How could the collapse of the Soviet Union have been prevented

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by Living in Exile

Going back all the way to WWII...


Khalkhyn Gol escalates to a full scale war with Japan. The USSR wins a solid victory, curbing Japanese ambitions yet also providing a experience that exposes weaknesses in the Red Army somewhat earlier. Reforms are sped up, plus Stalin is more focused on the West. The Red Army takes warnings seriously, and is prepared for Operation Barbarossa. The Nazis are decisively defeated early. The Soviets get a bigger sphere of influence in Europe, and suffer fewer losses than OTL doing it. Without the catastrophic losses of OTL, the population of the USSR is not quite as messed up. It will likely still be ugly demographically, but somewhat improved.

Because Japan has been cowed, there's no Pearl Harbor. The United States doesn't ever get around to intervening in Europe, and never fully emerges from Isolationism. With no Marshall Plan or the like, the countries that aren't drawn into the Communist Bloc by force topple. The resulting association of Communist states, dominated by the USSR, is economically strong enough to last to the present day, just by virtue of size. The United States doesn't get to rebuild the bombed out world post-war, and the economy doesn't boom as much in the 50s. First man on the Moon is Russian, etc. USSR doesn't feel as threatened by the USA, less intense arms race and lower defense spending.

This is actually quite good, to say the least.

[Living in Exile]

It's a Soviet-wank, but that's what the OP was asking for, wasn't it?

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by Living in Exile

It's a Soviet-wank, but that's what the OP was asking for, wasn't it?

Hey, that was a very well put together Soviet wank that used a very unique POD, to say the least.

[maestro876]

It is interesting to discuss what the Soviet Union would have needed to do in order to survive in recognizable form into the modern day.

However, I would like to point out that all the things necessary to achieve that would never, ever, EVER be even contemplated, let alone implemented, by Soviet leadership. Ever.

[d32123]

Have them not try to compete on a global economic and military scale with the United States of America.

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by maestro876

It is interesting to discuss what the Soviet Union would have needed to do in order to survive in recognizable form into the modern day.

However, I would like to point out that all the things necessary to achieve that would never, ever, EVER be even contemplated, let alone implemented, by Soviet leadership. Ever.

Okay, the latter is flatly ridiculous, and is proven wrong by China, in regards to people like Deng.

[d32123]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Okay, the latter is flatly ridiculous, and is proven wrong by China, in regards to people like Deng.

The Chinese situation was completely different from the Soviet one for a multitude of reasons.

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by d32123

The Chinese situation was completely different from the Soviet one for a multitude of reasons.

True, but saying that it's impossible for the Soviet Union to reform is ridiculous. Now, is it very difficult? Yes, but it's nowhere ASB, considering this is the country that has things like the NEP in its heritage.

[superjames1992]

Originally Posted by Living in Exile

It's a Soviet-wank, but that's what the OP was asking for, wasn't it?

It is, indeed, a Soviet-wank, but it is quite plausible and would make a good timeline, IMO.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Killer300

What type of market? Also, this partially violates the rules above, and doesn't take into account that China still does central planning, just not on the same scale.

Not possible within the rules.

[couldawouldashoulda]

it would be cool to see a few maps related to Living in Exile's TL

[Kishan]

Gorbachev shouldn't have loosened his hold on the reins in the name of glasnost and perestroika. He should have carried out the economic reforms carefully as was carried out by Deng Xiaoping in China. Rebels and challengers like Boris Yeltsin should have been put down without any hesitation. It was his reluctance to act decisively against his detractors and rivals that led to the downfall of Mikhail Gorbachev.
A polity that was controlled by an authoritarian regime for decades, was suddenly freed of many of the controls. It was like blowing a hole in the wall of a dam full of water. It collapses! The result was an uncontrolled flooding washing away everything on its path! Water should be released from a dam slowly, in small measured quantities.That was what Deng did in China.

[Archibald]

Never, never have Breznhev in power for 18 years. He, by himself, propelled the Soviet Union into the wall.

[The Oncoming Storm]

I think I saw an earlier thread on this subject in which someone made the point that ideologically the USSR couldn't have carried out the kind of market reforms the PRC did because it was the home of global communism in a way that China wasn't. It would have been like the Vatican renouncing belief in the Virgin Birth, the established interests in the Soviet system were probably too strong to be overcome.

[Killer300]

Originally Posted by The Oncoming Storm

I think I saw an earlier thread on this subject in which someone made the point that ideologically the USSR couldn't have carried out the kind of market reforms the PRC did because it was the home of global communism in a way that China wasn't. It would have been like the Vatican renouncing belief in the Virgin Birth, the established interests in the Soviet system were probably too strong to be overcome.

Judging by a TL I've read elsewhere... there are interesting ways around this.

For one, while the Soviet constitution stipulates that there can't be private property, it should be okay for the government to lease property to people, and if the lease is low... well, you get quite the enterprises developing.

For justification, you can use the NEP, and utilize Lenin as a figurehead to spearhead the reforms.

[Sicarius]

I really don't think the Soviet Union needs to transform into a state capitalist society like China as a prerequisite to survival. Soviet economic policy was hit or miss, but if you could get some competent leaders and a few more hits than misses, I think they'd stagger along fine.

[Gunnarnz]

Originally Posted by Killer300

The power of alcoholism saves the Soviet Union?

It's the hero we deserve, but not the one we need right now...

[PoeFacedKilla]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Okay, well, a POD before then could probably prevent their secession, which is already required here.

i don't know the pod that would allow Lithuania to stay, as soon as they get the chance their gone.

[BELFAST]

Originally Posted by Kishan

Gorbachev shouldn't have loosened his hold on the reins in the name of glasnost and perestroika. He should have carried out the economic reforms carefully as was carried out by Deng Xiaoping in China. Rebels and challengers like Boris Yeltsin should have been put down without any hesitation. It was his reluctance to act decisively against his detractors and rivals that led to the downfall of Mikhail Gorbachev.
A polity that was controlled by an authoritarian regime for decades, was suddenly freed of many of the controls. It was like blowing a hole in the wall of a dam full of water. It collapses! The result was an uncontrolled flooding washing away everything on its path! Water should be released from a dam slowly, in small measured quantities.That was what Deng did in China.

What finished the soviets was the price of oil and gold dropped too low. They were no longer able to import enough food to feed them selves.

Without some kind of of market based economy the soviets could not survive.
Having to import food from their enemy meant the soviets were never real the to the Americans.

A large army was not much use to the soviets as they could not use it against the west when they were depend on imported food and with nuclear weapons any attack would have been point less.

Soviets need enough of a market economy to feed themselves and not just depend on exporting raw materials to buy the stuff they should have been able to produce them selves.

[Rainbow Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Living in Exile

Going back all the way to WWII...


Khalkhyn Gol escalates to a full scale war with Japan. The USSR wins a solid victory, curbing Japanese ambitions yet also providing a experience that exposes weaknesses in the Red Army somewhat earlier. Reforms are sped up, plus Stalin is more focused on the West. The Red Army takes warnings seriously, and is prepared for Operation Barbarossa. The Nazis are decisively defeated early. The Soviets get a bigger sphere of influence in Europe, and suffer fewer losses than OTL doing it. Without the catastrophic losses of OTL, the population of the USSR is not quite as messed up. It will likely still be ugly demographically, but somewhat improved.

Because Japan has been cowed, there's no Pearl Harbor. The United States doesn't ever get around to intervening in Europe, and never fully emerges from Isolationism. With no Marshall Plan or the like, the countries that aren't drawn into the Communist Bloc by force topple. The resulting association of Communist states, dominated by the USSR, is economically strong enough to last to the present day, just by virtue of size. The United States doesn't get to rebuild the bombed out world post-war, and the economy doesn't boom as much in the 50s. First man on the Moon is Russian, etc. USSR doesn't feel as threatened by the USA, less intense arms race and lower defense spending.

Can someone please write this timeline? if not write it, can someone at least point me to a good Soviet-Wank?