Russian Prime Ministers 1930s onwards

hey, all. one of the major countries in my ATL is russia. the post-1900 history, in short, is that the bolsheviks fail in their revolution and the romanovs maintain the russian empire for another decade or two (i currently have the date as 1939, but i want it to be when russia starts to industrialize and i dont know the exact date). as they industrialize, similar problems as in the west as it industrialized arise and result in the romanovs being deposed, but not killed, and russia becomes a constitutional monarchy, the Russian Federation; basically, the soviet union phase is skipped over and it goes straight from empire to federation.

keep in mind that theres no WW2 ITTL, so that shouldnt have any impact on russia prime minister elections, and that much pretty much all of the territory of teh russian empire is maintained by the federation (except for alaska), and that lenin is dead, trotsky fled teh country, and stalin is an outlaw again

lets assume that the russian PM has the same basic specifications as OTL russian presidents: appointed by direct popular vote, and a six year term with a one-time renewable four year term

two goals to this thread:

  1. figure out exactly what time russia should become a constitutional monarchy and therefore when the first prime minister would be appointed
  2. figure out which historical russians (or people from lands that are part of the country ITTL, like kazakhstan) are the most likely to become prime ministers by popular vote.
any help here?
 
*blink*
lets assume that the russian PM has the same basic specifications as OTL russian presidents: appointed by direct popular vote, and a six year term with a one-time renewable four year term

It's six and six right now, and it was four and four before. Putin changed it to ease his having to play the dedazo game too much, but it was never six and four at the same time.
 
well six and a renewed four-year term was what wikipedia said at least from what i could tell by just briefly looking it over. whatever the right term length is will work
 
That's not a prime minister though. The office of directly elected head of state is the same function as a constitutional monarch. Prime ministers are appointed by the constitutional monarch with the consent of parliament, and serve as the head of the Monarch's government.

Most plausible, I think, would be a more radical 1905 Revolution, which leads to a constitutional monarchy in practice as well as law. Maybe a Kadet/SR/SDLP coalition government. Could come into power, and Czar Nicholas II gets to avoid getting executed by the Bolsheviks, who never come into power.
 
hm. what i was planning as part of the TL is that russia is debating whether or not they should go to the aid of their ally serbia against austria in the Austro-Serbian War (analogous to WWI) but right as they decide they would help, the bolsheviks rebel and that holds them off for a bit as they recover, and then they go and help serbia and win that war.

now that i think about it, maybe a more plausible reasoning for the second civil war would be riots resulting from the great depression, similar to the french revolution but not nearly as bloody, primarily with the romanovs becoming constitutional monarchs rather than being sent to a firing squad
 
hm. what i was planning as part of the TL is that russia is debating whether or not they should go to the aid of their ally serbia against austria in the Austro-Serbian War (analogous to WWI) but right as they decide they would help, the bolsheviks rebel and that holds them off for a bit as they recover, and then they go and help serbia and win that war.

now that i think about it, maybe a more plausible reasoning for the second civil war would be riots resulting from the great depression, similar to the french revolution but not nearly as bloody, primarily with the romanovs becoming constitutional monarchs rather than being sent to a firing squad
Well, having Lenin disinherit Stalin before his death might do the trick. I think at that point, it's plausible to see a drift back in a less authoritarian direction, especially if you get a fumbled Stalinist coup attempt when he's trying to avoid being pushed out. That won't get the Romanovs back, but it gets you moving back in the right direction...particularly if things get nasty and it manages to trigger some sort of counter-coup. Not sure how that would come to pass, and a CM seems unlikely, but you could at least plausibly see the Kulaks and so forth emerging as a base of support for a steadily more democratic regime.
 
Well, having Lenin disinherit Stalin before his death might do the trick. I think at that point, it's plausible to see a drift back in a less authoritarian direction, especially if you get a fumbled Stalinist coup attempt when he's trying to avoid being pushed out. That won't get the Romanovs back, but it gets you moving back in the right direction...particularly if things get nasty and it manages to trigger some sort of counter-coup. Not sure how that would come to pass, and a CM seems unlikely, but you could at least plausibly see the Kulaks and so forth emerging as a base of support for a steadily more democratic regime.
hm. it was my understanding that trotsky was originally lenin's successor, so i guess a (relatively) minor POD could be that lenin simply keeps trotsky as his right hand man and whatever it was that stalin did to humiliate trotsky (assuming it was before the bolshevik revolution; im not too clear on that part) never happens. im thinking that, because the romanovs fight back effectively, the revolution lasts maybe a month or so instead of just a couple days, maybe with the romanovs holing up in a palace before the white army arrives and beats the bolsheviks

now that i think about it, maybe a return by stalin would be a good thing to spark the later civil war, but maybe with someone in turn having stalin killed (maybe trotsky in a reversal of history?) before the civil war ends so that he never becomes dictator or prime minister or whatever. alternatively, stalin could spearhead the civil war, be unable to kill the romanovs (maybe they surrender and he doesnt want to become a pariah for killing them; ITTL, teh romanovs are somewhat more likeable by the russian people, maybe they undergo some good reforms prior to the depression) and appoints himself dictator, but is in turn overthrown or just outright killed by his subordinates
 
The issue with the Russian people and the Romanovs boils down to the Tsar's choice of wife. She was shy and not a great public speaker, which came off as rude to the public, she kept giving birth to girls rather than to an heir, (and when Alexei was eventually born, she spent all her time with him, further distancing herself from the public eye), and to top it all off she was German at a time when the Germans were supposed to be the enemy.

So, a different Tsarina would probably cause a swing in public perception, (or at least giving her a radical personality change to become more likeable). If, ITTL, WWI doesn't involve the Germans then that already gives her a boost.

You might also consider keeping Alexander III on the throne a little longer. This would mean that his son gets more used to public life and can be trained better in politics before he comes to the throne, (in OTL he was only 26 at the time and instantly expected to grasp everything involved in running an empire).
 

archaeogeek

Banned
The issue with the Russian people and the Romanovs boils down to the Tsar's choice of wife. She was shy and not a great public speaker, which came off as rude to the public, she kept giving birth to girls rather than to an heir, (and when Alexei was eventually born, she spent all her time with him, further distancing herself from the public eye), and to top it all off she was German at a time when the Germans were supposed to be the enemy.

So, a different Tsarina would probably cause a swing in public perception, (or at least giving her a radical personality change to become more likeable). If, ITTL, WWI doesn't involve the Germans then that already gives her a boost.

You might also consider keeping Alexander III on the throne a little longer. This would mean that his son gets more used to public life and can be trained better in politics before he comes to the throne, (in OTL he was only 26 at the time and instantly expected to grasp everything involved in running an empire).

Alexander III with a longer reign = longer reactionary repression
Nicolas II marrying a different princess = he remains a reactionary who answers to pacific petitions for parliamentarism with gunfire and cavalry charges.
 
I suspect that the future might involve Kornilov's coup succeeding and a temporary ending of Democracy before the Bolshevik's are able to sieze power. Possibly there will be a conest between a Western based Kornilov and an Eastern based Admiral Kolchak but possibly Denekin would be chosen. The reactionary generals might try to impose a monarchy in the interest of unity. I cannot envisage a monarchy surviving in a Russia where the provisional government survives
 
The issue with the Russian people and the Romanovs boils down to the Tsar's choice of wife. She was shy and not a great public speaker, which came off as rude to the public, she kept giving birth to girls rather than to an heir, (and when Alexei was eventually born, she spent all her time with him, further distancing herself from the public eye), and to top it all off she was German at a time when the Germans were supposed to be the enemy.

So, a different Tsarina would probably cause a swing in public perception, (or at least giving her a radical personality change to become more likeable). If, ITTL, WWI doesn't involve the Germans then that already gives her a boost.

You might also consider keeping Alexander III on the throne a little longer. This would mean that his son gets more used to public life and can be trained better in politics before he comes to the throne, (in OTL he was only 26 at the time and instantly expected to grasp everything involved in running an empire).
i think for the bolsheviks to rebel a fair amount of this will remain the same, but, like you suggest, if theres no germany for russia to be mad at (which is the case), then there goes a factor that the russian commoners would use to justify their rebellion

i'll look into alex iii; at the moment, the timeline still has the ruler of the time as nick ii who comes into power when he does IOTL
 
Top