Poll: probability of Soviet survival after 1964

Probability of USSR still being around and a major power with post-1964 PODs?

  • Better than 50%

    Votes: 20 35.7%
  • Over 25% but no more than 50%

    Votes: 22 39.3%
  • 10%-25%

    Votes: 9 16.1%
  • Under 10%

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Only Thande can save the USSR

    Votes: 3 5.4%

  • Total voters
    56
What do you think the likelihood of the USSR still being around and still being considered a major power in 2009 (if perhaps not quite superpower-level any longer), with PODs after Kruschev's removal from power? (Feel free to explain your choice)

Bruce
 

wormyguy

Banned
I voted for better than 25% but less than 50%. I think that in the infinite multiverse, TLs with PODs after Khrushchev's removal from power wherein the USSR survives after 1991 are in the minority. However, it certainly is possible, but you must get rid of Brezhnev, and replace him with someone competent, preferably a reformist. That, assuming there are no Afghanistan-like military misadventures, probably would be enough to give the Soviet empire a 20-year lease on life.
 
Last edited:
It could probably survive if it reformed somewhat spent less money on nukes and went with the Chinese way of economics
 
The Cuban missile crisis proved that MAD would prevent the Soviets from actualy launching an attack and made the Soviets spending 1/3 of their budget on the military fairly stupid; along with other policies (aka massive totalitarian state to protect them from the Capatalists who weren't going to attack). The only way for it to survive is for Reform and Gorbi was computent and he couldn't keep Soviet survival.
 
I voted for better than 25% but less than 50%. I don't think that in the infinite multiverse, TLs with PODs after Khrushchev's removal from power wherein the USSR survives after 1991 are in the minority. However, it certainly is possible, but you must get rid of Brezhnev, and replace him with someone competent, preferably a reformist. That, assuming there are no Afghanistan-like military misadventures, probably would be enough to give the Soviet empire a 20-year lease on life.

I agree. Have fellas like Kosygin in power and Andropov lasting longer with Brezhnev either lasting a year or two or not at all and it far more likely that reforms along the lines of the ones that keep China's party going today would have occurred.
 
Had they had a reformer earlier or had a harliner later they could have easily have made it to 2009. If Gorbachev hadn't gained power the USSR would have stagnated but there would not have been the chaos and decline which afflicted it because of his efforts. If the leader of Russia had been willing to use excessive force to put down various revolts the USSR could have held the Pact and the Union together and they could have taken advantage of '90's Middle Eastern issues to make a killing on the oil markets while the western governments would most likely be winding down the arms race and willing to negotiate lowering of armarments, which could have helped the Soviets that way. The Soviet nuclear arsenal would be enourmas and their conventional forces would appear top-nothch. Ultimitatly while it would be stagnating and in decline few outside the Politburo would be aware of that and the "Soviet experts" of the outside world would most likely be waxing poetic on the superiority of the Soviet system in 2009.
 

Germaniac

Donor
The soviet Union had plenty of chances to survive in a post 64' world. They just failed to capitalize.. lol perfect word
 
It would require major reform of both their foreign and domestic policies - which is going to lead to a fair bit of turbulence along the way - but yes, it could have been done provided they started early enough.
 
Over 50%. I don't like to say it, but America at the time could easily could ahev lost the Cold War then. The USSR could easily surrvive, just remove Afghanistan, and reform the country.
 
Over 50%. I don't like to say it, but America at the time could easily could ahev lost the Cold War then. The USSR could easily surrvive, just remove Afghanistan, and reform the country.

Gorbi was a competent and good leader and he couldn't do that
 
Gorbi was a competent and good leader and he couldn't do that

Gorbi was following two decades of stagnation, corruption and waste from Brezhnev and by the time Gorbi came on the scene the Soviets were involved in Afghanistan for almost 6 years.

Gorbi only had 5 years, which isn't really all that long to fix a mess 20 years in the making.

Have Gorbi come in earlier or have him being preceded by someone like him and today the situation would be very different.

Plus when catboy said "remove Afghanistan" he could well have meant the Soviets not entering Afghanistan. That alone would probably give someone like Gorbi an extra year or two and much less pressure. It would mean 14,000 less deaths in the military and probably loads of money saved in not replacing all that military equipment lost in Afghanistan (plus not having to pay to support operations in Afghanistan). That wouldn't really make a difference in a place like the USA, but in a country like the USSR where military spending was so high, any savings would have been significant.
 
A major reform movement launched in the Soviet Union earlier probably would have allowed the country to limp along for another few years, maybe even to the 2000s. But the Politburo and central government in Moscow would have to overcome the strong forces of self-government and ethnic division in the other republics of the USSR (Baltic states, Ukraine, etc).

Maybe the Soviet Union would continue in name with the current boundaries of the Russian Federation.
 
As mentioned before,

No involvement in Afghanistan, No Chernobyl(every bit helps), adopting Chinese style economic reforms. But military spending needs to come down. Maybe a orderly withdrawl from Eastern Europe, but that is going to take a serious reformer and not sure if one is around until Gorbi.. The heavy handedness from the KGB has to moderate, but hell that is probably ASB...
 
Top