Discussion in 'Alternate History Maps and Graphics' started by Hindustani Person, Aug 17, 2019.
*clears throat in a dignified manner*
Could you also try making a Poland patch for my map, @mikroraptor , and make the borders only one pixel thick (including the corners etc.)?
Sejm Election 2018
Patcha Polska (I left the borders between the Constituent Nations of LitBel dark)
Thanks for the patch - I'll incorporate it tomorrow - and you are indeed getting better at border-making, @mikroraptor . There is room for improvement, but you are getting mch better!
No, a Socialist Japan is unlikely. My Korean civil war idea is, by the way (if someone could make an Infobox of this, it would be appreciated)
The Monarchists, led by Lee Beom-seok and Prince Yi Kang, rule the Southwestern coast
Anarchists, led by Kim Chwa- Chin
Nationalists, led by Syngman Rhee
Here is my ideal list of leaders of Communist Australia.
LIST OF PRESIDENTS OF AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC:
1947-1970: Jock Garden (Communist)
1967-1986: Ted Hill (Communist)
1986-1994: John Cummins (Communist)
Is there any list of incomplete leaders to complete this one?
What should we do in order to get Japan red? and what form of "going red" is likely in Japan?
Perhaps a moderate socdem state? To do this, we could perhaps have the Emperor less under the influence of the far-right.
What do you think about the chances of the JCP first taking power, and then reforming so that we are left with a more moderate democratic socialist nation by 2019? And could they still lead that red sphere of influence?
I haven't seen any discussion on it - correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm not objecting to the poll results, I'm just pointing out that the poll didn't conclude a majority for any one option, and so while most people been incorporated into the discussion, said discussion has not resulted in any conclusive result, and thus I would suggest more discussion until we know what's happening.
I didn't see that part, sorry. Although it does raise the question, which borders were being voted on? There have been a few different border proposals floating around.
No, and I think that's being needlessly combative. I'm just saying that from my point of view, a consensus hasn't yet been reached on this specific issue.
I wasn't saying you wouldn't, it was just a general statement that solid justifications and backstory for each event makes them more interesting.
No. You haven't. I didn't suggest you did. The vast majority of ideas have been accepted without much discussion of how they fit into the overall framework, and I was, again, making a general statement that not every idea has to be used. Please don't take every comment I make as a direct attack on you.
I just mentioned it because some ideas - like anarchist Japan - are wildly outside the bounds of plausibility, while Baltoslavia is torn apart for being implausible, when really it's just a combination of two almost-OTL proposals.
That's fine, as long as it's been considered. Again, 'twas a general statement.
I wouldn't say my standards on consensus are too high. What I've been saying is that if we do a poll, a majority should support something before it becomes canon, otherwise there should be a general consensus in discussion before something is considered to be canon. I don't see that as unreasonable.
The other option would be to have the Emperor more under the influence of the far-right, and more overtly supporting a war of aggression, which fails, and the Emperor is dethroned and a republic established, which becomes a moderate socdem state.
We voted on the borders on my last map as far as I know.
What about Japan being more aggressive in World War I, and then, in the interwar period, the Emperor is dethroned in a revolution which initially is democratic, but radicalises into a red one? Or the initial democracy, of a Weimar Republic type, is unstable and then Japan becomes communist?
That was indeed something which I didn't understand, why Baltoslavia - the idea championed by @Augenis , a native Lithuanian - was rated as implausible.
That is the main point where we disagree. What do the others think? @Ferd42 , @mikroraptor , @Hindustani Person , @ETGalaxy , @YaaItsRewindTime , @Gabzcervo et al. - do yo uthink there is an established consensus about the division of Australia into a Libertarian-Democratic West Australia and a communist/syndicalist/far-left East Australia?
I like this idea.
And, most likely, are much more plausible than both an anarchist Japan and an original communist revolution.
I believe that is correct. I am not wedded to the concept of a divided Australia, and I am fine with it being either divided or United.
This makes a lot of sense, actually.
But now I have to retcon my maps, again...
The reason I don't think Baltoslavia makes sense is the same reason that the Intermarium doesn't make sense to me in this scenario. It's antithetical to Germany and Russia's Imperial ambitions in the east.
The last thing that Imperial Germany wants is a powerful eastern European country that can challenge their authority. The same thing with Russia. And if such a state is formed, then they'll back the separatist movements, and Baltoslavia will collapse faster than you can say "Yugoslavia analog"
There's a reason why it's called divide and conquer. A Lithuania-Belorussia Union I can see as a reasonable proposal, but the Baltic Siperstate extending from Riga to the outskirts of Moscow is implausible in a central powers victory, in my humble opinion.
People seem to like the idea, but I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on Australia.
Regarding the wider issue of the Polls, it seems that a lot of them are being decided by an extremely small margin. It seems that 1-2 voters can swing an entire poll. As a potential solution, I propose that instead of a runoff poll, @Hindustani Person use the benevolent dictatorship powers they have by making a ruling on the vote if it is within a three-vote margin
The Bolsheviks won (for a little while). These will be known as the Lenin Years, lasting from 1922 to 1927
This is my newest map.
It incorporates some changes made after polls and discussions, and it also includes a compromise proposal on a Baltoslavia: Here, Baltoslavia includes Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus, but not Estonia.
Also, the colour of Red Russia is now clearly distinct from Red Japan.
What do you think about it? Have I forgot some change or something?
That is why we thought - for the interwar period - of "just" LitBel, and only after World War II, when Russia was destroyed, would Baltoslavia form.
Also, @Augenis ' idea was, as far as I know, a union of all Baltic nations and Belarus. Not extending
Another interesting idea! Poll, and then we ask @Hindustani Person . However, from September 16, as far as I understood, Hindustani Person will be away for a time.
EDIT: Also, we should only use this when the margin is less than two votes, not three.
Why is Russia split in three? Also, why is China balkanized?
Good question. Also, I have some ideas for China, which might conflict with the map. But China will probably still be balkanized, though maybe not as much
Separate names with a comma.