AHC Bigger Eastern European populations during communist era

How could you with a pod preferly in 1945, change the direction of the region such that Eastern European countries have a larger population in 1989 than in OTL? These countries should become communist as in OTL, atleast nominally.

Eastern Europe being defined as the countries that became communist OTL.
- Albania
- Armenia (Soviet Union)
- Azerbajian (Soviet Union)
- Belarus (Soviet Union)
- Bosnia (Yugoslavia)
- Bulgaria
- Czechia (Czechoslovakia)
- East Germany
- Estonia (Soviet Union)
- FYROM (Yugoslavia)
- Georgia (Soviet Union)
- Hungary
- Kosovo (Yugoslavia)
- Kroatia (Yugoslavia)
- Latvia (Soviet Union)
- Lithuania (Soviet Union)
- Moldova (Soviet Union)
- Montenegro (Yugoslavia)
- Poland
- Romania
- Russia (Soviet Union)
- Serbia (Yugoslavia)
- Slovakia (Czechoslovakia)
- Slovenia (Yugoslavia)
- Ukraine (Soviet Union)
7c8f80d3357d8759f1a22dc96989bf5d.gif
 
Last edited:

Toraach

Banned
With POD after 1945? Nearly impossible. You cannot have bigger population in those countries if they have similar socio-economic conditions like in OTL. Only some small changes are possible. I mean if during times of building foundation of socialism they didn't kill tens of thousands of people in each particular country, populations might be slightly bigger.

In the case of the GDR, if they had built the Wall sooner, more people would have stayed.

For Poland.
1. Less people killed during the "glorious period of combat of consolidation of the People's Power", but that wouldn't be that much. 20k perhaps.
2. the SU allowed bigger migration of Poles from the East, still there are hundreds of thousands of Poles in the former SU. So that might be even 200k people or more.
3. No "volkswagendeutche". That's a term under commonly were known people who migrated to West Germany in 60s and 70s, who were from mixed polish-german families from regions which were in Germany pre 2ww. Many of them weren't Germans, but indigenous Poles from those regions, but they just used a possibility to leave the "paradise". So their name, which is a play on a term "volksdeutche" from IIWW. Changed into volkswagendeutche, because well, in the eyes of remaining population they left for the richer country.
4. No Jaruzelski's imigration. After the Martial Law in early 80s. Jaruzelski and his gang recognized that if they expel/allow imigration of many the most active and industrious people from the country, they won't be a danger for the People's Power anymore, so their rule will be easier. Not that it was at danger in any point, but it is just easier to rule over calm and disinterested in politics population.

With those conditions, Poland could have achieved 40m in 1990.
 
You would need some sort of economic miracle to happen in the communist bloc. The problem with population growth alongside a static economy is that the same resources become more diluted as the population increases.
 
This is probably a political nonstarter in the Eastern bloc, but maybe a scenario where the flight and expulsion of the ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, etc is less comprehensive and total than it was IOTL?
 
If all we care is population growth those countries could try to do what Romania did. It obviously isn't the best solution but It might be the only one considering the situation those countries were in and changing that would require a much earlier POD
 
Here is a list of some former communist countries and their population in 1945 and 1990. I will add a ATL population number, that you can try to make happen.

Poland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Poland)
1945 - 23,7 million
OTL 1990 - 38,1 million
ATL 1990 - 60 million

Yugoslavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia#Demographics)
1945 - around 14 million
OTL 1990 - around 23 million
ATL 1990 - 100 million

Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine#Between_WWI_and_WWII)
1945 - around 34 million
OTL 1990 - 51,8 million
ATL 1990 - 90 million
 
Last edited:
Here is a list of some former communist countries and their population in 1945 and 1990. I will add a ATL population number, that you can try to make happen.

Poland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Poland)
1945 - 23,7 million
OTL 1990 - 38,1 million
ATL 1990 - 60 million

Yugoslavia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia#Demographics)
1945 - around 14 million
OTL 1990 - around 23 million
ATL 1990 - 100 million

Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine#Between_WWI_and_WWII)
1945 - around 34 million
OTL 1990 - 51,8 million
ATL 1990 - 90 million

These population figures are completely impossible. Rates of growth like this might be almost possible for major yet underpopulated immigrant receiving countries like Canada or New Zealand. For relatively poor immigrant sending countries with a high level of human development, this is not possible.
 
These population figures are completely impossible. Rates of growth like this might be almost possible for major yet underpopulated immigrant receiving countries like Canada or New Zealand. For relatively poor immigrant sending countries with a high level of human development, this is not possible.
I think the Polish one is possible if you could get the TFR up to 4 and increase life expectancy by 10 years, which should not be impossible. I think this is the most likely ATL population challenge.

In Yugoslavia you need to prevent the TFR decline, increase life expectancy (a life expectancy of 85 should not be impossible) and reduce emigration. This is probably the least likely ATL population challenge.

Ukraine mostly needs to increase it's life expectany aswell as avoiding the fertility decline following ww2.
 
I think the Polish one is possible if you could get the TFR up to 4 and increase life expectancy by 10 years, which should not be impossible. I think this is the most likely ATL population challenge.

How would you do that? Even at its highest in the early 1950s, Polish fertility rates peaked at 3.7 and quickly fell In coming years. How can an increasingly urban and industrial country with not especially high living standards—a country that, unlike Saudi Arabia with oil, cannot take a quick shortcut to wealth without social development—not experience that shift?

In Yugoslavia you need to prevent the TFR decline, increase life expectancy (a life expectancy of 85 should not be impossible) and reduce emigration. This is probably the least likely ATL population challenge.

Yes. That Yugoslavia was so closely linked to western Europe makes this all the less likely.

Ukraine mostly needs to increase it's life expectany aswell as avoiding the fertility decline following ww2.

How is it supposed to do the first in the Soviet system, and how can it do the second as a rapidly modernizing country?
 
Some people have no imagination. We are speaking of totalitarian regimes with the might of the Soviet army behind them. OTL they did incredibly idiotic things and got away with it.

Meaning if the party decides the country needs more people they will try to do it. Like dont know, make it a law that every women must have at least 4 children by the age of 30. The only exception is if they are infertile. If they dont than that has consequences. A milder version is to forbid abortation - this actually was law in Hungary for a few years under Rákosi. Or other idiocies they may come up with.
 
Some people have no imagination. We are speaking of totalitarian regimes with the might of the Soviet army behind them.
I agree that centralised authoritorian states can change societies quickly.
OTL they did incredibly idiotic things and got away with it.
Yes, anyway Lysenko is a example of one the worst Soviet mistakes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/trofim-lysenko-soviet-union-russia/548786/
Meaning if the party decides the country needs more people they will try to do it. Like dont know, make it a law that every women must have at least 4 children by the age of 30. The only exception is if they are infertile. If they dont than that has consequences. A milder version is to forbid abortation - this actually was law in Hungary for a few years under Rákosi. Or other idiocies they may come up with.
The difficulty is how to enforce such laws and regulations.
 
How would you do that? Even at its highest in the early 1950s, Polish fertility rates peaked at 3.7 and quickly fell In coming years. How can an increasingly urban and industrial country with not especially high living standards—a country that, unlike Saudi Arabia with oil, cannot take a quick shortcut to wealth without social development—not experience that shift?
https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#_s...astModified:1526034531375;&chart-type=bubbles
I added Poland and three other countries(Argentina, Iceland, Israel) to this graph. All these countries were and are relativly developed, they have also since ww2 had for the most part higher TFRs than Poland. This shows that it is not impossible for developed countries to have above replacement fertility rates.
Yes. That Yugoslavia was so closely linked to western Europe makes this all the less likely.
If Yugoslavia had kept people more settled and spread in small vilages this might reduce the effects of modernisation. Aswell as preventing emigration.
How is it supposed to do the first in the Soviet system, and how can it do the second as a rapidly modernizing country?
Maybe not having children could be framed as "nazi" opinions since the Nazis wanted to exterminate the Ukrainians(Lebensraum).
 
Last edited:
Poland TFR thru Time compared to Argentina, Iceland, Israel.JPG

This graphs shows a comparison between Poland and other developed countries. These developed countries were chosen because they had higher TFRs than Poland thru out the latter part of the 20 century.
Green: Shows countries in the Americas.
Yellow: Shows countries in Europe.
Red: Shows countries in Asia.
 
Albania hardly could be improved compared to OTL-Albanian population already tripled during communist rule.
Albanian TFR 1800-2018.JPG

Albanian TFR spiked during WW2, peaked in 1958 at 6,54 children per woman and did not start to decline until 1959. Perhaps this decline could be avoided or lessened?
 
Some people have no imagination. We are speaking of totalitarian regimes with the might of the Soviet army behind them. OTL they did incredibly idiotic things and got away with it.

Meaning if the party decides the country needs more people they will try to do it. Like dont know, make it a law that every women must have at least 4 children by the age of 30. The only exception is if they are infertile. If they dont than that has consequences. A milder version is to forbid abortation - this actually was law in Hungary for a few years under Rákosi. Or other idiocies they may come up with.

We're speaking of totalitarian Marxist-Leninist regimes (I suppose Titoism and Hoxhaism can be included under that banner), which have a particular ideology regarding women's rights and the role of women in society which doesn't make sense to alter too much. Eastern European regimes also had increased levels of female participation in the workforce and female education. Now, these states obviously weren't paragons of feminism, but they had inherent reasons (along with their economic strengths versus undeveloped African/Asian countries) why such high fertility rates are unreasonable.

The other factor is corruption. You can pass laws like Romania did demanding women reproduce, but can you actually enforce them? History shows us that, no, you can't. There's too many people you can bribe to make the problem go away, and the government is none the wiser or you have corrupt officials complaining about other corrupt officials. To use your example of "every woman must have 4 children by age 30", I'd imagine there'd be lots of bribery that would create children who existed only on paper, or perhaps abduction/trading of children from parents with more children (or less) or stealing children from orphanages--it's something which would be circumvented.

View attachment 386524
This graphs shows a comparison between Poland and other developed countries. These developed countries were chosen because they had higher TFRs than Poland thru out the latter part of the 20 century.
Green: Shows countries in the Americas.
Yellow: Shows countries in Europe.
Red: Shows countries in Asia.

Argentina's post-WWII fertility rate shows the decline of the Argentine economy due to national instability which prevented it from following a trend akin to more developed countries. Israel has a large amount of highly religious Jews who have correspondingly huge families. The situation isn't comparable, especially with Israel.

View attachment 386525
Albanian TFR spiked during WW2, peaked in 1958 at 6,54 children per woman and did not start to decline until 1959. Perhaps this decline could be avoided or lessened?

Albania was a highly impoverished country, with the lowest GDP in Europe. The country was extremely unstable for most of the 20th century until Hoxha's iron-fisted rule was established. It's logical it would have a high fertility rate for the same reasons African countries do.

The fertility rate and population increased because the Albanian government modernised the medical system to whatever degree they could as well as were able to eradicate many diseases like malaria. At the same time, Hoxha's regime also restricted abortions. However, in other ways, Hoxha's regime was very much in favour of women's rights, as communist regimes have tended to be, by encouraging female education and advocating for women to join the workforce. Quote Hoxha "The entire party and country should hurl into the fire and break the neck of anyone who dared trample underfoot the sacred edict of the party on the defense of women's rights."

Combine nominal/on paper support of women's rights common in Eastern Bloc regimes with the fact the government can't be everywhere at once, and you have a system which will prevent artificially high fertility rates from existing.
 
We're speaking of totalitarian Marxist-Leninist regimes (I suppose Titoism and Hoxhaism can be included under that banner), which have a particular ideology regarding women's rights and the role of women in society which doesn't make sense to alter too much. Eastern European regimes also had increased levels of female participation in the workforce and female education. Now, these states obviously weren't paragons of feminism, but they had inherent reasons (along with their economic strengths versus undeveloped African/Asian countries) why such high fertility rates are unreasonable.
Many good points i have to admit.
The other factor is corruption. You can pass laws like Romania did demanding women reproduce, but can you actually enforce them? History shows us that, no, you can't. There's too many people you can bribe to make the problem go away, and the government is none the wiser or you have corrupt officials complaining about other corrupt officials. To use your example of "every woman must have 4 children by age 30", I'd imagine there'd be lots of bribery that would create children who existed only on paper, or perhaps abduction/trading of children from parents with more children (or less) or stealing children from orphanages--it's something which would be circumvented.
Maybe the foster care systems could thrive in such an environment? Many individuals especially young women would give up unplanned babies to continue studying, while many older couples might have a intrerest in fostering or adopting.
Argentina's post-WWII fertility rate shows the decline of the Argentine economy due to national instability which prevented it from following a trend akin to more developed countries. Israel has a large amount of highly religious Jews who have correspondingly huge families. The situation isn't comparable, especially with Israel.
Do you think that Argentine fertility is just related to economics, or might society(culture, norms) play a part too? In Israel while secular people have lower fertility than non secular people, the secular Israelis do have higher fertility than secular European, Canadians and Americans.

Some other developed regions with high fertility(for a developed region) is
- Faroe Islands
- Kosovo
- Georgia
- Tasmania
- Ireland
Albania was a highly impoverished country, with the lowest GDP in Europe. The country was extremely unstable for most of the 20th century until Hoxha's iron-fisted rule was established. It's logical it would have a high fertility rate for the same reasons African countries do.

The fertility rate and population increased because the Albanian government modernised the medical system to whatever degree they could as well as were able to eradicate many diseases like malaria. At the same time, Hoxha's regime also restricted abortions. However, in other ways, Hoxha's regime was very much in favour of women's rights, as communist regimes have tended to be, by encouraging female education and advocating for women to join the workforce. Quote Hoxha "The entire party and country should hurl into the fire and break the neck of anyone who dared trample underfoot the sacred edict of the party on the defense of women's rights."

Combine nominal/on paper support of women's rights common in Eastern Bloc regimes with the fact the government can't be everywhere at once, and you have a system which will prevent artificially high fertility rates from existing.
Perhaps child bearing could become part of eastern feminism? Feminism with Albanian charateristics perhaps?
 
Many good points i have to admit.

Maybe the foster care systems could thrive in such an environment? Many individuals especially young women would give up unplanned babies to continue studying, while many older couples might have a intrerest in fostering or adopting.

Do you think that Argentine fertility is just related to economics, or might society(culture, norms) play a part too? In Israel while secular people have lower fertility than non secular people, the secular Israelis do have higher fertility than secular European, Canadians and Americans.

Argentine culture is similar to other Latin Americans and also Italian culture (given over half the country is descended in part or whole from Italian immigrants). Catholics statistically have higher fertility rates than Protestants (including in secular countries like the US). Jews have higher fertility rates than Protestants as well (and I'm not sure what role Zionism might play regarding fertility rates in Israel). But as a general rule, economics do determine a lot of factors regarding fertility rates.

Regarding foster care, I'm not sure, but Romanian orphanages are pretty infamous places. Corruption and lack of money from the government is likely to keep orphanages and foster care not a place where children can thrive, but instead create massive alienation. It's been cited that the Romanian Revolution was in large part due to young adults born because of natalist policies being so alienated at the system they grew up in (in addition to the other problems in Romania and neighbouring countries)--Ceausescu was executed during the revolution and the Romanian Communist Party utterly collapsed (rather than evolving into social democratic successor parties like elsewhere in the Eastern Bloc).

Some other developed regions with high fertility(for a developed region) is
- Faroe Islands
- Kosovo
- Georgia
- Tasmania
- Ireland

Many of those places are small and rural in nature. Kosovo's GDP per capita was about half of Albania's, for instance, and about a third of Yugoslavia as a whole. Ireland had among the lowest GDP per capita in Western Europe and was also highly religious (I can't imagine state atheism in the communist bloc had a positive effect on fertility).

Perhaps child bearing could become part of eastern feminism? Feminism with Albanian charateristics perhaps?

Child-bearing is not incompatible with feminism, but the ideology of Eastern European states included supporting women in the workforce and female education which lowers fertility rates. The idea of Kinder, Küche, Kirche as seen in Nazi Germany (or in general in reactionary ideologies) is alien to this mindset.
 
Argentine culture is similar to other Latin Americans and also Italian culture (given over half the country is descended in part or whole from Italian immigrants). Catholics statistically have higher fertility rates than Protestants (including in secular countries like the US). Jews have higher fertility rates than Protestants as well (and I'm not sure what role Zionism might play regarding fertility rates in Israel). But as a general rule, economics do determine a lot of factors regarding fertility rates.
Im anot sure that catholics do have higher fertility than protestants. Perhaps they used to due to earlier industrialisation in protestant dominated areas? Today Protestan/atheist Sweden has a higher fertility rate than catholic/atheist Italy.

I wonder to what degree economics affect fertility? I imagine that it is also connected to culture and lifestyle. If you want to travel, then you need money and time for example.
Regarding foster care, I'm not sure, but Romanian orphanages are pretty infamous places. Corruption and lack of money from the government is likely to keep orphanages and foster care not a place where children can thrive, but instead create massive alienation. It's been cited that the Romanian Revolution was in large part due to young adults born because of natalist policies being so alienated at the system they grew up in (in addition to the other problems in Romania and neighbouring countries)--Ceausescu was executed during the revolution and the Romanian Communist Party utterly collapsed (rather than evolving into social democratic successor parties like elsewhere in the Eastern Bloc).
Maybe ATL the orphanges and foster system in Romania can have less reason for infamy.
Many of those places are small and rural in nature. Kosovo's GDP per capita was about half of Albania's, for instance, and about a third of Yugoslavia as a whole. Ireland had among the lowest GDP per capita in Western Europe and was also highly religious (I can't imagine state atheism in the communist bloc had a positive effect on fertility).
Maybe some sort of "atheist religion" could form in a communist country? What about a state cult? It seems that the communist beliefs that these Warsaw pact countries held, had some resemblance to religion.
Child-bearing is not incompatible with feminism, but the ideology of Eastern European states included supporting women in the workforce and female education which lowers fertility rates. The idea of Kinder, Küche, Kirche as seen in Nazi Germany (or in general in reactionary ideologies) is alien to this mindset.
Ok.
 
Top