Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352 
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Jan 28, 2022 19:20:47 GMT
So, stevep and miletus12, any thoughts on this? You seem more knowledgeable about the geopolitical implications of an ultra-evil USSR, so while my version(s) is sufficiently depraved to make the cut, I haven't come up with any good PoDs that'd make a logical springboard (save for Stalin experiencing the same illness that engendered Caligula's "mad phase" or something). |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Jan 29, 2022 14:19:34 GMT
So, stevep and miletus12 , any thoughts on this? You seem more knowledgeable about the geopolitical implications of an ultra-evil USSR, so while my version(s) is sufficiently depraved to make the cut, I haven't come up with any good PoDs that'd make a logical springboard (save for Stalin experiencing the same illness that engendered Caligula's "mad phase" or something).
I think as you say in your previous post it depends on when Stalin loses it totally. If prior to ~1939 then relatively little butterflies outside the USSR other than reports coming out of massive ethnic cleansing meaning the system is even more of a pariah to everybody else. It will also be substantially weaker economic, industrially and militarily because so much effort is being given to slaughtering its own populations. Plus in many areas, such as Central Asia and possibly parts of the Caucasus's along with some of the wilder areas of the north and Siberia you are likely to see desperate guerilla resistance by the survivors. If he's also killing fellow Slavs from say Belarus and Ukraine then its going to really, really screw the state as the resources of Ukraine are especially important.
As such butterflies might mean small changes, like Poland not opposing German control in Sept 39 simply because what their hearing from the east is even worse. However a German invasion, especially if still in 1941 and after the occupation of France and the Low Countries is going to be distinctly more successful as there are simply less people and resources to oppose them. If Stalin is going the Slavic rather than the Great Russia route - i.e. accepting Ukrainians and Belarus as OK subjects then it would still be a tough fight but if their also been largely slaughtered then I would expect a German victory.
If he losses it after the defeat of Japan - and hence the knowledge of nuclear weapons then things get even worse for those under his rule. Which could include many Poles, Germans, Czechs, Romanians etc. Unless he really goes insane he won't attack the western powers because their effective nuclear monopoly and the security of the US and to a lesser degree the UK means that he can't win a decisive victory over them and will simply be nuked until the empire collapses.
Rough guestimates. Option a would probably mean say 40-80M dead plus add another say 30-50 million if a German victory is lasting. Option b probably means say 100M+ if he gets the time and no one has the sense to coup him. Even more if sometime in the early 50's he does attack the west and gets a few nukes through. Either way Russia and many neighbouring areas are depopulated wastelands, which probably means the big winners in the longer term could be China, Germany if the Nazis are replaced by a non-insane government or possibly say an Iranian revival if they manage to stay outside his clutches with many areas to their north open for resettlement.
Anyway initial thoughts on the issue. However not sure - or possibly just being my usual optimistic self - if things could get that totally insane without him suffering some sort of lead - or cyanide = overdose at some stage.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Jan 29, 2022 17:36:00 GMT
So, stevep and miletus12 , any thoughts on this? You seem more knowledgeable about the geopolitical implications of an ultra-evil USSR, so while my version(s) is sufficiently depraved to make the cut, I haven't come up with any good PoDs that'd make a logical springboard (save for Stalin experiencing the same illness that engendered Caligula's "mad phase" or something).
I think as you say in your previous post it depends on when Stalin loses it totally. If prior to ~1939 then relatively little butterflies outside the USSR other than reports coming out of massive ethnic cleansing meaning the system is even more of a pariah to everybody else. It will also be substantially weaker economic, industrially and militarily because so much effort is being given to slaughtering its own populations. Plus in many areas, such as Central Asia and possibly parts of the Caucasus's along with some of the wilder areas of the north and Siberia you are likely to see desperate guerilla resistance by the survivors. If he's also killing fellow Slavs from say Belarus and Ukraine then its going to really, really screw the state as the resources of Ukraine are especially important.
As such butterflies might mean small changes, like Poland not opposing German control in Sept 39 simply because what their hearing from the east is even worse. However a German invasion, especially if still in 1941 and after the occupation of France and the Low Countries is going to be distinctly more successful as there are simply less people and resources to oppose them. If Stalin is going the Slavic rather than the Great Russia route - i.e. accepting Ukrainians and Belarus as OK subjects then it would still be a tough fight but if their also been largely slaughtered then I would expect a German victory.
If he losses it after the defect of Japan - and hence the knowledge of nuclear weapons then things get even worse for those under his rule. Which could include many Poles, Germans, Czechs, Romanians etc. Unless he really goes insane he won't attack the western powers because their effective nuclear monopoly and the security of the US and to a lesser degree the UK means that he can't win a decisive victory over them and will simply be nuked until the empire collapses.
Rough guestimates. Option a would probably mean say 40-80M dead plus add another say 30-50 million if a German victory is lasting. Option b probably means say 100M+ if he gets the time and no one has the sense to coup him. Even more if sometime in the early 50's he does attack the west and gets a few nukes through. Either way Russia and many neighbouring areas are depopulated wastelands, which probably means the big winners in the longer term could be China, Germany if the Nazis are replaced by a non-insane government or possibly say an Iranian revival if they manage to stay outside his clutches with many areas to their north open for resettlement.
Anyway initial thoughts on the issue. However not sure - or possibly just being my usual optimistic self - if things could get that totally insane without him suffering some sort of lead - or cyanide = overdose at some stage.
In a word: “Oof…” |
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Jan 30, 2022 19:57:42 GMT
I think as you say in your previous post it depends on when Stalin loses it totally. If prior to ~1939 then relatively little butterflies outside the USSR other than reports coming out of massive ethnic cleansing meaning the system is even more of a pariah to everybody else. It will also be substantially weaker economic, industrially and militarily because so much effort is being given to slaughtering its own populations. Plus in many areas, such as Central Asia and possibly parts of the Caucasus's along with some of the wilder areas of the north and Siberia you are likely to see desperate guerilla resistance by the survivors. If he's also killing fellow Slavs from say Belarus and Ukraine then its going to really, really screw the state as the resources of Ukraine are especially important.
As such butterflies might mean small changes, like Poland not opposing German control in Sept 39 simply because what their hearing from the east is even worse. However a German invasion, especially if still in 1941 and after the occupation of France and the Low Countries is going to be distinctly more successful as there are simply less people and resources to oppose them. If Stalin is going the Slavic rather than the Great Russia route - i.e. accepting Ukrainians and Belarus as OK subjects then it would still be a tough fight but if their also been largely slaughtered then I would expect a German victory.
If he losses it after the defect of Japan - and hence the knowledge of nuclear weapons then things get even worse for those under his rule. Which could include many Poles, Germans, Czechs, Romanians etc. Unless he really goes insane he won't attack the western powers because their effective nuclear monopoly and the security of the US and to a lesser degree the UK means that he can't win a decisive victory over them and will simply be nuked until the empire collapses.
Rough guestimates. Option a would probably mean say 40-80M dead plus add another say 30-50 million if a German victory is lasting. Option b probably means say 100M+ if he gets the time and no one has the sense to coup him. Even more if sometime in the early 50's he does attack the west and gets a few nukes through. Either way Russia and many neighbouring areas are depopulated wastelands, which probably means the big winners in the longer term could be China, Germany if the Nazis are replaced by a non-insane government or possibly say an Iranian revival if they manage to stay outside his clutches with many areas to their north open for resettlement.
Anyway initial thoughts on the issue. However not sure - or possibly just being my usual optimistic self - if things could get that totally insane without him suffering some sort of lead - or cyanide = overdose at some stage.
In a word: “Oof…” Also, in the event that Stalin loses it before Hitler turns on him, I assume that any Operation Barbarossa—should Hitler still give the green light and have enough resources to fight the Soviets—would also be buoyed by the propaganda victory it'd afford the Nazis. Which is to say, they can easily frame Stalin's Russia as the most evil regime in history via photos and propping up survivors as testimony, all while not having to do (most of) the slaughtering themselves.
That's not to claim the Reich was any nicer in principle, mind you. It's just easier to maintain appearances when the need to actually erect death camps and otherwise carry out your post-war genocides are greatly reduced, when your enemy has already decimated his people on your behalf. (I do, however, fear that the Nazi leadership would still be sickeningly delighted at how mad Stalin has gone, which is how you know that Hitler was no better.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Apr 30, 2022 13:22:44 GMT
I'm kinda grateful that Stalin didn't decide to annex all conquered countries in Europe to make a super-Soviet Union. Why? Because that would've meant that a madman like Ceaucescu could've risen to become leader of it. Nuff said?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 30, 2022 13:24:10 GMT
I'm kinda grateful that Stalin didn't decide to annex all conquered countries in Europe to make a super-Soviet Union. Why? Because that would've meant that a madman like Ceaucescu could've risen to become leader of it. Nuff said? Question could he do it, one thing to have them as a puppet where at lease they can appear to be independent from the Soviet Union, another thing is to annex it. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Apr 30, 2022 13:33:45 GMT
I'm kinda grateful that Stalin didn't decide to annex all conquered countries in Europe to make a super-Soviet Union. Why? Because that would've meant that a madman like Ceaucescu could've risen to become leader of it. Nuff said? Question could he do it, one thing to have them as a puppet where at lease they can appear to be independent from the Soviet Union, another thing is to annex it.
Lenin himself said that countries like Germany, Poland, Finland etc. couldn't be incorporated in the Soviet Union, so they'd have to have a looser connection with the SU. Doesn't mean Stalin couldn't decide otherwise.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 30, 2022 13:38:29 GMT
Question could he do it, one thing to have them as a puppet where at lease they can appear to be independent from the Soviet Union, another thing is to annex it. Lenin himself said that countries like Germany, Poland, Finland etc. couldn't be incorporated in the Soviet Union, so they'd have a looser connection. Doesn't mean Stalin could decide otherwise.
But i doubt some of those counties under Soviet occupation will go silent, they will resist. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Apr 30, 2022 13:54:42 GMT
But would it make that much of a difference? And as said: Theoretically a Honecker/Gomulka/Ceaucescu might rise to the very top. That's at least an interesting possibility.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 30, 2022 13:59:06 GMT
But would it make that much of a difference? And as said: Theoretically a Honecker/Gomulka/Ceaucescu might rise to the very top. That's at least an interesting possibility. Well they would be a minority in the Soviet Union with most likely all the top spots going to Russians. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Apr 30, 2022 14:18:52 GMT
Not necessarily... Khrushchev e.g. was Ukrainian.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 30, 2022 14:20:51 GMT
Not necessarily... Khrushchev e.g. was Ukrainian. And Stalin was a Georgian. But the majority where from Russia. |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Apr 30, 2022 14:39:18 GMT
I'm kinda grateful that Stalin didn't decide to annex all conquered countries in Europe to make a super-Soviet Union. Why? Because that would've meant that a madman like Ceaucescu could've risen to become leader of it. Nuff said? Because Stalin knew his limits. Annexing Eastern Europe right after the war would pose a huge problem to a USSR that is still recovering from WWII. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Apr 30, 2022 16:13:11 GMT
I'm kinda grateful that Stalin didn't decide to annex all conquered countries in Europe to make a super-Soviet Union. Why? Because that would've meant that a madman like Ceaucescu could've risen to become leader of it. Nuff said? Because Stalin knew his limits. Annexing Eastern Europe right after the war would pose a huge problem to a USSR that is still recovering from WWII.
Especially since it would also cause a big reaction in the west. Probably not war but the myth that Stalin would allow human and national rights in places like Poland and Czechoslovakia would be smashed very quickly. You are also likely to see a big reaction in the countries in western Europe as there would be a much stronger determination to avoid Soviet rule. You might also see less de-Nazification in western Europe as the allies might think they can't afford to alienate the right wings in those countries too much which could have some nasty consequences.
|
|
