Sir Isaac Brock said:
That's a great point. We are really splitting hairs to try to tamper with the West when so much of the rest of the world needs so much more work!
Africa needs to evolve in a way that prevents the "national liberation movements" seizing power when the Europeans leave and starting the cycle of dictatorship and coup. POD could be that the Europeans aren't forced out of the continent, but rather the colonies develop their independence slowly in stages, like Canada did from 1840 to 1982.
The Muslim world needs a healy competition of ideas and a tradition of peaceful transfer of power rather than simply the choice of repressive moarchies, secular dictatorships, or Islamist theocracies. POD could be Arab independence well before the Cold War started (or after it ended) and issues of Soviet - American rivalry and the Arab-Israeli dispute complicated things.
Russia need to avoid communism, or have it fail and be discredited early on, before Stalin started killing millions. A slow transition from Tsarist autocracy to a constitutional parliamentary system would help. But it needs to start well before 1917!
China is the same as Russia: reforming the old system before it collapses and allows extremists to take over is key.
South America needs go for true democratic revolutions in the mould of the US and France, not shifting power from Spain and Portugal to local elites. OR stay with Spain and Portugal and have a POD where they reform democratically.
I agree with your points.
However , the only POD in the poll which could have achieved some of those improvements is the one with the survival of the British Empire.
But let's examine them:
"Alexander the Great lives to a ripe old age"
So , assuming he had remained sane , he would have tried to conquer the Arabian peninsula , he would have had to put down rebelions , and , after his death , the empire would have collapsed , because it was way too big , too diverse , and it was made in a very short time by the ambition of one man .
In the end , not much different from OTL.
"The Roman Empire never collapsed"
It depends on what everyone understands by that , but if it survives in the form it had in the II or III century AD , the consequences are too hard to predict .
However , the Roman society , and life in the empire were far from perfect. ( gladiators , slaves , many civil wars , mad emperors , barbarian invasions ).
"Constantinople doesn't fall to the Turks"
It's too late for that to change something . In 1453 , the Ottomans were pretty much in control of the Balkans and Anatolia , and the Byzantine Empire had only Constantinople and Morea ( Peleopones ). If Constantinople hadn't fallen in 1453 it would have either fallen later or it would have become another small Ottoman vassal. Not much different from OTL , and it might have been actually worse. In the final days of the Empire , constantinople had only 100,000 inhabitants ( as to 500,000 to 1 million several hundred years earlier ) and many buildings were little more than ruins. The Ottomans had transformed the decayed city into their capital and into one of europe's greatest cities.
Now , If Byzantium had avoided the decline it experienced in the XIV century , it might have changed something to the better , but only on the local plan ( united Balkans , wealthyer Balkans and Anatolia ).
"The Muslims are not driven out from Spain"
This would probably have meant a later discovery and colonisation of America.
"The Aztecs destroy the Cortez expedition"
Then the Spaniards will try again.
And if the Aztec Empire had survived it would have continued to be a theocracy that practiced human sacrifices.
"There is no protestant reform"
Slower scientific progress , slower colonisation of America , Europe is dominated by a repressive and corrupt Catholic Church.
"Peter the Great doesn't attempt to modernise Russia"
IMO this would have been worse than in OTL , I think Russia needed more czars like him.
"The French win the French and Indian war"
This would probably slow down history . The French didn't really care about New France , in OTL they actually chose to keep a sugar island ( Guadelupe? ) rather than Canada. The loss of Canada lead to the American Revolution , a good thing IMO , because the US was more liberal than Britain in the late XVIIIth century , and because it made the British Empire to reconsider it's attitude towards their colonies , becoming more liberal.
"Woodrow Wilson never becomes president"
What would that lead to? No 14 points , harsher peace treaty , WWII harder to avoid than in OTL , maybe no League of Nations , maybe even no UN after WWII.
"British Empire never collapses"
Almost certainly better for the African states which became independent ( no dictatorships , no civil wars , less poverty , more prospects ).
Probably more liberal Singapore , Malaysia and Burma.
It could have been better for the Arab countries if the British had managed to keep controll over them . Given enough time , maybe those countires would have become like Kuwait and the UAE. Maybe even Iran wouldn't have had the islamic revolution.
I'm not sure about India and Pakistan , but maybe it would have been better for them to remain in the Empire a few more decades.
