WI: Stalin dies/incapacitated before purges?

What would the effects be of Stalin (say) suffering an incapacitating but non-fatal stroke in 1936 be? What would a plausible way of so incapacitating or killing Stalin be in the 1934-1936 period?

Obviously the Great Purges as OTL are largely stopped in their tracks...I can't imagine that the Soviet leadership here will be more friendly to the NKVD than they were after Stalin's actual death in 1953, and though some murders may continue on simply by inertia or in case Stalin wakes up, most of them will be avoided. Will this substantially affect *Barbarossa? In fact, with the likelihood that nothing even remotely like Molotov-Ribbentrop is signed here, will WWII even happen?

What are the economic effects? Is collectivization stopped or even reversed? Is the Soviet/Stalin emphasis on heavy industry stopped or ended (which could have some interesting butterfly effects on Chinese development...assuming the Communists win the war, of course, and that Mao will listen to non-Stalin Soviets)?

Does Bukharin regain a prominent place in Soviet politics (he was theoretically rehabilitated between 1934 and 1936, and with the death of Stalin it seems possible that certain figures will reenter the political scene)? In fact, does Trotsky attempt to stage a comeback?

------------------
I'm working on a timeline involving Stalin getting taken out in such a way, and I want to make sure I'm not doing something ridiculously stupid before I post it.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Obviously the Great Purges as OTL are largely stopped in their tracks...I can't imagine that the Soviet leadership here will be more friendly to the NKVD than they were after Stalin's actual death in 1953, and though some murders may continue on simply by inertia or in case Stalin wakes up, most of them will be avoided. Will this substantially affect *Barbarossa? In fact, with the likelihood that nothing even remotely like Molotov-Ribbentrop is signed here, will WWII even happen?

I wouldn't rule out the Purges, at least for the Party big wigs. Maybe no trials (they were Stalin's idea) but a lot of people really wanted to "cleanse" the party. Kaganovich, Molotov, Voroshilov, Zhdanov, they all wanted to get rid of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, and other non-hardline elements. Bukharin's situation is a bit more tricky, but he may fall, too.

The Soviet leadership will be more friendly to the NKVD because they only got scared of it after the Purges, and even then only when Beria took over (most very much liked Yezhov until he fell out of favor with Stalin. They were terrified of Beria).

But Purges without Stalin mean that (most likely) they will be confined to top Party members/rivals of the Stalinist clique as opposed to encompassing the general population (though this may still happen; one should never underestimate the zeal of Stalin's inner circle in these matters.)

Molotov-Ribbentrop probably won't be signed. The USSR will actually probably prove more hostile to Germany; Stalin was rather adept at realpolitik, unlike Molotov and his other foreign policy fellows, most of who were completely directed by ideology.

What are the economic effects? Is collectivization stopped or even reversed? Is the Soviet/Stalin emphasis on heavy industry stopped or ended (which could have some interesting butterfly effects on Chinese development...assuming the Communists win the war, of course, and that Mao will listen to non-Stalin Soviets)?

Collectivation still happens. The primary mover behind that wasn't actually Stalin. In fact, the Vozhd had very little to do with it at all. Molotov and Kaganovich were the main leaders/managers/executors of collectivization. So probably not very many (if any) economic/industrial changes.

Does Bukharin regain a prominent place in Soviet politics (he was theoretically rehabilitated between 1934 and 1936, and with the death of Stalin it seems possible that certain figures will reenter the political scene)? In fact, does Trotsky attempt to stage a comeback?

Again, Bukharin's situation is tricky. When Stalin turned his back on him, he became a pariah and his friends abandoned him. Still, he probably wouldn't have made the top spot. Maybe figurehead status, but the man was too much of an intellectual who by and large couldn't / didn't want to be bothered with administering anything.

Trotsky's too demonized by this point to make a comeback.

A big part of this is when you have Stalin die. If it's before Kirov's assassination (the beginning of the Purges) then things take a more divergent path. If he dies mid-Purge, well . . . the situation gets really complicated and hard to predict.

I'm working on a timeline involving Stalin getting taken out in such a way, and I want to make sure I'm not doing something ridiculously stupid before I post it.

For your research into Stalin and the Soviet hierarchy under him, I'd highly recommend Simon Sebag-Montefiore's Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar. It's the best biography I've ever read, if not one of the best books I've ever read.
 
I wouldn't rule out the Purges, at least for the Party big wigs. Maybe no trials (they were Stalin's idea) but a lot of people really wanted to "cleanse" the party. Kaganovich, Molotov, Voroshilov, Zhdanov, they all wanted to get rid of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, and other non-hardline elements. Bukharin's situation is a bit more tricky, but he may fall, too.
Ah. Well, I was specifically thinking of the military purges, not just the political ones. Will those go on? It seems not, or at least not to the same scale (the oft-quoted 30,000+ officers executed or dismissed). I was partially wondering whether the more hard-line Stalinists, without the big man around to protect and encourage them, might lose their nerve, turn away from Stalinism, or themselves be purged or eliminated by a combination of the first two groups.

The Soviet leadership will be more friendly to the NKVD because they only got scared of it after the Purges, and even then only when Beria took over (most very much liked Yezhov until he fell out of favor with Stalin. They were terrified of Beria).
Really? Wiki (yeah I know, but it's hard to find reliable sources de novo...) claims Yezhov was quite a bad apple himself. OTOH, all the NKVD heads seem to be...and perhaps Yezhov was such a bad apple that he himself could relatively easily be controlled. Of course, Yezhov himself also didn't become titular head of the NKVD until late 1936, and I was thinking of an earlier POD.

But Purges without Stalin mean that (most likely) they will be confined to top Party members/rivals of the Stalinist clique as opposed to encompassing the general population (though this may still happen; one should never underestimate the zeal of Stalin's inner circle in these matters.)
Well, that /may/ be good news for the population.

Molotov-Ribbentrop probably won't be signed. The USSR will actually probably prove more hostile to Germany; Stalin was rather adept at realpolitik, unlike Molotov and his other foreign policy fellows, most of who were completely directed by ideology.
That's what I figured, but would Hitler attack Poland if he didn't have that assurance?

Collectivation still happens. The primary mover behind that wasn't actually Stalin. In fact, the Vozhd had very little to do with it at all. Molotov and Kaganovich were the main leaders/managers/executors of collectivization. So probably not very many (if any) economic/industrial changes.
But will Molotov and Kaganovich be able to hold onto power for as long as Stalin did? They were railroaded out relatively soon after 1953, after all, and while they may be quite successful in the 1934-194? period, perhaps after the Great Patriotic War they will lose control, or even earlier?

Again, Bukharin's situation is tricky. When Stalin turned his back on him, he became a pariah and his friends abandoned him. Still, he probably wouldn't have made the top spot. Maybe figurehead status, but the man was too much of an intellectual who by and large couldn't / didn't want to be bothered with administering anything.
Well, I didn't really want (or need) him to be anything more than a figurehead. I was just interested if his ideas could become an important part of Soviet ideology and policy later on, with Stalinism essentially killed before it can *really* get going.

Trotsky's too demonized by this point to make a comeback.
This is actually good news for me, I wanted an isolationist-style USSR. I was just hoping I didn't throw a big spanner in the works. Still, perhaps he ends up living a mostly-peaceful life in exile instead of being killed in 1940? I suppose Molotov et al. might still want that, but they might also figure it's a bit pointless--man ain't coming back, and Soviet Russia's got a lot more resources than he has.

A big part of this is when you have Stalin die. If it's before Kirov's assassination (the beginning of the Purges) then things take a more divergent path. If he dies mid-Purge, well . . . the situation gets really complicated and hard to predict.
Originally, I was planning on an early 1936 POD (originally, it was going to be based off of Hearts of Iron--but I changed that pretty quickly), but now I believe I will be going for a 1934 POD. Will that avoid the Purges more throughly, with certain figures not yet risen to prominence, or even a Kirov leadership? Any idea about things that could kill Stalin (besides the obvious sorts--accidents, plane crashes, car crashes, and so forth)?

For your research into Stalin and the Soviet hierarchy under him, I'd highly recommend Simon Sebag-Montefiore's Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar. It's the best biography I've ever read, if not one of the best books I've ever read.
Thanks for the recommendation--it's a hard job finding reliable sources about something so politically charged. I do believe I will be getting that when I have the opportunity.
 
Far fewer disillusioned Communists abroad following World War 2 (the full facts and revelations of the horrors of the Stalinist regime did a lot to destroy Communist following in the West).
 
Far fewer disillusioned Communists abroad following World War 2 (the full facts and revelations of the horrors of the Stalinist regime did a lot to destroy Communist following in the West).

So we might see more friendly regimes in the West later? Perhaps a stronger pro-Communist lobby in the various Western nations turns the Cold War to ice? OTOH, the big one--the Holodomer--has already happened by 1934, and even the OTL destalinization programs didn't eliminate the influence of that. Still, perhaps Communism ends up being viewed as a relatively benign authoritarian ideology--rather like, say, absolute monarchy as opposed to the OTL view were it tended to be closer to Nazism? (Though maybe that's just a Texas thing...)
 
Oh, this is a good one--this is going to totally butterfly Lysenkoism. Might this have big beneficial effect on Soviet agricultural production?
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Ah. Well, I was specifically thinking of the military purges, not just the political ones. Will those go on? It seems not, or at least not to the same scale (the oft-quoted 30,000+ officers executed or dismissed).

The military purges are bound to happen. Again, perhaps not on the same scale as OTL, but Tukhachevsky and his pals are goners; everybody from every camp was really wary of the Red Army back then. They may even go further if the Budyonny-Voroshilov group is not kept in check by Stalin and gets its way in the whole "Shoot everybody who thinks tanks are better than horses in warfare" issue.

I was partially wondering whether the more hard-line Stalinists, without the big man around to protect and encourage them, might lose their nerve, turn away from Stalinism, or themselves be purged or eliminated by a combination of the first two groups.

If Stalin dies in 1936, the Stalinists and Stalinism are pretty firmly entrenched. Granted, when he dies they'll probably rule as a collective (they actually all got on rather well; the cowardice and backstabbing was mostly Stalin's doing).

Really? Wiki (yeah I know, but it's hard to find reliable sources de novo...) claims Yezhov was quite a bad apple himself. OTOH, all the NKVD heads seem to be...and perhaps Yezhov was such a bad apple that he himself could relatively easily be controlled. Of course, Yezhov himself also didn't become titular head of the NKVD until late 1936, and I was thinking of an earlier POD.

Oh, Yezhov was a nut, but he never really wanted supreme power. He much preferred torturing people and spending his nights getting drunk and engaging in bisexual orgies whenever he and his wife weren't off on vacation with another magistrate's wife or husband. He was a sybaritic sadist. He never wanted to run the country, just kill people and indulge in excess.

That's what I figured, but would Hitler attack Poland if he didn't have that assurance?

I'd like to restate something. You may very well have a Molotov-Ribbentrop sort of agreement up to a point. By which I mean, "Yeah, we'll carve up Poland with you, but we're not friends. In fact, stay the fuck out my way!" as opposed to OTL's "Yeah, we'll carve up Poland with you. Also, let's be pals! Need resources? Sure! Oh Germany, I can tell we're just going to be bestest friends foreverest!"


But will Molotov and Kaganovich be able to hold onto power for as long as Stalin did? They were railroaded out relatively soon after 1953, after all, and while they may be quite successful in the 1934-194? period, perhaps after the Great Patriotic War they will lose control, or even earlier?

Maybe, maybe not. After the Purges, after WWII, yes, they could. But the power system of pre-Purge Russia was so different, fluid, and non-institutionalized that it's really up in the air.


This is actually good news for me, I wanted an isolationist-style USSR. I was just hoping I didn't throw a big spanner in the works. Still, perhaps he ends up living a mostly-peaceful life in exile instead of being killed in 1940? I suppose Molotov et al. might still want that, but they might also figure it's a bit pointless--man ain't coming back, and Soviet Russia's got a lot more resources than he has.

Trotsky's probably going to die; Stalin's crew (and their successors) really didn't like leaving loose ends . . .

Originally, I was planning on an early 1936 POD (originally, it was going to be based off of Hearts of Iron--but I changed that pretty quickly), but now I believe I will be going for a 1934 POD. Will that avoid the Purges more throughly, with certain figures not yet risen to prominence, or even a Kirov leadership? Any idea about things that could kill Stalin (besides the obvious sorts--accidents, plane crashes, car crashes, and so forth)?

Oh, I'm so glad you asked! IMO, the best time to kill of Stalin would be in 1932. Specifically around November 9. On the evening of the 9th, after a particularly nasty fight at a banquet, Stalin's wife Nadezhda went back to their apartment and killed herself. When he found out, Stalin basically had a nervous breakdown and seriously contemplated/threatened suicide to the point where his courtiers were terrified to leave him alone, yet had little choice what with his word being law.

So, have Stalin's despair really overcome him and have him kill himself around then, if not the very same night. That could see a Kirov leadership rising, which would probably butterfly away a lot of things, like...Stalinism, which was not yet completely dominant.

So instead of the more bumbling and brutal Stalinist sycophants running the country, you'd have people like Kirov, Sergo Ordzhonikidze, Kamenev, and Zinoviev running the Soviet Union, which would probably make for a much happier USSR!
 
Oh, Yezhov was a nut, but he never really wanted supreme power. He much preferred torturing people and spending his nights getting drunk and engaging in bisexual orgies whenever he and his wife weren't off on vacation with another magistrate's wife or husband. He was a sybaritic sadist. He never wanted to run the country, just kill people and indulge in excess.
Ah, so pretty much like I said then. Yezhov was a demon...but a controllable one. Whoever was in charge could use him however they wished, pretty much, while Beria was not only a demon, but one that really wanted to get YOU. You could never be safe around him, whereas as long as Yezhov got to kill people and have orgies he'd be all right with you.


Oh, I'm so glad you asked! IMO, the best time to kill of Stalin would be in 1932. Specifically around November 9. On the evening of the 9th, after a particularly nasty fight at a banquet, Stalin's wife Nadezhda went back to their apartment and killed herself. When he found out, Stalin basically had a nervous breakdown and seriously contemplated/threatened suicide to the point where his courtiers were terrified to leave him alone, yet had little choice what with his word being law.

So, have Stalin's despair really overcome him and have him kill himself around then, if not the very same night. That could see a Kirov leadership rising, which would probably butterfly away a lot of things, like...Stalinism, which was not yet completely dominant.

So instead of the more bumbling and brutal Stalinist sycophants running the country, you'd have people like Kirov, Sergo Ordzhonikidze, Kamenev, and Zinoviev running the Soviet Union, which would probably make for a much happier USSR!
This sounds like a really good POD. If I chose this, how would it affect your earlier responses? I mean, it seems that Kirov et al. will be less likely to do purges than Stalin's clique, and might have saner economic and military policies. Assuming that Hitler still launches WWII and attacks the USSR for the moment, will they do much better than Stalin? Are there any sources besides that biography you mentioned which would be good for the period?

EDIT: Ah, I also discovered that that biography is on the shelves at my university's library! Excellent, now I can read it /now/!
 
Last edited:
Top