Depending on how the end of the war plays out, I might be willing to throw out some ideas for the postwar world here and there.
I'm always going to have
some knowledge.
I'm always glad to hear ideas! Feel free to post them on the thread or PM me if you don't want everyone else seeing them
Damn. How have I missed this?!
Have you been opening AH.com only starting from page 2 of the After 1900 forum? Because I've been doing my best to keep this on page 1 for more than a month now.
I am also wondering what is the attitude of non-Stalinist communists at this point in this war. Moscow has burnt a lot of bridges by allying with the Nazis (not just appeasing them, not even being in co-belligerance, but outright being in a military alliance, up to and including the propping up of the Reich in economic and military terms). In the context of a alliance of Fascism and Democracy against Nazism and Totalitarian Communism, where does the rest of the Left stand?
'Communism' is going to be pretty badly discredited after the war (even if the USSR stays communist post-war, I still haven't decided on that), and associations to the Holocaust plus Stalin's bad behaviour in the 1930s aren't going to help things. Without any communist countries existing in the world other than the USSR, any movement that appears to be trending towards the far-left is going to be associated with Stalinism and evil, a bit like how OTL's public will snap to calling any far-right movement "Nazi" even if that group doesn't make any statements about Jewish or other groups that Hitler tried to kill.
The rest of the left is going to be forced to do one of two things: either somehow distance themselves from 'Communism' (a bit like socialists today do, or how Franco was considered somehow different to Mussolini/Hitler) in an attempt to appear more democratic (so a Labour Party can still exist in say Britain or France, but they will be more careful to avoid topics associated with Stalin), or simply not care and accept that they will be called "communists", with that word having the same negative connotations that "Nazi" has IOTL - a bit like the alt-right rationalises itself among its members, but with radical/Stalinist leftist beliefs.
At this point, I can easily see countries like Spain and Portugal actually entering the war or at least providing volunteers (as Spain historically did IOTL), and I assume that most of Latin America is also formally involved in some way, Argentina being the most likely significant exception - I guess there's at mnimum a Brazilian brigade or something somewhere in Europe. That would do a little about the Allied concern for manpower (the serious answer to that problem, of course, would be Dominion-status India, but that requires a British willingness to manage the matter a lot more sensibly than they did IOTL, and probably also a different approach by the Indian leadership; conditions seem more favorable to such an outcome ITTL, but it is not really guaranteed).
Spain in particular I can't see joining until at least Hitler is out of the way. Not only because Hitler supported him in the SCW, but also the whole rebuilding issue - the Spanish Army isn't up to fighting the Red Army in anything beyond perhaps Corps strength so far from Spain. Possibly in 1945, doubt it any earlier. (Franco has made sure to distance himself from the Axis since it became clear that Germany wasn't going to break through France).
Re: India, it is still Churchill in charge here, and he's not exactly known for his great handling of the situation (Bengal!). The Indians have fought well and provide the overwhelming majority of forces for the Middle Eastern Front, but I can't see any of the radical changes needed to get a large commitment of Indians in Europe.
At the very least, send my boi Patton to Minsk! Before the Ruskies run out of oil, starve to death, and get nuked. Surely the Allies can at least project power to Belarus before Stalin capitulates.
- BNC