Plausibility check: Russia goes totalitarian after the collapse of the USSR

I was pondering the other day and it occured to me that Russia might have turned into a dictatorship. The situation was shitty with massive unemployment, poverty, collapse of the economy and social welfare system, Russia losing its status of great power and becoming something only marginally better than a third world country, infrastructure bad and a lot of instability in the immediate aftermath.

Is it possible to have some demagogue rise and eventually took over from Yeltsin and establish some sort of militaristic, nationalistic fascist-like regime? And I'm not talking about Putinism but a true totalitarian one party state that doesn't pretend to be a democracy like Putin's Russia.
 
Is it possible to have some demagogue rise and eventually took over from Yeltsin and establish some sort of militaristic, nationalistic fascist-like regime?
Possible? Yes. Russians, as you said, were royally pissed off. After all, Nazi rose in Germany out of similar circumstances in Thirties. Likely? No, for many reasons. Taste for violence and willingness to rock the boat were at very low level. However, given true, one-in-a-lifetime demagogue, it is possible. However, this guy should make Hitler look like stuttering weirdo, completely unable to talk to people. True miracle of demagoguery this guy should be.

And I'm not talking about Putinism but a true totalitarian one party state that doesn't pretend to be a democracy like Putin's Russia.
Putinism isn't democracy or totalitarism on Western sense of the word. It is something specific to the region (not quite Europe, not quite Asia) and is comparable to Peronism or interwar Hungary, for example. Regime enjoying quiet approval of the majority, even if formal democratic trappings aren't fully implemented.
 
Putinism isn't democracy or totalitarism on Western sense of the word. It is something specific to the region (not quite Europe, not quite Asia) and is comparable to Peronism or interwar Hungary, for example. Regime enjoying quiet approval of the majority, even if formal democratic trappings aren't fully implemented.

That is an insanely good, yet simple definition. No sarcasm.
 
Isn't the Russian Federation already leaning towards a more authoritarian regime?


Elect the Kiat as the new Tsar! Term limits, sure I'll limit myself to one term; LIFE.
 
Not sure if this suggestion belongs in Books and Media or ASB but anyway
PoD in a fictional TL
Has anyone read Icon by Frederick Forsyth?
Have the attempt to restore the Tsar fail either through a successful coup attept or the leaking of the Black Manifesto being TL-191ed away (whichever takes your fancy) and Igor Komarov's Union of Patriotic Forces comes to power
Of course this suggestion is only relevent to the discussion if you didn't mean Immediately after the collapse of the USSR.
 
Could something like this arise from the confrontation between the Supreme Soviet and the Presidency from 1993, the communist-nationalist coallition supporting the Supreme Soviet would be unlikely to form a democracy.
 
Not sure if this suggestion belongs in Books and Media or ASB but anyway
PoD in a fictional TL
Has anyone read Icon by Frederick Forsyth?
Have the attempt to restore the Tsar fail either through a successful coup attept or the leaking of the Black Manifesto being TL-191ed away (whichever takes your fancy) and Igor Komarov's Union of Patriotic Forces comes to power
Of course this suggestion is only relevent to the discussion if you didn't mean Immediately after the collapse of the USSR.

No I didn't mean immediately but in a few years time after Yeltsin has screwed up Russia's economy enough (although the rise of said demagogue could begin as soon as the Soviet Union is gone of course).
 
That is an insanely good, yet simple definition. No sarcasm.
Thank you. Giving it some more thought, this type of regime isn't as much region-specific as it is characteristic of stage in development of society. It is what society which lived under undemocratic regime before is likely to get once it moves to peoples' power. It is inherently transitional. It might recast itself into outright totalitarianism or continue toward democracy.

Could something like this arise from the confrontation between the Supreme Soviet and the Presidency from 1993, the communist-nationalist coallition supporting the Supreme Soviet would be unlikely to form a democracy.
Unlikely. 1st, it was too early (ppls didn't suffer enough yet, Soviet citizens were used to one-two "lean years" now and then, it happened before, so collapse had been viewed by society as something which is about to pass), 2nd there was (and, thankfully, is) very little support for Communist idea and Khasbulatov-Rutskoi didn't offer any other alternative, 3rd coup leaders were miserable and everyone saw it (Russians can support an authoritarian, but the guy have to be a true leader, not just some talking head)and 4th (and, possibly, most important) majority was scared of violence and total U-turn to authoritarianism was conditional on Civil War won by commies.

No I didn't mean immediately but in a few years time after Yeltsin has screwed up Russia's economy enough
So, basically we're talking about future history (or some kind of very recent alternative, around 1999, Yeltsin not transferring power to Putin). Yes, it is possible in the future. Again, possible, not likely.
 
Putinism isn't democracy or totalitarism on Western sense of the word. It is something specific to the region (not quite Europe, not quite Asia) and is comparable to Peronism or interwar Hungary, for example. Regime enjoying quiet approval of the majority, even if formal democratic trappings aren't fully implemented.
I don't think "formal democratic trappings" quite works since the state kills or imprisons some of it's opponents.
 
MNPundit, I don't see how that conflicts with what CanadianGoose said. The trapping are sort-of there, in that there are elections and whatnot, but not in the same manner as we are accustomed to in the Western world, and some of the trappings of a Western society are absent or present in a different form.
 
Thank you. Giving it some more thought, this type of regime isn't as much region-specific as it is characteristic of stage in development of society. It is what society which lived under undemocratic regime before is likely to get once it moves to peoples' power. It is inherently transitional. It might recast itself into outright totalitarianism or continue toward democracy.

Unlikely. 1st, it was too early (ppls didn't suffer enough yet, Soviet citizens were used to one-two "lean years" now and then, it happened before, so collapse had been viewed by society as something which is about to pass), 2nd there was (and, thankfully, is) very little support for Communist idea and Khasbulatov-Rutskoi didn't offer any other alternative, 3rd coup leaders were miserable and everyone saw it (Russians can support an authoritarian, but the guy have to be a true leader, not just some talking head)and 4th (and, possibly, most important) majority was scared of violence and total U-turn to authoritarianism was conditional on Civil War won by commies.

So, basically we're talking about future history (or some kind of very recent alternative, around 1999, Yeltsin not transferring power to Putin). Yes, it is possible in the future. Again, possible, not likely.

Electorally speaking, the Communist Party enjoyed great popularity up to Putin's years ...
 
MNPundit, I don't see how that conflicts with what CanadianGoose said. The trapping are sort-of there, in that there are elections and whatnot, but not in the same manner as we are accustomed to in the Western world, and some of the trappings of a Western society are absent or present in a different form.
I don't think it is fair to compare a country in transition from totalitarian system to democracy to mature democracy. I could post list of very serious ills from very recent past of most countries we think of as "mature democracies" (starting with 2-level societies of colonial empires as lately as 40-45 years ago), but it would lead us nowhere. But I would just say that, by standards of the world outside of Old Europe, North America and Australia, Russia isn't doing so badly. Putin's regime is in fact far more dependent on public support than most Westerners are brainwashed to believe (being able to draw information from both Western and Russian sources, as well as from relatives back there, I can tell you that Western portrayal of Russia actually makes Putin's internal propaganda looks half-decent in comparison). Anyone seeking proof is welcome to research on "monetarization of benefits" (be prepared to encounter extreme scarcity of information, as events did not get nearly enough coverage in Anglophone media).

Electorally speaking, the Communist Party enjoyed great popularity up to Putin's years ...
I would not call it "popularity", it is "stability" or even "decreased stability". CPRF is a perpetuum "party of yesterday", unable to attract electorate that matters (young and/or professional). However, there is disturbing tendention recently with part of "40+" crowd (who were in their late teen or early 20s when USSR collapsed and spent most of their productive years under Yeltsin and Putine regimes) started to vote CPRF, not because of their great attachment to ideas of communism (there's none) but protesting against essentially Third World capitalist system rejecting them as soon as their age makes them unable to work their arses off for peanuts. This is the biggest (and scariest) window of opportunity for commies post-1991, to prey on social ills of very uncivilized capitalism (think Brazil or Columbia, not Sweden).
 
Hasn't the Russian Communist Party moderated somewhat?

In 1996, when the guy whose name starts with Z ran against Yeltsin, I thought their big issue was nationalizing the vodka industry and using the $$ to rebuild the safety net.

That's hardly "put all class enemies in the gulag."
 
Not sure if this suggestion belongs in Books and Media or ASB but anyway
PoD in a fictional TL
Has anyone read Icon by Frederick Forsyth?
Have the attempt to restore the Tsar fail either through a successful coup attept or the leaking of the Black Manifesto being TL-191ed away (whichever takes your fancy) and Igor Komarov's Union of Patriotic Forces comes to power
Of course this suggestion is only relevent to the discussion if you didn't mean Immediately after the collapse of the USSR.

I like some of his other books better but it sure is a good read. I think not giving the manifest to sir Nigel Irving would do just fine. Or one of a million little things going wrong for Monk.

But as CanadianGoose said, you need somebody like Igor Komarov in the first place.
 
I was pondering the other day and it occured to me that Russia might have turned into a dictatorship. The situation was shitty with massive unemployment, poverty, collapse of the economy and social welfare system, Russia losing its status of great power and becoming something only marginally better than a third world country, infrastructure bad and a lot of instability in the immediate aftermath.

Is it possible to have some demagogue rise and eventually took over from Yeltsin and establish some sort of militaristic, nationalistic fascist-like regime? And I'm not talking about Putinism but a true totalitarian one party state that doesn't pretend to be a democracy like Putin's Russia.

I remember in the early 90s the UK newspapers were predicting that it was a distinct possibility that Zhirinovsky's supporters would take over Russia and install a quasi-fascist regime there
 
Top