So I stumbled (and read) the ISOT spin-off of TLM in this site, but I'm gonna write the issues that the UAR would have to deal after finding themselves in the OTL world:
1: Due to the shenanigan that is the War On Terror (and the ongoing low-level conflict that taken place at the time of Wamda) that the PRC would take baby steps to slowly institute Nazi-esque policies towards Uyghur that would place them in Nazi-esque concentration camps in the future. That, and DPRK running Nazi-esque concentration camps would prove to be a headache for the newly-created Comintern.
2: The budding conflict that would ravage the Sahel Region.
3: The unresolved question, in OTL context, of Kurdish separatism since Kurdish militant groups would be still active in interiors of southeast Turkey and northwest-central Iran.
4: And finally, UAR would have to deal with the skepticism from other leftists of the planet in regards to their progressive social policies, due to the fact that the social conservative-oriented leftism is (and still is in OTL) widespread due to the fact that Stalin managing to reign the Soviet Union than Bukharin of TNO/TLM one.
4: And finally, UAR would have to deal with the skepticism from other leftists of the planet in regards to their progressive social policies, due to the fact that the social conservative-oriented leftism is (and still is in OTL) widespread due to the fact that Stalin managing to reign the Soviet Union than Bukharin of TNO/TLM one.
The TLM timeline's take on OTL Stalin, the USSR, and the OTL's path compared to theirs as a whole is going to be interesting.
Using just Stalin as an example of the contrasts here.
On the one hand he'll prove a controversial figure for his obvious failings and foibles. His policy and leadership (as well as OTL USSR as a whole) is going to be studied to death in the UAR to learn as much as possible about where things went wrong.
But on the other hand he'll still get massive credit both for his TLM counterparts influence being born out, as well as the ways that his OTL version will garner respect for accomplishments both with industrializing Russia as well as keeping the USSR alive and most importantly actually facing down and pushing back the Nazis.
These victories may very well counterbalance his faults for them, especially through the eyes of a people from a world that saw much much worse done than even Stalins worst detractors acclaim him of and how he was a part of averting that fate. But then again his actions would also be part of averting the rise of the 4th Comintern and global socialism/communism that these same people worked so hard to bring about.
Ultimately, I think key living political figures like Castro as well as actual living members of the USSR who still push for its ideals and other leftist figures will be essential for how they come to an understanding of things.
The TLM timeline's take on OTL Stalin, the USSR, and the OTL's path compared to theirs as a whole is going to be interesting.
Using just Stalin as an example of the contrasts here.
On the one hand he'll prove a controversial figure for his obvious failings and foibles. His policy and leadership (as well as OTL USSR as a whole) is going to be studied to death in the UAR to learn as much as possible about where things went wrong.
But on the other hand he'll still get massive credit both for his TLM counterparts influence being born out, as well as the ways that his OTL version will garner respect for accomplishments both with industrializing Russia as well as keeping the USSR alive and most importantly actually facing down and pushing back the Nazis.
These victories may very well counterbalance his faults for them, especially through the eyes of a people from a world that saw much much worse done than even Stalins worst detractors acclaim him of and how he was a part of averting that fate. But then again his actions would also be part of averting the rise of the 4th Comintern and global socialism/communism that these same people worked so hard to bring about.
Ultimately, I think key living political figures like Castro as well as actual living members of the USSR who still push for its ideals and other leftist figures will be essential for how they come to an understanding of things.
I don't think the good justify all of the bads.
Like, for example:
-the holodomor
-the 5 year plan leading to mass starvation
-His itchy trigger finger
-he is a paranoid wreck
-Lysenkoism
-his obsesion with control
Just because he prevented a worst fate, doesn't mean it justify what he did. Just ask a esstern european, or a balkaner, or a caucasian, or a nordic. Or any russian not in the politburo
I don't think the good justify all of the bads.
Like, for example:
-the holodomor
-the 5 year plan leading to mass starvation
-His itchy trigger finger
-he is a paranoid wreck
-Lysenkoism
-his obsesion with control
Just because he prevented a worst fate, doesn't mean it justify what he did. Just ask a esstern european, or a balkaner, or a caucasian, or a nordic. Or any russian not in the politburo
Can we get things back on track? Because the threat is rapidly heading towards the flame War that is entirely unnecessary and barely related to the threat.
Just because he prevented a worst fate, doesn't mean it justify what he did. Just ask a esstern european, or a balkaner, or a caucasian, or a nordic. Or any russian not in the politburo
UAR: Yeah I know it was only two but that's all we seemed to need for now.
---
Irishman from TLM looking at OTL Ireland: I have never seen such a utopian and heavenly vision of the Emerald Isle as your Troubles.
---
Also I can't begin to imagine the apocalyptic rage and horror that is currently reigning supreme in AIPAC.
The TLM timeline's take on OTL Stalin, the USSR, and the OTL's path compared to theirs as a whole is going to be interesting.
Using just Stalin as an example of the contrasts here.
On the one hand he'll prove a controversial figure for his obvious failings and foibles. His policy and leadership (as well as OTL USSR as a whole) is going to be studied to death in the UAR to learn as much as possible about where things went wrong.
But on the other hand he'll still get massive credit both for his TLM counterparts influence being born out, as well as the ways that his OTL version will garner respect for accomplishments both with industrializing Russia as well as keeping the USSR alive and most importantly actually facing down and pushing back the Nazis.
These victories may very well counterbalance his faults for them, especially through the eyes of a people from a world that saw much much worse done than even Stalins worst detractors acclaim him of and how he was a part of averting that fate. But then again his actions would also be part of averting the rise of the 4th Comintern and global socialism/communism that these same people worked so hard to bring about.
Ultimately, I think key living political figures like Castro as well as actual living members of the USSR who still push for its ideals and other leftist figures will be essential for how they come to an understanding of things.
Talking it over with Star, the Wamda will have mixed effects on Stalin's reputation in both the UAR and the OTL world, which goes for either popular imagination or historiography. I'd argue he overall comes off better, alongside Bukharin ironically. For one, Stalin's image will benefit greatly by virtue of his being the leader of the iteration of the USSR which marched to Berlin and prevented the world's descent into the horrors that we'd only ever imagine about an Axis victory scenario and then some. That combined with his TLM reputation as an excellent economic theoretician will make his merits stand out.
The flipside for Stalin is... other things, particularly after the war (with more than a few sore spots before), but even then, he gets the "benefit" of steering the ship into uncharted waters after the most disastrous war in history which arguably doomed the USSR long term (~27 million dead tends to do that).
That said, that justification can only go so far for many of his stances, particularly socially-conservative policies, relative laxness towards the Russian Orthodox Church (which is still a major force of reaction today in post-Soviet Russia as a partial consequence), indifference to (and sometimes even enabling of) Great Russian chauvinism and antisemitism, haphazardly-managed crash industrialization and subsequently the Great Famine/Holodomor, foreign policy appeasement towards capitalist powers both before and the war (Molotov-Ribbentrop as the one most egregious example), recognition of Israel, poor leadership of the global communist movement, and, of course, the Great Purge and establishment of a "High Stalinist" orthodoxy worldwide. Those will cast positivity on Bukharin's legacy from both sides, seeing how he maintained Korenizatsiia and seriously mitigated if not outright avoided the Great Famine, among other accomplishments. There's also the matter that the Siberian Plan was a success, it just happened in the Union that lost.
Bukharin's defeat, just as with the German success in Operation Sealion, will probably be seen by historians as less the result of his incompetence and more of a historical oddity, compounded with the lack of effective coordination between the Allies at a time most crucial. TLMside, there's actually some in-universe arguments and speculation over if the US under President Dewey deliberately tried to handicap if not outright sabotage the USSR, which otherwise seemed poised to win even after the constant disasters of Barbarossa, in addition to unintentionally screwing over the Allies in Western Europe.
Ultimately, under the Comintern's line towards Soviet history, the importance of Stalin and Bukharin at the helm will be de-emphasized and contextualized by the universal conditions of the early Soviet Union in both timelines, which was that of a devastated Pariah state needing to eat itself alive to catch up to the enemy powers surrounding it. If anything, more scorn will be heaped on Friedrich Ebert or CGE Mannerheim than any individual communist leader for "ruining" the USSR.
This will have some interesting implications for OTL communist parties, who will be advised by the Comintern to stop splitting over what some early Soviet figures may or may not have said and re-learn theory.
Of course, all the arguments about Stalin, Bukharin and the early USSR pale in comparison to the elephant in the room: the fact that a Nazi victory TL ended up ushering in world socialism while the Nazi defeat TL ushered in…well whatever you wanna call the Dewey Denied TL.
Of course, all the arguments about Stalin, Bukharin and the early USSR pale in comparison to the elephant in the room: the fact that a Nazi victory TL ended up ushering in world socialism while the Nazi defeat TL ushered in…well whatever you wanna call the Dewey Denied TL.
Bukharin's defeat, just as with the German success in Operation Sealion, will probably be seen by historians as less the result of his incompetence and more of a historical oddity, compounded with the lack of effective coordination between the Allies at a time most crucial. TLMside, there's actually some in-universe arguments and speculation over if the US under President Dewey deliberately tried to handicap if not outright sabotage the USSR, which otherwise seemed poised to win even after the constant disasters of Barbarossa, in addition to unintentionally screwing over the Allies in Western Europe.
To be honest imo. They won't really blame Bukharin 100% given the other multiple actions which affected the War.
The somewhat more isolationist USA during the war which was crippled by delusional demilitarization and whatever economic bullcrap they were doing. The fact that Russian's fractured during the conflict. Sealion Magic etc.
Chances are they would see it more as multiple small differences causing the Nazi's to win rather than looking for a specific point of failure imo.
In the middle of the chaos caused by the UAR's arrival and the subsequent dismantlement of the post-Soviet consensus and world order it is easy to forget some of the less flashy effects of the Wamda on the psyche of the world of Two Bushes.
It is hard to quantify the sheer psychological impact caused by the Wamda, an event that has confirmed to billions that yes there is an all powerful entity out there somewhere (even if they disagreed on who and what that entity would be) and apparently enjoys randomly inserting different nations across time and space for whatever reason (and respects exact national/space borders too no less). Beliefs were unmade or reformed while new ones sprang like flowers in a spring meadow.
One of the more subtle and lesser known global effects of the Wamda would come from the Two Bushes Nations learning about their counterparts' experiences in the Long March world, the ramifications and developments caused by this often overlooked in favor of the more obvious and dramatic religious and economic hysteria that followed the Wamda, but these slower going reactions would prove no less world changing in time.
For the nations of Africa, knowledge of the ASU was a complete game changer for the TB world's withered pan-African movement, whose greatest accomplishment was the creation of the largely toothless African Union in 2001 as a pale imitation of the EU (made even paler by the loss of some of its most important members).
The UAR held within its borders a considerable number of displaced ASU citizens and a treasure trove of historical, economical, political and cultural texts that described in detail a functioning, prosperous and democratic pan-African state that encompassed almost all of non-Arab Africa; the extent of such was enough to make even ardent deniers of the Long March world's existence acknowledge that even if the UAR was faking the existence of the ASU, it was very meticulous if nothing else.
For most, however, the very knowledge that a pan-African state was possible to begin with was a galvanizing factor, especially as economic conditions worsened and paved the way for revitalizing radicalism among the working classes of the dark continent, and would be theorized later to play a key role in South Africa's decision to seek closer ties with the UAR along with Mozambique and Angola, the leadership's of these countries if nothing else believing that the UAR's presence was a useful counterbalance to predatory American policy in the region, the ANC especially hoping to leverage its newfound advantage in global trade to "renegotiate" certain loan agreements and IMF mandated reforms.
Zimbabwe would go a step further than all three nations and secretly request Comintern membership, Mugabe hoping to use his nominal socialist credentials to gain a great power patron and economic support in the wake of the country's increasing and devastating economic isolation in the wake of its withdrawal from the commonwealth and the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act enacted by the US that very same year. Alexandria would consider the proposal rather than accept immediately, since Mugabe's past policies left much to be desired.
The most long reaching effect of the UAR however would be the revival of Pan-Africanism as a potent political force across the continent, among both left wing radicals and their liberal counterparts, each hoping to subordinate the movement's vision to their ideological view of it, and the Long March diaspora would play a vital role in this nascent struggle.
In Non-Western Europe, official government reactions to information from the Long March world was hostile from the outset for the most part; the majority of governments in the regions having built their reputations and policies around nationalism and anti communist credentials meant that the very existence of the likes of Eurasia, Zapadoslavia, Yugoslavia and the Union of Pan-Europa were an anathema to the vision they sought so hard to realize and a threat to the legitimacy they built.
From Romania to Slovenia and from Serbia to Lithuania, many nationalists would lament that their counterparts were trapped in "nation prisons" concocted by communist madmen whitewashing what was undoubtedly several Yugoslavia scale disasters in the making, any claims by displaced Zapadoslavs, Yugoslavs or otherwise were dismissed as propaganda made by coercion or through extensive brainwashing. Even the existence of the Luddye was decried in right wing circles as a demented social experiment by communists hoping to weaken and pervert national cultures through forced intermingling and mixing to create easily controlled "rootless" Europeans (though conversely the Luddye were praised as the ultimate white race by American white nationalists) while Long March Romania became the rallying cry of every xenophobe in Europe, seen as the endgame of the nebulous globalist agenda made real in another doomed world.
The economic crisis, weakness/non-existence of local left currents and a general rise in xenophobia ensured that most of these notions often went unchallenged and allowed into the mainstream, ensuring that popular opinion throughout Eastern and Southern Europe would be hostile to the UAR and the growing red bloc with only a few exceptions, though curiously there would be a small but noticeable rise in popularity of so called "national Bolshevist" movements which admired the likes of Zapadoslavia and Yugoslavia for their military and economic strength but despised their social attitudes and internationalism and wishing to recreate these nations in a purer form.
Russia in particular saw a rise in the popularity of Eurasianism and a massive interest in Long March Eurasia in the immediate aftermath of the Wamda among right wing circles but that quickly faded just as fast once most realized the eurasianism of TLM had little resemblance to their own and made the likes of Dugin scream bloody murder.
The Russian government for its part adopted an anti-Comintern stance from the outset despite initial fears of a Soviet revival, the Yelsinist/Putinist regime had built itself up on strangling the USSR and devouring its corpse, and Moscow was just as threatened by the UAR as the United States. The mutual threat would lead relations between the two nations to deepen as the US came to see the new Russia as an anti-communist bulwark to keep Central Asia and the Caucasus in check, much to the fear and ire of Eastern Europe, who saw Russo-American rapprochement as a threat to their long term interests.
Not all reactions in the region to the UAR were hostile however as the Arab nation would receive an influx of so called "Ostugees" from throughout the former communist bloc: Eastern Europeans and Central Asians who yearned for the days of the Warsaw pact and state socialism in the wake of their nations unstable or outright catastrophic transition to capitalism and moved to the UAR in droves in hopes of recapturing some of what they lost.
Latin American and Asian reactions were more mixed to the implications of the Long March world….
I imagine the fact that the UAR has a lot of (now broken) connections into Sub-Saharan Africa also makes it much easier for them to and the ASU citizens to influence Africa and sway them into the Comintern.
And yeah, no surprise about Eastern Europe largely screaming in terror at TLM's multinational communist Supra-states.
While the countries of Central and Eastern Europe are governed largely by ardently anticommunist bourgeois-nationalist regimes (either with pro-EU Western liberal trappings a la Czechia or the more reactionary right-populist/conservative ones soon to sweep to power in a post-Wamda world), I don't think the UAR and Comintern would write them off entirely. Especially not when the average adult citizen's idea of communism (aside from the "Ostalgic" boomers) isn't only "the horrors of the old regime they showed us in school" just yet and they're just trying to make ends meet in whichever system that "works". Moreover, some countries' governments, regardless of leanings, are going to be desperate for any port in the storm that's going to follow either this decade or the next, like Ukraine right on Russia's border (whose communist party polls decently, interestingly).
Also, ethnic Russian minorities in bordering countries, like Muslims in the West, are going to be in for a really unpleasant time, given the double-whammy of anticommunism and, if the US-RF Detente falls through, Russophobia. I could see them as a group trending towards emigration in particular, at least the ones who don't cross into Russia.
Of course, all the arguments about Stalin, Bukharin and the early USSR pale in comparison to the elephant in the room: the fact that a Nazi victory TL ended up ushering in world socialism while the Nazi defeat TL ushered in…well whatever you wanna call the Dewey Denied TL.
Of course, all the arguments about Stalin, Bukharin and the early USSR pale in comparison to the elephant in the room: the fact that a Nazi victory TL ended up ushering in world socialism while the Nazi defeat TL ushered in…well whatever you wanna call the Dewey Denied TL.
