Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

gral

Well-known member
Speaking of Arabs - OPEC starts playing silly bugger earlier?
They can't play embargo games much earlier than they did - the 1973 Embargo worked, instead of failing like their previous(two, IIRC) earlier attempts, because US oil production couldn't cover oil consumption for the whole world anymore - whenever someone tried to pull an embargo, the oil companies would open up the taps on the Texan and Californian oil fields to keep the price down. The point where that strategy didn't work anymore was reached around the late-60s, IIRC.
 

49ersfootball

Well-known member
They can't play embargo games much earlier than they did - the 1973 Embargo worked, instead of failing like their previous(two, IIRC) earlier attempts, because US oil production couldn't cover oil consumption for the whole world anymore - whenever someone tried to pull an embargo, the oil companies would open up the taps on the Texan and Californian oil fields to keep the price down. The point where that strategy didn't work anymore was reached around the late-60s, IIRC.
Didn't that play a slight role in the Shah's downfall in 1979 ?
 

ATP

Well-known member
'2022 Turkey To 1962'.

Say it happens on October 16th of both years (the start of the Cuban Missile Crisis).

As I recall, the US's Jupiter missiles in Turkey were what prompted the USSR to install its own missiles in Cuba, so Turkey from the future will definitely "spice up" an already-contentious crisis.
Either nukes fly,and we had better Europe/burned Turkey and partially burned but east Europe/
better USA/no Washington/ and no soviets.
USA would cleanse themselves of Marcuse and others shit.

Or not,and then Turkey must agree to be american puppet again,or get burned by soviets.Again,better then OTL,becouse we do not have leftista taking over West from within.

Hopefully,no protestant changes in Catholic Church,too.
 
Last edited:

gral

Well-known member
Didn't that play a slight role in the Shah's downfall in 1979 ?
What exactly are you referring to?

EDIT:

Hopefully,no changes in Catholic Church,too.

Eh, here I think there will be pressure against Vatican II, but most of its foundations were already laid - and pretty solid - by 1962. I think the Church will try to walk the tightrope(and almost certainly fail) and try to implement 'less radical' changes.
 

49ersfootball

Well-known member
What exactly are you referring to?

EDIT:



Eh, here I think there will be pressure against Vatican II, but most of its foundations were already laid - and pretty solid - by 1962. I think the Church will try to walk the tightrope(and almost certainly fail) and try to implement 'less radical' changes.
I was referring to the oil embargo hitting the Middle East back in the early 1970s.
 

49ersfootball

Well-known member
Eh, it had some impact, yes - the Shah now had more money to pursue his modernization efforts, which were the main cause of the Revolution.
Basically you're saying the Shah was fucked regardless with his modernization efforts SMH.

Now if he had those Ayatollahs whacked years earlier, Iran would've been a much better place & better off.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Basically you're saying the Shah was fucked regardless with his modernization efforts SMH.

Now if he had those Ayatollahs whacked years earlier, Iran would've been a much better place & better off.
Shah was hated thanks to his modernization efforts.If he remained old fashioned King and spend money on better army and factories,he would keep power.And do not let CIA and Mossad torturers deal with his enemies,people do not liked it,too.

@gral ,you are sadly right that Cathoic Church in 1962 was arleady infiltrated by masons,but maybe they manage to at least keep old latin rite.
 

mandragon

Well-known member
Shah was hated thanks to his modernization efforts.If he remained old fashioned King and spend money on better army and factories,he would keep power.And do not let CIA and Mossad torturers deal with his enemies,people do not liked it,too.

@gral ,you are sadly right that Cathoic Church in 1962 was arleady infiltrated by masons,but maybe they manage to at least keep old latin rite.
I mean factories and the military is a huge part of modernizing. In fact I would argue that the two are the majority of such
 

ATP

Well-known member
I mean factories and the military is a huge part of modernizing. In fact I would argue that the two are the majority of such
Yes,but he also not only supported woman rights,which in Iran could be done,but also fucked local merchants making state supported bussiness.
Which,i think was last straw.
 

gral

Well-known member
@gral ,you are sadly right that Cathoic Church in 1962 was arleady infiltrated by masons,but maybe they manage to at least keep old latin rite.
I don't think they would keep the Tridentine Rite, because the theological justifications for the New Rite were already presented in Pius XII's Papacy -mainly in Mediator Dei, but also other encyclicals, like Musicae Sacrae. They will have to square that circle, and I think that the result will be a mix of Tridentine and New Rites, with the vernacular at the very least being used in some parts of the Mass(as was already done in Bavaria since the 1920s, and in parts of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire as early as 1906).

I'd expect other theological changes to go the same way, a mix of what was enacted after Vatican II and the previous norm - which of course would merely slow the process we see happening in the Catholic Church in OTL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

Buba

A total creep
the vernacular at the very least being used in some parts of the Mass(as was already done in Bavaria since the 1920s, and in parts of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire as early as 1906).
Supposedly Old Church Slavonic was used in Tridentine Rite Mass in Dalmatia (under Venice) since Day One.
Tridentine versus Pauline Rite differ in MANY things, the use of the veracular being only one - and, even if highly visible, not the most important.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I don't think they would keep the Tridentine Rite, because the theological justifications for the New Rite were already presented in Pius XII's Papacy -mainly in Mediator Dei, but also other encyclicals, like Musicae Sacrae. They will have to square that circle, and I think that the result will be a mix of Tridentine and New Rites, with the vernacular at the very least being used in some parts of the Mass(as was already done in Bavaria since the 1920s, and in parts of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire as early as 1906).

I'd expect other theological changes to go the same way, a mix of what was enacted after Vatican II and the previous norm - which of course would merely slow the process we see happening in the Catholic Church in OTL.
Sadly,you are probably right,BUT - at least maybe lavenda mafia and commies would be purged.

Aside from that - you could just save Spain,Portugal,Rhodesia and South Africa.

After witnessing what happened to their countries,Franco and Salazar could find good young colonels to replace them,and at least Boers would survive free on their lands.

Soviets would fall earlier/americans would knew how to finish them,knew their agents,and do not fuck Vietnam/,and Poland and other liberated countries would purge their traitors.
Or,soviets could start WW3 - stil better for USA,becouse they would lost top 30 bigger cities,including Washington,and soviets would lost all.
When Turkey would burn to the ground,so they would not profit from that.
 

Skallagrim

Well-known member
@gral ,you are sadly right that Cathoic Church in 1962 was arleady infiltrated by masons,but maybe they manage to at least keep old latin rite.

I don't think they would keep the Tridentine Rite, because the theological justifications for the New Rite were already presented in Pius XII's Papacy -mainly in Mediator Dei, but also other encyclicals, like Musicae Sacrae. They will have to square that circle, and I think that the result will be a mix of Tridentine and New Rites, with the vernacular at the very least being used in some parts of the Mass(as was already done in Bavaria since the 1920s, and in parts of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire as early as 1906).

I'd expect other theological changes to go the same way, a mix of what was enacted after Vatican II and the previous norm - which of course would merely slow the process we see happening in the Catholic Church in OTL.


I think you can track certain left-wing infiltrations that ultimately led to disaster all the way back to Rerum Novarum in 1891. Not to imply that Leo XIII was a crypto-leftie, of course, but his attempts to find a middle path while getting involved in such temporal socio-eoconomic matters would provide a precursor (and an excuse!) for errors... and deliberate warpings... down the line.



Sometimes, I think about a world in which Pius IX is succeeded by Cardinal Bilio in 1878. Of course, Bilio would only live until 1884, so most probably, Cardinal Pecci would still be elected, only six years later. But who knows? Maybe a few more years the hard line against all forms of modernism could still make a difference?

Let's dream. Pecci is still Pope from 1884-1903, but maybe with more of a focus on Thomism, and less of a focus on getting involved in socio-economic temporal affairs. That would be splendid.

Pius X was splendid, so nothing has to change there. He dies in 1914, and then... Serafini instead of della Chiesa? Would be a rather brief Papacy, only until 1918, but he was the most reactionary candidate, and therefore would be my choice for sure.

Then, perhaps, Merry del Val? Leader of the reactionary faction at the 1922 conclave in OTL. He'd live until 1930.

I have no real clue who would make an ideal Pope in a hypothetical 1930 conclave. Piazza? He'd live until 1957, which would allow for Cardinal Siri to become the Pope we never had in OTL from then until 1989. (Alternatively, August Hlond until his death in 1948, because having a Pope from Poland for the period 1930-1948 would be something, for sure. And then just have Piazza elected in '48.)

Then have Ratzinger be elected early, and (in this more reactionary Church) stay on until 2022.



It's only a dream, but a very happy one. To see the Church fully dedicated to opposing modernism in all its forms, all throughout the 20th century; never once abating in its mission to keep the fires of faith and tradition alive. No leftism-infused social teachings, no Second Vatican Council, no Pope washing the feet of muslims, and no "inter-faith dialogue" that implies the ludicrous notion of equality between all religions.
 

49ersfootball

Well-known member
@Skallagrim Here's one particular What If discussion topic: The Vatican hires Dr. Pedro Ara of Spain to do embalming methods on the late Pope Pius XII instead of that incompetent idiot, who botched the embalming job.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I think you can track certain left-wing infiltrations that ultimately led to disaster all the way back to Rerum Novarum in 1891. Not to imply that Leo XIII was a crypto-leftie, of course, but his attempts to find a middle path while getting involved in such temporal socio-eoconomic matters would provide a precursor (and an excuse!) for errors... and deliberate warpings... down the line.



Sometimes, I think about a world in which Pius IX is succeeded by Cardinal Bilio in 1878. Of course, Bilio would only live until 1884, so most probably, Cardinal Pecci would still be elected, only six years later. But who knows? Maybe a few more years the hard line against all forms of modernism could still make a difference?

Let's dream. Pecci is still Pope from 1884-1903, but maybe with more of a focus on Thomism, and less of a focus on getting involved in socio-economic temporal affairs. That would be splendid.

Pius X was splendid, so nothing has to change there. He dies in 1914, and then... Serafini instead of della Chiesa? Would be a rather brief Papacy, only until 1918, but he was the most reactionary candidate, and therefore would be my choice for sure.

Then, perhaps, Merry del Val? Leader of the reactionary faction at the 1922 conclave in OTL. He'd live until 1930.

I have no real clue who would make an ideal Pope in a hypothetical 1930 conclave. Piazza? He'd live until 1957, which would allow for Cardinal Siri to become the Pope we never had in OTL from then until 1989. (Alternatively, August Hlond until his death in 1948, because having a Pope from Poland for the period 1930-1948 would be something, for sure. And then just have Piazza elected in '48.)

Then have Ratzinger be elected early, and (in this more reactionary Church) stay on until 2022.



It's only a dream, but a very happy one. To see the Church fully dedicated to opposing modernism in all its forms, all throughout the 20th century; never once abating in its mission to keep the fires of faith and tradition alive. No leftism-infused social teachings, no Second Vatican Council, no Pope washing the feet of muslims, and no "inter-faith dialogue" that implies the ludicrous notion of equality between all religions.
Thanks! i would be happy to see that,too.
With one difference - Hlond as pope from 1930 could be killed by germans in 1943,and that would be big change.
But if not - commies could murder him in 1948,so here he could live till 1960 or later if germans do not kill him.

No matter what would happen,he would certainly show the world in 1939 that Hitler and Sralin are allies.
 

mandragon

Well-known member
I think you can track certain left-wing infiltrations that ultimately led to disaster all the way back to Rerum Novarum in 1891. Not to imply that Leo XIII was a crypto-leftie, of course, but his attempts to find a middle path while getting involved in such temporal socio-eoconomic matters would provide a precursor (and an excuse!) for errors... and deliberate warpings... down the line.



Sometimes, I think about a world in which Pius IX is succeeded by Cardinal Bilio in 1878. Of course, Bilio would only live until 1884, so most probably, Cardinal Pecci would still be elected, only six years later. But who knows? Maybe a few more years the hard line against all forms of modernism could still make a difference?

Let's dream. Pecci is still Pope from 1884-1903, but maybe with more of a focus on Thomism, and less of a focus on getting involved in socio-economic temporal affairs. That would be splendid.

Pius X was splendid, so nothing has to change there. He dies in 1914, and then... Serafini instead of della Chiesa? Would be a rather brief Papacy, only until 1918, but he was the most reactionary candidate, and therefore would be my choice for sure.

Then, perhaps, Merry del Val? Leader of the reactionary faction at the 1922 conclave in OTL. He'd live until 1930.

I have no real clue who would make an ideal Pope in a hypothetical 1930 conclave. Piazza? He'd live until 1957, which would allow for Cardinal Siri to become the Pope we never had in OTL from then until 1989. (Alternatively, August Hlond until his death in 1948, because having a Pope from Poland for the period 1930-1948 would be something, for sure. And then just have Piazza elected in '48.)

Then have Ratzinger be elected early, and (in this more reactionary Church) stay on until 2022.



It's only a dream, but a very happy one. To see the Church fully dedicated to opposing modernism in all its forms, all throughout the 20th century; never once abating in its mission to keep the fires of faith and tradition alive. No leftism-infused social teachings, no Second Vatican Council, no Pope washing the feet of muslims, and no "inter-faith dialogue" that implies the ludicrous notion of equality between all religions.
I've read some things that said a Cadre of homosexuals entered into the priesthood in the 60s. With the intention of undermining the moral legitimacy of the Roman Catholic church. No idea if it's factual but it was an interesting little theory in my opinion
 

Buba

A total creep
I've read some things that said a Cadre of homosexuals entered into the priesthood in the 60s. With the intention of undermining the moral legitimacy of the Roman Catholic church. No idea if it's factual but it was an interesting little theory in my opinion
And they were all ninja-trained too, I gather?
 

gral

Well-known member
Supposedly Old Church Slavonic was used in Tridentine Rite Mass in Dalmatia (under Venice) since Day One.
Tridentine versus Pauline Rite differ in MANY things, the use of the veracular being only one - and, even if highly visible, not the most important.
In reverse order: yes, the use of Latin isn't the only, or even the main, difference between Pauline and Tridentine Rites. It is the one that comes to the mind of most people when talking about the Tridentine Rite, though(that, and the priest facing God, instead of the faithful). That's why I mentioned it as a way of showing the effects of a possible middle-of-the-way between Tridentine and Pauline Rites. I may have(falsely) given the impression I was saying the sole(or the main) difference between both rites was the use of vernacular.

As for the use of Old Church Slavonic in Dalmatia(which I wasn't aware of, but makes sense. However, there were Papal dispensations to use the vernacular on Mass in 1906(in parts of what is now Croatia and Slovenia, IIRC), 1923(Bavaria), and another in the 1920s as well covering the whole of Croatia, Slovenia and Czechia.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top