A Soviet Victory in the Cold War

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by IchBinDieKaiser, Nov 25, 2010.

  1. IchBinDieKaiser Casual Historian

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Location:
    California
    I was wondering, what exactly would a Soviet Victory in the cold war look like?
     
  2. Cook Real friends stab you in the front.

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Location:
    this side of the Black Stump.
    Grey.





    That's about it.
     
  3. Van555 Social Reformist

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Location:
    Santa Clara Region, Republic of California
    It's hard to say

    One thing I know is that america would end up being a horrible facist bunker nation....

    oh wait...:eek:

    :p never mind
     
  4. Dan Reilly The Great Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    yeah, hard to say, the word "victory" is widely open to interpretation here, so a soviet victory in the cold war could look like any number of things.
     
  5. Wyragen-TXRG4P Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    Without atomic bombs?
     
  6. Laqueesha The Right Honourable and Quasi-Learned Laq'

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Location:
    Placentashire, Placentaland, Placenta Kingdom
    The Soviet Union is left as the only superpower in the world?
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2010
  7. Elidor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    A "red plenty" sitaution where everything the US does the USSR does better?
     
  8. Emperor of Scandinavia Emperor of Scandinavia

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Heres what I'm thinking

    To keep with realism, lets say this coldwar lasts until about the year 2000.
    What happened to the soviet union after the cold war partially happened because there were many ethnic groups demanding independence.

    In america there are not many people advocating seccession (well there is Rick Perry Governor of Texas), so most likely the union would remain together.

    The soviets had to sell off and dismantal many of their nukes. It is likely that america would sell some of its nukes to countries like Canada,Mexico and maybe Japan. Brazil?

    It is likely that if america lost the cold war its economy would experience some sort of crash. Hell, americas economy right now being hollowed out by corruption and greed. Not to mention america's economy right now is very weak and could at any moment could take that perverbial jump off the cliff.

    During Gorbachev's time in power the soviet military was cut by percentages such as 50%. Not to say that russia was completely defensless, but it was pretty weak. For a while america whould slash military spending by similar amountd just to keep the economy afloat. There would still be a military, but think more along the lines of less than one million soldiers, several aicraft carriers probally are sold to remaining allies or they are sold for scrap. This america could intervene in its neighboring countries, but the most i could see for a while would be small border schirmishes with cross border bandits.
     
  9. TNF Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    For this to work, you have to have a perfect storm in the United States.

    (1) Isolationism returns in the postwar United States. This means that either Henry Wallace becomes POTUS on April 12, 1945, or Truman does, and then loses re-election to Bob Taft in 1948. Regardless of what happens, you have no Marshall Plan and no NATO.

    (2) As a result, Western Europe falls to the Soviet Union. Germany is united as the German Democratic Republic, Italian elections in 1948 bring the Communists to power, leaving only Britain and France standing against the Soviet threat. By 1968, however, a student and workers revolt in France establishes the People's Republic of France. The United Kingdom is alone in a sea of 'Red' European regimes, as Portugal's Carnation Revolution leads to the installation of a communist government there as well. Spain and Britain, along with the Nordic countries, hold out and form an anti-Communist alliance, though there's no telling how long it will actually hold up in the face of expanding Communist influence and a lack of interest on the part of the United States.

    (3) In Asia, the PRC invades and deposes the ROC on Taiwan, uniting China fully under the red banner. North Korea defeats South Korea and establishes a united DPRK, and Japan, which has been split like Germany was after the war, is governed by a communist North and a authoritarian South. The North eventually defeats the South following a general war, repeating patterns seen in Korea and in Viet Nam. India aligns with the Soviet Union openly, as does Israel, as a buffer against Arab aggression.

    (4) African colonial regimes are largely replaced by Soviet satellite regimes. In South Africa, a bloody uprising deposes Apartheid in the early nineties, installing instead a communist state there.

    (5) The rest of Europe finds itself under siege as well. Labor unrest in Britain leads to a general strike and a worker's revolution in the seventies, deposing the Queen and installing the People's Republic of Britain. With the death of Franco, a second Spanish Civil War occurs, with communist forces succeeding outright, establishing the Third Spanish Republic.

    (6) Latin America quickly becomes a hotbed of communism as pro-American regimes are deposed by communist regimes. Cuba and Chile are especially of note here, as is the People's Republic of Brazil. Economic unrest in Mexico leads to a peasant revolt in the late eighties which will eventually topple the Mexican government in the nineties, leading to the establishment of the 'People's Republic of Mexico' under Subcomandante Marcos.

    (7) As a result of all of these changes, the United States has, by 1989, become a paranoid fascist state. Student unrest in the late sixties lead to draconian anti-communist laws being passed and eventually, most Americans just gave up on waiting for elections that never came. However, a general strike in 1989, provoked by American communists, did shake the existing government enough to begin reforms. By 1991 however, it was clear that reforms would not work and the nation split apart, with various communist regimes replacing whatever was left of the United States by the early 2000s.
     
  10. Corbell Mark IV Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    Agreed.

    Just compare West Germany to East Germany.




    Now details could vary though. You could have a hundred differant Soviet Victory TLs.

    BUt by and large you would have more nations will less freedom and prosperity.


    Oh, and the US would survive in most of them. The US is not, as the SOviet Union was, a multi=ethnic empire.
     
  11. Readman I Accidentally POTUS'd

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Location:
    Orillia,Ontario
    Good analysis, TNF.
     
  12. Rogue Shadows Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Let's see if I can't dig up that map...

    Alt History.PNG
     
  13. Monty Burns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    I think the Soviet union following the Chinese way and becoming an economic superpower and never partitioning should be considered a victory.
     
  14. LeX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    USA
    I think the map is plausible but it requires some more changes to the 1945-75 period, particularly in the Soviet political state.
     
  15. Rogue Shadows Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    I wanted the latest POD I could think of that realistically could have allowed for a successful, non-military Soviet victory: the failure of the US' civil rights act.
     
  16. LeX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Location:
    USA
    You'd probably need a better replacement for Brezhnev, IMO. He wasn't a very good leader.
     
  17. 9 Fanged Hummingbird Some Random Guy

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Easy. Kosygin. Alexei Kosygin should have been the one to take over rather than Brezhnev. Also, not having Khrushchev's agricultural policies not become total failures would help as well.
     
  18. Readman I Accidentally POTUS'd

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Location:
    Orillia,Ontario
    Yeah, the whole "Virgin Lands" Campaign was basically an economic and agricultural Epic Fail. I don't have a source handy, but I'm pretty certain that program's failure was responsible for making the USSR a net food *Importer*, which was bad news all around.
     
  19. General Tirpitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Location:
    The Kingdom of Finland
    Yup. It pretty much devastated areas in Kazakstan and in few years nothing grew there anymore. Khurchev also wanted to encourage maize farming and in Russian climate that didn't just work at all. Private plots (which were very important for food production in the USSR) were also made smaller in kolkhozes which then led to overall smaller agricultural production.
     
  20. General Tirpitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Location:
    The Kingdom of Finland
    I think that by just solving Soviet agricultural problems their situation would have become much better. Creating more Private plots and stopping following lysenkoism earlier would help a lot.

    More agricultural products + wealthier peasants = more money to the state to use to other things + more support from rural population

    It would have increased their prestige a lot if they didn't have to buy their grain from the US as in OTL.