No Bolshevik coup in Russia

Thomas1195

Banned
One can criticize one's own allies, though; heck, just take a look at how some of the U.S.'s NATO allies criticized it in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq War in our TL.



Yeah, France would be more willing to act in this TL. However, in the grand scheme of things, France and Russia would only make Germany and Austria hate them more. Indeed, if they prevent an Austro-German union in the late 1930s/early 1940s, what exactly is going to prevent Germany and Austria from trying again to unite at some future point in time (such as when France is busy dealing with a rebellion in Vietnam and/or in Algeria)?
If they actually launch a pre-emptive strike then Germany would be crushed before they could have a chance to become powerful enough.
 

Deleted member 1487

Alexander Kerensky definitely decided to deal with the Bolsheviks after the failed coup of July 1917. The Bolshevik Party is banned and its activists arrested en masse. Kerensky decided to also speed up the elections to the Constituent Assembly and sets them in September. Is Russia was able to participate in WWI until the end? What look like post-war order, if Russia participated in the Versailles Conference? Could be avoided WWII?
Well if Russia stays in the war to the end there would still be a revolution and his regime toppled, just not by the Bolsheviks; it was an intensely unpopular war and the Bolshevik uprising was only possible because the army fell apart during the Kerensky offensive. He'd have to exit the war in 1917 or be toppled one way or another. If Kerensky really was into regime saving he'd exit the war after suppressing the Bolsheviks and get the best terms he could, which IIRC would be giving up Poland and Lithuania. That means Brest-Litovsk doesn't happen and the Germans are actually stronger by the end of the year and freed up earlier for an offensive in the West. History changes quite a bit. Assuming it doesn't change the eventual outcome Russia is in a tough spot for dropping out, but a less bad one than if the Bolsheviks took over. The Allies too benefit from not having to intervene in Russia post-WW1. The Nazis never rise because for one thing the Allies have a lot less trouble without the Soviets around and can work again with Russia down the road to stabilize the international situation and economic situation. Plus too the Nazis don't have the concept of 'Jewish-Bolshevism' to play off of. With Russia not being outside the international system in the 1930s there is a much more coordinated response to extremism in Germany if it even gets near power. So the world is probably a much more peaceful place as a result.
 
In many ways Russian fascism would be somewhere in the middle between Italian fascism (which I think of as 'fascism proper') and Nazism. It would probably be defined by the following features:
  • A rejection of the 'overly material' and 'decadent' culture of the West, which would be oriented more against Anglo-Saxon and French liberalism than Central European or Mediterranean culture.
  • A deep distrust of Catholicism and the Pope as a subversive element (likely with some nasty consequences for Poland).
  • Favoritism towards Orthodox Slavs, with some internal conflict between the more strongly Slavic elements and the Hellenophile (and pro-Armenian) clergy.
  • Conflict between 'secular' and clerico-fascists.
  • The reduction of Muslims to de jure second-class citizens as opposed to merely de-facto. Whilst not looked down upon to the same degree as atheists perhaps, there may well be justification of Russian rule over Muslims as a 'crusade' against the 'heathen Tatars'.
  • A powerful drive to seize Constantinople as 'Tsargrad' which will lead to conflict with the British and French over Turkey and Greece.
  • The Russofascists are going to absolutely love the Iron Guard in Romania. Not only that, but they'll support Bulgarian fascists and Royal Yugoslavia. Although they aren't really fascists, per se, Zveno in Bulgaria is likely to be supported by Russia, as they sought to suppress VMRO, an organisation which had the potential to flare up the Macedonian question and create a split between Bulgaria and Serbia, which would make Russia's dominance of a Balkan Orthodox bloc very difficult. They will also support Metaxas in Greece. It's important to note that in most of these cases they won't align 100% in terms of ideology with these groups, but are close enough in being conservative, Orthodox and essentially anti-liberal, anti-individual and anti-materialist.
Interesting idea. The whole far-right trope of "dictatorship is a native institution, liberalism is a foreign trojan horse" did already exist in some reactionary circles (ignoring how the Imperial autocracy owes at least as much to Peter the Great's Westernization as to old Muscovite institutions, but hey). Working out the economic side of the ideology is going to be pretty hard, though.

The Poles probably get away after WWI, by being upgraded to an independent state or at least an autonomous puppet.

The wholesale repression of Tatars also doesn't seem that likely. The Tsarist far right did not view this community as much of a threat or target, and often found itself allied with Muslim landowners and other conservatives. For example, the Black Hundreds even had Muslim branches in Tatar areas. They generally hoped for the Empire's diverse subjects to unite (and then, of course, gang up on the Jews and leftists).
So I imagine this hypothetical regime will make Jews the major target of repression; maybe together with local Germans, Georgians, Finns or Lithuanians.

There's also the impact that having ~fascism instead of communism in Russia will make on far-right movements in eastern Europe. The Iron Guard might still get somewhere, but Metaxas, whose rise was 100% artificial, will get nowhere at all. In general, they will all need to do some rebranding.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
If they actually launch a pre-emptive strike then Germany would be crushed before they could have a chance to become powerful enough.
Yes; correct! However, France could have launched a pre-emptive strike together with Poland on Germany in our TL before Germany got too strong and yet refused to do this.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Yes; correct! However, France could have launched a pre-emptive strike together with Poland on Germany in our TL before Germany got too strong and yet refused to do this.
But in this timeline, there would be no Communist fear, and Germany would be the sole threat.
 
The Provisional Government agreed to Polish independence (of course, in alliance with Russia).

True, its' easy to give up what is already lost-Yet the discussions between Kerensky and Ukraine's Hrushevsky show a rather tactical mindset as to what could be lost

The Russian army broke up after the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. They deliberately destroyed it.

Well, the framework for destruction was set up during the Kerensky era-Elected officers, soldiers input as to whether to carry out an assault or not, endless propagandizing and a game of musical chairs regarding commanders at all levels-not to mention Order Number One taking place in March (OS). The only difference between Kerensky and the Bolsheviks' army was that Kerensky expected it to work, while the Bolos just pressed the button that bought it crashing down. Take one look at the Kerensky offensive and tell me that's still a capable fighting force-if not for the stark difference between those who couldn't care less and those who zealously charged in the name of the Republic (See Victor Shklovsky's Sentimental Journey for more on that) It seemed at all levels a disjointed outlet of energy in which the only thing coordinated was the order to attack. And with it, the last of Kerensky's authority melted away.

Also entirely agree with David T's Martov analysis-there was as much to be said for Socialist solidarity as there was for disunity, a factor often overlooked by many (Myself included) who seek an anti-Bolshevik alliance as natural, and while respected figures such as Nikolai Tchaikovsky and Boris Savinkov did undergo somewhat of a Metamorphosis to that end, most committed socialists (Vynnychenko and a great deal of the socialist intelligentsia) gravitated towards the dominant socialist force. Most people, on the other hand-just went along with the power that grew from the barrel of a gun
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Well, it also depends on how Allies treated White Russia. But I dont think they would treat them like in "The Folly of Admiral Essen", this kind of treatment is a zenith of stupidity.
 
Well if Russia stays in the war to the end there would still be a revolution and his regime toppled, just not by the Bolsheviks

The conviction of the "inevitability" the fall of the Provisional Government is a myth:

Impressed by the ease with which the Bolsheviks overthrew the Provisional Government - according to Lenin - it was like "raising the pen" - many historians have held that the October revolution was "inevitable". But this may seem only in retrospect. Lenin himself regarded him as an extremely risky venture. In urgent letters to the Central Committee [of the Bolshevik Party], which in September and October 1917 he sent from his hiding place, he claimed that success depends entirely on the speed and decisiveness of contractors armed uprising. "Procrastination the rise is equal to death; now everything hangs in the balance," - he wrote on Oct. 24. So don't behave someone who trusts a fitness historical process. Trotsky later claimed - and who could know it better than he - that had "neither Lenin nor I was not in Petrograd, the October Revolution would not have happened." Or "inevitable" historical event may depend on two people?

And if anyone is still not convinced, let's look at the conduct of accidents Petrograd in October 1917. You can see them at a glance, that the "masses" played the role of spectators, ignoring the calls of the Bolsheviks stormed the Winter Palace [...] From Trotsky himself, we know that the "revolution" in October Petrograd forces conducted "at most" 25 000 - 30 000 people - it's not enough for a country of 150 million people and the city, which was home to 400 000 workers and stationed 200-thousandth garrison.


Richard Pipes: Russian revolution

Even if the Tsars hang on and stave off the Bolsheviks, the Depression is probably going to kick the shit out of the Russian economy same as anyone else, and then the Tsars will have a fight on their hands. Not sure who takes over - perhaps a military pseudo-fascist group - and if they do, oh damn. Granted, Hitler may not trust them since he has a hard-on for hating Slavs, but he might call them "Slavic Aryans" same as the Italians were "Mediterranean Aryans" and the Japanese were shoehorned in as "Honorary Aryans." And at that point, WWII becomes the free world versus fascism, and it's a hell of a fight that probably takes the entire 1940s and ends when the Axis powers succumb to internal squabbling while the West AIDS resistance anywhere they can find it, including Vietnam and China. Then America, the least damaged power, rebuilds the world in its own image as much as possible.

I can't imagine that without the seizure of power in Russia by the Bolsheviks and the creation of the international communist movement, fascism and Nazism made such a career as OTL. The so-called movements "radically right-wing," inspired by the methods of political struggle invented by the Bolsheviks, also built its identity in opposition to communism and gained mass support scaring the conservative middle class. So without the October Revolution, the political history of Europe in the interwar period would look quite different.
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
The conviction of the "inevitability" the fall of the Provisional Government.



I can't imagine that without the seizure of power in Russia by the Bolsheviks and the creation of the international communist movement, fascism and Nazism made such a career as OTL. The so-called movements "radically right-wing," inspired by the methods of political struggle invented by the Bolsheviks, also built its identity in opposition to communism and gained mass support scaring the conservative middle class. So without the October Revolution, the political history of Europe in the interwar period would look quite different.
The extreme movements would also depend on how Wallies treat White Russia. If they piss it off by carving its land to form nations like Finland and Poland, then it would not be fun at all.
 
Top