Rumsfeldia: Fear and Loathing in the Decade of Tears

Status
Not open for further replies.
to be honest, it would be really hard to overtake China in terms of body count, which probably exceeded tens, if not hundreds of millions at this point.
Kiang Liu speculated 200 million not including the ones that only died after the Lesser Mao's fall, and stated that India's population was double of China's in the year 2000.
 
Kiang Liu speculated 200 million not including the ones that only died after the Lesser Mao's fall, and stated that India's population was double of China's in the year 2000.
That could be due to disparate population growth numbers. China's fertility rates would have gone through the floor as a result of NBC contamination and widespread famine and disease, while India's growth rates were allowed to recover quickly after its civil war. Of course, that still doesn't tell us whether, in the Joker's words, there's one India or several.
 
That could be due to disparate population growth numbers. China's fertility rates would have gone through the floor as a result of NBC contamination and widespread famine and disease, while India's growth rates were allowed to recover quickly after its civil war. Of course, that still doesn't tell us whether, in the Joker's words, there's one India or several.

Let's not also remember the little fact of Mao dropping a nuke into a densely populated province. That might have been detrimental to the long term health of the people there.

I don't no whether to be horrified or impressed that Drew managed to screw China so horribly, but in a way that was scarily plausible. What does it say about our world that we can conceive of people like Mao Yuanxin coming to power. I have to imagine in an alternate timeline, the very idea of Mao Zedong is ASB, let alone the Lesser Mao.
 
Let's not also remember the little fact of Mao dropping a nuke into a densely populated province. That might have been detrimental to the long term health of the people there.

I don't no whether to be horrified or impressed that Drew managed to screw China so horribly, but in a way that was scarily plausible. What does it say about our world that we can conceive of people like Mao Yuanxin coming to power. I have to imagine in an alternate timeline, the very idea of Mao Zedong is ASB, let alone the Lesser Mao.
That would... well, it would take a wide variety of factors to prevent Mao The Dong's rise to power. First and foremost, the Nationalists not being quite so shit at their job, or hopelessly corrupt and overstretched. Or having Yuan Shikai keel over of a heart attack before he proclaimed himself Emperor, preventing him from weakening the Nationalist push and actually allow China a chance to develop. Sure, the Japanese would have still made a mess of things, but a more unified/centralized Chinese command would have reduced the damage and even prevented the rise of the Communists.

Alternatively, a last-ditch move would be Jiang not wasting the best of his trained troops in pointless skirmishes in 1946-8, allowing him to finally grind down the ChiComms. Then again, that would predicated on the KMT, again, not being shit at their job.
 
That would... well, it would take a wide variety of factors to prevent Mao The Dong's rise to power. First and foremost, the Nationalists not being quite so shit at their job, or hopelessly corrupt and overstretched. Or having Yuan Shikai keel over of a heart attack before he proclaimed himself Emperor, preventing him from weakening the Nationalist push and actually allow China a chance to develop. Sure, the Japanese would have still made a mess of things, but a more unified/centralized Chinese command would have reduced the damage and even prevented the rise of the Communists.

Alternatively, a last-ditch move would be Jiang not wasting the best of his trained troops in pointless skirmishes in 1946-8, allowing him to finally grind down the ChiComms. Then again, that would predicated on the KMT, again, not being shit at their job.

I'm saying that if you lived in China in 1911, when the Imperial Dynasty collapsed, the idea of a man preaching equality and a classless society (Mao Sr. and Mao Jr.) being worse then the Qing would sound utterly ridiculous.
 
I'm saying that if you lived in China in 1911, when the Imperial Dynasty collapsed, the idea of a man preaching equality and a classless society (Mao Sr. and Mao Jr.) being worse then the Qing would sound utterly ridiculous.
...man, China had a long, painful path till it finally returned to global power status, didn't she? And ITTL, it still ended badly.
 
...man, China had a long, painful path till it finally returned to global power status, didn't she? And ITTL, it still ended badly.

And ITTL, America has gone through the same thing. In under a generation, it went putting a man on the moon to glassing its own cities.

I bet ITTL, Americans and Mainland Chinese might bond over their shared misery and humiliation.
 

Deleted member 96212

I don't no whether to be horrified or impressed that Drew managed to screw China so horribly, but in a way that was scarily plausible. What does it say about our world that we can conceive of people like Mao Yuanxin coming to power.

Don't have to imagine it.

That would... well, it would take a wide variety of factors to prevent Mao The Dong's rise to power. First and foremost, the Nationalists not being quite so shit at their job, or hopelessly corrupt and overstretched. Or having Yuan Shikai keel over of a heart attack before he proclaimed himself Emperor, preventing him from weakening the Nationalist push and actually allow China a chance to develop. Sure, the Japanese would have still made a mess of things, but a more unified/centralized Chinese command would have reduced the damage and even prevented the rise of the Communists.

Alternatively, a last-ditch move would be Jiang not wasting the best of his trained troops in pointless skirmishes in 1946-8, allowing him to finally grind down the ChiComms. Then again, that would predicated on the KMT, again, not being shit at their job.

It does also make me wonder if there are some PODs that would make Mao less of a shitty leader, or at the very least die sooner so that the reigns of power can go to someone more competent.
 

manav95

Banned
That would... well, it would take a wide variety of factors to prevent Mao The Dong's rise to power. First and foremost, the Nationalists not being quite so shit at their job, or hopelessly corrupt and overstretched. Or having Yuan Shikai keel over of a heart attack before he proclaimed himself Emperor, preventing him from weakening the Nationalist push and actually allow China a chance to develop. Sure, the Japanese would have still made a mess of things, but a more unified/centralized Chinese command would have reduced the damage and even prevented the rise of the Communists.

Alternatively, a last-ditch move would be Jiang not wasting the best of his trained troops in pointless skirmishes in 1946-8, allowing him to finally grind down the ChiComms. Then again, that would predicated on the KMT, again, not being shit at their job.

Or Mao Zedong dies during the expulsion of the Communists westwards in the 1930s.
 
It does also make me wonder if there are some PODs that would make Mao less of a shitty leader, or at the very least die sooner so that the reigns of power can go to someone more competent.
It seems to be a common point. Most of the time, the revolutionary leader shouldn't stay in power, or they're going to mess things up. Mao, Pol Pot, Ne Win, Castro, etc...

Or Mao Zedong dies during the expulsion of the Communists westwards in the 1930s.
That wouldn't create a TL where his rise to power is ASB. More like one he doesn't get to power.
 
with the collapse of democracy/the west
What do you mean "collapse of democracy/the west"? The only democracy that's collapsed is America, and that's because of the idiosyncrasies of their system.
why would they? good odds of the US deciding to adopt a what could be called proletarian democracy
soviet-style communism
, since the US's old government failed and Russia is doing just fine.
"Soviet-style Communism"
"Proletarian democracy"
Pick one.:p
 
It's got one party and regular elections within the party, hence it's a proletarian democracy, not the subvertable liberal-bourgeoisie democracy that's capable of electing a rumsfeld.
 
"Soviet-style Communism"
"Proletarian democracy"
Pick one.:p

It's got one party and regular elections within the party, hence it's a proletarian democracy, not the subvertable liberal-bourgeoisie democracy that's capable of electing a rumsfeld.


China's economic success isn't driving Americans toward embracing a quasi-socialist one-party state OTL.

Despite America collapsing horribly TTL, most people still see democracy as good. Italian Communists ITTL aren't exactly eager to build a Marxist-Leninist state after all. The blame for America's fall will not be because American democracy was bad, but because the 18th century document couldn't adapt to the strains, which were exploited by a pack of vicious demagogues.
 
Chinese society as it stands in OTL is dystopian, so just economic growth isn't enough to make it attractive.

Of course, they see democracy as good, but it's just that the old model failed and needs to be replaced with something that works. An inclusive one-party state modelled on the USSR would be more attractive than trying to revive a system based on a failed document.
 
Chinese society as it stands in OTL is dystopian, so just economic growth isn't enough to make it attractive.

Of course, they see democracy as good, but it's just that the old model failed and needs to be replaced with something that works. An inclusive one-party state modelled on the USSR would be more attractive than trying to revive a system based on a failed document.
Western Europe says hi.
 
Chinese society as it stands in OTL is dystopian, so just economic growth isn't enough to make it attractive.

But ITTL Soviet Russia is still not a particularly nice place. Even Ryzkhov, the "good guy" of the Soviet nation, has to do brutal things to implement the necessary reforms.

Of course, they see democracy as good, but it's just that the old model failed and needs to be replaced with something that works. An inclusive one-party state modelled on the USSR would be more attractive than trying to revive a system based on a failed document.

Uh...

Rumsfeld and the CVs created a one-party state in all but name. I doubt ITTL want anything limiting their democracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top