WI: Theocratic, anti-feminist USSR

These concepts appeal is limited enough as it is-religious egalitarianism has never appealed to mass populations-small groups yes.

A theocracy can make use of socialistic rhetoric and a socialist government can seek to "re-tool" religion but never shoud the two meet in any sort of sincerity.
 
What if instead of being an atheist regime that encouraged women to work, the USSR was a christian theocracy that forced women to stay in the house?
If the Bolsheviks had lost to the White Movement, the country would have reverted back to right wing tyranny IMO. With no history or expectation of personal freedom, whoever comes out on top is going to turn into a tyrant. Same goes for Spain, had the Republicans won. I wrote this, set in a world where the scenario you suggest pretty much happens. There's a factual error at the end that's the result of too much TV and movies on my part (though it might have been closer to the truth in the early 70s), and with the FSM as my witness I had no idea Bob Novak is a conservative columnist when I wrote that. Yeah, maybe it's the same Bob Novak, but had I known better I would have used a different name.
 

Christian socialism in early twentieth century Russia was primarily the work of a few intellectuals like Sergei Bulgakov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Bulgakov who (1) had little political influence and (2) were not "theocrats" in the sense the original post uses that term. Some of them, following Soloviev, talked about "free theocracy"--but of course the adjective "free" is all-important here. Soloviev explicitly contrasted "free theocracy" with "false theocracy"--i.e., domination of the state or economy by the Church. https://books.google.com/books?id=WhbUAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA253

In any event, I don't know what is more absurd--seeing people like Sergei Bulgakov and Semyon Frank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Frank rule Russia or seeing either of them--even if they could--trying to force women out of the workplace...
 
Top