The Footprint of Mussolini - TL

Perhaps a middle case: They don't outright re-join, but some Eastern Europe/Central Asia version of the EU is formed in TTL.
And everyone in ITO and RA scratch their heads when realizing that the Tolstoygrad Pact is mostly Stalingrad Pact, just with Prayers and Choirs intead of Military Domination.

Somewhere in Rome, Balbo is nervously eyeing the St. Peter Cathedral...
 
Hopefully by 2020, things for the Arab World are starting to improve for the Arabs and they could feel a sense of optimism for the future that they haven't seen in decades.
Didn't one of the earlier chapters hinted that missiles were launched against Israel from a place called "Mesopotamia"?
Considering the situation in the kingdoms of Syria and Iraq, i wouldn't be surprised if the end of the RA allowed the local population to overthrow their puppet kings and unite in a single country.

Also regarding the serbian and greek royal families: in OTL they became extremly unpopular for their inability to protect their countries from the Axis invasion.
ITTL they are probably even more impopular for abandoning their people and letting them stay under fascist rule for decades so i doubt they are going to be restored.
 
Last edited:
HA! I knew it!

Also, would the name Tolstoygrad eventually warp into Tolstograd just because it has a better flow?
As a native Russian speaker, I'd say that Tolstovsk or just Tolstoy would have had a better ring to it that either of the two.

And, since I'm here, I would add that to reconcile the Russian Orthodox Church with the teachings of Tolstoy would be no small task - after all, it has excommunicated him and has never bothered to lift the excommunication IOTL to this day. I've also got a bad feeling about TTL's source's title: 'The Decade of Freedom: the 70s Remembered'. I wouldn't be surprised if things go haywire somewhere down the line and Russia becomes fascist, or an Orthodox Christian theocracy, or even pulls a Stalinist Restoration 2: Electric Boogaloo by the early 80s.
 
As a native Russian speaker, I'd say that Tolstovsk or just Tolstoy would have had a better ring to it that either of the two.

And, since I'm here, I would add that to reconcile the Russian Orthodox Church with the teachings of Tolstoy would be no small task - after all, it has excommunicated him and has never bothered to lift the excommunication IOTL to this day. I've also got a bad feeling about TTL's source's title: 'The Decade of Freedom: the 70s Remembered'. I wouldn't be surprised if things go haywire somewhere down the line and Russia becomes fascist, or an Orthodox Christian theocracy, or even pulls a Stalinist Restoration 2: Electric Boogaloo by the early 80s.
What were Tolstoy's political views?
 
I wouldn't be surprised if things go haywire somewhere down the line and Russia becomes fascist, or an Orthodox Christian theocracy, or even pulls a Stalinist Restoration 2: Electric Boogaloo by the early 80s.
Don't worry, even if it the TL was abandoned, if Russia didn't became a theocracy or a dictatorship after what happened in Twilight of the Red Tsar it's even more improbable it will happen here.
 
What were Tolstoy's political views?
It was as much about his political views (such as wholesale rejection of violence and of the state, and of the then Orthodox Church as the part of the state's apparatus) as about his dogmatic ones (for instance, he denied the Godhood of Jesus Christ and believed that there may be salvation outside of the Christian faith).
 
It was as much about his political views (such as wholesale rejection of violence and of the state, and of the then Orthodox Church as the part of the state's apparatus) as about his dogmatic ones (for instance, he denied the Godhood of Jesus Christ and believed that there may be salvation outside of the Christian faith).
Man, Tolstoy would've been an awesome prime minister of a democratic Russia.
 
In the Soviet Union itself, Malenkov removed all traces of Suslov supporters and sympathisers from the ranks, leaving the Party effectively under his sole influence. The Communist Party was abolished as ‘tainted’ and Malenkov created the ‘Christian Socialist Party’, which would win the elections in a landslide that September. He symbolically rename Stalingrad to Tolstoygrad to symbolise the new direction of the new state. Boris Yeltsin, who had proven his valour due to his charging into the Kremlin, would become a senior member of the new Politburo. Malenkov would meet President Corley, Prime Minister Jenkins, President Pompidou, Kaiser Ferdinand and even Prime Minister Balbo in Dublin on July 3rd 1972, the first time in years a Soviet leader was seriously entertained as a foreign dignitary. Malenkov was able to astonish the attendees with his promises of phasing out Communism and ‘Rescuing Socialism’ from the pit it had found itself in. The trip had done precisely what it needed to do, with all foreign powers, with the exception of Begin’s Israel, agreeing to reopen their embassies in Moscow if they hadn’t already. Grain shipments were promised, alongside increased economic liberalisation, championed in the Politburo by Yeltsin. Balbo, under pressure from Rhodesia and South Africa especially, was able to secure a guarantee of liberalisation in the emigration process. Despite the improvements at home, most people wanted a significantly better life than the misery living in the Soviet Union had become. Rhodesia and South Africa threw open their doors to the new arrivals, reviving their flagging immigration figures and supercharging them, putting them both back on course for their targets of being White Majority states by the end of the Millennium. Malenkov also agreed to the principle of the Baltic States and Finland deciding their own destinies. Not only did the four states all secede at the first chance (with Finland actually leaving with more territory than she entered with as the remainder of Karelia had been part of the Finnish SSR), but the call came from far and wide, with every SSR demanding session, including some ASSRs like Chechnya, often due to fear of being controlled by an Orthodox Theocracy. In keeping with his religious beliefs, Malenkov eschewed control and domination, allowing the three Baltic States, Finland, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian Republics, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Dagestan, Chechnya, Tuva, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan to go independent. In reality, even if Malenkov wanted to, the Soviet state was too exhausted to even begin to keep these uprisings down. But Malenkov went even further than that. On August 4th, he travelled to Hiroshima, sight of the first Nuclear detonation in hate, at the sight of the newly constructed Hiroshima Peace Museum. That was where Malenkov dropped the bombshell that would deliver him a Nobel Prize - the Soviet Union would unilaterally and totally abolish its nuclear weapon supply. It was estimated that nearly 10,000 nuclear weapons were in Soviet possession, making up roughly a third of the world’s nuclear weapons. By 1975, the Russians had destroyed every single one. The move was extremely controversial around the world, with questions over what do with each country’s own nuclear arsenal now becoming a serious issue. Ultimately, as Italy still had nukes and insisted they would die before giving them up, Western leaders merely made noise about negotiations with Italy. Behind the scenes however, the denuclearisation argument was actually weakening, with both Spain and South Africa on the brink of detonating their first nuclear devices, the former detonating in February 1973, the latter detonating their first device in August 1973. They argued that the Russian move (as by 1973, the state had abolished the name of the Soviet Union to the more proper and accurate title of ‘The Russian Federation’) was simply an act of astonishing self-harm that they were giddy to take advantage of. But Malenkov’s move had done something that few Fascist powers realised for the moment - he had removed Communism from the international equation. Communism was no longer an international menace but a handful of scrawny states scrambling for life. International attention was about to be focussed on the Italian regime for its continued atrocities in Ethiopia, with the cries of ‘Free Enrico Berlinguer’ getting louder and louder across the nations of the world. However, there still remained a slew of Communist states in East Asia, whose fall was destined to be bloodier, harsher and far more bitter than the relatively tame affairs elsewhere.
This is going to cause a lot of interesting aftershocks.

First of all, with just how completely communism discredited itself here, the few remaining radical socialists in most places places outside the soviet union were already desperately looking for an ideology. The most obvious choice would for them so far would likely have been anarcho-socialism, but for obvious reasons, organizing an anarchist movement to actually do anything is tricky at best. Any who aren't totally opposed to religion may well latch onto this new ideology very quickly. It is very likely to become the darling of western champagne socialists, especially if the pacifism is not just Malenkov's own personal new ethos but remains a core part of Tolstoyism after his death. Christopher Hitchens was of course born after the POD, but it would be interested to see how someone who is both socialist-leaning and an ardent atheist reacts to this.

Secondly, the pacifism and the bloodless breakup of the soviet union is going to cause outrage in both the remaining-and-future socialist true believers within and any future Russian nationalists, while also leaving the state very weak to such groups trying to force their way into power. I can see civil wars happening down the line, with small numbers of reasonably well-equipped nationalist and/or communist counter-counter-revolutionaries attacking large numbers of police and other relatively poorly armed internal security people. This could of course lead to further fragmentation, with the Komi, Yakut and Mari El republics staying put for now, but with very large native minorities which might be OK with shedding a few border cities for the sake of independence (in the Komi republic's case likely exchanging Syktyvkar and some of the area west thereof for a chunk of predominantly Nenets-inhabited northern coastline between the urban areas of the Nenets and Yamalo-Nenets Okrugs.

This timeline is also something of a Christianity-wank, I suppose. A democrat is supposed to be a protestant, and vice versa. A fascist is supposed to be a good catholic, in most places anyway. Now, a socialist is supposed to be a devout orthodox. This is obviously a vast oversimplification for comedic effect, but I think the point still stands.

So what's going to happen to the Black sea Fleet with Crimea gone is it going to be moved to the Pacific, degrade due to lack of funds or just outright disband
While some of it might be sold for scrap, depending on just how easily Malenkov gave in to the Ukrainian desires, it might be sold by them, with a few of the newer and smaller vessels forming the core of the Ukrainian navy.

Not sure, post-ww2 British migrants in Rhodesia quickly got the racist attitudes of the pre-existing urban population, I'm not sure about all post ww2 Migrants in South Africa, but I know that Portuguese Mozambican "retornados" (can they be called like that if they didn't return to portugal?) who went to South Africa after the carnation revolution were among the staunchest supporter of Apartheid and of the National Party in the 80s.
One should not underestimate how thankful the first generation of migrants escaping a hellhole would usually be. It's the following generations who are more likely to rebel against what they see as an unfair and unpleasant state, or indeed embrace their roots in all the wrong ways to become communist agitators. Though apartheid South Africa is one of the few places where even a commie might default to joining the more moral side.

OTL Kaliningrad Oblast and Poland/Ukraine/Belarus are what stand out to me.
The Ukrainian and Belarussian eastern borders do as I understand follow borders which were in place since the era of the tsars. If they are old borders and accepted by the ethnic Ukrainians and Byelorussians now, it makes sense to use them TTL. That said, having an issue with how the Königsberg area follows the OTL map is entirely fair.

And, since I'm here, I would add that to reconcile the Russian Orthodox Church with the teachings of Tolstoy would be no small task - after all, it has excommunicated him and has never bothered to lift the excommunication IOTL to this day. I've also got a bad feeling about TTL's source's title: 'The Decade of Freedom: the 70s Remembered'. I wouldn't be surprised if things go haywire somewhere down the line and Russia becomes fascist, or an Orthodox Christian theocracy, or even pulls a Stalinist Restoration 2: Electric Boogaloo by the early 80s.
I believe so as well, though I would add that it sounds like it will not be a bloodless democratic rise to power. I'd bet on a civil war, perhaps even a three-way one.
 
I wonder how the Red Scarce developed in this world?

Also, how is the counterculture movement, rock and roll, and cinema ITTL? Have there been any significant wins and losses as of late?
 
You know what? Despite all evidence of the contrary, I have a lot of hope for Malenkov's new Russia. Despite it's theocratic bent, it seems more committed to nonviolence then imposing a state religion on anyone, and so far seems to have sounded leadership than the Russian Federation OTL. Even if it is poor, I hope this Russia can be more humanistic, more transparent and happier than her OTL counterpart.
 
Just wondering if there is a concrete point of no return for the USSR where it's only living on borrowed time? Like is the Chinese War or the UAR launching nerve gas more of a beginning of the end for them?
 
Just wondering if there is a concrete point of no return for the USSR where it's only living on borrowed time? Like is the Chinese War or the UAR launching nerve gas more of a beginning of the end for them?
The whole UAR war I think was the beginning of the end. In part of the nerve gas, and in part of the fact Nazis was helping, and aiding the Arabs. The chapter ' The Blood Libel' made a point about 'if Khrushchev wasn't removed, maybe the USSR could have reformed and last until today.' How much that is true is up to the reader, but the whole affair truly destroyed what little credibility the USSR had left after Stalin, and ended reforms that could have, if not save it, make it last longer.
 
Last edited:
I think that final point was allying with UAR and keeping alliance until revelation of Nazi connections. Altough even if USSR never would had ally with UAR and Khruschev managed keep control much longer perhaps to end of 1960's/early 1970's it is still possible that things might had gone shitty. Stalin already damaged the country quiet much and Second Holocaust and nuking of Warsaw didn't help any. These just discredit USSR and Communism in eyes of most leftist people.
 
You know what? Despite all evidence of the contrary, I have a lot of hope for Malenkov's new Russia. Despite it's theocratic bent, it seems more committed to nonviolence then imposing a state religion on anyone, and so far seems to have sounded leadership than the Russian Federation OTL. Even if it is poor, I hope this Russia can be more humanistic, more transparent and happier than her OTL counterpart.
At the very least, it seems to have survived until 1975 to finish the nuclear disarmament.

And wow, lets just take a moment to consider the impact of that ITTL eh? While America dropped the first bombs in Japan, it was Stalin who kicked off the era of nuclear colonialism with the destruction of Poland. And act justified as necessary to save the USSR; and the nuke knowledge acquired through Cold War espionage and collaboration. And the panic Warsaw started ITTL really propelled the world into the nuclear standoff.

And Malenkov, not only has ended Stalinism in Russia, he has divested Russia of the fruits of its. Stalin and his evil ITTL is seen as having gained Russia 'nothing'. The Pact is gone, the gains in European territory gone, heck they have less territory than the Tsars ruled for centuries now. And in the end that territory did not kick them out, they gave it up willingly. And to top it all off, Russia is not seen to be plotting a comeback from this decline, but instead has answered the nuclear standoff by throwing its own gun away.

Its mad and wonderful. Taking a promise to change as a nation and backing it up with dramatic immediate action that would have been considered bold too demand.

By contrast it makes the chest thumping new nuclear powers in the RA come across as petty and barbaric no?
 
Just wondering if there is a concrete point of no return for the USSR where it's only living on borrowed time? Like is the Chinese War or the UAR launching nerve gas more of a beginning of the end for them?
I think the moon landing stunt was probably the point of no return.

While the USSR was not in a good place, it is possible a reformist could've come to power and fixed the system up a bit.

But when the leader engages in a costly, pathetic, and transparent attempt at propaganda, there is no hope for the system.

You know what? Despite all evidence of the contrary, I have a lot of hope for Malenkov's new Russia. Despite it's theocratic bent, it seems more committed to nonviolence then imposing a state religion on anyone, and so far seems to have sounded leadership than the Russian Federation OTL. Even if it is poor, I hope this Russia can be more humanistic, more transparent and happier than her OTL counterpart.
Malenkov has, so far, set a good standard for any post-communist leadership.

Unlike OTL Yeltsin, he hasn't let his country be plundered by oligarchs, nor guzzled vodka like it was water.

Unlike Putin, he isn't indulging in nationalist nonsense.
 
Hard to say for Greece. I suppose we would need to know how the royal family ia viewed by Greeks as a result of this long occupation by Fascists. And wgat the exiled royals have been up too since they fled to the UK. If they have just been living in London this whole time I don't see much support; but if they have been doing some aid work in say Cyprus, they might have some recognition.
America elects George Papandreou president and the Greeks proceed to request annexation in manner reminiscent of Albania's pro-Americanism in the 90s. Oppa!


Christian socialism, but also economic liberalization in Russia. Also they're working through the Russian Orthodox Church, one of the last functioning social institutions in post communist Russia. I wonder how that'll go.
No Yeltsin selling off the country is looking good. Without the oligarchs, a liberal economy may actually develop.


US politics are probably weird. The axis of politics seems to be social rather than economic. Wallace (Corley) was a racist but also a pretty committed New Dealer. The GOP seems like a cross between Rockefeller Republicanism and a moderate socially-conscious libertarianism.
The Freedom Party seems to be a hodgepodge of Dixiecrats and White Ethnics. The Republicans seem to be just about everybody else (business and african-americans being the most loyal demos, I would think).
Hispanics seem like a natural swing vote. Socially conservative (Catholic) and broadly center-left economically, but also likely to be put off by a lot about the Freedom Party.

I wonder what Bill Clinton's up to. Or what a Jewish Socialist from Vermont would do.


Mass immigration from the former Communist World to South Africa and Rhodesia. That seems prone to messiness. Will the new arrivals question the system that they've shown up to, or assimilate into a new oppressive system?

Tatarstan is landlocked, but it also has oil. Maybe it could become a center of Islamic Finance - a landlocked polity that transcends its geographic constraints with the advent of the electronic financial economy. I imagine they'd be pretty pro-trade as well, seeking to profit off of movement of goods through their territory.

Armenia is likely going to be in a very awkward position now, with a Nationalist Turkey to their west.

Central Asia seems likely to join the RA to me.
 
Last edited:
Malenkov has, so far, set a good standard for any post-communist leadership.

Unlike OTL Yeltsin, he hasn't let his country be plundered by oligarchs, nor guzzled vodka like it was water.

Unlike Putin, he isn't indulging in nationalist nonsense.
He is however an old man holding down a stressful job at a stressful time and while he will win great acclaim in the eyes of clerics around the world and from the leaders of most democratic states, he will leave himself open to foes from within and without. Even without an enemy offing him, he may well die before the ideology he is penning has truly cemented itself in the national conciousness, leaving shoes too big for any of his followers to fill. I'd guess he is likely to be seen as hopelessly naive in retrospect.
 
He is however an old man holding down a stressful job at a stressful time and while he will win great acclaim in the eyes of clerics around the world and from the leaders of most democratic states, he will leave himself open to foes from within and without. Even without an enemy offing him, he may well die before the ideology he is penning has truly cemented itself in the national conciousness, leaving shoes too big for any of his followers to fill. I'd guess he is likely to be seen as hopelessly naive in retrospect.
^ Sadly and tragically, I have to agree on this. Malenkov has proven to be by far a better than darn near anyone in this TL by far and by wide. Unfortunately, although he would be a morally rich man here, in terms of political policy, I can't fathom Tolstoyism surviving the man. But it does give hope that Socialism might just end up being saved from being chained down to Communism here.
 
Top