Communist Britain in CP victory

[RousseauX]

What is the actual probability of a Bolshevik style Communist Britain in the aftermath of a CP victory in 1918? How would this be accomplished?

[Killer300]

Well, for one, how does the CP win exactly?

With that said... maybe. It really depends on whether the US presses to gets it debt money back, because if it does, the UK economy is screwed. Such economic turmoil could result in this, especially with disillusionment with nationalism on top only adding to problems.

[LOTLOF]

Pretty close to ASB. In Russia and Germany you had populations that were starving or close to starving. You need people to become truly desperate to embrace radical revolution. Even at the absolute worst the population of Britain is not really suffering.

You would need a much more effective submarine campaign and have it last for a few years before the populace would be ready to go Red. Britain is probably one of the most staunchly anti-communist nations ion old Europe and its people would have to go through an awful lot to move in this direction.

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by LOTLOF

Pretty close to ASB. In Russia and Germany you had populations that were starving or close to starving. You need people to become truly desperate to embrace radical revolution. Even at the absolute worst the population of Britain is not really suffering.

You would need a much more effective submarine campaign and have it last for a few years before the populace would be ready to go Red. Britain is probably one of the most staunchly anti-communist nations ion old Europe and its people would have to go through an awful lot to move in this direction.

Actually, you may be surprised. For one, again, if US presses for its debt money, that will WRECK the British economy, utterly. Additionally, you have a large populace that is completely disillusioned with ideologies like nationalism from the experiences of World War 1.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Actually, you may be surprised. For one, again, if US presses for its debt money, that will WRECK the British economy, utterly. Additionally, you have a large populace that is completely disillusioned with ideologies like nationalism from the experiences of World War 1.

Killer300

As far as I'm aware Britain only stopped debt repayments in the 30's after the depression hit. You might get something then if the US government was insistent but its more likely to bite the US as Britain follows everybody else in basically defaulting.

Steve

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by stevep

Killer300

As far as I'm aware Britain only stopped debt repayments in the 30's after the depression hit. You might get something then if the US government was insistent but its more likely to bite the US as Britain follows everybody else in basically defaulting.

Steve

While perhaps true, that was when the UK was on the winning side. I don't think in a CP victory world that would be as easy to pay, among other things.

Speaking of, how does the CP win? They obviously can't invade the UK, so what the hell happens?

[stevep]

Originally Posted by Killer300

While perhaps true, that was when the UK was on the winning side. I don't think in a CP victory world that would be as easy to pay, among other things.

Possibly, although if the choice is between paying the US and maintaining the defences in the face of a rampant Germany I can see a default coming. Especially since other allied powers would already have done so a US government rash enough to insist on early payment when the resources aren't there should get a good kicking from Congress.

Speaking of, how does the CP win? They obviously can't invade the UK, so what the hell happens?

I would presume a late victory in 1918 last gasp offensive taking Paris and war weariness persuades the allies to come to terms. France will get screwed as will Belgium and Italy, although probably not quite as bad as the former Russian empire but Britain is likely to get off quite lightly as the Germans can't really hurt us once convoying starts.

An earlier victory, say by the Schlieffen Plan somehow working, there wouldn't be any significant war debts, at least not for Britain.

Steve

[Astrodragon]

Just how is the US pressing for payment going to wreck anything?

If the US presses too hard, the UK defaults. Given the size of the Empire, not being able to get credit outside of it for a while isn't going to hurt that much at all/ - its basically only the USA who cant be paid off in sterling. And pressing so hard is rather ASB, the US isnt totally idiotic, and forcing repayments in that sort of way is self-defeating.

[Analytical Engine]

Originally Posted by LOTLOF

Pretty close to ASB. In Russia and Germany you had populations that were starving or close to starving. You need people to become truly desperate to embrace radical revolution. Even at the absolute worst the population of Britain is not really suffering.

Considering that Britain came rather close to experiencing a revolution of its own during the General Strike, despite having won the war IOTL, I'd say it wouldn't be ASB. Unlikely, yes, but not ASB territory.

[Killer300]

You know, that General Strike could accomplish the TL if the UK lost, especially if the UK was appropriately economically devastated by the loss.

[Wolfpaw]

Military defeat, economic crisis, and widespread disillusionment with the "Donkeys/Asses" in the Establishment sounds like a perfect recipe for revolution (or reaction) of some kind.

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by Wolfpaw

Military defeat, economic crisis, and widespread disillusionment with the "Donkeys/Asses" in the Establishment sounds like a perfect recipe for revolution (or reaction) of some kind.

And reaction I'd argue no because Nationalism will be firmly discredited by World War 1, what with the amount of men dead, among other things.

So, in a way, World War 1 determined who would become Communist or Fascist, as it was the losers. (Yes, Italy didn't technically lose, but got nothing out of the war.)

[History_Pintobean]

After the October Revolution of 1917, a declaration was issued by the new Bolshevik-led revolutionary regime giving national minorities the right to secede from the former Russian Empire, which had the not-so-honorary title of a "prison of nationalities."

As for a United Kingdom beset by grave defeat, turmoil at home and abroad, and ultimately the burning fires of social revolution, the Welsh, Scots, and Irish peoples would have great reason to rise up and form their own independent states.

Cries for secession, seen notably in Scotland wherein independence was advocated by such people as Scottish socialist John Maclean, would take center stage following Russia's example.

The British isles would effectively cease to be organized around one grand monarchistic union, with a revolutionary republic being proclaimed in London, a la Berlin during the German Revolution.

We could stretch it further, and possibly have a "Union of Britain"(as seen in Kaiserreich) proclaimed after a vicious civil war, with a revolutionary regime centered in and around London bringing at least Scotland and Wales back into the fold.

Assuming the British Revolution succeeds, the nascent Soviet Union, if it survives as well, would receive support from Europe in countries where communist revolution succeeded.

[Killer300]

Which has its own butterflies, not the least of which is this.

Containment? You can go ahead and forget any sort of containment of Communism, not if it the UK falls to it. Assuming any sort of Cold War arises, there isn't going to be containment.

With that in mind, another issue is that a Communist British Isles won't have any of the issues Communist Russia has. Already being vastly industrialized, for example, means that Marxism is actually arising in a country it was, "designed," for, if you will. This has... interesting implications.

[History_Pintobean]

Russia never "fell" to communism. Al tough the Bolshevik Party's "adventure"(as the Menshevik and Right SR Parties called the October Revolution) had elements of a political coup, it was unique in that a majority of the working-class populace in the cities supported it(out of several million workers across western Russia, which was more representative of the popular will then it sounded)

The right-leaning leftist parties drew support mainly from the upper and middle classes predominately, while the Bolsheviks drew support from the working-class, whom made up the majority of the urban populace in Petrograd and Moscow.

Furthermore, a main point of Lenin's "coup"(an allegation that he was keen to deny, and even explain in great detail why it wasn't a coup to his opponents and supporters alike) was to radicalize the Petrograd Soviet and the local district soviets.

Trotsky wrote in his epic, The History of the Russian Revolution, that at the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets, for the first time ever a Soviet Congress was made up not of suit-and-tie professional politicians, but of impoverished workers, peasants, soldiers, and sailors, whom were sent as delegates from local soviets across the west Russian provinces to Petrograd.

That was the whole entire point of the revolutionary insurrection in the streets of Petrograd on the day of the alleged coup: not to simply replace one set of leaders with a new set of leaders from a different party(in fact, Lenin showcased immense anger when he wrote following a Menshevik and Right SR walkout at the Second Soviet Congress that he wanted a coalition government of all parties of the left, to broaden the government and to allow for the people to, in theory, test out various parties and ultimately choose the party of their choice in the Constituent Assembly elections.)

Following the walkout, and before the split in the Right SR party that would forge a new, much more radical party, the Left SR party, the Bolsheviks had to govern Russia alone for a while, hampering their efforts to fix Russia's numerous problems following it's disengagement from the WWI.

Russia's communist revolution was rather popular, at least amongst the lower-classes, prior to the issues created by a variety of negative factors in 1918 plaguing the country.

As for a British Revolution, the radical course set by the revolution could only lead to one thing: a swift breakup of the former United Kingdom of England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, and the ultimate destruction or exile of the British monarchy.

As Mao Zedong is often quoted as saying: "Revolution is not a dinner party."

A British Revolution would be violent, merciless, an terrible. With the 'have nots' on one side, and the 'haves' on the other: all-out civil war.

[Jello_Biafra]

Originally Posted by RousseauX

What is the actual probability of a Bolshevik style Communist Britain in the aftermath of a CP victory in 1918? How would this be accomplished?

How Bolshevik are we talking?

Most of Bolshevism was an ad hoc adaptation to circumstances of the Russian Civil War and the aftermath, and unlikely to be repeated outside of that context.

If you mean a state that proclaims to be internationalist and adopts a widely disparate social model ostensibly based on participatory democracy but in actuality a single party state, then that's possible.

[RousseauX]

Originally Posted by Jello_Biafra

How Bolshevik are we talking?

Most of Bolshevism was an ad hoc adaptation to circumstances of the Russian Civil War and the aftermath, and unlikely to be repeated outside of that context.

If you mean a state that proclaims to be internationalist and adopts a widely disparate social model ostensibly based on participatory democracy but in actuality a single party state, then that's possible.

Yeah, by Bolshevik I pretty much mean "dictatorship of the Vanguard party".

[History_Pintobean]

Most of Bolshevism was an ad hoc adaptation to circumstances of the Russian Civil War and the aftermath, and unlikely to be repeated outside of that context.

War Communism was attempted in Russia more or less due to the harshness of the Russian Civil War; Lenin's diehard variation on Bolshevism, which dictated that the revolution had to become centralized if it were to survive(going as far as to end factionalism inside the Bolshevik Party in 1919, which effectively allowed Lenin's line to triumph during the civil war up until his death in 1924), would only be attempted in other countries(in our case Britain) IF the revolution and potential civil war reached the magnitude of the Russian Revolution and Civil War.

Britain's civil war would no doubt be briefer, although equally as harsh, the result I figure being a more mild form of British 'Bolshevism,' at least in England assuming national minorities in the United Kingdom were given the right to secede and thus disunite the former kingdom.

[Mikestone8]

Ant thoughts on how the outside world reacts? Would the US, say, be willing to export oil or other commodities to a Communist Britain? [1] And would whatever British forces controlled Mideast oilfields recognise the Communist regime back in Blighty? FTM would the Dominions do so?

Also, what are the counter-revolutionaries doing? If there is a full blown civil war in progress, and the "Whites" expect (rightly or wrongly) that they'll be massacred if they lose, might they be prepared to do like the ones in Finland did and accept German intervention? "Better the Kaiser than the Commissar" or something like that. After all, it wasn't that long since Ulster Unionists had flirted with Germany.

[1] I'm assuming a US which has remained neutral in WW1. That is probably a necessary condition for a CP victory, which in turn is probably ditto for a communist Britain - or even for a serious attempt at one.

[Blackadder mk 2]

Having studied the General Strike, really? That could lead to revolution? The TUC were desperate to renegotiate, all but begged the government to stay on the table and the actual thing lasted for ten days before the TUC all but gave up everything. You had radicals in the movement and sympathy amongst many in the public but the closest thing possible would be Labour getting back in.

One idea for a revolution would be for the CP victory to be blamed on "subversive" elements and start interning Communists, follow that up with radical socialists and trade unionists, and then follow it with people who even criticise the internments and you get the core but then you need an incident to cause disruption. A General Strike could be done, some radical printers for the Daily Mail could stop the anti-strike headline as they did IOTL and then an even more heavy-handed response led by Neville Chamberlain or Churchill who both weren't fans of the labour movement (although the former sympathised with the miners conditions) and then you have a start to the revolution, have the interned gain freedom and then things get heated up.