Irritating cliches of post-1900 Alternate History:

1) The Axis can seriously win WWII. The obvious. There are ways for the Allies to lose WWII, there are virtually none for the Axis to win it.

2) German hegemony following a Central Powers victory produces utopia in Europe and in the world. ROFLMAO, no. It would produce a different kind of dystopia at best. The German Empire would be an Imperial Japan run by the generals and admirals in the heart of Europe and that's no recipe for stability in any sense of the term.

3) The rise of the United States to superpower status is inevitable. To use one counterexample the USA went into WWI late and was equipped by the Allies while Pershing was amazingly deaf to military reality unfolding in front of him. The USA in any different scenario that sees shorter and less gruesome world wars is going to be overshadowed by Europe.

4) The Soviets cannot win the Cold War. Soviet victory if victory be defined by a neo-isolationist spasm in the USA is not implausible. A US collapse is, the USA retreating into America Firster thinking is not.
5) Nazis and WWII as OTL must happen. Short version: NO. Long version: the rise of Hitler and the Nazis and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact were all contingent events, nothing makes them no less certain unforeknown.

Your cliches? This thread inspired by https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=206127
 
Japan as a Nation-Bukkake
Japan was luck to became the asian naval power, while China was sleeping.
Japan was fucking lucky to have Royal Navy on his ass only during WWII.

Communist North-[Random]
North Japan, North China, North anywhere is not realistic, it's just annoying. It's at a point where communist Sud-Vietnam against US-linked North one would be fun.
Aslo every divisied country between two sides because, meh, states are to be divided not regarding of the situation.

"Put the Zion on the map" (AH.com wiki)
No matter when, no matter what, it would be always an Israel somewhere. You can't escape it.
I'm pretty sure that some people remembers of this "Israel-in-exile" in a WWII map, showing a new Israelian state in Africa after the palestinian one have been conquered by Germany.
 
Last edited:
The inevitabilid Spanish Civil War that begins in July 1936 led by Francisco Franco : This one is sort of understandable, since Franco and the Civil War are perhaps the only 20th century event in Spain that everybody knows, but its persistence throughout the timelines, even in those where the Spanish Republic never comes into being, is commendable. And Franco started the war as one of many rebel generals, he only became their leader months after it started and after a few other contenders died in freak aviation accidents...

France getting kicked out of WWII in weeks because hurr durr surrender monkeys:
That campaign was much closer fought than commonly thought, and the germans had an uncommon lucky streak throughout the early days. Also, 1940 is pretty much the only year where it could have happened: Germany would be too weak in 1939, and the allies too strong in 1941, it was not a granted outcome in 1940 and yet the germans always defeat France in six weeks no matter the year or the actual divergence.
 
Ha, beat me to it.

Some few more:

* Papa Hitler moves to X country. Little Hitler takes over X country and makes it completely like Nazi Germany. It... uh... doesn't work that way.

* All fascists like each other.

* All fascists go to war on the same side the minute one declares it.

* All fascists are genocidal.

* All fascists are antisemitic.

* Since antisemitism was widespread through Europe in the 30s, it surely was strongest in Inquisitionland (it wasn't).
 
Ha, beat me to it.

Some few more:

* Papa Hitler moves to X country. Little Hitler takes over X country and makes it completely like Nazi Germany. It... uh... doesn't work that way.

* All fascists like each other.

* All fascists go to war on the same side the minute one declares it.

* All fascists are genocidal.

* All fascists are antisemitic.

* Since antisemitism was widespread through Europe in the 30s, it surely was stronger in Inquisitionland (it wasn't).

You could put Papa Dzhugashvili there for Stalin and Communists in for all the rest and the same cliches apply. There are grains of truth to these statements but grains of truth do not a seashore make.
 
France getting kicked out of WWII in weeks because hurr durr surrender monkeys: That campaign was much closer fought than commonly thought, and the germans had an uncommon lucky streak throughout the early days. Also, 1940 is pretty much the only year where it could have happened: Germany would be too weak in 1939, and the allies too strong in 1941, it was not a granted outcome in 1940 and yet the germans always defeat France in six weeks no matter the year or the actual divergence.

That's the most irritating one for me, especially since there is plenty of evidence regarding the fact that France could fight on even if the métropole had been lost. The Germans were very luck in Sedan and in Belgium too and it is often forgotten that their tanks were inferior to the French ones as far as armor and guns were conerned.
 
India must be a colony during the first half of the 20th century

It was luck that India ended up being a colony, and there is sufficient proof to show that it could have been independent from its conception to the modern times.
 

loughery111

Banned
1) The Axis can seriously win WWII. The obvious. There are ways for the Allies to lose WWII, there are virtually none for the Axis to win it.

2) German hegemony following a Central Powers victory produces utopia in Europe and in the world. ROFLMAO, no. It would produce a different kind of dystopia at best. The German Empire would be an Imperial Japan run by the generals and admirals in the heart of Europe and that's no recipe for stability in any sense of the term.

3) The rise of the United States to superpower status is inevitable. To use one counterexample the USA went into WWI late and was equipped by the Allies while Pershing was amazingly deaf to military reality unfolding in front of him. The USA in any different scenario that sees shorter and less gruesome world wars is going to be overshadowed by Europe.

4) The Soviets cannot win the Cold War. Soviet victory if victory be defined by a neo-isolationist spasm in the USA is not implausible. A US collapse is, the USA retreating into America Firster thinking is not.
5) Nazis and WWII as OTL must happen. Short version: NO. Long version: the rise of Hitler and the Nazis and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact were all contingent events, nothing makes them no less certain unforeknown.

Your cliches? This thread inspired by https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=206127

Mostly, I agree... but I have to mention for point 2 that, were the victory an early one, Germany would not be as you described. Of course, were the victory an early Allied one, it would likely be better than OTL as well.
 

loughery111

Banned
India must be a colony during the first half of the 20th century

It was luck that India ended up being a colony, and there is sufficient proof to show that it could have been independent from its conception to the modern times.

With a post-1900 POD, India WILL be a colony of the UK until at least January 2nd, 1900.
 
thank you guys.. this helps alot

heres one of my own..

America was destined to become Anti Socialist-
Nope it was a culmination of complicated forgein events and careful planning and execution by Conservatives.
 
I have one that gets on my nerves.

Same Leaders:


Scenario: Its an alternate 1936. Huey Long is President, and pulls the US out of the Depression through slightly despotic means. The War is only in Europe, culminating in the dropping of the atomic bomb on a German city to force the Reich to surrender. Shortly after the war, a Pacific War erupts with Japan in an age of the jet and atomic bombs, leading to a limited nuclear conflict.

Meanwhile, JFK, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton all go on to become President.


This one is a pain. The people who became leaders of nations aren't as likely to become leaders of nations in the parallel universe, especially as you get further from the POD. And often times, it was luck that got them into the leadership. Bill Clinton was a dark horse for God's sake. And yet he seems to often be the one most immune to the butterflies.
 
I have one that gets on my nerves.

Same Leaders:

Scenario: Its an alternate 1936. Huey Long is President, and pulls the US out of the Depression through slightly despotic means. The War is only in Europe, culminating in the dropping of the atomic bomb on a German city to force the Reich to surrender. Shortly after the war, a Pacific War erupts with Japan in an age of the jet and atomic bombs, leading to a limited nuclear conflict.

Meanwhile, JFK, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton all go on to become President.

This one is a pain. The people who became leaders of nations aren't as likely to become leaders of nations in the parallel universe, especially as you get further from the POD. And often times, it was luck that got them into the leadership. Bill Clinton was a dark horse for God's sake. And yet he seems to often be the one most immune to the butterflies.


Bill Clinton is always president. Always.
 
That's the most irritating one for me, especially since there is plenty of evidence regarding the fact that France could fight on even if the métropole had been lost. The Germans were very luck in Sedan and in Belgium too and it is often forgotten that their tanks were inferior to the French ones as far as armor and guns were conerned.

Indeed. Wasn't there that one incident where the single Char tank made mincemeat of all the panzers that confronted it? It's also forgotten the original German plan was one the Allies fully expected and were prepared for, and this logistical gap created by the OTL incident would not have happened in that case. As with Barbarossa OTL was the best-case scenario for Nazi Germany.

Mostly, I agree... but I have to mention for point 2 that, were the victory an early one, Germany would not be as you described. Of course, were the victory an early Allied one, it would likely be better than OTL as well.

Certainly. The devil is in the details about how either scenario happens. ;)
 
That reminds me, I mentioned this somewhere before, but something that ticks me off is when Teddy Roosevelt is elected president. It happens all the time, and he's always some legendary leader.
 
Top