What if Germany turned communist after WW1?

[@possiblehistory]

This was the first alternate history scenario written by Arakon. Let us know what you think in the comments below! As always to support the content leave a like and a comment to help us against the algorithm. Subscribe for a new alternate history video every week, as well as many other (alternate) history video related video's!

[@ivanserov1846]

Comrade Arakon for the first time does not ashamed the proletariat

[@sharkronical]

:Wojack-Arakon:

[@xianxiaemperor1438]

Cool video :)

[@zhcultivator]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZSXpoJvj6yZmMU - I wonder what you think of this Monsieur Z video.

[@KssLP]

I really liked it

[@charmyzard]

"The Berlin-Moscow Dream Team" at the end sounds just like what your friends would call their faction in a multiplayer HOI4 night. I laughed.

[@Alexander-h9g9h]

Idk what i like less, german-soviet dascism ir german-soviet communism in hoi 4

[@charmyzard]

@@Alexander-h9g9hNot too far from each other in either case.

[@orangecitrus8056]

I am having flashbacks.10 assignments due tommorow, it is 2 in the morning and most of the entire dorm is shouting while playing hoi4

[@B4CKWARDS_CH4RM]

Lenin basically counted on the German revolution succeeding, and only when it failed did things start to really get draconian in the USSR. I think in this timeline the USSR is still authoritarian, but with the German industrial base helping with technology and education, the USSR can afford to be more relaxed. I think this would allow the USSR to continue past the 90s, as a more flexible USSR could adapt better to economic changes.

[@alessandrosilvafilho8527]

Also, that would impact USSR politics. Since Stalin isn't so authoritarian and paranoid and expanded a lot the soviet influence, Nikita Krushchov probably wouldn't win and wouldn't make the complete turn in USSR politics with the destalinization. This would imply in the sino-soviet split not happening, essentially making a HUGE Eastern Block a lot more united than in real history.

[@Makarosc]

@@alessandrosilvafilho8527 Stalin would've been authoritarian and paranoid no matter what that's just the type of person he was

[@alessandrosilvafilho8527]

@@Makarosc but not as much without the obvious super threat that is the NAZI Germany and an extremely costly war with a big unstable enviroment to control after it. His paranoia would be restricted to the times of the revolution/civil war or maybe decreases a little over time, not grow more than that.

[@Ukalnsk]

I agree

[@mojo94102]

@@Makarosc why is nobody considering that in a less chaotic after-revolutionary situation in Russia, may Trotzki gained Power instead of Stalin?

[@theoheinrich529]

This heavily reminds me of the Alt. History project about the timeline where Hitler became a hardline communist. It's still unfinished but its a worthwhile read.

[@brendanrodgers9753]

That sounds interesting asf, do u have a link for it?

[@SEELE-1946]

Link?

[@alexthedemon2203]

Link?

[@teeby2037]

Queef?

[@Jerry-tg7zx]

Critikal support for comrade Hitler against Imperial Britain and France!

[@ivowehsely9131]

Hey possible history! This video was honestly your best until now and has made you the best alternate historian on KZbin in my mind. I really like your unbiased approach, keep it up!

[@WawasConCebolla]

Unbiased aproach: "calling communism a hellhole

[@RobairtO-Dhoilingta-n16420]

​@@WawasConCebollaStalin's dictatorship*

[@joaojonito3764]

​@@WawasConCebolla Stalin's regime was not even real communism

[@zeeshanasif476]

I'm a little confused about the formation of the Iron Front. In OTL, the Iron Front was a united front of moderates, and was openly opposed to Communism, with the 3 arrows being towards Hilter (NatSocs), von Papen (monarchists), and most notable, Thaelmann (communists). To me, it would make sense if the "Einheitsfront" was formed, this was already a concept pushed by the KPD and Comintern, and this time, wasn't anti-communist.

[@ottersirotten4290]

Centrists were and will always get crushed

[@alfredandersson875]

@@ottersirotten4290 correct. They either get pushed right by the right or are subsumed by the left out of fear of them becoming more right wing. In my opinion, being a centrist is a non-position as a leftist from today share a lot with a leftist from 100 years ago, and a right winger sharing a lot with the right from the same period. A centrist does not due to their arbitrary stances.

[@stardustcrusader5018]

Nice vid. It’d be interesting to see how the Cold War develops in this timeline, especially if France were to flip red

[@e4arakon]

Honestly I just don't see France turning red. Not with american backing and moderate social welfare state in place anyway. Now, if the americans f.e. hold back on supporting europe that'd be another story, but there's just to much american interest in european industry for them not to entangle themselves

[@spanglish_official]

@@e4arakon it almost did in 1875

[@John.McMillan]

​@@e4arakonIt almost did several times in our timeline. It's certainly possible that many communists would go to Germany instead, or without the Fascist threat there is less Communist support, however it is equally possible that with a Communist neighbor the sentiment would only increase.

[@chheinrich8486]

Well the european economy wiuld be doomed

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

​@@e4arakon It almost did in our timeline. So unless Britain manages to somehow convince America to fight communism and give money to france tk crush the commies, the France will become communist.

[@LegiyonEhellout]

I wondered this for a long time. Finally someone makes a video about it! Thanks!

[@profeseurchemical]

with germany aligning with russia, france and especially britain might actually end up joining italy in supporting franco 😬

[@siyacer]

So much better huh?

[@siyacer]

@@profeseurchemical Stalin in a puddle of his own piss.png

[@siyacer]

@@andrewzhu5394 cringecel

[@averagebohemian5791]

Then Franco would be more morally flawless in this timeline

[@Bzgiorno_Bzgiovanna]

​@@averagebohemian5791 well in our timeline he at least cooperated with allies and helped to evacuate lots of jews to America, idk what to bring to justify his dictatorship without Hitler.

[@noaht8592]

There is no eastern front so russian industry is damaged but still intact, and germnay has the ruhr meaning russia and Germany could likely compete quite well with the western industry instead of being utterly outclassed by America's industrial might

[@laisphinto6372]

i dont think france will Germany let have the ruhr and britain has no convincing Argument to temper demands since they actually hoped to have germany be a Future trade partner and shield against communism,this flies out the window with communist germny

[@nyctomint]

@@laisphinto6372 if the war in europe is a stalemate and the US heads the negotiations, I highly doubt france would take any german land. they'd probably keep alsace-lorraine, but taking the ruhr is just an insane demand from a frontline that doesn't move in six entire years

[@chickensoldier9790]

They werent outclassed lol. The soviets were actually on the way to surpass the usa economically irl. So this alliance would have probably done that before the 90s even.

[@theoheinrich529]

16:17 Didn't Nazi Germany not fully implement total war doctrine during the early years of the war? They only did that when the Allied powers started to shift the balance of the war to their favor.

[@helmutschmidt50]

Germany only started total war measures 43 yeah

[@kazakhstanisastate4614]

@@helmutschmidt50 i thught it was 41 after america joined

[@shawtyshort7649]

@@kazakhstanisastate4614 i believe it began when goebells did the sportpalast speech (total war speech)

[@PLATINUM12x5]

​@@shawtyshort7649that explains what that was about. maybe if Germany went total war earlier they would have won. and won at Dunkirk. also they would need Japanese help against Moscow.

[@socialistmapper3060]

While it may seem that the Republicans would win in Spain easily, I disagree. The reason many European powers like France and Britain were split on who to support was because of their opposition to Germany and Fascism. However, with a greater emphasis on socialism, Britain and maybe France would support the Nationalists. Also, great scenario!

[@man-uk8cz]

Imo the main reason they would lose is they are just too divided and prone to infighting, Franco had the nationalists unified.

[@arthurbriand2175]

Considering how the sino soviet relationship soured once China got powerful enough to not take orders from Moscow, it seems weird that Stalin would share with anyone willingly the control of the Communist bloc. I think the aftermath of the war would include a split between the two on trivial political matters, maybe some border fighting and eventually the americans would probably try to poach Germany and open a separate relationship with them. You didn't really specify who controlled Germany. Is it a single strongman, a shadowy Politburo ? Like many 20th century regimes the egos of the people in charge would greatly alter the fate of the nations.

[@projectpitchfork860]

China und the USSR didn't break because Moscow was dictating China and they wanted it to stop. It was because differences in how they layed put Marx work. And siviet destalinization was a big part in that.

[@johnnyissuper6955]

@@projectpitchfork860 and that happened because China was not a puppet of the USSR and were free to have their own political beliefs and enact their own policies The exact same thing happened with Yugoslavia, they liberated themselves during ww2 so it did not become a soviet puppet, causing the Soviets and Yugoslavs to hate each other.

[@charlesramirez587]

@@azlanadil3646 I mean best case scenario Germany is less wealthy but still part of the most developed economies, though if trade wasn't heavily restricted It would loose it's manufacturing base and an EU under German hegemony would be impossible. This might see the rise of a Resurgent France if it allowed it's economy to function more freely allowing it to replace Germany as the first nation of Europe.

[@pedroavila5796]

@@azlanadil3646 Arguably the Soviets are in an better position in this timeline then anyone else, the Germans are an close second to this. The USSR got to annex its claims in Poland, i would assume they got to take the baltics, ( who's gonna stop them, the Germans that need their help ? ) they got to keep their industrialisation program going undisturbed outside of maybe some sporadic Allied bombing, they got that sweet sweet German technology as payment for giving the germans resources, they didnt suffer the massive 27M casualties of ww2, it didnt establish the easter European satelites wich were big economical drains ( the Soviets had to maintail oil prices low, running an deficit ), it also lacks the need to Maintain such an Massive military spending with having almost no borders it needs to heavily militarise outside of the Iran-Pakistan and possibly the Iran-Iraq Borders, even assuming Germany becomes an massive threat i dont see the Soviets having to mantain an army as large as they did historically. The main places that the Soviets lose compared to OTL are the ones that matter the least to how succesfull the Soviet state is, that being international prestiege, afterall they didnt take the majority of the German army for 4 years strait and come out ahead, they at best helped Germany stalemate France and the UK + take some middle eastern lands ( that are also filled with Oil ) Their economic and political sistem did not get validated nearly as much, so its less likely to solidify and be unwilling to change like it was during the Brezhnev years, and an reformer will have an easier time to reform the economy with the German example to follow.

[@Gooberman-yv1fp]

​@@johnnyissuper6955Yugoslavia actively opposed the Soviet Union and supported the west via inaction. Thats a good reason for souring relations with the USSR.

[@Fancy-8380]

Remember that there are differences between Socialists and social democrat parties,the SPD was socialdemocratic not socialist.

[@X4Epidermis]

how so? doesn't the social in social democrat mean socialist?

[@Fancy-8380]

@@X4Epidermis No it means that it's interest is the fair treatment of workers, ( wages, regulated work hours, work insurance) . Meanwhile the socialists demand for wider nationalization of factories for the public and the limiting of private property focusing for a socialist path.

[@Fancy-8380]

@@X4Epidermis social in social democrats means being social (equally fairly treated but not the communist way of "equality").

[@nyctomint]

@@Fancy-8380 the goal of the majority of social democrat parties is to provide a peaceful gradual transition into socialism through reform and use of the apparatus of state. yes, it's different to bolshevik communism and other forms of authoritarian communists, but the vast majority of social democrats' final aim is to become democratic socialists, exercising the will of the people to reach that final stage

[@magma440]

The SDP were further left in the 1920s and 30s. They only stopped being socialist and switched to social democratic fully after WW2.

[@riesenbonobo7846]

SPD was not socialist, it was social-democratic, which is capitalist but with workers rights and entirely different from democratic socialism!

[@gergelykovacs4008]

At the 20s and 30s they were still a marxist reformist socialist party, they were so officially untill the 70s i think. Dont forget social democracy didnt mean non-socialism at the time (even Lenin started in a socdem party) these parties simply didnt support revolutions and after some decades (+ cold war politics) they mostly dropped the marxism and socialism from their manifestos (not all i think the swede and some other parties are still officially claim to want to transition from capitalism)

[@riesenbonobo7846]

@@gergelykovacs4008 This is only true for the USPD, the SPD hat many wings, some more left some less, but even the Weimarer SPD was not socialist. Social democracy was a conscious dissociation from socialism.

[@gergelykovacs4008]

@@riesenbonobo7846 Not at the time, there were many members from the USPD who rejoined in the SPD also members who never left yet were far-left (as you said it was pretty diverse) but even the most moderate social democrat believed in achieving socialism at the time. It was part of the manifesto and what socialdemocrats aimed to achieve only with reformist parliamentary means. Essentially there wasnt a difference between demsocs and socdems at the time. The whole concept of "rhine capitalism" or a socialmarket economy didnt exist yet, it came to be post war as a compromise between the christian democrats and socialdemocrats, even then they didnt saw this as the end goal, but now most socdems did stopped identifying as a socialist as the Soviet Union kinda "corrupted" the term and instead focused on more short term goals instead of a long end such as socialism. With the beginning of the neoliberal era in europe many social democrats moved to the right and adopted liberal policies in hopes of electoral success (as the working class as a voting block started to fade so they wanted to reach out to urban liberal voters). This aliented many traditional socdem voters who went to the new leftist parties who were often historically communist now ideologically democratic socialist like the various "The Left" parties. So yeah sorry for all that history i just find european socialdemocracy intresting since they tend to be the oldest party in every country.

[@hawk992]

@@gergelykovacs4008 Riesen Bonobo is right. Only USPD did stay socialist. SPD in the 1920th and early 1930th was part of the Weimar Coalition. Together with the Zentrum (catholics), left liberal, national liberal and economic liberal parties. So in Realpolitics the SPD was not a socialist party anymore post World War 1.

[@gergelykovacs4008]

@@hawk992 thats only true if u think socialism can only be achieved through revolution and with no class colaboration. Which can be argued for sure. But even tho they were revisionist they still worked towards socialism in their eyes and wanted collective ownership of the MoP and this makes them socialist. Socialism is a very broad movement, heck even social democracy is very broad (w people like Blair and Palme identifying w the same label) i dont think it achieves anything by branding early socdems as nonsocialist. A socialist is simply someone who advocates for collective ownership and a more democratic economy something that early socdems (even some modern ones) clearly did.

[@juliane__]

22:40 France got most out of the funds of the Marshall Plan in our timeline. How about a video about, what if Marshall Plan didn't happened?

[@nickmumpfield5319]

Western Europe Woody the fall to Soviet influence or they might create an early version of the European Union without American influence

[@lottenetzel8751]

14:18 The civil war would've lasted longer like ten years.

[@davidbalogun7569]

Main thing i disagree with here is Japan. Without France falling to Germany they wouldnt have gone after Indochina which means they wouldn't have been hit with the embargo, there would also be less general animosity towards them without the anti commitern pact and without joining the axis. There is just no way they would attack the allies and america when they aren't in anywhere near as bad a position as they were in real life and when there isnt a reason to do so without the embargo

[@qazdr6]

Well you didn't talk much about German re-militarisation. Did they do the polish war w/ the 100k Versailles troops? I don't think there would be a world war with a socialist Germany and a 1v1 war between Japan and the USA doesn't make sense. The resources are in the southern colonies and China. Also 1930's worker owned factories are different from modern cooperatives.

[@e4arakon]

I agree in so far that it certainly wouldn't be a world war, even with the different theaters. Tbh I didn't think about the small military part of the treaty at all, so point taken. Japan would still be at war with the US, GB and FR, and in this timeline for the resources, only difference is that the soviets would join earlier, since they have little to lose and much to gain. I do agree that todays worker coops work in other ways then back in the day, where do you want to go with this? Please elaborate on that.

[@qazdr6]

@@e4arakon the way I heard the video it sounded like Japan never went to war w/ the European entente, something about America fighting Japan on its own. Re: worker owned factories in the 30's; they don't seem to have a good record of success and the Soviets quickly got rid of them after the Civil War. Flashing the headline of a Nation article about modern co-ops I thought was a little silly. By no world war I mean I don't think Britain, France or the US is going to go to war w/ Red Germany and would abandon Poland especially if that is Germany's the first action with territorial expansion in mind.

[@e4arakon]

@@qazdr6 In that case I'm sorry I didn't make that clearer. The japanese still stay on their route of trying to dominate souteast asia. Accepted, a Nation article from this century says little about the worker coops from last century. I'm sure that if we did more research into why the soviet worker coops failed we'd find some interesting reasons behind it. Call me crazy but I believe it might have something to do with the literacy rate ^^ Well, why would france and britain let a perfectly good chance to try and get rid of germany pass by though? I mean, sure, the french wouldn't be head over heels for it, but I think its fair to assume the ruling classes of both countries would have a huge interest in bringing this worker republic down.

[@qazdr6]

@@e4arakon well, I think your model of how 1930's/40's Britain and France make decisions is different from mine. Things like 'the focus' won't exist TTL, and the press (important in 'democracies') is not going to be as harsh on moderate Red Germany as it was OTL on the Nazis. Double that as red Germany is less expansionist that OTL Germany or SU. Even when the allies thought Stalin was Hitler's ally they didn't go to war over the invasion of Poland, Finland, the Baltics or the sale of oil to Germany. Ditto after WW2 when Stalin occupied half of Europe, with a more evil regime than your red Germany, and with a better chance of success with the Yanks on board and red army exhausted. I think you need more forces to align to produce a world war than just opportunity + a certain would like it. I'm just enjoying the back and forth at this point.

[@catrielmarignaclionti4518]

@@azlanadil3646 im just curious, what is your political afilliation?

[@yannickluecker3983]

An interesting aspect to be kept in mind about Marxism and Communism in this case is that, in theory, the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" does not have to be an authoritarian one-party state like the Soviet Union was. Because quite simply, according to Marx, all of us right now, already live in a "Dictatorship of the Burgeoisie". It doesn't fit at all with the modern colloqial use of the term, and should maybe be rephrased, but basically, the "Dictatorship" of a class in Marxian terms refers to which socioeconomic class the state apparatus is designed to serve and benefit. Some Communist movements, as you doubtlessly know already, aimed to build such an apparatus for the working class via authoritarian means (which derailed quite often into plain tyrrany), while your depiction of a gradual process of expropriation is a perfect example of achieving the same goal by much less brutish means. So, when you say the Socialists would have to keep down the Communists from establishing a dictatorship, by the Communists' definition they'd already be working together to do just that XD

[@Ribulose15diphosphat]

One Party Realsocialism is just a way to implement a Soviet Republik under a Parlamentarian Constitution. The Party Conference is the real election, and the Parlamentary Election is just for show.

[@comrademakno]

So did Germany do an anchuluss in this world our not? I'm confused In the European section it's a free Austria, in the world map Germany annexed it. I'd say the German government would try for an anchuless bc in this time period of pre WW2 there was high German sentiment in Austria, but I can also see that Austria gets heavy far right influence from Italy and far right dissidents from Germany fleeing the country so it could go any way? But also great scenario I think you are one of first alternate history channel to cover this!

[@vfanon]

IRL, German socialists believed in reunification with Austria because Austria was a monarchist construct populated by both ethnic and cultural germans. But the practicality might change that, especially if in this potential world Austria became a refuge for reactionary germans.

[@comrademakno]

@@vfanon I agree.

[@riesenbonobo7846]

@@vfanon on the other hand, since germany stays democratic, austria might join it voluntarily, since pangermanic enthusiasm was quite high during the weimarer republic and only declined since many austrians feared the nazi regime.

[@lorefox201]

​@@riesenbonobo7846""""democratic""""

[@necromater6656]

@@vfanon I mean Austria is absolutely an artificial state, without the Habsburgs they have no reason to exist separated from the other southern germans.

[@EastGermany-pc2lw]

the world if my parents got along

[@feli-the-sunfairy]

About the western Front... Fall Gelb was basically just the Schlieffenplan in a new Paint coat, so I wouldn't say Germany struggles in the West because of the lack of Generals. It's more likely that Germany struggles because they didn't remobilise like the Nazis did in OTL. Other then that, a very interesting and believable Scenario!

[@TheLostArchangel666]

Honestly I'd love to see the CNT-FAI win the Spanish civil war in this timeline...

[@edelweiss7928]

The bad ending

[@TheLostArchangel666]

@@edelweiss7928 Lol no

[@Imulti]

In reality CNT-FAI was a part of the Republicans not a separate faction although they seriously considered declaring independence. I'm sorry but hoi4 lied to you. CNT-FAI victory is very difficult as it requires a quick defeat of the nationalists before pro Moscow communists get too much control and seize power from CNT-FAI and POUM like in our timeline. After defeat of the nationalists they would have to fight against other republican factions as republican popular front likely falls apart. I expect pro Moscow communists to hold advantage as they were secretly preparing for another civil war after they defeated the nationalists so CNT-FAI victory is unlikely

[@jansundvall2082]

This scenario will most possible lead to that at least the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands voluntarily allies with Germany in the 30s may be also Czechoslovakia do so.

[@SalvadorCiaro]

Nice A alt history video that is actually good.

[@SDM_Arcugos]

-Arakon's secret viewer scenario?!?!?!-

[@PizzaChess69]

Conservatives be like: BuT gErMaNy DiD tUrN LeFt iN oUr TiMeLiNe No, the Nazis were not leftists. They were far-right. Please stop claiming that the Nazis were leftists, it has literally become a meme at this point.

[@Danail079]

Economically, Nazis disagreed with austerity, but endorsed market economy during their first few years, but politically they were maybe tho most Right of the Rights except the DVNP

[@barsukascool]

Define left vs right. Because National Socialism was a racist socialism which also wanted to expand massively into the East up to the Urals.

[@PizzaChess69]

@@barsukascool I'd say left-wing means wanting to reduce class differences and societal hierarchies whereas right-wing means believing in firm societal hierarchies. With that definition, National Socialism was 100 % far-right.

[@barsukascool]

⁠@@PizzaChess69well the natsocs claimed that they wanted an egalitarian utopia for the Aryan race. If what we need is believing against societal hierarchies, than we definetly have that in both AH and Stalin. And anyway i disagree with this definition. I think that classifying the complex human brain and all our thoughts into one dimension is wrong and ineffective and in the end just leads to it being used to insult people who disagree with a given political position. A more concrete classification would be public control vs private control imo

[@chickensoldier9790]

​@@barsukascool the national socialism of the nazis werent socialist. It was just a word they used to gain support. They were economically right wing and socially even more so. There wasnt a single piece of leftism in them. They are right wing no matter what neoliberal politicians make up.

[@Makarosc]

Honestly the most likely outcome is German Soviet split and the two of then fighting over spheres of influence

[@alessandrosilvafilho8527]

If the german revolution was Marxist-Leninist, I don't see a reason for a split. They could form a great eastern block and trade with each other, and with the Baltic states.

[@Makarosc]

@@alessandrosilvafilho8527 well it wasn't it was some flavor of Democratic Socialism if it was Marxist Leninist they would conquer the Baltics

[@dirtypinhead8850]

Nice vid!

[@magma440]

I don't think Germany would have as rough a time from the 1929 Crash in this timeline. In our timeline the Liberals made it policy for Germany and German companies to take large amounts of cheap debt from the US. When the crash hit, that cheap debt became expensive debt, which led to the German economy crashing. In the socialist timeline, Germany would have taken out less American loans, so wouldn't have been as badly effected, although they still would have been effected, only to a lesser degree. I also don't believe that Britain and France would side with a reactionary Poland, especially if Germany didn't make any hostile moves towards Austria or Czechoslovakia. Appeasement was a popular policy initially after all.

[@profeseurchemical]

germany could take posen, but itd be some work to justify ideologically, maybe theyd carve out a polish ssr or assr?

[@e4arakon]

honestly I'd say that it'd be just a popular move. Like, left or right wing voter would support regaining of lost territories, so even if the ideological justification is flimsy at best, any leader would be an utter fool to let this chance of easy popularity pass by.

[@profeseurchemical]

@@e4arakon west prussia and even upper silesia i see, posen tho, naah

[@profeseurchemical]

for the full old border to work, itd be a luxembourgist antinationalist line, with all of old congress poland going to the ussr, obviously in pratice this just props up russian and german nationalism.

[@profeseurchemical]

@@e4arakon socialism in germany, rather than socialism for germans was the idea behnd that line of thought.

[@e4arakon]

@@profeseurchemical well, sadly nationalism was no stranger to socialism historically speaking. But I see the point with congress poland being argued to go to the ussr. Maybe a shared control/split would've been more realistic then ^^

[@palehunter6711]

I personally think that later in the cold War as the nations expand the German soviet relations would fracture via some form of dis agreement over spheres of in fulence ending with a break up that may lead to a war probably seeing the opening nato would either support 1 side that they think is more moderate or both to make the nations rip each other apart

[@johnwalsh4857]

Spain I think goes like OTL Nationalists win, but it goes on longer and the Spanish civil war ends in 1940 with a Nationalist win due to France and GB support Franco. (as well as Italy). , Franco sends volunteeres to France to fight the Germans.

[@dalegribble7939]

While the republicans might not infight as much as otl there would still be considerable infighting with anarchists, liberals and. Trotskyists

[@effeff7029]

I disagree on Italy being western aligned, historically Italy and the Soviets had a very good relationship until Barbarossa, which Mussolini was heavily reluctant to even join. Also the fascist economy and ideology is much more similar to that of the socialists than that of the liberals in the West. With Mussolini not joining the war he could have even potentially solidified enough control and support to oust the King since he was always anti-monarchy.

[@joshuabanner3675]

I honestly think that Mussolini’s personal history with the international socialist movement (they kicked him out) would preclude him getting on well with such a bloc. Possibly a palace coup or something that results in a realignment though.

[@effeff7029]

@@joshuabanner3675 To be fair its more like Mussolini was just kicked from the Italian Socialist movement. Lenin disavowed the Italian Socialist Party for kicking out Mussolini. Also history speaks for itself when Italy was a way smoother relationship with the Soviets until the 1940s than with the west.

[@elcastellano790]

Where can I find the music around 13:00? It’s beautiful

[@BS-vx8dg]

I'm at 5:19 and am leaving. It may be my fault, but I'm not sure when the "alternate" timeline began. Was it at the beginning? This just wasn't clear to me, but at this point I can see I missed something.

[@bigd982]

nice video

[@LongTran-kp3kz]

I like that. 'No mistakes. Just happy accidents'.

[@itapi697]

I really enjoyed the video

[@Brasc]

I have to wonder about this 1v1 war between Japan and the USA. The primary impetus for that in OTL was because Japan occupied French Indochina, which in turn was because France had fallen to Nazi Germany and it was ripe to be grabbed without much of a fight. In this TL, France still stands, Britain isn't on the ropes, the Netherlands are still neutral and holding on to the East Indies, and Japan hasn't signed any agreements with a European power like Nazi Germany - the Japanese wouldn't make any moves towards Southeast Asia and concentrate on China while worrying about the advances of the USSR. As long as Japan is still just fighting China, the USA will grumble but they won't do anything, especially if the Soviets are on the march and might move into East Asia if Japan is distracted. The German-Soviet alliance seems like a much bigger threat than the Empire of Japan bogged down in China. Personally, I see the war with China continuing to drag on and, if the USSR starts making any moves towards East Asia, the Western powers will be more likely to support Japan than the USSR. In fact, it may come to pass that the Japanese will eventually discover the Daqing oil field in Manchukuo sometime in the 1940s, which the PRC later discovered in OTL in 1959, which will increase their capacity to mechanize their army and allow their navy to operate unimpeded. In fact, that might make an interesting TL in itself - What if Imperial Japan discovered the Daqing Oil Field in the 1930s? They'd be completely independent of any US attempts at an embargo.

[@tappyline8666]

Great video!

[@Post_the_most]

I really love this scenario as it's not staunlchly anti-communist but atill not glorifying

[@johnpyefinch3454]

very good alternate history

[@tomegert8857]

I think nationalist would still win the spanish civil war, but it would be longer.

[@Humble-one]

Hi, great viedo.

[@samuelturner1668]

Commissar Binkov? Your voice sounds familiar...

[@k.umquat8604]

He's too young to be Binkov.

[@BoyanZhelyazkov_theDoctor]

Germany would build better socialism than the soviet union and a similar split like the sino-soviet split will occur. Germany would have a "socialism with a human face" style of government, Soviets will keep their hard-line. Maybe some states like Hungary and Czechoslovakia would follow Germany and there will be a small block of countries close to the USSR but not aligned with it. I guess that Germany will become a nuclear power, and will have world power status similar to France and Britain but falling behind the Soviets and Americans. It would be curious if Germany manage to reform the socialist regime into something that is feasible nowadays. After the collapse of the Soviet Union probably Germany will take over a lot of the Easter Europe countries as a major ally and some socialist regimes probably will survive in a reformed manner.

[@stekra3159]

Thank you so much

[@barsukascool]

18:24 the marxists also are not very pro-Jewish

[@briankaroll57]

You should do what if about British empire For Honor Queen Elizabeth Ii Like you make what if Gorbachev reform For Honor Mikhail Gorbachev

[@dalegribble7939]

22:50 I could also imagine them going towards the right as well with the war being against socialists action france could very easily use this to try to gain more political support . Along with this they would be closer to the us

[@hazelarson6970]

This seems like Germany becomes an actual successful socialist state, I feel like this is a world where Communism could thrive : )

[@iamthepiemaster]

That's the problem with these alternate histories - they always assume that fictitious communism will magically work better than any real iteration that has been tried when there is no reason to assume that would be the case. But still, people can dream right?

[@tekinet7958]

​@@iamthepiemaster I mean communism worked in ussr and China no?

[@iamthepiemaster]

@@tekinet7958 Worked in what way? China started to become economically successful when it basically dropped its communist economy in the 80s and introduced a state-controlled capitalism instead (although it is worth noting that the Chinese economy is still significantly smaller than the US despite having a population 4 times larger). As for the USSR you only have to sort European countries by GDP per capita and see that, although they have caught up a lot in the 30 years since, even today all the countries at the bottom are the ones that endured 40 years of Soviet-style communism and the ones at the top are the ones that didn't.

[@tekinet7958]

@@iamthepiemaster China became economically successful even before the economy became to liberalise. Because of Mao China became a superpower that rivals USA to this day and what if Chinese economy is still smaller than the US despite its smaller population? It was very poorly industrialised and had a weak economy after WW2 not to mention the civil war that it had. Actually it is more embarrassing for USA to compete with the Chinese after it had grown for half a century to be strong and even bypassing the Americans in the future. The ussr industrialised the baltic states which is why they have a higher gdp per capita than the Russians. This is also why they were the only nations in the west of ussr to be willing to leave the ussr bcs they didn't need Russia and they knew it. And the ones who "endured" Soviet style economy like Kazakhstan apparently has the same GDP per capita Russia seems to be at the "bottom" bcs of that right?

[@iamthepiemaster]

@@tekinet7958 I'm probably done here because you are clearly way too far down the "communism=good" rabbit hole to be convinced by anything I say, but no Mao did not make China a superpower, he presided over a stagnated and failing economy due to horrendously mismanaged industrialisation and collectivisation policies that killed over 30 million people in famines. And WW2 is no excuse. Japan and Germany were also crippled after WW2 and look where they are now without Communism holding them down. And how can you possibly say that population doesn't matter when comparing economies? The economies of Denmark and Bangladesh are about the same size yet one is a very rich country, the other very poor. When China 'overtakes' the US to be the largest economy in the world it will be symbolic but will mean nothing in practice. The majority of Chinese people will still be poor by western standards.

[@trillionbones89]

America would not receive their economic boost from the WW2 programs

[@3chmidt]

23:56 Hitler was elected into the Bavatian Sovjet Republic tho

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

No.

[@3chmidt]

@@Wendeta-hq2cp yes + ratio + 0 contra evidence

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

@@3chmidt Hitler entered in politics when he, as a military man, was tasked with entering the reactionary right wing DAP party and investigating it. He ended up being convinced of their crap so much that he founded the much more radical NSDAP later. During the Soviet Bavaria period Hitler actually aided the other military personnel in fighting against the communists, since the guy tried to remain in the military for as long as possible.

[@3chmidt]

@@Wendeta-hq2cp Well researched, but... There are photos and videos of Hitler attending the funeral procession of the Jewish socialist revolutionary Karl Eisner which was in the Karl Marx party SPD, Hitler was elected into the soldier's soviet council of Eisner's Bavarian people's republic and became the deputy battalion representative, after the people's republic collapsed, Hitler was elected again in the Bavarian Soviet Republic which was 1919. Also Julius Schreck, the founder of the SS fought in the Bavarian red army. The Freikorps Epp including Karl Rahm, Hans Frank, Rudolf Hess and Strasser brothers fought against the communists in 1919 while Hitler and Schreck fought for the communists. Don't forget that Hitler wrote himself that he fought against the communists in his Book, it would be bad for him if it came out at that time, that Hitler was a communist, but we know better today. Also the DAP was a socialist/revolutionary party, which the name German Worker's Party makes it quite obvious, everything can be called right wing pre ww2 from the western modern view

[@Wendeta-hq2cp]

@@3chmidt What part of informer don't you get man. Okay, so Hitler being in that circle was, simply, to provide information on the members of the movement, which in turn were killed. It's that simple. 🤷‍♀️

[@E.C.GoMusicandMore]

The CNT FAI win in this scenario

[@brianclaffey6138]

I think this scenario is unlikely. If the revolution was successful in Germany there would be further unrest around the world. The success of the Russian revolution sent shockwaves around the world. I think it would make a revolution in France and Britain far more likely and could trigger anti-colonial uprisings around the world.

[@Heinrich-k1u]

If Germany would not become national socialist, and instead Marxist socialist, the fascist would perhaps survive and isolate for some years and then after they open borders they see a strong nation and culture and military and fascism would be a normalized ideology especially because it doesn’t get falsely mixed with national socialism from ww2.

[@thebutcher7541]

Nah

[@alexanderboev]

interesting take

[@clodsirelover2501]

22:36 wait a minute france turns red in 2008 😳😳😳

[@Hans1871_AndSchnitzel]

Very Kool :D

[@mackpeters9916]

Good vid

[@lbgamer6166]

It went slightly to the left and then left a rocket called nationalism and went to space.

[@erickromero5638]

What a interesting scenario!

[@PizzaChess69]

There is no way in hell the Social Fascists would've allied with the proletariat. Still nice video though.

[@barsukascool]

Social Fascists? What is that?

[@PizzaChess69]

@@barsukascool The Social Democrats, Social Fascists is what Stalin called them because they'd rather allow the Nazis to take power than work with the communists to stop them.

[@lloydgush]

10:50 "profits goes to the workers" lol, not under communism. Subsistence living at best.

[@SchalusinSpace]

Remake when?

[@dostumpikachu5118]

The SPD wasn't Communist tho

[@aleaf4098]

honestly the soviets would be so much better off its kinda crazy to think how most of their post war ideals would be different like their stance on genetics, farming and actual science as it wouldnt be seen as a special evil german thing

[@depotheose7890]

i personally don't think that france and britain would declare war on germany in this timeline. After all, there is no history of failed appeasement and poland was the aggressor by pushing for gdansk

[@szymon2078]

"Poland was the aggressor" what is bro yapping

[@depotheose7890]

@@szymon2078 in this timeline. Not in purs of course

[@barsukascool]

This is a reply to Chicken Soldier: I’m not even gonna argue with you, just gonna quote some historians a bunch to disprove you: "Business and professional associations, sports clubs, choral societies, shooting clubs, patriotic associations, and most other forms of organised activity were taken under - or more frequently hastened to place themselves under - National Socialist control in the first months of the Third Reich." -Kershaw "The [NSDAP] reorganised industry into 13 administrative groups with a large number of subgroups to create a private hierarchy for state control. The state therefore could direct the firms' activities without acquiring direct ownership of enterprises." -Temin If it was "state control" it's no longer private, since it belongs to the public sector. "The [NSDAP] viewed private property as conditional on its use - not as a fundamental right. If the property was not being used to further Nazi goals, it could be nationalized. Prof. Junkers of the Junkers aeroplane factory refused to follow the government's bidding in 1934. The [NSDAP] thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated." -Temin "Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to "examine" the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under [the NSDAP] there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the state. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred." -Reimann "How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary Government decisions concerning quantity, quality and prices for foreign raw materials. You cannot imagine how taxation has increased. Yet everyone is afraid to complain about it. The new State loans are nothing but confiscation of private property, because no one believed that the Government will ever make repayment, nor even pay interest after the first few years. We businessmen still make sufficient profit, sometimes even large profits, but we never know how much we are going to be able to keep." -German bussinesman writing to American bussinesman, from Reimann "The decree of February 28, 1933, nullified article 153 of the Weimar Constitution which guaranteed private property and restricted interference with private property in accordance with certain legally defined conditions ... The conception of property has experienced a fundamental change. The individualistic conception of the State - a result of the liberal spirit - must give way to the concept that communal welfare precedes individual welfare." -Reimann "Such a system also changes the psychology of businessmen. Their experiences teach them that the old right of property no longer exists. They find themselves compelled to respect the "national interest" or the "welfare of the community". Businessmen must claim that everything they do, any new business for which they want a certificate, any preferment in the supply of raw materials, etc., is "in the interest of the national community." -Reimann "The Reich's economic administration, for its part, accumulated unprecedented powers of national economic control." -Tooze "In addition, the delivery of some public services that were produced by government prior to the 1930s, especially social and labor-related services, was transferred to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the [NSDAP]." "Besides the transfer to the private sector of public ownership in firms, the Nazi government also transferred many public services (some long established, others newly created) to special organizations: either the Nazi party and its affiliates or other allegedly independent organizations" -Bel Bel thinks that the NSDAP is private. It’s not, it was the state. So, it’s nationalization, not privatization. "The reprivatization of United Steel Works, which put Fritz Thyssen in the leading position in the trust, appears to be an example of the use of privatization to increase political support. It is worth remembering that Thyssen had been one of the only two big industrialists to support the Nazi Party before it became the most powerful party in the political scene." -Bel Yep, reprivatization to the NSDAP, which is the state. Not privatization at all, rather nationalization to the state. "At least half the time of a German manufacturer is spent on the problem of how to get scarce raw materials. These cannot be obtained without a certificate from one of the supervisory boards which distribute the available raw materials, domestic as well as foreign." -Reimann "From the point of view of company finance the prisoners' work unit was not profitable even once Monowitz had been built. Although the managers agreed with the SS that the average work capacity of a prisoner was 75 per cent that of a free German worker, this prognosis soon proved to be unrealistic. In fact the capacity of the prisoners clearly fell below 50 per cent of that of a German worker, and sometimes reached only 20 per cent. Despite the minimal labour costs, IG Farben made no profit out of the prisoners' units because productivity, given inadequate nutrition, harassment and punishments, and the physically draining and psychologically humiliating work, fell far short of expectations." -Steinbarcher Yes, it was hardly profitable for the corporations to work for the state, yet they did. This was because of state control. "...class, as well as other bonds of affiliation and identity, and, above all, political parties based on economic interest were viewed as forms of "false consciousness" that threatened to divide racial comrades and unite racial rivals in a manner inherently inimical to the well-being of a racial collective or Volksgemeinschaft and contrary to the law of nature." -Geyer This quote demonstrates my original point that the Nazis were egalitarian for the 'Aryan'. TL;DR - the Nazis exercised significant control of the economy. If you reply with terms like "state capitalism" and "not real socialism", then please define these terms, as well as other commonly misused or distorted terms. If you are able to simply dismiss this as "political propoganda" or "incorrect" somehow, than I can’t do anything to convince you - you’ve already chose your position and I can’t go into your head and change it. Remember, I am not your enemy, I simply disagree with you on this topics and I’m sure we’d agree on a lot of other topics. Please, reconsider your stance and don’t attack me. If I’m wrong, than PROVE ME WRONG. I will admit I’m wrong, if you prove it.

[@darth_nihilus_]

The SPD was Most of the time governing the Country and ist was always a democratic party. Also the SPD was the only Party that voted against the Enabling Act.

[@herroberbesserwisser7331]

Well that was kinda because the communists were banned from parliament at the time. There were 0 communists from the 60 that should have been in the Reichstag because the nazis got them "banned".

[@milanvitu3963]

You left some things: At first the the rhineland ocupation by france ( the western allies would take all teritory west of rhine river much longer... the soviets and germans would be total brother nations at least until the 30s and they ll invade poland bevore it even firms ( poland becoming a soviet republik). Germany take old teritory and would never acept the peace treaty with france from our time line . It ll develop a left wing nationalism. After a long border war with france the western force ll leafe the rhine land and germany ll takes its old borders without elsas Lothringen . Somewhere in 30s,40s or 50s a soviet german split ll happen..and maby result in a german invasion of soviet Union about right way of idiology....in this timeline germany ll be first nuclear power and first rocket into space ll start from swinemünde. The USA ll develop nuclear power after germany and ll angage in a cold war with red germany. The war in russia ll take decades and end up like the soviet afghan war in our time line with backing of russian (even sovjet)partisan against red germans . At the end the west ll maby win the cold war

[@theoheinrich529]

The red ending

[@ethanfranzen8684]

What is the Cold War like?

[@stefanoprimo8158]

Possibile History, in my opinion the nationalist would have won anyway, because the French in no way might accepted two socialist nations at their borders, maybe also Britain would send help, but less then France and Italy. And the Germans, in my opinion, couldn't massivly increase their army, because in our timeline the Allies like a powerful Germany to keep away the communists from them: so the Condor Legion, that detroyed a lot of spanish cities, was praticaly inesistent in this alternative timeline.

[@nyctomint]

I doubt france could intervene in a meaningful enough way to undo the german revolution without its government collapsing before 1940 at least

[@MellonAM]

I feel like a war happening after the end of this video could be Germany, USSR, Balkans, and China Versus USA, France, UK, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Japan, (and maybe Greece)

[@Dummigame]

Who wrote this?!

[@adivshtein2054]

The good ending?

[@dallas9397]

No.

[@ahmadfabhli4133]

For germany and russia yes others idk

[@bradleyhoyt3188]

I love this timeline. :)

[@blackout_officer66]

3:57

[@filiperosa7496]

Your confusiom with communist and stalinism is understandable, but if you want to be a histocaly social KZbin you need to understand the difference between communists in the same way that you understand the difference between Hoover and Frackly Roosevelt

[@Strix2031]

Insane video lmao.

[@dyllanwoolston5546]

Interesting

[@mugen7819]

hi pretty cool scenario

[@stargazer-elite]

No Austrian painter with a silly mustache would come to power in Germany as his values would be destroyed Itsly would be alone with the silly bald guy

[@kaiserredgamer8943]

Did this Germany rearm on a similar scale as the Nazis?

[@Rick79LUFC]

Japan would never surrender with out the atom bomb in any reality they would fight to the last man women and child as nothing is more dishonorable than surrender expecially the Japanese mind set in the 1940s Japan could be againts the entire planet and still fight ....it was the absolute horror of the A bombs that guaranteed Japan's surrender any thing less and Japan would of fought on .

[@chrisgaming9567]

Orientalist racism

[@PPRR-io3un]

Easter europe faith

[@EHBUD67]

I mean it did, Germany also created real socialism

[@bigd982]

hi

[@EchteSauerkartoffel]

the spd wasnt communist.

[@LeonDS17414]

But socialist

[@LoganLS0]

They did. First with Social Democrats then with the National Socialist German Workers Party.

[@barsukascool]

It’s not communist tho, it was just socialist

[@jon_the_special]

Hi

[@briangithinji8901]

Awesome. Berlin Moscow alliance could rule the world for 1000 years. German influences on Moscow would have made Stalin less likely to purge the general's and he would have wanted to be seen as the leading communist power. Trade between the two could spur specialisation and transfer of technologies. Moscow would feed Germany and provide oil for its industry, Berlin would lead the push to induatrialize the Soviet behemoth. Instead of the total destruction of the cossacks and other traditional business class, the Soviets would build on it. Just thinking. We would be in a Communist utopia

[@rey_nemaattori]

Sooo, basically Germany & Russia up till the war? Yah, they tried that, didn't work.

[@culmination8206]

I agree

[@redcrown5154]

no lmao

[@dallas9397]

no lmao

[@nyctomint]

I highly doubt the moscow-berlin connection would last past the 1940s, especially given they explicitly disagree on the fundamentals of socialism in this scenario

[@bigd982]

hello

[@somnolentea]

Heyyy wassup

[@tiagoemilio7204]

Realy good

[@irpwellyn]

certainly wouldn't be under the SPD

[@stekra3159]

I think a communist EU of sorts woud form in Europe wich woud compeat with the capitalist one