lybia and eritrea for sure while istria had a huge italian population and mussolini was keen on italianizing the rest
Libya and Eritrea probably not, but yeah Istria would have stayed
No USSR would probably mean that socialism would be more popular in the west than today but I think that the capitalist system would still remain the strongest for a while. In the end I think the world probably would have been more extremist capitalist for a long while but that would mean that the systemic collapse of late stage capitalism we see today would have happened earlier and sense socialism would remain stronger amongst the people I think we would have more socialist countries today.
Nice
I also think if colonialism falls witch it probably will in this timeline I think India would be on its way to competing with the other world powers. But that’s just what I think.
There is no reason to think that, a change in Russia would not greatly affect India. The British would still likely give it indepedance at the same time and in the same way, at the same level of development. And there is little reason to see India choosing different choices and thus no reason to think it's position in the world (as a rising but not yet there power) would change.
@matthiuskoenig3378
oh ok 👍
you cheeky bastard I saw you gave Denmark southern Schleswig
also shouldn’t Russia have demanded red ruthuania Ukraine? (The tail bit of Slovakia)
For the sake of the borders no
Earth: Good Ending
in order to be this happened, russia had to use more of resoureces in 19th century
As always people forget about Japan like it wasn't great superpower in the 20th century
I wouldnt say that out country has had good consequences of globalism and social-democracy.
From what I've heard, only about 10% of Russia was Communist at the time of the revolution, so we'd probably see a coalition government, instead of a full on socialist government
but we would also be far behind from the technology we have now
Without Nazi and strong fascists, I'm not sure Czechoslovakia would disolve, if nationalist version of Russia didn't (cannot see it as real democracy even w/o USSR). If so, Carpathian Ruthenia could become a part of Russia. On the other hand nationalist Russia pulling whole Czechoslovakia into their influence is also likely. Panslavism instead of Communist Socialism, skewed in a similar way like Eastern Bloc. It's hard to tell, because in our world, Czechoslovakia was surrounded by rivals and two clear enemies (Nazi Germany and USSR). Slovaks and Ruthenians going independent after minor conflicts with Hungary and Russia (like with Poland in our timeline)?
Czechoslovakia had better economy before the WWII, but also it was under a stress from militarization. Two eastern lands weren't always happy with the rich Czech land, however there were all kinds of factors. With Yugoslavia and Russian Empire not falling apart, it could have had diminished Slovak and Ruthenian independence movements. Or maybe not, independence movements could have gained traction like in the 19th century and another civil war would occur in Russia and Yugoslavia as well. A similar, yet different Europe would emerge.
Where does Czechoslovakia have a common border with the USSR?
@@user-on5jn9tn5n You are right, I made a mistake. The first Czechoslovakian republic didn't share border with the USSR, there was significant amount of Poland and Romania in-between (Moldova incl.). After the WWII, the USSR took a slice of Europe westwards from Baltics to Moldova. Postwar Czechoslovakia had a common border after losing Carpathian Ruthenia.
Would Belarus, Ukraine, and the turkestan countries ever get the semi-independent model???
They didnt exist, they didnt have their flags, they didnt have Borders, they were just land inside of the Russian Empire.
no
Alright, I still think Adolf would still come up.
And the He would sadly win....
@@Spartakist-ch4nb how ?
@@Zycore1 this Russia whould not industrialized as quickly as the USSR did
Poland would never remain part of Russia.
They doing just fine under the Russians and Germans. They were treated like trash or anything.
Without socialist I wouldn’t be born.
Good ending
As a Russian Social Democrat, this scenario is amazing
Would the War in Asia have involved the US, if Japan focused all its efforts on China, they wouldn't have had reasons to invade the European colonies in Asia thanks to the lack of a War in Europe.
genuinly a better world tbh
I love this video. However, I seriously doubt that WWII would not occur. I doubt that the Russians would be generous to Germany in terms of reparations. This, combined with Germany's humiliation and even resentment of having lost East Prussia, the conditions of Versailles, and the Great Depression, would still set the scene for Hitler to rise to power and for many of the historical events that happened in our timeline, to still occur. Also, even without a communist Russia, Hitler's Lebensraum plans would still be in place.
Italy would still be led by the Facists under Mussolini. Italy would be sore about not having the land Britain and France had promised, in exchange for Italy entering the war on the Entente side. Mussolini's ambitions to rebuild the Roman Empire would still be put in place.
I doubt Germany would give up all of East Prussia
They need to be happy that they hold śląsk (Silesia)
heyyy this doesent actually sound that bad!
Whould the mensviks and SRs be the main left wing faction in this Russia?
Epic borders.
True, so clean and historic
neatling is epic
I can't bleve my kid are weaker in this time line! I am so dissapointed to turkey in this scenario... **sighs**
I think the Polish would become independent, after all its been their goal since the 18th century.
So at that time in Poland there were two factions, Pro German and Pro Russian, Roman Dmowski (leader of pro Russians) believed that Russia and Entente is superior in power towards Germans and that whole Poland will come into an rule/influence of Russia "Our goal was to create a serious Polish representation in the Russian state, which would force Russia to take Poland into account by its conduct and which would gradually gain external significance for Poland as a factor of European policy."
5:05 Yeah, it would avoid complete disintegration but Russia will still get constantinople. Or you know what, that'll be imperial Russia, maybe Socialist republican Russia would basically drop that and just act like the Soviets in that region, so still Armenian genocide.
Lore of What if the Soviet Union Never Formed momentum 100
The good ending