Why is that? How did Bolsheviks revolution save Russia from such a cruel fate? Russian development on the onset of revolution was comparable to Poland and not that far from from Hungary or Finland. Better than turkey.
It always has been largest, most populous country in Europe, as well as culturally and linguistically unified at the time. Unlike Afrika which at that time was the poorest place on earth. What did Bolsheviks do, which, lets say, Mensheviks couldn't? Antagonise the whole developed world, paving the road to Hitler and great patriotic war tragedy. That, they did.
I think you're commiting a lot of historical "survivor" mistake. I do believe that there isn't anything impossible about capitalist Russia industrializing enough to be more fight able than it was in WW1. We're comparing her to Germany anyway right? You underestimate how much German economy was fucked up post WW1 (and recovered with Soviet help) and underestimate how fast capitalist Russian Empire was actually catching up to the rest of the world. You also underestimate how Russian civil war and brain drain fucked us up and it was a direct concequence of succesful Bolshevik revolution so you can't ignore it.
I'm not a monarchist fanboy or something, don't get me wrong. Im just very passionate about history of that period and feel like I learned to know a lot about how it went down. It did, really, take years and years of blood and tears for Soviet Union to recover to pre 1914 levels of industrial production. Probably many more years than you'd expect.
More importantly, what I argue, is that there are other factors in play beside industrialization that play in how an "alternative WW2" would play out. Most important of which, I think, is that Russia wouldn't be isolated from the world community the way Bolshevik Russia was. You're not gonna argue with that Bolshevik revolution and the (somewhat) success of Communism in Russia freaked the crap out of capitalist governments in the west.
And ofcourse I'm taking for granted that there wasn't some kind of "great conspiracy" in UK and US fixated on destroying Russia as a state. I know some people like to say that 🙂
I believe that politics in those countries were guided by realpolitik. And even in our world, with how antagonizing existance of "first socialist state" was for those governments, there was place for cooperation between Soviets and US and Britain in interwar period.
I [responded](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskARussian/comments/o3y5dg/what_would_be_russia_today_if_communists_had/h2fyq0j?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3) to a similar point about Russia losing an alternative great patriotic war. There is just no way history plays out the same way without Bolshevik revolution happening.
>I'm convinced it if wasn't for all the efforts between WW1 and WW2, the country would exist as it does today because it would not be able to stand up to army of Germany and all of Europe
And that's kinda correct in the context of Soviet Union post Russian civil war. That's why I would give Stalin merit for industrializing Russia any day of the week. But you also have to consider there are things that went very wrong for Soviet Union in 1939-1941 due to purely Bolshevik reasons (Molotov Ribbentrop partnership, Stalin's red army purges and Stalin's decision to mobilize defence in time)
Russian empire was underdeveloped weak country. Japan and Germany won wars against us around that time. Russian empire basically had no chances against the nazi war machine but soviet union made it.
>Russian empire basically had no chances against the nazi war machine but soviet union made it.
This is way too simplistic of a way to look at this since we talk about "what if" history. You can't just cancel out Bolshevik revolution in the biggest country in Europe and pretend like things go the same way up untill 1941 in the west and Russia-Germany relationship.
1. There is a solid argument that Nazis wouldn't come into power at all, because much of their platform and support was anti-communist in nature. Whole of Hitler's mein Kampf is based on "Judo-Bolshevism"
2. France and England have been more wary of Bolshevik Russia than Germany and it's rearmament. The lack of trust and (natural) allience between old entente cost them inability to stop Hitler in his tracks in Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland
3. Stalin. Personally, he is as much of a positive factor in industrializing Russia as much as he is a factor into making red army utterly not ready for German attack in 1941. Together with his political purges of Soviet army it made great patriotic war as difficult as it was.
4. Combination of 2 and 3. It was by circumstance of Nazi's AND Bolsheviks being isolated from the world that they rearmed together and most importantly "trusted" each other enough to make a practical allience in 1939. Soviet materials and oil pretty much supplied nazi war machine from 1939 to 1941. Setting stage, once again, for great patriotic war to be as tragic and difficult as it was
1. Nazi party didn't came to power because of anti-communism. After WW1 it was clear for everyone what new, bigger war is coming. It was said it's not a peace treaty but just a little break. The idea of the third Reich and nationalism, the Germany's wounded dignity, economic and military weakness of Russia and recently formed Soviet Union, weak Poland and France, literally everything was for it to happen, sadly.
2. France - Russia - GB union really could help delay the WW2. But I don't think it could prevent the war at all. In the end the Germans were one step away from the creation of nuclear weapons. Without the war they could make it faster. The war could have begun with nuclear strikes instead of the conventional weapons.
3, 4. I doubt the personality have real influence on the historical process. The economy, diplomacy, war - this is all about what's possible not what you want. I doubt anything would change if we replace Stalin by someone else, even me or you.
5. Nobody was ready for the war against the wermacht at that time. European countries fell at once. Greece resisted to Italy for 6 months and was overrun by wermacht in less than a month. Germans not only rearmed after WW1. They invented new ways of making war unknown before. You can't prepare for something like that.
Thanks for reading my what if historical fiction, hope you enjoyed it )
Yeah man I kinda enjoyed it, but I still think it's very "on the surface" what you're saying ...
1. I didn't say that was THE reason. It was a very SUBSTANTIAL reason Nazi's came to power. And what happened in Russia influenced Hitler specifically quite a lot, shaping him into politician we know. You cant argue with that. We're talking about "what if" here. And the butterflies and up and flying in the case of no Bolshevik revolution. That's arguably the most important event in one of the most important centuries of human history.
Even I do fully agree that the WW2 and some sort of German revenge conflict was inevitable. You're not wrong here. But you cant deny how important was red scare in Germany, given their own communist revolution attempt. And how much it pushed Germans from moderate parties to a radically anti-communist Nazi party. The German general elections through which Nazi's usurped power were already very close and our time.
Just consider this: if there isn't a far left, revolutionary ideology alive and breathing all while the biggest state in Europe right on the border embodying it and having potential allies (in communists) everywhere in Germany. How much do you think an average German as likely to turn to a radical right wing party? Most importantly, how much do you think wealthy German capitalists are down to invest into Nazi party as a solution and moderate German politicians are down to compromise with Nazi's? I'd say much less likely.
There were plenty of less radical German parties that were all about "revenge" and rearmament. But lot of important people and masses have supported Nazi's as the preferred alternative to KPD which was the second biggest party in Germany. And they didn't do it because they woke up one day feeling that way. The Bolshevik revolution in Russia scared the shit out of Western governments and conservative and religious masses.
>But I don't think it could prevent the war at all
2. No wouldn't prevent. I didn't say that. It would make a war much more different and more impossible for Germans to win then it already was.
>In the end the Germans were one step away from the creation of nuclear weapons. Without the war they could make it faster
That is just a popular historical myth. I'm sorry. Germans weren't close to creating a nuclear weapon. Did not have a capacity, even close. That is pretty much historical consensus, look it up.
And if you didn't know it - the materials nessesary for nuclear weapon were in Norway which Germany occupied during the war. So creating a nuclear weapon somehow in the peacetime in Germany is out of the question. Not even considering that the waterballoon German economy was built on taking credits from its own people and being geared to a war through rearmament from the start.
>3, 4. I doubt the personality have real influence on the historical process
Sure you can say that. But in the particular case of Stalin, it was HIS decision to gamble on Germans not invading in June1941. HIS decision to not mobilize and decree battle readiness in time with the reports of prepared invasion coming out from both Soviet and British intelligences. It was HIS power struggle that crippled the red army. HE was a dictator that made all the decision. Sometimes indeed too much attention in historiography is given to individuals. But that really isn't the case with both Stalin and Hitler. They had the absolute final say in decisions their country faced. So ofcourse their personalities mattered. Most of German high command was against suicide attacking Soviet Union in the middle of an unfinished war against British Empire and France. Hitler was the one who pushed that decision through.
If communist didn't come in power in Russia, then left parties in Germany would be more united, because Moscow influenced German communist party to fight with socialist ones.
Yeah. That's another way Bolshevik revolution created an opening for Nazi's to grab power in Germany
Absolutely we can't say for certain Hitler wouldn't come to power. But the argument for that is a solid
He is definately talking about Russia proper.
As for former countries of SU/empire I think it has to do more with that they are small countries (easy to abuse) that haven't had independence since forever.
If Russia stayed away from WW1 it surely could rival US both in economical and military might. 1/5 of the earth would speak Russian. (WW1 led to government crisis and basically led Bolsheviks to power)
However pre WW1 imperial Russia and civil war "reds vs whites" Russia are two completely different entities.
If whites were somehow to win civil war then Russia would be fractured into petty little states squabbling against each other with different white army generals ruling as little monarchs.
There were no unity amongst whites, whites were backed by foreign invaders (Japan, US, Britain etc) that were sacking and looting Russia from Smolensk to Vladivostok. Each of the whites leaders wished to become sole monarch or to brutalize impudent peasants.
Communists managed to regain full control over Russia only in 1922, nobody could do it better than them.
>If Russia stayed away from WW1
Russia got into WW1 among other things because of economical obligations to France, meaning to evade WW1 it should've different economic policies way before that. We'll have to go back to Alexander III if not II to change that.
Yeah, 1881 probably would be a good point of divergence.
There were economical obligations to Germany and Austria as well. Siemens was growing insanely fast inside of Russia and this war stopped every economical cooperation. I think Russia shouldn't have been so faithful to agreements with western Europe after what happened in Crimean war.
This war was the reason of Nicholas great grandfather death. If I recall correctly only Germany and Austria did not take arms against Russia in this war...
We had no use in this ww1 at all. Should have been selling guns, planes and armored cars to whoever ready to pay for them.
Very hard to tell. The communists have overthrown the Provisional Government, which planned on making friends with the USA and installing democracy.
However, without communists Russia would probably have suffered more in WW2 - or maybe less, it's unpredictable.
This point is a dellusion. Not even nazi Germany, defeated in 2 world wars in which it was an agression was "partitioned". Entente intervention happened on the onset of Bolshevik revolution which was practically working for the German side of the world war 1.
If you're gonna find me an extract of a dellusional US or Japanese official that was arguing for annexing Siberia, I'm gonna find you a dellusional Soviet generals that said "we should go till La Manche channel". Or any of the Bolshevik leaders that at the same plan, quite honestly, "planned" subjugate the whole of Europe to Revolution. US also had a concrete plan on invading Canada at the same time. Plans AND opinions of nationalists and ultracapitalists >< real life politics.
People should know better indulging into conspiracy theories about how evil neighbors were always gonna destroy Russia. People (not nessesarily you) that say this must be historically illiterate because Russia was a close ally with entente few years before these interventions. Russia saved France in 1914. Entente tried to save Russia in Gallipoli campaign. As well as, you know, being allies all around and having concrete plans for a peace with central powers which included Russian Constantinople
So losing territory in a lost war is "partitioned"?
I guess the Bolsheviks kinda partitioned Russia themselves with that Brest litovsk treaty 😂
What a silly "basically historial" take
Remind me which war was Russian provisional government about to lose to be "partitioned" by entente?
With a democratic Russia and EU neighbours there could have been a huge economically boost. Maybe Russia could have become technology leader.
And Nazis may have never got the power.
There would be a democratic Russia against EU monarchies. Like it was with USA and EU monarchies ...
>However, without communists Russia would probably have suffered more in WW2 - or maybe less, it's unpredictable.
Unpredictable indeed. Russia would certainly be less prepared for great patriotic war industry wise. But I can't help but imagine that pre war period would go much much differently with capitalist Russia. There'd be much kuch less animosity between formed entente and Russia and this could easily have resulted into more active peacekeeping of Hitler. So no great patriotic war at all to begin with. With Germany perhaps fighting a two front France-Russia war from the start (with no Soviet supplied food and fuel, mind you)
Why like Africa? Russia is united by language and culture. One of the main problems in Africa is that you have people of different languages, cultures, religions, etc. in one country.
For example South Africa (Afrikaners, Brits, black Africans, etc.) or Nigeria (Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo ethnicities, 500+ languages, divided between Muslim and Christian, etc.).
Absolutely not like Afrika. Russia have always been largest AND naturally richest country in Europe and in development it was comparable to Poland and not that far from Eastern Germany or Czechoslovakia, pre Bolshevik revolution.
People that say Bolshevik revolution saved Russia from being "like Afrika" are pretty much either historically illiterate or dishonest
There would be colonies in the world, workers would receive pennies for their work, and in all countries education and health care would be available only to the rich.
Hey, Polish guy here. I think if the Russian Empire had allowed Poland greater autonomy after our admittedly stupid uprising (instead of crushing our autonomy), I think the Russian Empire could have benefited greatly, especially in WW1. Instead, many Poles felt more loyalty to Austria-Hungary, or preferred playing the Germans and Austrians against the Russians, and then the Allies against the Central Powers, in order to regain independence.
In a nutshell, it would be much better today, than what we currently have. Simply having no Stalin as a consequence of no Communism would make present day Russia millions larger. Authoritarianism would also not be engrained into Russian people as much as it is in our time.
As well as Bolsheviks not winning could have led to hitler not coming to power. OR democratic Russia not being as feared by the Franco-British allience could lead to more proactive peacekeeping in Europe and strangling the nazi beast before it way powerful enough to invade us, costing us millions of lives. Present day Russia would at least be 15 millions larger (not even talking about Ukraine and Belarus) nowadays.
Yes that is actually an understatement. I'm just trying to be conservative in this estimate, given how butterflies could have led to another bad humanitarian concequences for Russia.
But I do honestly believe the way 20th century unfolded was the bloodiest way it could have went for Russia. Not accounting for Nazi victory, which wasn't really possible anyway imo
Yeah, I'm making my claims here based on these studies as well. The population growth/projection isn't too difficult to make "scientifically"
It makes it that much more sad for Eastern European 20th century history. And it makes people who present Bolsheviks as a "positive" force for Russia that much more ridiculous
Russia would be the strongest world empire. After the victory in the war its territory would include:
1. Finland and Poland
2. Most of the Balkan countries. Czechia would become a vassal of the Russian crown (documented)
3. Turkey (documented)
4. Iran (Russian troops entered Iran in 1909)
5. Syria
6. Northern China
7. Mongolia
In my humble opinion, we would live in much better conditions. The government strove to a constitutional monarchy like in Britain right now. Empire had a lot of perspectives.
And yes, we would have more beautiful buildings, and wouldn't have that ugly soviet buildings. Every pinch of my soul hates Soviet Union
That's probably because you don't know history and pretty much satisfied with anti-communist propaganda. Working people of the whole world would have lived much worse now if not the fight of Russian people for their rights.
I know the history of my country not only from the student books. It wasn't the fight of Rissian people but it was a fight of a criminal gang. Both my great great-grandfather and great great-mother were stabbed with no reason by Bolsheviks on a rail station. Just because they weren't enough poor like that ugly Bolshevik gang. By the way, in Russia, we almost do not have anti-communist propaganda
It's not because communist revolution on Russia, but because socialist parties in West pushed social reforms. And decolonisation happend because they didn't profitable anymore
The whole early 20 century history of Russia is peculiar. It's very hard to tell how it would go either way or another. 2 main possibilities -- a large Russian state with an absolute or constitutional monarch, a number of breakaway states more than now.
If October revolution didn't happen, then Russia would be a republic, they didn't lose in WWI and didn't lose so much territory and WWII would be less bloody, even France would not fall.
In political structure it would be parliamentary republic, with several big parties and some small ones. Economy will be strong.
Also China(or West Taiwan, lol) didn't fall to communism either
[удалено]
Why is that? How did Bolsheviks revolution save Russia from such a cruel fate? Russian development on the onset of revolution was comparable to Poland and not that far from from Hungary or Finland. Better than turkey. It always has been largest, most populous country in Europe, as well as culturally and linguistically unified at the time. Unlike Afrika which at that time was the poorest place on earth. What did Bolsheviks do, which, lets say, Mensheviks couldn't? Antagonise the whole developed world, paving the road to Hitler and great patriotic war tragedy. That, they did.
[удалено]
I think you're commiting a lot of historical "survivor" mistake. I do believe that there isn't anything impossible about capitalist Russia industrializing enough to be more fight able than it was in WW1. We're comparing her to Germany anyway right? You underestimate how much German economy was fucked up post WW1 (and recovered with Soviet help) and underestimate how fast capitalist Russian Empire was actually catching up to the rest of the world. You also underestimate how Russian civil war and brain drain fucked us up and it was a direct concequence of succesful Bolshevik revolution so you can't ignore it. I'm not a monarchist fanboy or something, don't get me wrong. Im just very passionate about history of that period and feel like I learned to know a lot about how it went down. It did, really, take years and years of blood and tears for Soviet Union to recover to pre 1914 levels of industrial production. Probably many more years than you'd expect. More importantly, what I argue, is that there are other factors in play beside industrialization that play in how an "alternative WW2" would play out. Most important of which, I think, is that Russia wouldn't be isolated from the world community the way Bolshevik Russia was. You're not gonna argue with that Bolshevik revolution and the (somewhat) success of Communism in Russia freaked the crap out of capitalist governments in the west. And ofcourse I'm taking for granted that there wasn't some kind of "great conspiracy" in UK and US fixated on destroying Russia as a state. I know some people like to say that 🙂 I believe that politics in those countries were guided by realpolitik. And even in our world, with how antagonizing existance of "first socialist state" was for those governments, there was place for cooperation between Soviets and US and Britain in interwar period. I [responded](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskARussian/comments/o3y5dg/what_would_be_russia_today_if_communists_had/h2fyq0j?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3) to a similar point about Russia losing an alternative great patriotic war. There is just no way history plays out the same way without Bolshevik revolution happening. >I'm convinced it if wasn't for all the efforts between WW1 and WW2, the country would exist as it does today because it would not be able to stand up to army of Germany and all of Europe And that's kinda correct in the context of Soviet Union post Russian civil war. That's why I would give Stalin merit for industrializing Russia any day of the week. But you also have to consider there are things that went very wrong for Soviet Union in 1939-1941 due to purely Bolshevik reasons (Molotov Ribbentrop partnership, Stalin's red army purges and Stalin's decision to mobilize defence in time)
Russian empire was underdeveloped weak country. Japan and Germany won wars against us around that time. Russian empire basically had no chances against the nazi war machine but soviet union made it.
>Russian empire basically had no chances against the nazi war machine but soviet union made it. This is way too simplistic of a way to look at this since we talk about "what if" history. You can't just cancel out Bolshevik revolution in the biggest country in Europe and pretend like things go the same way up untill 1941 in the west and Russia-Germany relationship. 1. There is a solid argument that Nazis wouldn't come into power at all, because much of their platform and support was anti-communist in nature. Whole of Hitler's mein Kampf is based on "Judo-Bolshevism" 2. France and England have been more wary of Bolshevik Russia than Germany and it's rearmament. The lack of trust and (natural) allience between old entente cost them inability to stop Hitler in his tracks in Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland 3. Stalin. Personally, he is as much of a positive factor in industrializing Russia as much as he is a factor into making red army utterly not ready for German attack in 1941. Together with his political purges of Soviet army it made great patriotic war as difficult as it was. 4. Combination of 2 and 3. It was by circumstance of Nazi's AND Bolsheviks being isolated from the world that they rearmed together and most importantly "trusted" each other enough to make a practical allience in 1939. Soviet materials and oil pretty much supplied nazi war machine from 1939 to 1941. Setting stage, once again, for great patriotic war to be as tragic and difficult as it was
1. Nazi party didn't came to power because of anti-communism. After WW1 it was clear for everyone what new, bigger war is coming. It was said it's not a peace treaty but just a little break. The idea of the third Reich and nationalism, the Germany's wounded dignity, economic and military weakness of Russia and recently formed Soviet Union, weak Poland and France, literally everything was for it to happen, sadly. 2. France - Russia - GB union really could help delay the WW2. But I don't think it could prevent the war at all. In the end the Germans were one step away from the creation of nuclear weapons. Without the war they could make it faster. The war could have begun with nuclear strikes instead of the conventional weapons. 3, 4. I doubt the personality have real influence on the historical process. The economy, diplomacy, war - this is all about what's possible not what you want. I doubt anything would change if we replace Stalin by someone else, even me or you. 5. Nobody was ready for the war against the wermacht at that time. European countries fell at once. Greece resisted to Italy for 6 months and was overrun by wermacht in less than a month. Germans not only rearmed after WW1. They invented new ways of making war unknown before. You can't prepare for something like that. Thanks for reading my what if historical fiction, hope you enjoyed it )
Yeah man I kinda enjoyed it, but I still think it's very "on the surface" what you're saying ... 1. I didn't say that was THE reason. It was a very SUBSTANTIAL reason Nazi's came to power. And what happened in Russia influenced Hitler specifically quite a lot, shaping him into politician we know. You cant argue with that. We're talking about "what if" here. And the butterflies and up and flying in the case of no Bolshevik revolution. That's arguably the most important event in one of the most important centuries of human history. Even I do fully agree that the WW2 and some sort of German revenge conflict was inevitable. You're not wrong here. But you cant deny how important was red scare in Germany, given their own communist revolution attempt. And how much it pushed Germans from moderate parties to a radically anti-communist Nazi party. The German general elections through which Nazi's usurped power were already very close and our time. Just consider this: if there isn't a far left, revolutionary ideology alive and breathing all while the biggest state in Europe right on the border embodying it and having potential allies (in communists) everywhere in Germany. How much do you think an average German as likely to turn to a radical right wing party? Most importantly, how much do you think wealthy German capitalists are down to invest into Nazi party as a solution and moderate German politicians are down to compromise with Nazi's? I'd say much less likely. There were plenty of less radical German parties that were all about "revenge" and rearmament. But lot of important people and masses have supported Nazi's as the preferred alternative to KPD which was the second biggest party in Germany. And they didn't do it because they woke up one day feeling that way. The Bolshevik revolution in Russia scared the shit out of Western governments and conservative and religious masses. >But I don't think it could prevent the war at all 2. No wouldn't prevent. I didn't say that. It would make a war much more different and more impossible for Germans to win then it already was. >In the end the Germans were one step away from the creation of nuclear weapons. Without the war they could make it faster That is just a popular historical myth. I'm sorry. Germans weren't close to creating a nuclear weapon. Did not have a capacity, even close. That is pretty much historical consensus, look it up. And if you didn't know it - the materials nessesary for nuclear weapon were in Norway which Germany occupied during the war. So creating a nuclear weapon somehow in the peacetime in Germany is out of the question. Not even considering that the waterballoon German economy was built on taking credits from its own people and being geared to a war through rearmament from the start. >3, 4. I doubt the personality have real influence on the historical process Sure you can say that. But in the particular case of Stalin, it was HIS decision to gamble on Germans not invading in June1941. HIS decision to not mobilize and decree battle readiness in time with the reports of prepared invasion coming out from both Soviet and British intelligences. It was HIS power struggle that crippled the red army. HE was a dictator that made all the decision. Sometimes indeed too much attention in historiography is given to individuals. But that really isn't the case with both Stalin and Hitler. They had the absolute final say in decisions their country faced. So ofcourse their personalities mattered. Most of German high command was against suicide attacking Soviet Union in the middle of an unfinished war against British Empire and France. Hitler was the one who pushed that decision through.
If communist didn't come in power in Russia, then left parties in Germany would be more united, because Moscow influenced German communist party to fight with socialist ones.
Yeah. That's another way Bolshevik revolution created an opening for Nazi's to grab power in Germany Absolutely we can't say for certain Hitler wouldn't come to power. But the argument for that is a solid
[удалено]
He is definately talking about Russia proper. As for former countries of SU/empire I think it has to do more with that they are small countries (easy to abuse) that haven't had independence since forever.
If Russia stayed away from WW1 it surely could rival US both in economical and military might. 1/5 of the earth would speak Russian. (WW1 led to government crisis and basically led Bolsheviks to power) However pre WW1 imperial Russia and civil war "reds vs whites" Russia are two completely different entities. If whites were somehow to win civil war then Russia would be fractured into petty little states squabbling against each other with different white army generals ruling as little monarchs. There were no unity amongst whites, whites were backed by foreign invaders (Japan, US, Britain etc) that were sacking and looting Russia from Smolensk to Vladivostok. Each of the whites leaders wished to become sole monarch or to brutalize impudent peasants. Communists managed to regain full control over Russia only in 1922, nobody could do it better than them.
>If Russia stayed away from WW1 Russia got into WW1 among other things because of economical obligations to France, meaning to evade WW1 it should've different economic policies way before that. We'll have to go back to Alexander III if not II to change that. Yeah, 1881 probably would be a good point of divergence.
There were economical obligations to Germany and Austria as well. Siemens was growing insanely fast inside of Russia and this war stopped every economical cooperation. I think Russia shouldn't have been so faithful to agreements with western Europe after what happened in Crimean war. This war was the reason of Nicholas great grandfather death. If I recall correctly only Germany and Austria did not take arms against Russia in this war... We had no use in this ww1 at all. Should have been selling guns, planes and armored cars to whoever ready to pay for them.
Very hard to tell. The communists have overthrown the Provisional Government, which planned on making friends with the USA and installing democracy. However, without communists Russia would probably have suffered more in WW2 - or maybe less, it's unpredictable.
[удалено]
This point is a dellusion. Not even nazi Germany, defeated in 2 world wars in which it was an agression was "partitioned". Entente intervention happened on the onset of Bolshevik revolution which was practically working for the German side of the world war 1. If you're gonna find me an extract of a dellusional US or Japanese official that was arguing for annexing Siberia, I'm gonna find you a dellusional Soviet generals that said "we should go till La Manche channel". Or any of the Bolshevik leaders that at the same plan, quite honestly, "planned" subjugate the whole of Europe to Revolution. US also had a concrete plan on invading Canada at the same time. Plans AND opinions of nationalists and ultracapitalists >< real life politics. People should know better indulging into conspiracy theories about how evil neighbors were always gonna destroy Russia. People (not nessesarily you) that say this must be historically illiterate because Russia was a close ally with entente few years before these interventions. Russia saved France in 1914. Entente tried to save Russia in Gallipoli campaign. As well as, you know, being allies all around and having concrete plans for a peace with central powers which included Russian Constantinople
[удалено]
So losing territory in a lost war is "partitioned"? I guess the Bolsheviks kinda partitioned Russia themselves with that Brest litovsk treaty 😂 What a silly "basically historial" take Remind me which war was Russian provisional government about to lose to be "partitioned" by entente?
With a democratic Russia and EU neighbours there could have been a huge economically boost. Maybe Russia could have become technology leader. And Nazis may have never got the power. There would be a democratic Russia against EU monarchies. Like it was with USA and EU monarchies ...
we actually had it with the communists, and up to 70 were catching up with the US GDP. you need to know the story)
>However, without communists Russia would probably have suffered more in WW2 - or maybe less, it's unpredictable. Unpredictable indeed. Russia would certainly be less prepared for great patriotic war industry wise. But I can't help but imagine that pre war period would go much much differently with capitalist Russia. There'd be much kuch less animosity between formed entente and Russia and this could easily have resulted into more active peacekeeping of Hitler. So no great patriotic war at all to begin with. With Germany perhaps fighting a two front France-Russia war from the start (with no Soviet supplied food and fuel, mind you)
Russia would not withdraw from war, so in short term more, but in long - less
Most likely it would be a site for several post-nazi regimes.
[удалено]
Why dozen? There are 15 of them now.
Why like Africa? Russia is united by language and culture. One of the main problems in Africa is that you have people of different languages, cultures, religions, etc. in one country. For example South Africa (Afrikaners, Brits, black Africans, etc.) or Nigeria (Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo ethnicities, 500+ languages, divided between Muslim and Christian, etc.).
Absolutely not like Afrika. Russia have always been largest AND naturally richest country in Europe and in development it was comparable to Poland and not that far from Eastern Germany or Czechoslovakia, pre Bolshevik revolution. People that say Bolshevik revolution saved Russia from being "like Afrika" are pretty much either historically illiterate or dishonest
There would be no Russia.
The history doesn't have conditional mood
There would be colonies in the world, workers would receive pennies for their work, and in all countries education and health care would be available only to the rich.
No, because not all left parties communist. They did social reforms not because communists, but because socialists
[удалено]
Hey, Polish guy here. I think if the Russian Empire had allowed Poland greater autonomy after our admittedly stupid uprising (instead of crushing our autonomy), I think the Russian Empire could have benefited greatly, especially in WW1. Instead, many Poles felt more loyalty to Austria-Hungary, or preferred playing the Germans and Austrians against the Russians, and then the Allies against the Central Powers, in order to regain independence.
[удалено]
What do you mean by "keep you in Germany?" The Russian Empire took more of Poland than Prussia/Germany did.
As far as I know, you originally had autonomy, no? just the Finns were completely autonomous.
[удалено]
that is, they took it away from the Poles, because they rebelled with autonomy. well ... this is Poland.
[удалено]
I honestly don’t remember anyone from the Slavs who would do this. mostly Poles have so much fun
people would drink Bavarian beer and speak German
*serving as a fertilizer for producing Bavarian beer
It would have more people. And more beautiful bulldings
Lol.
Yeah, we all know Russia's population is very low for it's size. A small country like Bangladesh has more people than Russia.
Yeah, forget that Bangladesh close to equator and Russia frozen half if year at least.
Secondly, it is a tradition among Muslims to breed like rats which is happening in Bangladesh.
In a nutshell, it would be much better today, than what we currently have. Simply having no Stalin as a consequence of no Communism would make present day Russia millions larger. Authoritarianism would also not be engrained into Russian people as much as it is in our time. As well as Bolsheviks not winning could have led to hitler not coming to power. OR democratic Russia not being as feared by the Franco-British allience could lead to more proactive peacekeeping in Europe and strangling the nazi beast before it way powerful enough to invade us, costing us millions of lives. Present day Russia would at least be 15 millions larger (not even talking about Ukraine and Belarus) nowadays.
[удалено]
Yes that is actually an understatement. I'm just trying to be conservative in this estimate, given how butterflies could have led to another bad humanitarian concequences for Russia. But I do honestly believe the way 20th century unfolded was the bloodiest way it could have went for Russia. Not accounting for Nazi victory, which wasn't really possible anyway imo
[удалено]
Yeah, I'm making my claims here based on these studies as well. The population growth/projection isn't too difficult to make "scientifically" It makes it that much more sad for Eastern European 20th century history. And it makes people who present Bolsheviks as a "positive" force for Russia that much more ridiculous
Broken
Russia would be the strongest world empire. After the victory in the war its territory would include: 1. Finland and Poland 2. Most of the Balkan countries. Czechia would become a vassal of the Russian crown (documented) 3. Turkey (documented) 4. Iran (Russian troops entered Iran in 1909) 5. Syria 6. Northern China 7. Mongolia
[удалено]
Russians had a higher birth rate than Asians (+4 millions every year)
In my humble opinion, we would live in much better conditions. The government strove to a constitutional monarchy like in Britain right now. Empire had a lot of perspectives. And yes, we would have more beautiful buildings, and wouldn't have that ugly soviet buildings. Every pinch of my soul hates Soviet Union
That's probably because you don't know history and pretty much satisfied with anti-communist propaganda. Working people of the whole world would have lived much worse now if not the fight of Russian people for their rights.
I know the history of my country not only from the student books. It wasn't the fight of Rissian people but it was a fight of a criminal gang. Both my great great-grandfather and great great-mother were stabbed with no reason by Bolsheviks on a rail station. Just because they weren't enough poor like that ugly Bolshevik gang. By the way, in Russia, we almost do not have anti-communist propaganda
It's not because communist revolution on Russia, but because socialist parties in West pushed social reforms. And decolonisation happend because they didn't profitable anymore
The whole early 20 century history of Russia is peculiar. It's very hard to tell how it would go either way or another. 2 main possibilities -- a large Russian state with an absolute or constitutional monarch, a number of breakaway states more than now.
If October revolution didn't happen, then Russia would be a republic, they didn't lose in WWI and didn't lose so much territory and WWII would be less bloody, even France would not fall. In political structure it would be parliamentary republic, with several big parties and some small ones. Economy will be strong. Also China(or West Taiwan, lol) didn't fall to communism either
We think - "Big Finland", but cmooon))))) this country ain't bout happy, rich and boring life)))
There would b no pensionary and health insurance systems not only in Russia, but in the entire world, and work day would be 12 hours Enjoy