Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

[Zyobot]

‘More Ideologically Vanilla WWII’.

Which is to say, make a Second World War that’s fought between countries with more “normal” political preferences and systems of government, rather than communism and fascism (or whatever analogous replacements might otherwise spring up).

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

‘More Ideologically Vanilla WWII’.

Which is to say, make a Second World War that’s fought between countries with more “normal” political preferences and systems of government, rather than communism and fascism (or whatever analogous replacements might otherwise spring up).

So Germany is fighting to take back their land, and trying to give France a crushing defeat for WW1?

 

[Skallagrim]

‘More Ideologically Vanilla WWII’.

Which is to say, make a Second World War that’s fought between countries with more “normal” political preferences and systems of government, rather than communism and fascism (or whatever analogous replacements might otherwise spring up).

If you can have World War I end on a negotiated settlement at the earliest posible opportunity, nobody is weakened too much, but nobody is satisfied, either.

Round two will be quite likely, and it'll be a quite "conventional" war between great powers, because none of the old regimes have collapsed and given way to more radical successors.

 

[Zyobot]

So Germany is fighting to take back their land, and trying to give France a crushing defeat for WW1?

If you can have World War I end on a negotiated settlement at the earliest posible opportunity, nobody is weakened too much, but nobody is satisfied, either.

Round two will be quite likely, and it'll be a quite "conventional" war between great powers, because none of the old regimes have collapsed and given way to more radical successors.

Sure, that works.

Assuming they bring manpower, technology, and industrial bases that are more or less in line with what their OTL counterparts fronted, it'll still be a bloodbath. Maybe with not quite as much mass-murdering of civilians by genocidal Nazis, vengeful Soviets, or berserker Japanese, though. Which, while not nearly as good as avoiding another war altogether, counts for... something, I guess.

 

[WolfBear]

If you can have World War I end on a negotiated settlement at the earliest posible opportunity, nobody is weakened too much, but nobody is satisfied, either.

Round two will be quite likely, and it'll be a quite "conventional" war between great powers, because none of the old regimes have collapsed and given way to more radical successors.

Actually, I think that if WWI will end in a draw, then there might not be the appetite for a second World War in the future since people and policymakers might reach the conclusion that a decisive victory in a coalition war is no longer possible and that it's thus no longer worth bother trying to achieve such a goal.

 

[Skallagrim]

Actually, I think that if WWI will end in a draw, then there might not be the appetite for a second World War in the future since people and policymakers might reach the conclusion that a decisive victory in a coalition war is no longer possible and that it's thus no longer worth bother trying to achieve such a goal.

They never learned that lesson from any previous war that ended in a stalemate. I wouldn't hold out hope for men to suddenly grow wise.

 

[WolfBear]

They never learned that lesson from any previous war that ended in a stalemate. I wouldn't hold out hope for men to suddenly grow wise.

The scale of WWI was much more massive than any previous war, no?

‘More Ideologically Vanilla WWII’.

Which is to say, make a Second World War that’s fought between countries with more “normal” political preferences and systems of government, rather than communism and fascism (or whatever analogous replacements might otherwise spring up).

Not a World War per se, but you could have Weimar Germany descend into an authoritarian but not totalitarian right-wing dictatorship in the 1930s that eventually decides to spark a war over Danzig and the Polish Corridor. Germany succeeds in conquering these territories, the Soviet Union conquers eastern Poland, and then Germany fights France to a stalemate in the West before Britain brokers a negotiated peace. Would that actually count for this?

 

[WolfBear]

@Zyobot @sillygoose @Skallagrim @stevep @History Learner 'AHC: Have at least 100 million people from India cumulatively move to the West by 2100'

 

[stevep]

@Zyobot @sillygoose @Skallagrim @stevep @History Learner 'AHC: Have at least 100 million people from India cumulatively move to the West by 2100'

a) Have some issue seriously depopulate Europe and possibly other areas such as China, Russia and the US. Then its simply the vacuum effect and there's a lot of Indians looking at a depopulated land.

b) Avoid doing anything serious about global warming and there are going to be a hell of a lot of Indians, alongside others, on the move. Possibly depending on the circumstances Indians might be seen as more welcome [or less unwelcome] migrants than other options.

 

[WolfBear]

a) Have some issue seriously depopulate Europe and possibly other areas such as China, Russia and the US. Then its simply the vacuum effect and there's a lot of Indians looking at a depopulated land.

b) Avoid doing anything serious about global warming and there are going to be a hell of a lot of Indians, alongside others, on the move. Possibly depending on the circumstances Indians might be seen as more welcome [or less unwelcome] migrants than other options.

A. But would Europeans actually let them in?

B. Well, Yeah, one would think that Indians would be viewed as being less objectionable than Muslims and Africans. The question would be, though, just how acceptable would they be overall? Would their presence in the tens of millions draw no more anger than the presence of tens of millions of Latinos in the US does?

@Zyobot @sillygoose @Skallagrim @stevep @History Learner @Husky_Khan 'AHC: Have extremely massive Muslim immigration to a non-Communist Russia (as in, a Russia that never actually goes Communist in either 1917 or later)'

 

[sillygoose]

A. But would Europeans actually let them in?

B. Well, Yeah, one would think that Indians would be viewed as being less objectionable than Muslims and Africans. The question would be, though, just how acceptable would they be overall? Would their presence in the tens of millions draw no more anger than the presence of tens of millions of Latinos in the US does?

@Zyobot @sillygoose @Skallagrim @stevep @History Learner @Husky_Khan 'AHC: Have extremely massive Muslim immigration to a non-Communist Russia (as in, a Russia that never actually goes Communist in either 1917 or later)'

I supposed not have the Russian empire virtually genocide some of the Central Asian Muslim populations during the initial conquests of the 1800s. Once incorporated and allowed to move about they could fit the bill.

 

[stevep]

A. But would Europeans actually let them in?

B. Well, Yeah, one would think that Indians would be viewed as being less objectionable than Muslims and Africans. The question would be, though, just how acceptable would they be overall? Would their presence in the tens of millions draw no more anger than the presence of tens of millions of Latinos in the US does?

@Zyobot @sillygoose @Skallagrim @stevep @History Learner @Husky_Khan 'AHC: Have extremely massive Muslim immigration to a non-Communist Russia (as in, a Russia that never actually goes Communist in either 1917 or later)'

In case A they might not have either the strength to do so.

In case B they are still likely to cause a lot of resentment but events could mean there is relatively little choice. If you have literally 10's of millions on the move then short of using nukes you could have issues stopping them. Alternatively if the population continues to decline, possibly with say internal conflict worsening this, then the desire for labourers to maintain society could provide a foot in the door and it grows from there. A bit like the case in the US with the desire for cheap labour gradually moving to some version of the current situation in much of the Gulf states where expat workers often outnumber the natives, but in this case their probably not going to be effectively in a state of slavery.

 

[WolfBear]

I supposed not have the Russian empire virtually genocide some of the Central Asian Muslim populations during the initial conquests of the 1800s. Once incorporated and allowed to move about they could fit the bill.

I don't think that the Russian Empire was actually big on genociding Central Asian Muslims, with the exception of the 1916 Urkun:

Central Asian revolt of 1916 - Wikipedia

de.wikibrief.org

In case A they might not have either the strength to do so.

In case B they are still likely to cause a lot of resentment but events could mean there is relatively little choice. If you have literally 10's of millions on the move then short of using nukes you could have issues stopping them. Alternatively if the population continues to decline, possibly with say internal conflict worsening this, then the desire for labourers to maintain society could provide a foot in the door and it grows from there. A bit like the case in the US with the desire for cheap labour gradually moving to some version of the current situation in much of the Gulf states where expat workers often outnumber the natives, but in this case their probably not going to be effectively in a state of slavery.

Worth noting that European countries generally don't have birthright citizenship like the US and Canada have. Still, when it comes to Indians, Europeans have a rather mixed attitude. On the one hand, many of them rather strongly dislike the Roma (of Indian descent), but at the same time, I don't think that the Indian middle- and upper-classes who move to places such as Britain in huge numbers actually generate very much resentment over there. The Indians in Britain certainly don't have any scandals like some of the Pakistanis in Britain have:

Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[sillygoose]

I don't think that the Russian Empire was actually big on genociding Central Asian Muslims, with the exception of the 1916 Urkun:

Central Asian revolt of 1916 - Wikipedia

de.wikibrief.org

https://hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP12.HTM

https://hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB12.1.GIF

I list in Table 12.1 the relevant estimates, sources, and calculations. The estimates are better for Russia than the other suspected megamurderers, Mexico and North Korea. Much less guessing and calculation is involved and sources do give the largest estimates that contribute to the final democide figure. However, the mid-value upon which I determine Russia's megamurder status is very close to 1,000,000 (line 124) and very sensitive to the few component democides. The largest of these is an alleged democide of 500,000 Central Asian Turks (line 75). This is from Arnold Toynbee, who admits that the toll is speculative. I could find no other sources for this democide other than the one he cites,1 which itself gives no estimates of those who died. But Toynbee's knowledge of these regions was gained from personal experience and access to information not easily available, and he is one of this century's foremost historians. His "speculation" is worthy of serious consideration. Still, almost half the alleged total democide of Russia hangs on this. Perhaps this is balanced by the fact that there was clearly much other killing by the Czar's forces in this region for which no estimates could have been made at all, as of the Armenians in the Caucasus, the Kara Kirghis, or the population of Samarkand.

 

[WolfBear]

https://hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP12.HTM

https://hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB12.1.GIF

It also says this at the end due to the uncertainty of the relevant information:

All this makes the acceptance of the final democide figures for Russia much more conjectural than for any of the megamurderers, such as Pakistan, Cambodia, or Turkey, and only sufficient to indict her regime for megamurder.

 

[sillygoose]

It also says this at the end due to the uncertainty of the relevant information:

Which is fair.
In context though it seems possible given the dearth of records kept:

The largest of these is an alleged democide of 500,000 Central Asian Turks (line 75). This is from Arnold Toynbee, who admits that the toll is speculative. I could find no other sources for this democide other than the one he cites,1 which itself gives no estimates of those who died. But Toynbee's knowledge of these regions was gained from personal experience and access to information not easily available, and he is one of this century's foremost historians. His "speculation" is worthy of serious consideration. Still, almost half the alleged total democide of Russia hangs on this. Perhaps this is balanced by the fact that there was clearly much other killing by the Czar's forces in this region for which no estimates could have been made at all, as of the Armenians in the Caucasus, the Kara Kirghis, or the population of Samarkand.

Arnold J. Toynbee - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Arnold Joseph Toynbee CH FBA (/ˈtɔɪnbi/; 14 April 1889 – 22 October 1975) was an English historian, a philosopher of history, an author of numerous books and a research professor of international history at the London School of Economics and King's College London. From 1918 to 1950, Toynbee was considered a leading specialist on international affairs.[7]

 

[WolfBear]

Which is fair.
In context though it seems possible given the dearth of records kept:

Arnold J. Toynbee - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah, that makes sense.

BTW, off-topic, but you still haven't responded to my last PM to you.

 

[sillygoose]

Yeah, that makes sense.

BTW, off-topic, but you still haven't responded to my last PM to you.

Sorry, been busy this weekend.

 

[WolfBear]

Sorry, been busy this weekend.

That's OK; thanks for responding right now.

 

[Zyobot]

'Pro-Gay George W. Bush'.

He doesn't necessarily have to be open about it, mind you. Just don't let him push for the Federal Marriage Amendment, which made it evident where he truly stood IOTL.