DBWI: Denikin doesn't capture Moscow

Superdude

Banned
In November 1919, 100 miles from Moscow, General Denikin linked up with the Polish army and drove the Communist forces from the city. With the fall of this center of the Bolshevik regime, the Red armies fragmented, and were finally stamped out in 1922.

But what if it didn't happen? What if the Poles didn't link up with Denikin? What if the attack failed? What if the Red's attacked first?
 

HelloLegend

Banned
Without a commie government in Russia,
the Western Democracies of the world would
FORCE the Middle Eastern countries to submit
to the NEW WORLD ORDER....


Once upon a time... America supported Democracies.
Nowadays... America CREATES them.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Good grief! Not THIS again! Look, dude, the Bolshevik "Revolution" in Russia was doomed to failure. If the Bolsheviks hadn't failed in 1919, they certainly would have fallen in 1920- 1921 at the latest.

The idea of a successful Bolshevik Revolution belongs in the ASB forum. Honestly, I'm getting tired of all the pretentious, beret-wearing, turtlenecked, coffee-house types expounded on this TL. It would NEVER have happened. Get over it already.
 

Fabilius

Anaxagoras said:
Good grief! Not THIS again! Look, dude, the Bolshevik "Revolution" in Russia was doomed to failure. If the Bolsheviks hadn't failed in 1919, they certainly would have fallen in 1920- 1921 at the latest.

The idea of a successful Bolshevik Revolution belongs in the ASB forum. Honestly, I'm getting tired of all the pretentious, beret-wearing, turtlenecked, coffee-house types expounded on this TL. It would NEVER have happened. Get over it already.
Click to expand...

Well it most certainly happened in Germany 1924, Finland, Sweden and Norway joined. But due to the pressure of the capitalist countries they couldn´t last.

Communism needs an international revolution. Only big countries that don´t need inport-export so much such as China, USA and Russia can last as communists.
 
Mr_ Bondoc

Mr_ Bondoc

I Beg to Differ...

Although it took until 1952, India under Ajoy Ghosh, Communist Party of India (CPI), was proof that a nation needed neither a large industrial base or an educated middle-class in order to form a communist/socialist government. The 1964 victory of Dipa Nusantara Aidit in Indonesia is further proof. With over 1/3 of the world's population still following this political ideology, who's to say that Russia might not have been a target?
 

Aldroud

Banned
But at what price? No Communist government ever came into existance by an election. Ajoy Ghosh ranks up there with Sandler and MacDowell as some of the worst butchers of the century.
 

Hendryk

Banned
Come on, have you read Marx at all? The Capital is quite clear: a successful Communist revolution can only take place in an advanced industrial society. Why? Because the instrument of revolution is the proletariat.

A Communist revolution in Russia was impossible according to Marxist theory. Not with such a small industrial base, and a proletariat accounting for barely 5% of the total population. Plus, Russia was not a bourgeois society, but a feudal one--it was still generations away from meeting the requirements for a true Communist revolution. I'm sure that, even without Denikin, the whole attempt would have collapsed within months.

Marx expected the revolution he had in mind to take place in Germany, or Britain, or possibly even the USA. Anywhere but that backwater Russia. What are you going to suggest next, Communism in China?
 

luakel

Hendryk said:
What are you going to suggest next, Communism in China?
Click to expand...
Which China? I've lost count of how many factions there are at this point...

@Fabilius- but just remember that the communist/socialist govt.'s in those countries were elected democratically, unlike the revolution in Germany...
 
Mr_ Bondoc

Mr_ Bondoc

When Has It Ever??

Aldroud said:
But at what price? No Communist government ever came into existance by an election. Ajoy Ghosh ranks up there with Sandler and MacDowell as some of the worst butchers of the century.
Click to expand...

Well hasn't it been said that "all political revolution is violent"? Ajoy Ghosh is simply a reaction and counterpoint to right-wing nationalist rival Subhas Chandra Bose, whom the British backed in 1942 during the initial Indian Civil War As to bloodshed, the suffering caused by the Eugenics Societies under P.M. Cyril Burt in Great Britain certainly caused more harm until 1978. So attacks against Ghosh would seem very hypocritical, if not racist...
 
Last edited:

Burton K Wheeler

Moderator
The Bolsheviks were clearly off-base with their claim that a revolutionary vanguard could lead a nation to socialism. The Mensheviks' plan to progressively develop their country proved to be the correct one. If the Bolsheviks had triumphed, socialism would never have appeared worldwide. Russia is an impoverished agricultural backwater. If they had somehow managed to control all 47 of the independent countries, including my own Wolgadeutschen A.S.S.R., which sprang out of the ashes of the Russian Empire, socialism would have been thoroughly discredited by being associated with such a backwards regime. Germany, Italy, and Eastern Europe would never have elected progressive socialist governments, and the nasty reactionary bunches who sprang up in response to the Bolshevik-inspired revolutionaries may even have taken power in Europe. I shudder to imagine such a world...
 

Burton K Wheeler

Moderator
Max Sinister said:
It just sounds strange - the ASSR was a creation of the Soviets, it's unlikely to come into existence without a Soviet Russia.
Click to expand...

Probably the name "A.S.S.R". wouldn't have been used. But a whole host of independent ethnic states cropped up around Russia after the fall of the Empire, and the Bolsheviks weren't strong enough to consolidate control over them until Stalin. The internal government of the Wolgadeutschen A.S.S.R. was virtually unchanged after the revolution, up until the point the population was genocided and exiled by Stalin in 1931.
 

Max Sinister

Banned
OK, that could happen. Only one question: Didn't the deportation to Siberia happen later, after barbarossa? 1941 would make more sense.
 
Mr_ Bondoc

Mr_ Bondoc

But What About...??

The Bald Imposter said:
Probably the name "A.S.S.R". wouldn't have been used. But a whole host of independent ethnic states cropped up around Russia after the fall of the Empire, and the Bolsheviks weren't strong enough to consolidate control over them until Stalin. The internal government of the Wolgadeutschen A.S.S.R. was virtually unchanged after the revolution, up until the point the population was genocided and exiled by Stalin in 1931.
Click to expand...

Well, the establishment of the state of Kingdom of Belarus to protect the British, French, Americans, and Japan in 1920, with Prince Alexei, being named Czar Alexander III in St. Petersburg seems to have been a major blow to the ASSR's attempt at unifying the people. Also with their control of the Black Sea borders, teh ASSR was strapped for trade, thus speeding up its ultimate demise...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top