Well actually it just restores their civil rights and allows them to move back. The Soviets don't really do much to help the people move back.
Twilight of the Red Tsar
- Thread starter Napoleon IV
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dystopia stalin lives
- Status
Interesting however I think its fair to say given the 'rights' of average Soviet citizens I don't see this as a major improvement especially when considering they will have to make their own way back to their homelands.
Although I see this as a way of regaining the loyalty of ethnics groups that have suffered severely under the madness of Stalin.
Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs
Excerpt from The Sino-Soviet War by William Clinton
Stalin’s death did not affect the course of Soviet-Chinese negotiations much. Malenkov and Suslov were more than willing to bring the Chinese back under the Soviet Union’s thumb, and the Chinese had no other option. The first meeting between Chou and the Soviet leadership occurred on May 10th, the day after Stalin’s death was announced. The Soviet’s terms were simple: China had to surrender East Turkestan and Inner Mongolia, accept the presence of Soviet advisors, and follow directives of the Soviet Union like all the Eastern European states had to. In return the Soviets would give the Chinese military aid, food aid, and smallpox inoculations. Chou and the other Chinese leaders realized that they had to accept.
The Soviets began withdrawing their troops on the 15th. For Malenkov, who advocated for much lower military spending, this was a massive accomplishment. As the Soviets began to withdraw Chinese troops, typically anti-Soviet guerrilla forces, entered the cities of Manchuria. After Chinese control were reestablished the guerrillas were sent south to join the rest of the PLA. But the Soviets quickly realized that rebuilding China would be incredibly difficult. An example of the problems they faced was the state of the Chinese air force. After almost two years of fighting without oil the Chinese air force no longer existed, and many pilots were dead. Although the Soviets could provide planes and train pilots there was no way the rebuilt PLAAF could challenge the KMT’s air force. Many pilots were shot down almost as soon as they got into the air, and the PLAAF was never a major factor. Another problem the Soviets couldn’t fix was the deep unpopularity of the Chinese government. This was only made worse by their surrender to the Soviet Union, which many Chinese blamed for the horrors they had experienced. As the news spread there were mass protests in many Chinese cities, forcing the newly freed up troops to put them down.
Excerpt from The Soviet Union and the United States by J.M. Yasser
One of Malenkov’s goals was to end the Soviet Union’s status as an international pariah. The first step in this would be reestablishing relations with the United States. This also tied to Malenkov’s goal of lessening the risk of nuclear war, which he considered the gravest threat to civilization. Like they had during the Egyptian Nuclear Crisis the Soviets established a backchannel through Finland. There was just one problem: Nixon was absolutely unwilling to reestablish relations with the USSR. As he put it: “If I work with Malenkov the anti-Communist cocksuckers will call me a traitor, the liberal cocksuckers will criticize me over human rights, and the Jews will scream about how the Reds have Hebrew blood on their hands.” Rather than outright refuse Nixon decided to send the Soviets a list of demands that they would find completely unacceptable. First he demanded that the Soviet Union acknowledge the Soviet Holocaust and allow all remaining Jews to emigrate to Israel. Next Nixon demanded that the Soviets withdraw from Eastern Europe and fulfill Stalin’s promise to hold free elections there. Finally, the Soviets would have to withdraw from the Baltic States, which the US considered illegally occupied territory. The utter failure of Malenkov’s initiative made him a laughingstock amongst the rest of the Presidium. Suslov wrote that “This incident proves that everlasting struggle between the Soviet Union and the capitalist world is inevitable, something that Chairman Malenkov fails to realize.” Ustinov went even further, implying that Malenkov was weak and unable to face the US. Even worse Malenkov had unintentionally humiliated Tikhonov, who as Foreign Minister was the public face of this deal. Along with the hardliners (Suslov, Ustinov, Kulakov, and Demichev) Tikhonov’s vote meant that 5 of the 11 votes in the Presidium were against Malenkov. All that was needed to unseat Malenkov was one more vote.
Way to go Richard, thanks to you the probably only reasonable soviet leader or at least the one that really understand the consequence of a war between the two block risk to lose his job to a bunch of idiot hardliner. Please...stop helping
Puzzle
Donor
Look at it from his point of view, the Soviet Union has been a parade of purges and atrocities for two decades. Why would he assume they had the slightest amount of good faith?
Still when we are talking about nuclear armed nation and superpower a certain level of flexibility can be necessary...plus at least he had the possibility to ask some more acceptable demand as preliminary to any talks. Hell even the european allies of NATO, even if they really don't trust the Soviet will have supported this move as they are basically on the first line in case of war and here nobody really desire to become radioactive dust because Tricky Dick need to show his attribute.
bookmark95
Banned
I don't honestly blame Richard Nixon. From 1928 to 1958 ITTL, the Soviet Union is a nation that has gotten steadily more brutal. In 1945, the Communists denied Eastern Europe political freedom, and by 1958, they've committed genocide against the Baltics, Jews, and Chinese.
Those hardliners are almost disturbingly delusional: they think that anyone speaking out against their racist policies is an imperialist. I just hope that they'll fall as quickly as they rise.
Those hardliners are almost disturbingly delusional: they think that anyone speaking out against their racist policies is an imperialist. I just hope that they'll fall as quickly as they rise.
Yeah. I get the argument that there should be some form of tactful allowance of Soviet atrocities in order to prevent possible nuclear war, but at this point the Soviets have shifted far beyond the "extremely repressive and ruthless" of OTL USSR to the "genocidally insane and sadistic" of a nuclear armed Nazi Germany/Imperial Japan. From the US perspective, being "tactful" with them would be nothing short of insane and immoral as the soviets had happily launched nuclear, chemical, and biological genocide against their former ally, and embraced the worst crimes of their former nazi foes for no reason other than their leader's whim. The US (and indeed the west) has zero reason to trust them, and every reason to see them as an existential threat to humanity itself, especially when the exact same people who ordered/engaged in these crimes still control the country (minus Stalin ofc).
It's partially that, but it's much more about domestic political concerns for Nixon. As his quote indicates, there's really no group in the US who supports reestablishing relations with the Soviet Union (well except the Communists). It would use up a lot of the political capital Nixon has gained from China and the Suez for nothing. Finally there's ideological concerns: the arch-Redbaiter Nixon loaths the idea of lending any support to Communism (realpolitik Nixon emerged in the 1960s and 1970s IOTL).
That said, there's going to be a massive debate ITTL over the merits of Nixon's refusal, with the realpolitik-inclined (what ironically IOTL would be called Nixonian) and anti-war on one side, and the Wilsonians on the other.
On Soviet Agriculture:
Would Malenkov allow the Collectives sell any excess crops and allow people to sell vegetables grown on home plots?
Would Malenkov allow the Collectives sell any excess crops and allow people to sell vegetables grown on home plots?
I know it's been mentioned before, but the historiography of World War 2 is going to fascinating. OTL, the USSR is (usually) depicted as "ruthless, but still on the side of the angels", while here my guess is that the Eastern Front is going to be straight up portrayed as "evil vs. evil", with the WAllies teaming up with Stalin because Hitler was the bigger threat. I'd expect a lot of popular culture moving forward to depict the WAlly/USSR alliance as a literal deal with the devil, with lot's of grim foreshadowing about "What rough beast have we unleashed?" (or whatever).
Weirdly, I could see popular history being sympathetic to the average Russian citizen; Stalin's killed so many of his own people that the cultural depiction of the USSR might be that of a ruthless and oppressive government stamping its boot in the face of a downtrodden and starving Soviet citizen.
Isn't that pretty much the modern conception of what life under Soviet Russia was like, especially under Stalin?
What I'm, as a film buff, especially interested in is the effect that this has on Hollywood and film in general. OTL, Hollywood was fairly indifferent to the idea of Communist villains after an initial swing in the late fourties, especially in the main studios, at least until the deluge of Anti-Soviet films when Reagan took over. Here, with a lot of Jewish producers and actors outraged with how the Soviets may have murdered their entire family lineage, I can easily see the screen awash with a fairly underutilised concept OTL. Perhaps the Best Picture Winner of the next Oscars could relate the tale of a Jewish family who survived Hitler now desperately trying to survive the Soviet Holocaust as well? Or perhaps a biopic about the mad Tyrant Stalin's descent into murder? Maybe a film about desperate tales of survival in China, or East Europe? I furthermore doubt that the Hollywood 10 will be quite as lionised as they are IOTL, with a much more nuanced view about the difference between people and their art, rather than a black and white tale of the right to free expression being the main angle it's remembered as. Elia Kazan, by contrast, I doubt will be such a polarising figure in the industry; saying "I was only naming Communists" will have the same understandable quality that "I was only naming Nazis" will have IOTL.
Then of course, Soviet Cinema probably never had a resurgence like it did in the late fifties, and Wajda was either purged or kept VERY quiet about Polish identity. I doubt someone with Tarkovsky's obsession with religion made it out of the Purge period in one piece either. I can't see any positives to the Soviet film industry at the moment; probably just racially charged films detailing the evils of the Chinese, and the "Zionist/Cosmopolitan Capitalist class". Wouldn't be surprised if they just slightly touched up old Nazis posters to deliver some of the Anti-Semitic propaganda Stalin is looking for.
EDIT: One of the good things about this TL is that Holocaust education is probably more widespread than before. IOTL, it was the Eichmann trial that turned the Holocaust from one crime among hundreds to being the absolute pinnacle of human evil in the mind of the Western public. I can easily imagine the West, especially America, using it as a stick to bash the Soviets with. It's a fairly easy way to get a class to hate the Soviets by pointing to a lot of dead Jews who are dead for no other reason than being Jews, and saying, "This is what the Communists are doing". The Holocausts will definitely get more traction in America, while I imagine in the USSR they'll practically be erased from history, with the emphasis being on the number of murdered Soviets in general.
Last edited:
bookmark95
Banned
Maybe, we'll see a film adaptation of Vasily Grossman's Life and Fate.
Or potentially, a film adaptation of the works of Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
I can also movies and TVs shows and books that talk about the Sino Soviet War. I think Godzilla is going to be very popular and accepted because of how many nukes were launched.
My hope is that the events of this TL force people to be less racist. Maybe the Civil Rights Movement can use the image of the Second Holocaust in their campaigns.
"In Mississippi we have the gulag, it's called the chain gang," said Medgar Evers, as an example.
- Status