Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg

Discussion in 'Alternate History Books and Media' started by RiverDelta, Dec 30, 2017.

  1. Twiggierjet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Every faction in the US civil war has an ideology of one sort or another, some are just way more, shall we say, enthusiastic in ensuring doctrinal purity.
     
    halfcoop and Ferd42 like this.
  2. terranova210486 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    What's Cuba doing in KR?
     
  3. Thoresby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    You keep missing the point, I'm not discussing the leadership of any of the factions, all of them, even New England or the PSA are ideological to some extent, I'm talking about the structure of the government.
    The Feds, New England, the PSA and to an extent are ideologues operating in and restrained by a non-ideological system of government, much like the US today, the CSA is a clean slate, fresh start ideological system of government with no checks and balances.
    It's like the difference between Allende's Chile and the Khmer Rouge, one was takeover of an existing state the other was Day Zero.
     
    Ice34, Whiteshore and Ferd42 like this.
  4. freivolk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Location:
    Germany
    I don´t see the CSA as clean slat. After all they control the state goverements in the Rust Belt since several years and they are the initial basis of their power.
    McArthur is the clean slate, replacing the entire political system through his person.
     
    Worffan101 likes this.
  5. Thoresby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Well they don't have complete control over the Rust Belt States, otherwise you wouldn't have all those pre Civil War events about conflict in the Rust Belt.
    Also I don't think the CSA would keep even those elements of the pre-war government they control around, unlike all the other factions they are explicitly about remaking society, the economy and government.
    New England and the PSA want tos what they can from the wreckage.
    MacArthur wants to salvage everything.
    Long wants Social Democracy with added racism and him in charge.
    None of them are going to to get rid of the Constitution or abolish States, they'll pack the Supreme Court rather than get rid of it.
    The CSA gets rid of the Constitution, it sets up new syndicalist structures of government, it sets up a new Court system based on socialist law. It's a far more radical transformation of the pre-war system than any of the others.
    Now as I said I don't think the RadSocs will actually do anything super-evil, the Totalists absolutely will and there won't be any checks and balances to stop them.
     
  6. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    I don't buy it. MacArthur is crazy. He's the guy who wanted to nuke Korea into an uninhabitable wasteland to deny a few inches of ground to communism. He isn't the "sane dictator" type.

    As for the usual red terror, as I said before, it'll really depend on what the SPA want to do about it. It's possible to reign in the people and focus on trying to have a proper judiciary for the targets who really deserve it only. There will still be damage at the edge of their control because, well, it's a civil war, but it wouldn't be aimless massacres by any means. As people pointed out, they have focuses for it and the Totalists are the only ones who go "kill them all".

    The check and balance on the Totalists is the unions. Contrary to the OTL Russian revolution, the Syndicalist one is built on a basis of bottom up organizations coming together as a party. They're not going to take the massive centralization of power the Totalists try lying down.

    I think you're way too kind on MacArthur too. He's the one who kill any chance the feds have to represent democracy.

    You're probably right about the constitution though.
     
  7. 1SaBy Enlightened Radical Alt-Censtrist

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2014
    Location:
    Cassovia
    There always people who slip through. No matter what choices you as a player make. There's an event about that as well. A writer whose name I don't remember wants to publish a book critical of the red terror and Hemmingway tries to stop him. The player can then choose to let it be published or not.
     
  8. Thoresby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Power is more dispersed than in the USSR so a Great Leap Forward or a Holdomor would be less likely but not impossible imho.

    MacArthur is absolutely an arsehole who radically weakens the Federal cause practically and morally. But he doesn't want to radically transform society he wants to restore it, that can mean a lot of bloodshed but all the really blood soaked regimes in history, Nazi Germany, USSR, Cambodia, China have been explicitly transformational.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2019
  9. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    Oh yeah for sure, but that's true for every side in the civil war. As I said, civil wars are always extremely messy and hard to control.

    If you pick Totalist yeah. But they should face rebellion from the popular structures that won't let themselves be cowed into irrelevant rubberstamps. Your alt-Holodomor may just be the Totalists purging everyone and killing independent union activists post war. Most Totalist paths are kinda unlikely to me though, because this isn't Stalin influenced communism, it's syndicalism that had a lot of ties to anarchism.

    Does he want to restore it? I've always felt MacArthur restoring democracy to be wishful thinking. He's more likely to be an American Pinochet than a second Washington.

    You're missing Imperial Japan and it's very much not transformational agenda. Regular military dominated fascism is 100% able to be monstrous too.
     
  10. President Earl Warren Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2017
    Just sticking up for Mac here (I don't like him but its got to be said) the plan was not to nuke Korea out of exsistence, it was to nuke Chinese Supply areas to make sure they could not keep investing troops in Korea. He misperceived the Nukes as another weapon of war (a misperception whiich was frighteningly widespread back in the begging going all the way up to the late 50s when France requested a Nuke for Vietnam). Sure he was no visionary but I don't think his desire to use the nukes showed that he was crazy
     
  11. Whiteshore Defender of Myrcella Baratheon

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Location:
    Philippines
    So, what would politics and economics of an Olson/Reed Pact or a Garner/Long Pact America look like?
     
  12. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    He also wanted to use dirty bombs over North Korea.

    And nuke PRC population centers if they didn't back off after the first few nukes.

    Nah he was perfectly conscious of the human damage it would do.

    Olson-Reed is probably close to Nordic Social Democracy? Very heavy trade union participation in the distribution of welfare and maybe a few attempts at increasing democratic ownership of industries in place?

    Garner-Long probably favours the reactionary parts of the AFP with a few token social programs carefully designed so that only white people profit. Kinda like the right wing populists of today.
     
  13. President Earl Warren Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2017
    I had not heard that before, Just curious do you have any sources? not that I doubt you, Id actually like to read up on this...
    I think theird also be a very akward conflict between the Socialist Labor department and the current Judical system, as I belive a earlier poster pointed out, that "compromise" essentially creates a seperate justice system which allows Reed to rig union disputes in his supporters favor every time, not to mention being unconstuional in about a dozen ways.
     
  14. Nyvis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    Okay the sources I can find seem he wanted to extend the air war to Manchuria (so directly against the PRC) and block supply through North Korea using dirty bombs. The direct bombing of Chinese population centers seem to be a separate threat by Truman during the negotiations and probably a lot less serious. The fallout of the amount of bombs he wanted to drop would still kill most of North Korea though.

    The wikipedia article seem to have some sources I don't have access to, but here's what it says:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Truman's_relief_of_General_Douglas_MacArthur#Nuclear_weapons

    Someone with academic sources may be able to get you a list of the actual targets for that large amount of bombs, I can't find it with what I have on hand.

    I think it's just a case of KR devs not being policy makers, I imagine the real text is a bit different and less nonsensical. Just copy whatever Scandinavia was doing at the height of its social democratic period in your head.

    A separate court system for labour disputes with heavy union involvement isn't entirely unknown though, that's what France does.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Court_(France)

    It ends up ruling in favour of employees often, and that's good because honestly most Labour disputes are either wage theft or firing without proper cause.
     
  15. terranova210486 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
     
    ETGalaxy likes this.
  16. terranova210486 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
  17. Dr.Kafka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    I think this critique is off-base. The poster is incorrect that the courts are primarily responsible for mediating disputes between employees and employers. That responsibility goes to the National Labor Relations Board, which is an executive agency separate from the judiciary (although it does make use of administrate law judges). As I recall, Reed's proposed measure is almost exactly like the OTL National Labor Relations Board.

    The Court's role in *Janus* had nothing to do with mediating a labor dispute, but rather dealt with whether a labor law was constitutional.
     
    Whiteshore likes this.
  18. halfcoop Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2016
    Relatively insular, with a pretty well made event path that leads to various governments. Been a bit so it’s not 100% accurate

    • National populist- one of the nicer Nat pop groups. Very big on not getting involved with the rest the world. Doesn’t really favor any governments
    • Paternal Aut- N/A maybe a military gov
    • Aut Dem- Pro USA, continuation of previous goverment and sides with feds
    • Soc Con/Soc Lib/ Mark Lib/ Soc Dem- boring but stable constitution democracy. Sides with Entente or Germans and if that fails Austria apparently
    • Rad Soc and Democratic Syndie- form a democratic socialist state. Sides with International
    • Authoritarian Syndie/ Totalist- Authoritarian socialist state. Totalist consider themselves communist. Sides with International
     
  19. 1SaBy Enlightened Radical Alt-Censtrist

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2014
    Location:
    Cassovia
    Austrian Empire
     
    Talkie_Toaster and halfcoop like this.
  20. terranova210486 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    What's Castro doing?
     
    AeroTheZealousOne likes this.