lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966 
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 16, 2016 18:37:54 GMT
In November, 1917, Lenin overthrew the first democratically elected government in Russian history. In May, 1922, Lenin suffered the first of three strokes, finally dying in January, 1924. What would have happened if Lenin had a fatal stroke in mid-1917? It's a pretty picture. In 1917, even Lenin's fellow Bolsheviks weren't ready for socialist revolution. As Richard Pipes explains in The Russian Revolution: Barely four weeks after tsarism had been overthrown, Lenin was publicly sentencing its successor to death. This proposition ran so contrary to the sentiments of the majority of his followers, it seemed so irresponsible and "adventurist," that the remainder of the night... was spent in tempestuous debate.When Lenin defended immediate socialist revolution in writing (the "April Theses"): Pravda's editorial board refused to print [it] on the pretext of a mechanical breakdown in its printing press. A meeting of the Bolshevik Central Committee on April 6 passed a negative resolution on them...- The Petrograd Committee met on April 8 to discuss Lenin's paper. Its verdict was also overwhelmingly negative, two voting in favor, thirteen against, with one abstention. The reaction in the provincial cities was similar... Only through great effort did Lenin win his followers over to his position. If he had been dead, then, it is quite likely that the Bolsheviks would have cooperated with the "bourgeois- democratic" government. The ripple effects would have been amazing: - If Kerensky's government made a separate peace with Germany, as Lenin did, the Germans would still have been defeated on schedule by American intervention in 1918. Otherwise the Germans would have been defeated sooner. Even if the Germans conquered the entirety of European Russia, the Versailles treaty would almost certainly have returned the democratically elected government of Russia to power. - Needless to say, without Lenin's coup there probably wouldn't have been a Russian Civil War or the horrific War Communism famine. - Without Lenin's coup, the Bolsheviks would never have ruled Russia. The Bolsheviks couldn't have won power democratically; they weren't even able to win the first election after their coup. Under peaceful conditions, their radicalism would have alienated almost any electorate. Given Russia's large culturally conservative peasant majority, the Bolsheviks wouldn't have stood a chance. - Without the Bolsheviks' example, attempted socialist coups in Germany, Hungary, and elsewhere probably wouldn't have happened either. Few Europeans would have yearned for dictators to protect them from the Red Peril - or scapegoated the whole Jewish people for the misdeeds of a handful of prominent Bolsheviks of Jewish descent. - Without the fear of Bolshevism, it's quite likely that Mussolini wouldn't have taken over Italy - and extremely likely that Hitler wouldn't have taken over Germany. Indeed, if the Germans hadn't gotten a foretaste of Bolshevism after World War I, Hitler might never have entered politics. - Under moderate economic policies, there's every reason to think that Russian economic growth would have resumed its very promising pre-war course. As Gregory and Stuart's 1990 text explains, "Russian industrial growth was more rapid than its European neighbors after 1880" (and before World War I). Per capita net national product rose at an annual rate of 1.7% between 1883 and 1913 - despite defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the subsequent failed 1905 revolution. All the horrors caused by Lenin's imitators around the world would have been far less likely. A Mao might have arisen in China without Soviet inspiration, but it's not likely. Bottom line: If Lenin had died, Russia would have emerged from the horrors of World War I smelling like a rose. There would have been no Soviet Union and no Stalinism, just steady progress. Russia would have been more authoritarian and statist than most countries in Europe, but it would have been a normal country. Even better, without the Red Scare and associated anti-Semitism, Germany would probably have remained a normal country, too. No Nazi Germany, no Soviet Union, no World War II. Even Japan might have behaved peaceably if it faced a civilized, prosperous Russia eager to trade food and resources for manufactures. Without war with Japan, China, too, could have gotten on the path to prosperity fifty years earlier. Imagine. Of course, something else could have gone wrong. Counter-factual history is never certain. But if a stroke killed Lenin in 1917, there's good reason to think that the world could have skipped decades of bloodshed, poverty, terror, and totalitarian dogma. Alas. From the website library of economics and liberty with a article called: What If Lenin's Stroke Came Five Years Sooner? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,834
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 16, 2016 18:54:42 GMT
Lordroel
In general agreement. There's still a lot that can go wrong as you say at the end but things are likely to be a hell of a lot better, at least up to ~1945. [After that difficult to tell and without the horrors of WWII someone might end up starting something similar but later with more destructive weapons. Dread the idea of of such a conflict with nukes on both sides!]
Russia is still likely to have a period of instability after 1918. Apart from unrest on the left you could see coup attempts by elements supporting a restoration of Czarist autocracy. Plus it will have huge debts and a fair amount of devastation in its western provinces. Likely to see significant unrest in Poland as well unless the new Russian government is likely to give them at least large scale autonomy.
However likely to see it come through reasonably securely and then possibly have the sort of steady and large scale growth you suggest. At the very least they won't have the massive devastation of the civil war and afterwards.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 16, 2016 18:56:34 GMT
Lordroel In general agreement. There's still a lot that can go wrong as you say at the end but things are likely to be a hell of a lot better, at least up to ~1945. [After that difficult to tell and without the horrors of WWII someone might end up starting something similar but later with more destructive weapons. Dread the idea of of such a conflict with nukes on both sides!] Russia is still likely to have a period of instability after 1918. Apart from unrest on the left you could see coup attempts by elements supporting a restoration of Czarist autocracy. Plus it will have huge debts and a fair amount of devastation in its western provinces. Likely to see significant unrest in Poland as well unless the new Russian government is likely to give them at least large scale autonomy. However likely to see it come through reasonably securely and then possibly have the sort of steady and large scale growth you suggest. At the very least they won't have the massive devastation of the civil war and afterwards. Well i think we both can agree the Tsar nor any member of the imperial family will be back on a Russian throne even with Lenin dying in 1917. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,834
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 16, 2016 21:37:46 GMT
Lordroel In general agreement. There's still a lot that can go wrong as you say at the end but things are likely to be a hell of a lot better, at least up to ~1945. [After that difficult to tell and without the horrors of WWII someone might end up starting something similar but later with more destructive weapons. Dread the idea of of such a conflict with nukes on both sides!] Russia is still likely to have a period of instability after 1918. Apart from unrest on the left you could see coup attempts by elements supporting a restoration of Czarist autocracy. Plus it will have huge debts and a fair amount of devastation in its western provinces. Likely to see significant unrest in Poland as well unless the new Russian government is likely to give them at least large scale autonomy. However likely to see it come through reasonably securely and then possibly have the sort of steady and large scale growth you suggest. At the very least they won't have the massive devastation of the civil war and afterwards. Well i think we both can agree the Tsar nor any member of the imperial family will be back on a Russian throne even with Lenin dying in 1917. I think its unlikely but not impossible. Presuming the Provisional Government survives its still going to face opposition from both left and right. Since Lenin's early death doesn't affect their policy effectively they will still continue to support the war including the attacks in 1917 OTL which with morale suffering took heavy losses. Without a Bolshevik take-over, the confusion that caused and Trotsky's stupid passive resistance approach Russia is unlikely to suffer the massive territorial losses that resulted in the Brest-Litovsk but it will suffer losses as the army crumbles and possibly more manpower losses as it will fight more effectively. The war was already deeply unpopular and I expect the more extreme left wing groups especially to seek to undermine both it and the government as they did OTL with effects on morale and urban unrest. The war will probably end a little earlier as the Germans will still be heavily involved in the east so having less troops in the west, although this may be countered somewhat if they don't launch their desperate Michael Offensive. This would win peace and prestige for the PG but how much of that will filter down. Also the release of many POWs may help but since they come from the Czarist regime in large part that could further undermine the government. Also in areas like Poland and Finland how is the PG going to respond to independence movements, which in Poland especially could see at least some military forces established before any Russian units get there? If they go democratic and liberal that may well win support abroad but could be displayed as losing Russian territory. If they seek to secure the 1914 borders and probably more, which would be likely if they want a stable Poland that would mean an occupation which would drain the economy, require maintaining troops there and lose popularity with the western democracies. After this Russia is likely to have a significant role in TTL's peace treaties, especially Versailles. Again here I could see a number of routes things could go. Also by definition this is a provisional government which will have to face an election which it might well lose, possibly heavily. [Both because of the widespread support for more moderate left wing groups such as the Mensheviks and the Social Revolutionaries who TTL won't be tainted by association with the Bolsheviks and because the PG is likely to face serious problems bringing a peace that keeps everybody happy]. You could see widespread social unrest and if they don't clamp down strongly not only would this disrupt economic recovery but it would open them to attack from the right wing for being weak. If they do repress dissent they will build up pressure for greater unrest later. At some point I would expect, if the PG wins an election, violent opposition arising from either left or right and once a civil war starts the extremes are likely to gain more support. If they lose the election to a left wing socially reforming government this might prompt a coup attempt by the army and a civil war from that. Ideally I would like to see moderate centralist government survive but I think there's a high chance of substantial violent opposition and from there a major civil war. In this, without the prestige of having brought 'peace' and the extreme autocracy of Lenin and the Bolsheviks I don't think its impossible for a right wing regime to win power. Even if their power is curtailed in actuality this is likely to bring some sort of 'return' for the Romanovs. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 2:56:11 GMT
Well i think we both can agree the Tsar nor any member of the imperial family will be back on a Russian throne even with Lenin dying in 1917. I think its unlikely but not impossible. Presuming the Provisional Government survives its still going to face opposition from both left and right. Since Lenin's early death doesn't affect their policy effectively they will still continue to support the war including the attacks in 1917 OTL which with morale suffering took heavy losses. Without a Bolshevik take-over, the confusion that caused and Trotsky's stupid passive resistance approach Russia is unlikely to suffer the massive territorial losses that resulted in the Brest-Litovsk but it will suffer losses as the army crumbles and possibly more manpower losses as it will fight more effectively. The war was already deeply unpopular and I expect the more extreme left wing groups especially to seek to undermine both it and the government as they did OTL with effects on morale and urban unrest. The war will probably end a little earlier as the Germans will still be heavily involved in the east so having less troops in the west, although this may be countered somewhat if they don't launch their desperate Michael Offensive. This would win peace and prestige for the PG but how much of that will filter down. Also the release of many POWs may help but since they come from the Czarist regime in large part that could further undermine the government. Also in areas like Poland and Finland how is the PG going to respond to independence movements, which in Poland especially could see at least some military forces established before any Russian units get there? If they go democratic and liberal that may well win support abroad but could be displayed as losing Russian territory. If they seek to secure the 1914 borders and probably more, which would be likely if they want a stable Poland that would mean an occupation which would drain the economy, require maintaining troops there and lose popularity with the western democracies. After this Russia is likely to have a significant role in TTL's peace treaties, especially Versailles. Again here I could see a number of routes things could go. Also by definition this is a provisional government which will have to face an election which it might well lose, possibly heavily. [Both because of the widespread support for more moderate left wing groups such as the Mensheviks and the Social Revolutionaries who TTL won't be tainted by association with the Bolsheviks and because the PG is likely to face serious problems bringing a peace that keeps everybody happy]. You could see widespread social unrest and if they don't clamp down strongly not only would this disrupt economic recovery but it would open them to attack from the right wing for being weak. If they do repress dissent they will build up pressure for greater unrest later. At some point I would expect, if the PG wins an election, violent opposition arising from either left or right and once a civil war starts the extremes are likely to gain more support. If they lose the election to a left wing socially reforming government this might prompt a coup attempt by the army and a civil war from that. Ideally I would like to see moderate centralist government survive but I think there's a high chance of substantial violent opposition and from there a major civil war. In this, without the prestige of having brought 'peace' and the extreme autocracy of Lenin and the Bolsheviks I don't think its impossible for a right wing regime to win power. Even if their power is curtailed in actuality this is likely to bring some sort of 'return' for the Romanovs. Was thinking, the death of Lenin in 1917 is not going to change the surender of Germany in 1917 and also not the situation Germany will get into after that wich would lead to the rise of Hitler, i would think that a Russia or Soviet Union what ever it is called will be much weaker here than it was in OTL. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,834
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 17, 2016 13:58:15 GMT
I think its unlikely but not impossible. Presuming the Provisional Government survives its still going to face opposition from both left and right. Since Lenin's early death doesn't affect their policy effectively they will still continue to support the war including the attacks in 1917 OTL which with morale suffering took heavy losses. Without a Bolshevik take-over, the confusion that caused and Trotsky's stupid passive resistance approach Russia is unlikely to suffer the massive territorial losses that resulted in the Brest-Litovsk but it will suffer losses as the army crumbles and possibly more manpower losses as it will fight more effectively. The war was already deeply unpopular and I expect the more extreme left wing groups especially to seek to undermine both it and the government as they did OTL with effects on morale and urban unrest. The war will probably end a little earlier as the Germans will still be heavily involved in the east so having less troops in the west, although this may be countered somewhat if they don't launch their desperate Michael Offensive. This would win peace and prestige for the PG but how much of that will filter down. Also the release of many POWs may help but since they come from the Czarist regime in large part that could further undermine the government. Also in areas like Poland and Finland how is the PG going to respond to independence movements, which in Poland especially could see at least some military forces established before any Russian units get there? If they go democratic and liberal that may well win support abroad but could be displayed as losing Russian territory. If they seek to secure the 1914 borders and probably more, which would be likely if they want a stable Poland that would mean an occupation which would drain the economy, require maintaining troops there and lose popularity with the western democracies. After this Russia is likely to have a significant role in TTL's peace treaties, especially Versailles. Again here I could see a number of routes things could go. Also by definition this is a provisional government which will have to face an election which it might well lose, possibly heavily. [Both because of the widespread support for more moderate left wing groups such as the Mensheviks and the Social Revolutionaries who TTL won't be tainted by association with the Bolsheviks and because the PG is likely to face serious problems bringing a peace that keeps everybody happy]. You could see widespread social unrest and if they don't clamp down strongly not only would this disrupt economic recovery but it would open them to attack from the right wing for being weak. If they do repress dissent they will build up pressure for greater unrest later. At some point I would expect, if the PG wins an election, violent opposition arising from either left or right and once a civil war starts the extremes are likely to gain more support. If they lose the election to a left wing socially reforming government this might prompt a coup attempt by the army and a civil war from that. Ideally I would like to see moderate centralist government survive but I think there's a high chance of substantial violent opposition and from there a major civil war. In this, without the prestige of having brought 'peace' and the extreme autocracy of Lenin and the Bolsheviks I don't think its impossible for a right wing regime to win power. Even if their power is curtailed in actuality this is likely to bring some sort of 'return' for the Romanovs. Was thinking, the death of Lenin in 1917 is not going to change the surender of Germany in 1917 and also not the situation Germany will get into after that wich would lead to the rise of Hitler, i would think that a Russia or Soviet Union what ever it is called will be much weaker here than it was in OTL. There will still be a desire for revanchment in Germany and probably also deeply set militarism. Especially if Germany still manages to make peace before much of its territory is occupied so the stab in the back myth will be created again. However if Russia is an active member of the international community, rather than the OTL pariah its likely to support the results of the 1919 peace treaty which means an Hitlerian government is likely to face serious threats from west and east when it starts getting too aggressive. Especially if a moderate liberal Russia has close links with Czechoslovakia. If Russia avoids a major civil war and is reasonably stable its likely to be a lot stronger than OTL USSR. Both because it will have a much higher population but also a far more content one. Your going to see very little collaboration as occurred OTL as the population hoped for an escape from Stalin's nightmare before realising the Nazis are even worse. Also a Russia connected in with the international community is likely to see a lot of trade so unless its hit by a Great Slump, if that occurs TTL, so its likely to see a lot of development itself and could have nearly as big, even if not bigger an industrial economy than Stalin's empire. Of course if the state suffers a civil war as bad as OTL and then an extreme element establishing a dictatorship it might suffer as badly in the 20's and 30's as OTL. However even an autocratic right wing one is unlikely to be as debilatating as the Bolsheviks in OTL. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 13:59:52 GMT
Was thinking, the death of Lenin in 1917 is not going to change the surender of Germany in 1917 and also not the situation Germany will get into after that wich would lead to the rise of Hitler, i would think that a Russia or Soviet Union what ever it is called will be much weaker here than it was in OTL. There will still be a desire for revanchment in Germany and probably also deeply set militarism. Especially if Germany still manages to make peace before much of its territory is occupied so the stab in the back myth will be created again. However if Russia is an active member of the international community, rather than the OTL pariah its likely to support the results of the 1919 peace treaty which means an Hitlerian government is likely to face serious threats from west and east when it starts getting too aggressive. Especially if a moderate liberal Russia has close links with Czechoslovakia. If Russia avoids a major civil war and is reasonably stable its likely to be a lot stronger than OTL USSR. Both because it will have a much higher population but also a far more content one. Your going to see very little collaboration as occurred OTL as the population hoped for an escape from Stalin's nightmare before realising the Nazis are even worse. Also a Russia connected in with the international community is likely to see a lot of trade so unless its hit by a Great Slump, if that occurs TTL, so its likely to see a lot of development itself and could have nearly as big, even if not bigger an industrial economy than Stalin's empire. Of course if the state suffers a civil war as bad as OTL and then an extreme element establishing a dictatorship it might suffer as badly in the 20's and 30's as OTL. However even an autocratic right wing one is unlikely to be as debilatating as the Bolsheviks in OTL. The problem is that with Lenin death in 1917 the civil war could last somewhat longer. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,834
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 17, 2016 18:11:53 GMT
There will still be a desire for revanchment in Germany and probably also deeply set militarism. Especially if Germany still manages to make peace before much of its territory is occupied so the stab in the back myth will be created again. However if Russia is an active member of the international community, rather than the OTL pariah its likely to support the results of the 1919 peace treaty which means an Hitlerian government is likely to face serious threats from west and east when it starts getting too aggressive. Especially if a moderate liberal Russia has close links with Czechoslovakia. If Russia avoids a major civil war and is reasonably stable its likely to be a lot stronger than OTL USSR. Both because it will have a much higher population but also a far more content one. Your going to see very little collaboration as occurred OTL as the population hoped for an escape from Stalin's nightmare before realising the Nazis are even worse. Also a Russia connected in with the international community is likely to see a lot of trade so unless its hit by a Great Slump, if that occurs TTL, so its likely to see a lot of development itself and could have nearly as big, even if not bigger an industrial economy than Stalin's empire. Of course if the state suffers a civil war as bad as OTL and then an extreme element establishing a dictatorship it might suffer as badly in the 20's and 30's as OTL. However even an autocratic right wing one is unlikely to be as debilatating as the Bolsheviks in OTL. The problem is that with Lenin death in 1917 the civil war could last somewhat longer. It would depend on: a) Is there a substantial civil war at all? There might be or just a failed coup attempt which is quickly suppressed and some terrorism which would make things a bit less stable but be massively less destructive than the OTL situation along with also the post-war situation. b) What parties are involved in the civil war if it does occur? Doubt it would include the Bolsheviks, other than for terrorism. You could have liberals, left wing radicals and a wide range of conservatives, from moderate monarchies to military dictatorships. Along with the political circumstances this could mean a markedly shorter war or, probably less likely, a longer one. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 18:19:57 GMT
The problem is that with Lenin death in 1917 the civil war could last somewhat longer. It would depend on: a) Is there a substantial civil war at all? There might be or just a failed coup attempt which is quickly suppressed and some terrorism which would make things a bit less stable but be massively less destructive than the OTL situation along with also the post-war situation. b) What parties are involved in the civil war if it does occur? Doubt it would include the Bolsheviks, other than for terrorism. You could have liberals, left wing radicals and a wide range of conservatives, from moderate monarchies to military dictatorships. Along with the political circumstances this could mean a markedly shorter war or, probably less likely, a longer one. What about Stalin, he was at the time of Lenin death here in 1917 the People's Commissar for Nationalities' Affairs and also was a member of a five-member Politburo, which included him and Trotsky |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,834
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 17, 2016 18:25:40 GMT
It would depend on: a) Is there a substantial civil war at all? There might be or just a failed coup attempt which is quickly suppressed and some terrorism which would make things a bit less stable but be massively less destructive than the OTL situation along with also the post-war situation. b) What parties are involved in the civil war if it does occur? Doubt it would include the Bolsheviks, other than for terrorism. You could have liberals, left wing radicals and a wide range of conservatives, from moderate monarchies to military dictatorships. Along with the political circumstances this could mean a markedly shorter war or, probably less likely, a longer one. What about Stalin, he was at the time of Lenin death here in 1917 the People's Commissar for Nationalities' Affairs and also was a member of a five-member Politburo, which included him and Trotsky He had experience as a bank robber/terrorist and as a political fixer but I doubt he could have driven the Bolsheviks to power in the way Lenin did. Also Lenin had got a position as a clear leader and with the party in a very autocratic role model. Hence its very likely it would have a period of bloodletting while there's a struggle for power. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,966
Likes: 49,372
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 18:33:00 GMT
What about Stalin, he was at the time of Lenin death here in 1917 the People's Commissar for Nationalities' Affairs and also was a member of a five-member Politburo, which included him and Trotsky He had experience as a bank robber/terrorist and as a political fixer but I doubt he could have driven the Bolsheviks to power in the way Lenin did. Also Lenin had got a position as a clear leader and with the party in a very autocratic role model. Hence its very likely it would have a period of bloodletting while there's a struggle for power. Stalin and Trotsky would be at each other throats i guess. |
|
