Stance of a surviving, reformed Soviet Union regarding far-right “new nationalism” or alt-right?

Pretty much what it says on the tin, but if we were to assume that Mikhail Gorbachev somehow succeeded in reforming the USSR to become a semi-democratic, nominally socialist mixed economy, and that the Cold War ended somewhere in the mid-90s (Warsaw Pact pretty much dissolved, yet no NATO expansion east of the Elbe), yet major OTL events continued to unfold (War on Terror, ‘08 global financial crash, etc.) to the point where Trump is still elected, far-right parties successfully contest European elections, and the responses to the failures of neoliberalism on the left (democratic socialism) and the right (alt-right white supremacy) continues, how would this Soviet Union respond to the events we are witnessing today?

I just like to imagine the inverse of the Brezhnevite gerontocracy meme, wherein a young and vibrant 30-something Y/O Soviet General Secretary shakes Trump’s hand, before he lectures him on how racist violence in the United States is the inevitable result of capitalism. Or would he be more subtle in his response?
 
Last edited:
I just like to imagine the inverse of the Brezhnevite gerontocracy meme, wherein a young and vibrant 30-something Y/O Soviet General Secretary shakes Trump’s hand, before he lectures him on how racist violence in the United States is the inevitable result of capitalist. Or would he be more subtle in his response?

In OTL, were leaders like Willy Brandt and Olof Palme given to lecturing American presidents about the connection between capitalism and racism at summit meetings? If not, then I'm not sure I see the rationale for saying a social-demicratic Soviet leader would.
 
I don't see a reformed Soviet Union being 'quasi-democratic'. If the USSR is to be reformed, I think it would've been reformed into a less-free and more restricted duplicate of the European Union, such as the proposed Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics which in OTL, was stopped by the August Coup.

That being said, with communism being a leftist ideology, the USSR would be the bane of far-right and alt-right personalities everywhere, so the USSR would take steps to limit their influence within their confederation, maybe by creating a closed off intranet for their subjects or declaring any speech that speaks out against communism being 'sympathetic to Neo-Nazis' or something like that. OTL's Russia government already slanders the Ukrainian government for supposedly being controlled by Neo-Nazis, so I have no doubt the USSR would attempt to put anti-government speech and Neo-Nazism into the same basket.
 
Same as how the Soviet Union handled the uproars of the 1960s or how Russia deals with current politics in the west. Aid far-whatever and sit back and watch the chaos.
 
With a surviving USSR to ah encourage feelings of national solidarity in the US, odds are we'd see the current wave of populism/nationalism in the west in the 90s or 00s.

Remember, we had Ross Perot being semi-credible in national politics in OTL's 1990s.
 
With a surviving USSR to ah encourage feelings of national solidarity in the US, odds are we'd see the current wave of populism/nationalism in the west in the 90s or 00s.

But I think American conservativism would be more interventionist than the current alt-right populism of our time, which, at least rhetorically if not in practice, postures as sort of isolationist(I'm thinking here of Trump in his "primaries" mode, wondering aloud why the US has troops in Korea and let's shut down NATO if our allies don't pony up more cash.)

Really, with a continuing USSR, you've probably just got a continuing Reaganism, ie. the Soviets are evil, let's fund every counterrevolutionary militia that comes to DC cap-in-hand. This would probably last as long as the Warsaw Pact and Soviet support for third-world leftists remain going concerns.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
The far-right consists of many different factions that have fundamental disagreements with each other. Some factions might maintain the old Red Scare, but the collapse of the Warsaw Pact will seriously weaken the image of the Soviets as a boogeyman. It's inevitable that other minds of the far-right will realize that the Soviet Union is the perfect ally against the "savage Muslim barbarians" and the "slanty-eyed Chinese hordes". Even during the Cold War there were pro-Soviet fascists like Otto Remer and Francis Parker Yockey. The rump Soviet Union will also rely on nationalism far more heavily now that the traditional Marxist-Leninist model proved a failure. The Soviet Union going NazBol is completely plausible.
 
The former soviet union lectured the USA.

Even read some old Soviet history books on the USA and the view point is different from that if the USA. They also not the progress and gains, but they point out inequalities, the racism and other things that ours would not really go into in depth.

I think the soviets would have mellowed even more over the last 30 years. The SU was on that path anyways.

Look at China, its communism in name only and more a runaway nationalist / captiolist or what ever you want to call it.
 
At most it'd last until sometime this coming decade ttl. I don't see *reaganism, even if they pick up altright/national populist views on race/immigration lasting much once the boomers go.
 
How would this affect central asians? Even otl the is a lot of racism against central Asian and caucasian migrants in Russia. I imagine it would be a lot worse in a surviving ussr. Seeing as they are already a huge part of the population and have higher birth rates than ethnic Russians, something of a Great Replacement conspiracy would form and would be a huge talking point of Russian fascists. If large scale third world immigration to Europe still happens, I can imagine Russian fascists/far right will find common cause with many others throughout Europe and America. Also expect a lot of gerrymandering to go on in central asia and the Caucasus.
 
How would this affect central asians? Even otl the is a lot of racism against central Asian and caucasian migrants in Russia. I imagine it would be a lot worse in a surviving ussr. Seeing as they are already a huge part of the population and have higher birth rates than ethnic Russians, something of a Great Replacement conspiracy would form and would be a huge talking point of Russian fascists. If large scale third world immigration to Europe still happens, I can imagine Russian fascists/far right will find common cause with many others throughout Europe and America. Also expect a lot of gerrymandering to go on in central asia and the Caucasus.
IIRC even the USSR of old was anxious about the shrinking Russian majority in the USSR and growing Islamic population.

In OTL, were leaders like Willy Brandt and Olof Palme given to lecturing American presidents about the connection between capitalism and racism at summit meetings? If not, then I'm not sure I see the rationale for saying a social-demicratic Soviet leader would.
But those are social democrats. OP suggests democratic socialists, who, rather than merely liking welfare and labour, actually do have the end game of establishing a communist society.
 
The Soviet Union did not just vanish into thin air but had concrete, legal reasons preceding the breakup.

The release of the Secret Protocols regarding the annexation of the Baltic States is not something that can just be handwaved away. And the economic reforms Gorbachev were making were far too modest to put a dent in the problem of productivity and corruption. The social collapse was arguably even worse. It accelerated in the 90s, but the ground work was laid in the 80s as alcoholism exploded and social unrest became uncontrollable.

In regards to the question at hand, the Soviet Union, much like China, would not be "woke". It would continue to push arms control because it cannot afford arms build ups, and its relationship with the US would be a frosty but productive one. Because its Eastern European empire would have disintegrated, it would be far more focused on its near abroad than on the US. The propaganda it put out by the 1980s was so stale and absurd that I don't think new generations of Soviet leadership are going to be paying much attention to it. My assumption is that if the Soviet Union is to stay together, it needs to consciously embrace Soviet Nationalism and therefore is not going to be bothering itself much with internationalist condemnations of the internal affairs of western countries.

It would be hilarious though to see how the Soviet Union would deal with environmentalism. Considering that the state oil and gas firms took up such a massive part of their economy, and were really the engines that Gorbachev was counting on for growth, I can imagine the Soviets considering the whole thing a nefarious western plot.
 
Last edited:
Do you think we may see any Muslim specific political parties? In many otl countries there are parties that center specifically around certain minority groups.
This would be contingent on a) the USSR's "semi-democracy" not having a massive blacklist of parties, and b) the USSR completely dropping its state atheism.

Both of which seem rather unlikely.
 
The USSR wouldn't necessarily need a "massive blacklist of parties". the US and post-1979 Iran don't. Germany likewise also only bans parties that get into "borderline nazi territory", the same applied for Pre-Erdogan Turkey and islamicist. No reason you couldn't have a USSR with a political spectrum of two, or if they do proportional representation 4-5 parties that are all some form of communist or another.
 
post-1979 Iran don't.
Post-1979 Iran absolutely does.

No reason you couldn't have a USSR with a political spectrum of two, or if they do proportional representation 4-5 parties that are all some form of communist or another.
This would require Soviet Communism to not only work, but work well enough that no one in the USSR feels behind when they compare themselves with their Western European counterpart. That is pretty much impossible, so it seems inevitable that the USSR either sets up a black list or accepts that at least one westernizer party could be expected to be a major player in Soviet politics.
 
Would this reformed USSR still bankroll third-world governments and leftist groups around the world, or would it engage in pragmatic checkbook diplomacy like OTL China?
 
The former soviet union lectured the USA.

Even read some old Soviet history books on the USA and the view point is different from that if the USA. They also not the progress and gains, but they point out inequalities, the racism and other things that ours would not really go into in depth.

I think the soviets would have mellowed even more over the last 30 years. The SU was on that path anyways.

Look at China, its communism in name only and more a runaway nationalist / captiolist or what ever you want to call it.

While not pointing out their own inequalities (High ranking party members vs everybody else. OTL the politburo was the de-facto owner of the entire USSR which makes Bill Gates look poor) and racism (How many non-Slavs made it into the inner circle, particularly the Politburo and Central Committee?) not speaking of the million other things that were wrong in the USSR.
 
Top