Post 1946 Western Europe and U.S turn to authoritarianism to combat Communism

Anyway post 1946 you could have political or economic Elite,military or other institutions in most of the Western Europe and U.S. get rid of liberal democracy and adopt authoritarian or totalitarian regimes to combat communism

ex. Holding Fraudlent or no elections ,torturing or killing leftists and other political opponents,heavily censorship of media
 

TinyTartar

Banned
The US is a bit decentralized for that to work in, but who really knows if things get bad enough. Authoritarianism tends to put a damper on economic activity, which is why I doubt that the US would adopt it. The American economy was what maintained our parity, along with nukes and a dominant navy, with the Soviets. Sacrificing that for a better crushing of almost nonexistent movements is something I doubt would be done. Longer lasting McCarthyism is not out of the realm of possibility, however.

In Europe, I can see this as more possible. A ruined economy leads to asserting control a hell of a lot easier to bring about. The continental states could see this especially, although with a lot more opposition from Communist movements which were actually powerful. In Britain, the growing welfare state and growing state power offers an opportunity for this kind of stuff (rationing remained even post war, the NHS, etc.) but Britain's political character makes me think that much like the US, it would be hard to bring this about. As for Italy, West Germany, and France, I see it as very possible to bring about.
 
The fact that UK leadership under Churchill was hardcore enough to delay the war effort in order to fight against their former allies, the partisans in Greece, yes, some of who were communists.
 
I would say it's fairly ASB, as part of the reason that the US is OK with Latin American countries being anti-Communist dictatorships is due to racism, namely the idea that the people there are "too susceptible to populism/demagoguery/propaganda"...
 
You'd want the Communists to be more of a threat in order to get the west to go to extreme measures.

Have Italy, Greece, and France go communist at the end of the war. Then more communist activity in Latin America. Then the US might be scared enough to take the McCarthy witch hunts and run with them.
 

Martynn

Banned
Anyway post 1946 you could have political or economic Elite,military or other institutions in most of the Western Europe and U.S. get rid of liberal democracy and adopt authoritarian or totalitarian regimes to combat communism

ex. Holding Fraudlent or no elections ,torturing or killing leftists and other political opponents,heavily censorship of media

A 1984 TL then?
 
There was a militarist coup in France in 58 due to the Algerian war. Didn't work all the way but they did control Algeria and invade Corsica
 
There was a militarist coup in France in 58 due to the Algerian war. Didn't work all the way but they did control Algeria and invade Corsica

But the immediate object of that coup was to bring de Gaulle to power. So unless de Gaulle was going to be a dictator, it couldn't have resulted in a dictatorship. (If de Gaulle had died by then, would there still be a May 1958 coup? I doubt it. As a friend of mine once put it, "Yes the 4th republic is in serious internal trouble, fire-breathers like Lagaillarde and opportunists like Salan are still around but the likes of Soustelle, Massu and co were acting to bring De Gaulle back not for Salan to play Napoleon.")

Later on, the OAS might have succeeded in killing de Gaulle but IMO any attempt on their part to seize power would fail. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/L2JS_kBsB0w/FbGzabt9dgEJ
 
Uh, no it couldn't. The situations were totally different. Greece had been occupied by the Nazis, and before that it had hardly had a history of stable parliamentary democracy in the twentieth century: e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ioannis_Metaxas
What I mean is that the UK leadership under Churchill was hardcore enough to ---

become attacking a former anti-nazi ally, and

begin allying with and arming former pro-nazi elements and collaborators,

And both of these in late '44 during the war at the cost of slowing the war effort!

So, if you want to paint a dystopian future, the UK leadership just rolls on from this point.

And if someone wants to argue the case that conservatives in the UK were more hardcore anti-communists than conservatives in the U.S., I suspect they could find a fair amount of evidence.
 
What I mean is that the UK leadership under Churchill was hardcore enough to ---

become attacking a former anti-nazi ally, and

begin allying with and arming former pro-nazi elements and collaborators,

And both of these in late '44 during the war at the cost of slowing the war effort!

So, if you want to paint a dystopian future, the UK leadership just rolls on from this point.

And if someone wants to argue the case that conservatives in the UK were more hardcore anti-communists than conservatives in the U.S., I suspect they could find a fair amount of evidence.

That still does not support the idea that they could--or would even try to--establish an authoritarian regime in the UK itself, as you suggested. ("The way the UK handled Greece in 1944. Could have become more of a norm *including within the UK itself.*")

BTW, Churchill wasn't even opposed to all Communist-dominated partisan movements--note how he switched his support to Tito in Yugoslavia.

I don't know how far Churchill would go to prevent Communist-led partisan movements from seizing control in France and Italy, but the question did not arise and was not likely to--for one thing, Stalin himself did not want them to try to seize power.
 
I agree with most ...

It's possible in the USA but you would need to have the troops come home to a continued Great Depression .. There was to much pent up demand .. It's why we had the roaring 50's ...

Now if you can stifle that.. Avoid Ike .. Have a militant communist underground in the USA ... Things might go more your lines ..


As for europe .. Less marshal plan.. More USA just pulls back home ...
Decolonization gets uglier for the French and British

The Irish issue continues to boil ... Maybe the English do something very nasty ..

Germany.. Not so sure I think they are tired of strongmen and communism and fascism ... But if the east does better quicker ... Who knows
 
But the immediate object of that coup was to bring de Gaulle to power. So unless de Gaulle was going to be a dictator, it couldn't have resulted in a dictatorship. (If de Gaulle had died by then, would there still be a May 1958 coup? I doubt it. As a friend of mine once put it, "Yes the 4th republic is in serious internal trouble, fire-breathers like Lagaillarde and opportunists like Salan are still around but the likes of Soustelle, Massu and co were acting to bring De Gaulle back not for Salan to play Napoleon.")

I'll admit I don't know as much about this particular episode as I'd like but my feel is that even if the person of de Gaulle was important as he had popular support, somebody else would have taken the helm. There was simply too much pressure and dissensions in the army at this point after Indochina.
Even if there's no actual invasion, there would have been some kind of coup, even locally in Algeria (see the putsch d'Algers).

Before WWII, I'm seriously backing Lyautey as a military dictator though
 
What I mean is that the UK leadership under Churchill was hardcore enough to ---

become attacking a former anti-nazi ally, and

begin allying with and arming former pro-nazi elements and collaborators,

And both of these in late '44 during the war at the cost of slowing the war effort!

So, if you want to paint a dystopian future, the UK leadership just rolls on from this point.

And if someone wants to argue the case that conservatives in the UK were more hardcore anti-communists than conservatives in the U.S., I suspect they could find a fair amount of evidence.

once the war was over.. all sides brought into the fold those they thought they could get benefit from the ashes of germany.

hell if himmler could have proved extremely useful i am sure someone would have given him a job
 
Top