If Not America, Then Who?

Which Was Most Likely To Emerge As The Leading Power at the end of the 20th Century?

  • Russia

    Votes: 41 22.7%
  • Germany

    Votes: 45 24.9%
  • United Kingdom

    Votes: 42 23.2%
  • France

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • Japan

    Votes: 10 5.5%
  • Italy

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • China

    Votes: 15 8.3%
  • India

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • Liechenstein

    Votes: 12 6.6%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 10 5.5%

  • Total voters
    181
For me, it's a toss-up between Britain and Russia. But I'm betting on Britain. If Britain can stay out of the World Wars she should be able to keep the empire mostly in line. There are likely to still be independance movements, but if Britain is still at her pre-war strength then the independance movement could more likely be for something akin to dominion status rather than full blown independance. And perhaps some sort of federation could then be put underway. And by the time the 21st Century rolls around the United Empire reigns supreme.
 
"Well, would you like to know where you'd be without the good old US of A to protect you? The smallest f***ing province in the Russian Empire!" :D
 
I voted for "Other", by which I mean the European Union. As a matter of fact, I do not consider it the most likely candidate for being the strongest power, but it should be on the list nevertheless. The Gross Domestic Product of the European Union as it is now in our timeline is bigger than that of the United States. If the EU were a unified country with a unified government and armed forces it would be the number one power on Earth (although, in the future, it might still lose this status to others, probably China or India). With earlier economic integration its strength would be even greater, and with earlier integration and no World Wars it would be stronger still. A European Union that begins to integrate earlier and is still more wealthy than in OTL might attract and admit still more members within Europe, at Europe's borders or even on other continents.

Having said all that, a POD that leads to an integration that makes the EU a unified country and the strongest power is difficult to find, but it is certainly not impossible.

So here is my personal choice of alternate Twentieth Century Number One Powers:
There are ten items on Anaxagoras' list, including "Other", for which I substitute "European Union". Liechtenstein must be removed because its inclusion is meant as a joke, leaving nine entities. I remove Italy from the list, if I remember correctly it has the smallest population base at the beginning of the Twentieth Century, and, at that time it is not even industrialized to the degree that the US, Britain and Germany are, and does not have valuable colonies. I also remove France from the list, it is far more industrialised than Italy and has valuable colonies. On the other hand, most of these colonies have populations that do not feel as French and the population of metropolitan France is small even compared to that of Germany. This leaves seven entities on the list.

I would like to group the remaining seven entities into two groups:
the most promising candidates: Russia, China, India, European Union
the outsiders with a chance: Britain, Germany, Japan
The difference between the two groups is the size of the "core group" - I do not know whether there is a scholarly name for this. With "core group" I mean those parts of the population of these entities that identify themselves with this entitiy - Russia, the European Union, the British Empire and so on. The members of the core group want the existence of the nation or Empire to continue, feel that the government of this entity represents at least partly their own interests, see each other as belonging to one of the same group and would, if the need arose, fight for this entity - not as mercenaries, but as patriots.

During large parts of the Twentieth Century the British Empire is the entity with the largest population, but its core group is only a small fraction of this - roughly the population of Britain, Irish Protestants and the white population of the Dominions and the British colonies. In China this group would be the Han Chinese, in India the Hindus, in Germany the Germans and in Japan the Japanese. If one makes the assumption (perhaps unfounded, criticism is welcome) that under other circumstances than those extreme ones that prevailed in the OTL Soviet Union, the Ukrainians, Byelorussians and the Russian population of Kazakhstan would see themselves as citizens of the same state as the Russians in Russia then one gets a much bigger core group for Russia than for either Britain, Germany or Japan. It needs no special comment that the core groups of China and China are also much bigger than those in the "outsider" group. In the case of the European communitiy I would say the core group would be much bigger than that of the British Empire, Germany or Japan, if the EU were one country.
 
I voted for "Other", by which I mean the European Union. As a matter of fact, I do not consider it the most likely candidate for being the strongest power, but it should be on the list nevertheless. The Gross Domestic Product of the European Union as it is now in our timeline is bigger than that of the United States. If the EU were a unified country with a unified government and armed forces it would be the number one power on Earth (although, in the future, it might still lose this status to others, probably China or India). With earlier economic integration its strength would be even greater, and with earlier integration and no World Wars it would be stronger still. A European Union that begins to integrate earlier and is still more wealthy than in OTL might attract and admit still more members within Europe, at Europe's borders or even on other continents.
Funny you should say that...
 
Following WWII, the United States and Soviet Union were the only two superpowers on Earth. Had the United States been stunted in its growth during the first half of the 20th century, the Soviet Union would have been the only superpower. Despite the fact that their economy was a mess, and their people were miserable, we must admit that the Soviet Union was a superpower, and would have been the only superpower without the United States to hold it in check.
 
I vote for Germany. If Japan is the second power in the world today, Germany could be the first. We just need different contenders in the First World War (France vs United Kingdom or something like that).​
 
I voted to British Empire and Russia because of the vast natural resources and larger population. Germany would not be because of the territorial size. France, Italy and Spain would not because of less industrialization. Japan would not be because of the territorial size and overpopulation.
 
Even though it had lost portions of its colonial empire, Britan remained the cultural and technological center of the world up until the end of World War I. Without a noisy little United States, Britan seems like the most likely candidate. If there wasn't a powerful US chances of the UN coming about are low, which means no forced de-colonization, Britan would still control land in Africa, parts of India, areas of Indochina, and several ports in China.

Imperial Federation? That would have been very difficult to achieve, but the only way I can see a global British Empire surviving. Furthermore, improvements in communications and traveling technology would make it easier to send an MP from Auckland to London by the mid 20th century than from , say some North English consituency to London in 1750.
 

mowque

Banned
i love people who think England was stronger then the USA is 1914...:p. Other then the financial sector (which we were shortly going to steal away) and armer forces (which could/would) be built up when needed, we were nearly light-years ahead of everyone. In population,land size,energy usage,production (of just about everything). Its really no contest.
 

Neroon

Banned
This may be borderline ASBs, but given how weird European dynastic bloodlines were i don't think it's THAT ASBisch: An Anglo-German dynastic union sometime between 1871 and 1914 eventually evolving into a full political union. The 2nd Reich had a federal sturcture already in place. So lets make England, Scotland, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa member kingdoms with the same level of autonomy as Bavaria et al. Capital switches between Berlin and London every 5 years or so.
That not just gives us an 800pound gorilla dominating Europe and much of the rest of the planet, but a large enough white population, that eventual enfranchisement of the natives is possible without the threat of them seizing power at the ballot box. Especially if done so phased rather than all at once.
 
I voted other, for if the US remains isolationist into the present day, none of the rest of the countries has the power to be the over-arching hegemon America has been for the past twenty years.

With a POD no earlier than 1914, and assuming that the Great War begins per OTL, there is very little chance that the Schlieffen Plan can lead to an early victory against France. Since the Germans will violate Belgian neutrality, Britain will enter the war to protect "poor little Belgium," and the Western Front will get bogged down in the quagmire we all know. Even without the Bolsheviks, Germany will beat Russia in 1917 or 18, and then try a last chance offensive in the West. Since the British and French forces held the Germans outside of Amiens OTL with few American troops on the front, they'll probably be able to do so without American participation. However, from that point (April 1918 OTL) on, without 250,000 American soldiers entering the lines each month, the Allies won't have the strength to push the Germans back very far, and Germany won't any longer have the strength for much offensive action after that themselves. Eventually, you will end with a Peace of Attrition, where Germany gets to keep its gains in the East for a return to the status quo ante bellum in the West and the forfeiting of its colonies.

Butterflies aplenty from that point on, of course, but in such a scenario, there wouldn't be any "superpowers," just quite a few "great powers," similar to what existed in Europe in the 100 years between the Congress of Vienna and the start of the Great War.

Great Powers:

-USA (largest economy, but no power projection beyond Central America)
-British Commonwealth (with independent India in close association)
-Central European Bloc (Germany and associated states)
-French Union
-Russia (sans the Ukraine and Baltic states)
-Japan (with certain colonial possessions, too many butterflies to specify)

That's just a list, not a ranking, mind :)
 
ok I voted "other" with Russia in a close second and Germany in a close third. I think that for the most part you guys are getting too America-centric, and thinking only in terms of who would be the superpower in the 1950's, not at the end of the century. Although the british empire if it was stronger than in OTL would still have a problem making it through the second world war and 50 more years without something changing considerably earlier than the 20th century, keep in mind that the 20th century was the century of the armed insurgency, I seriously doubt that the British army could have held onto the empire with resistance movements popping up all over the place as they most likely would have.

Meanwhile the Russians had a horrible economic model, and an ass backwards educational system which would have caused it to lag behind the rest of the world. In order to control the vast amount of terriroty that it would have controlled without a strong USA to balance them out they would have gone into economic recession earlier than it would have in OTL.

The Germans might have won WWII without US intervention, although what most people don't realize is that the Russians could have taken on the Germans solo and won, at least in a military sense. Without a bombing campaign carried out by the allies in the west hurting German morale and production, and US lend lease aid to supplement Russian supply shortages it may be argued that the Russians may have lost the war, although we may never know if that would have been the case. Either way if the Germans had beaten the Russians they would have bled themselves dry doing it, and occupying a partisan ridden Soviet Union would taken most of their resources. Aside from the fact that with Hitler dying within five years of WWII as he probably would have without a sudden case of lead poisoning in his bunker, he would have left a power vacuum in Berlin leading to all sorts of infighting in the Nazi party, and there is no knowing what Germany would have looked like afterward.


Now i'm going to make a quick and dirty AH with a POD that I have yet to hear anyone ever come close to naming. In 1914 FDR had recently married Ealenor but shortly after hiring a secretary he started having an affair with her. The affair wasn't found out for years to come and the Roosevelt marraige survived it, but what if Ealenor found out about it right away. The marraige may have dissolved shortly after it had begun, and in retaliation for the scandal FDR is cut off from his family fortune. He is forced to rely on his career in corporate law for a living and never realizes his political ambitions and never runs for president in 1932.

As a result a president of less skill is elected in the midst of the Great Depression. The USA doesn't fully recover in time for WWII, also the president in office at the time doesn't take as hard a line with the Japanese who never attack Pearl Harbor. The USA never enters the war and the European Allies are forced to fight the Axis on their own. The war progresses pretty much the same as it does in OTL for the first couple years. France is overrun, and Britian remains isolated in Western Europe. Meanwhile Hitler turns his attentions towards the USSR. The Germans try and fail to invade England, the loss is devastating to the German military who suffer tens of thousands dead or captured. The war Grinds on but in 1948 the Soviet Union captures Berlin and successfully occupy most of France, leaving only a Rump State along the Mediterranian. The Russians then attack the antagonistic Japanese who have been busy fighting the Chinese. After two more years the Russians occupy the Japanese mainland finally ending WWII. A cold war ensues between the Russians and pretty much just the British, who avoid conquest by the Russians in the early 50's due to Russian exhaustion. Atomic weapons aren't developed until 1960 by the British who have become the economic, political, and scientific leaders of the world in stead of the US. The Russians don't manage to develope nukes for another 8 years due to being handicapped by the wrong conclusions drawn by German Scientists that they captured after the war.

The next couple decades are marked by a large arms race and numerous proxy wars fought by both sides. By the 90's the Soviet Union collapses due to an expensive arms race and fighting far too many little wars all over the world. Britians empire is in virtual collapse, the British cannot keep control of the middle east anymore and the vital oil supply which the British need to keep its large military active is in danger of being cut off. As such Parlaiment and the PM decide that it is preferable to let Northern Ireland go as it has less to offer the Empire and the constant attacks by the IRA are simply drawing troops away from the countless other hot spots around the globe.

In the end the British outlast the Soviets but only by a couple years. At the turn of the century there is no individual superpower in the world which has now gone along a multipolar path as it is now.
 
Japan. Russia would never become a power under the tsar rule. United Kingdom lost all that territory without any U.S. involvement. France...France would probably surrender to somebody. Germany, if countinuing with kaisers would probably screw up somewhere. Italy just doesn't have the potential. It's on a pennisula and has very little room to expand. China would probably still have a revolution, and the Nationalists still lost with U.S. help! India is just too easy to counqer. I just don't know why Leichenstien is on here. It had one man in it's army for a lot of years.

Japan would still be war like and take the Phillipenes. In fact a non-major U.S. would be even easier!
 
Top