WI: Effects of a Socialist US President on Soviet-American relations and the Cold War

Assuming that the global geopolitical situation remains by and large as IOTL, what effect would a non-Communist Socialist Presidency have on Soviet-US relations and the Cold War. In particular going by the decade that this socialist Presidency happens, i.e. what would be the effect if it happened in the 20s, 30s, 40s, etc.
 
Since you say Socialist rather than socialist, I assume you mean a president from the Socialist Party. In all likelihood, getting one requires a POD way before 1945 but if we just wave our hands and make Norman Thomas, the six-time Socialist Party candidate somehow become President, I would say that of all the presidential candidates in 1948 (Truman, Dewey, Thurmond, Wallace) he was the *only* one who was really critical of the Soviet Union during World War II.

And of course the Soviets and their American fan club reciprocated. Israel Amter wrote in *The Communist* in 1942:

"Mussolini was a “socialist,” Laval was a “socialist,” Norman Thomas, too, is a "Socialist." He offers the world only one kind of peace—-the peace of a Hitler, a Mussolini, a Laval...Norman Thomas, fifth columnist and spearhead of fascism, still has access to the radio and spews forth his traitorous program. It is a distinct disservice to our country to allow this worker for fascism to use the air in order to spread disunity and hatred for our allies. Let us not allow ourselves a repetition of the fate of France, where the fascists were permitted to carry on their work. Let us rather adopt the methods of the Soviet Union..." http://www.unz.org/Pub/Communist-1942jun-00450
 
In addition to the what David Tenner is saying, the USSR had a poor record of getting along with other leftist regimes generally.

So I reckon a Socialist president worsens Soviet-American relations.

fasquardon
 
To some extent, I think you're going to have the only-Nixon-could-go-to-China effect. Only Clinton could do welfare reform, only Reagan could get the Brady bill passed, etc.

Plus, Stalin really was a bastard and probably clinically diagnosable as a sociopath, killing people he knew to "prove" he was right. Maybe some relaxation after his death in 1953.
 
To some extent, I think you're going to have the only-Nixon-could-go-to-China effect. Only Clinton could do welfare reform, only Reagan could get the Brady bill passed, etc.

Plus, Stalin really was a bastard and probably clinically diagnosable as a sociopath, killing people he knew to "prove" he was right. Maybe some relaxation after his death in 1953.

I agree with the latter point. An American Socialist president would be highly critical of Stalin. The closeness of their ideologies would irk our POTUSocialist even more.
 
If Stalin is the main issue, what would happen if the socialist President came into office during or in the aftermath of destalinisation? Leaving aside the considerable question of how they did it, if they were to win the 52 or 56 election how would things play out?
 
If Stalin is the main issue, what would happen if the socialist President came into office during or in the aftermath of destalinisation? Leaving aside the considerable question of how they did it, if they were to win the 52 or 56 election how would things play out?

Fears of subversion were high in the 1950s. I think with the revelations (both the true ones and the lies) of Soviet infiltration scaring many Americans, socialists would be critical of the US in this era.
 

Sabot Cat

Banned
Much like how having self-proclaimed socialists as Prime Minister in the UK didn't really do much in regards to Soviet relations, the same would probably be true of the United States.
 
If one also remembers hathat Marxism predicted a socialist revolution in capitalist could tries, then the underpinnings for a US socialist party would have far more "legitimacy" with international groups.
And of course Stalin/the soviets were among the worst things to happen for the Left OTL. Hell the association with communism likely put the civil rights movement back a decade... if America somehow has a socialist president I think that such issues happen earlier.
 
Compare Socialist leaders of e.g. Germany or Britain, and their relations with the USSR.

Not a whole lot of change, except slightly warmer relations, and no demonizing of
'the Evil Empire'.
 
Compare Socialist leaders of e.g. Germany or Britain, and their relations with the USSR.

Not a whole lot of change, except slightly warmer relations, and no demonizing of
'the Evil Empire'.

I wonder, though, how a socialist POTUS would deal with Communists or at least Communist-allied groups in America's backyard. Would they he be just as inclined as OTL Republicans and(to a lesser extent) Dems to oppose the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, for example?

I seem to recall reading that Gough Whitlam, while favouring more cordial relations with the Eastern Bloc, was supportive of the Indonesian annexation of East Timor, partly because he didn't want a Communist state that close to Australia.
 
Last edited:
Top