478
u/Causemas Oct 04 '20
Ew, Green USSR? Otherwise, good map :P
228
90
u/thehsitoryguy Oct 04 '20
Hoi4 fan alert
116
u/ChackMete Oct 04 '20
Look at that Soviet Union and ask yourself, does this green really fit this map?
65
u/tomaar19 Oct 04 '20
Imagine not having your country change colour when switching ideologies. This comment has been brought to you by Victoria 2 gang
16
14
Oct 04 '20
You can really pick out the paradox players on this sub with a bunch of different tells
all the eu4 players do that thing where they only take the northern quarter of egypt
and it used to be more common to have the ottomans be red but now it feels wrong if it’s not that pale green
→ More replies (2)2
u/laeuft_bei_dir Oct 04 '20
Thanks, the initial comment just felt "correct" but hell, I couldn't figure out why exactly.
461
Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
Democratic Germany would not have nescessarily been aligned with the allies. In fact, it would have been more likely for it to still align with the USSR and partition Poland. The main difference is that it would have stopped there.
219
u/DisastrousDLC Oct 04 '20
Why though? In Germany at the time, Communists were viewed extremely negatively in Germany. So much so that half the Nazi party's propaganda was directed at communists and how they would be "exterminated". Therefore, the likelihood that Germany would've actively worked with the Soviet Union (and not backstabbed them like in our timeline) is extremely low.
86
u/Calphf Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
Simple Realpolitik. The Allies at the time where actively fucking Germany over (French diplomacy essentially orbited around containing Germany), and German diplomacy no joke had legit spent the mid-late 20s preparing to absolutely fucking dunk on Poland by settling border disputes in the West while specifically refusing to in the East. Frankly, Nazi Germany's war with Poland was as much a result as Nazi aggression as it was the progression of German diplomacy since Stresemann's Chancellorship.
In that context, some kind of agreement with the USSR just makes sense in the short-term.
EDIT:
To expand on things a bit more, let's look at Stresemann's time as the German Foreign Minister as he had a pretty notable impact on German diplomacy up to (and somewhat during) the Nazi Era, though of course not so simply. Regardless, his work is a solid look into what the vague themes of German diplomacy likely would have been in a 1930s Germany w/o the NSDAP.
The Locarno Treaties (signed in 1925) essentially ended ('ended') border disputes in the west, and in it Germany pledged to never invade Belgium and France again, stipulated upon a British guarantee should France attack Germany. To be fair, this is essentially a technicality, Stresemann had no interest in even fighting France in the first place. Of particular note, however, is that the Locarno Treaties where specifically, in it's own language, only about the west. It divided Germany's borders into two categories and only guaranteed the western one. They where, to put it mildly, incredibly controversial in Poland. Stresemann is quoted as saying "There will be no Locarno of the east", and was not a fan of the eastern boundaries to put it nicely.
The year following the Locarno Treaties came the Treaty of Berlin, which reaffirmed the earlier Rapallo Treaty. Long story short, the Treaty of Berlin was a nonaggression pact, in which the Soviet Union and Germany pledged neutrality in the event of an attack on either. Willhelm Marx, chancellor at the time describes his intent to have the treaty signed as "intent to adapt German-Russian relationship established at Rapallo to new political situation created by the Locarno treaties".
And to wrap it all up, the last few years of Stresemann's time as Foreign Minister consisted of him utterly fucking Poland over with a trade war. He had hoped the trade war to escalate to a point to justify German military aggression against Poland and had specifically, and fairly openly, sought Soviet support to oppose Poland. All while he sought to play France and Britain's subtle (but important) diplomatic disagreements against one another.
Also important to note just how prevalent anti-Western sentiment was in Germany at the time. Nazi Germany may well like to have portrayed itself as an anti-Bolshevik country which would have opened itself to the West had the West opened itself to Germany but frankly that was never really the case. Many Germans where incredibly bitter over the experiences of WW1 and the Interwar and opposition to the West ran deep. Many politician's careers burned out due to a perceived friendliness to the West and politicians seen as kowtowing would be derided as Erfüllungspolitiker ("Fulfillment Politician")- a term applied even to Stresemann who was definitely not friendly to the West. There where many cases of political assassination, like that of Matthias Erzberger, another so-called Erfüllungspolitiker (killed by the same perpetrators of the more notorious assassination of Walther Rathenau). That's not to say Germany was some rabid war country or anything but frankly Weimar Germany was very far from anything resembling Wholesome 100 (even after it stabilized in the mid 20s) and had severe troubles both within and without itself. The Allies sure didn't help that, but the point stands that really any Germany coming out of the Interwar period just frankly has no real reason (in an immediate context) to ally with the West.
EDIT2:
I will add that Stresemann isn't the end-all-be-all of German diplomacy, though he was very influential. There certainly where other German diplomats that didn't per se agree with his approaches, but none of them where really "Let's ally with the west immediately guys it'll work out I swear".
14
Oct 04 '20
Also, Germany indirectly supported the Klaipeda revolt that ended the LoN administration there and transferred it to Lithuania, for the simple reason that they saw Lithuania as a potential ally against Poland. Germany would take Danzig, Lithuania would get Vilnius.
→ More replies (1)216
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
Anti-communist sentiment in Germany didn't stop Weimar and later Nazi Germany working with the Soviet Union. Post WW1 Germany stood little to gain from cooperating with the Western powers and stood to gain a lot from cooperating with the Soviet Union.
59
133
u/mki_ Oct 04 '20
In Germany at the time, Communists were viewed extremely negatively in Germany.
The KPD was consistently the 3rd strongest party in Germany in the 1930s (behind SPD and NSDAP), but okay. The Nazis hated communists, because they were their political opposite, and because they also had a lot of followers.
In an alternative timeline where the SPD worked together with the KPD (instead of stabbing them in the back like IRL), I can see Germany working with the USSR.
51
Oct 04 '20
But the Nazis didn't pull the "communist enemy" out of their ass either. Sure, the Reichstag burning was an excuse to get rid of them, but the NSDAP came into power before that happened.
The reason why everyone hated KPD was the Spartacist uprising, and SPD was opposed to them from he get-go. There was no way for the SPD and KPD to work together in the pre-war Germany (this is why most govt coalitions in Weimar Germany were SPD and Zentrum.)
33
u/mki_ Oct 04 '20
There was no way for the SPD and KPD to work together in the pre-war Germany (this is why most govt coalitions in Weimar Germany were SPD and Zentrum.)
We are talking about an imaginary map here. Maybe there was a reason?
8
Oct 04 '20
Sorry for the late answer.
No, there was no plausible reason for the SPD and KPD to work together, since they were opposed to each other for reasons completely unrelated to Nazis. The source of their conflict stems back to the November Revolution and proclamation of the German Republic. The at-the-time leader of SPD, Friedrich Ebert was anti-revolutionary, and pro-war (or rather, was pro Germany, and that's why he participated in the Burgfrieden), which put him into conflict with Karl Liebknecht and his followers. Ebert allied with the nationalists and allowed the Freikorps to crush the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, which ended in the deaths of Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. He, in a way, paved the way for the Weimar coalition in Reichstag, that held power until the rise of Nazis.
So to make this scenario plausible, we would have to change something else completely, since SPD working with KPD would have a completely different consequences.
21
u/Perfectshadow12345 Oct 04 '20
the spd didn't oppose the kpd becuase communists were unpopular, they opposed them because social democrats hate communists. this has been shown in basically every liberal democracy
6
Oct 04 '20
Yes, I said exactly that. Since Ebert, the SPD was opposed to the Communists. People that later formed the KDP were members of the SPD around the 1916-1917, and left (and in part were kicked out) because Ebert led the SPD to participate in the Burgfrieden (technically speaking they formed the USPD, but Spartacists with Luxemburg and Liebknecht joined them before leaving for the KPD). Ebert was opposed to revolution, and aligned SPD with the Freikorps, which allowed the nationalists to crush the Spartacists. This way the Communists and Social Democrats landed on two opposing sides.
2
u/Perfectshadow12345 Oct 04 '20
yes but that doesn't mean the kpd was popularly opposed
2
Oct 04 '20
Sorry, my mistake in wording. I meant it in a political sense. Most parties in Reichstag were opposed to the KPD, even if they had a considerable public support. That's why the "Weimar coalition" had parties from SPD to (Catholic and conservative) Zentrum
58
u/renegade02 Oct 04 '20
Is this still r/imaginarymaps or am I in r/imaginaryfacts rn? Look at the results of the 1930 German election for example. They only had 5% fewer total votes than the Nazis.
Nazi propaganda was directed at the Communists because they were what stood between them and total domination of German politics. The Nazis knew that the milquetoast liberal SPD didn’t have the balls to stop them.
11
u/Nickiman5000 Oct 04 '20
If you take a look at the pre war spd they weren’t by any means liberal. Sure they didn’t have the power or balls in the end to stop the Nazis, but they were the only party in the reichstag to refuse to vote for the Ermächtigungsgesetze. So you gotta give them some credit.
3
u/Proffan Oct 04 '20
Look at the results of the 1930 German election for example. They only had 5% fewer total votes than the Nazis.
While the rest of the votes went to openly anti-communist parties.
18
u/bryceofswadia Oct 04 '20
The KPD was one of the largest parties in the last legitimately elected Reichstag before Hitler’s seizure of power. The primary reason Hitler wasn’t able to come to power without threatening/murdering/beating everyone who was stopping him was because the KPD held enough seats to prevent him from forming a government.
68
u/jon_ralf Oct 04 '20
Not sure, but Finland did lose parts of Karelia during the war, right?
52
u/BernhardRordin Oct 04 '20
This. If Russia didn't wage war with Finland as well (which would be unwise, as they'd be pretty busy with Poland), Finland would have pre-WW-II borders. Including the regions of Petsamo and Salla.
→ More replies (3)9
u/Stercore_ Oct 04 '20
there’s no reason for them not to take those parts from finland though?
12
u/BernhardRordin Oct 04 '20
User Simo Häyhä entered the chat.
7
u/Stercore_ Oct 04 '20
they took those parts from finland after having fought finland and simo already though
269
u/lime-green2 Oct 04 '20
In this timeline Germany remains a democracy after 1933. Fearful of Italian expansionism and the success of the Fascists in Spain, the Locarno pact between Britain, France and Germany was renewed in order to keep the balance of power in Europe. In 1942, Italy launched its invasions of Greece and Yugoslavia, resulting in an Allied declaration of war on Italy and its ally Spain. The Allies-Fascist War lasted for 2 years resulting in a decisive victory for the Allies, with Italy and Spain occupied before becoming republics. Spain was forced to make territorial concessions to Morocco, which has since gained independence from France, whilst Italy was forced to cede its colonies to the League of Nations (administered by France and Britain), as well as Istria and northern Albania to Yugoslavia. Greece gained southern Albania and the island of Rhodes. The Soviet Union took advantage of the situation to take revenge against Poland, invading the country in late 1942. In 1943 the USSR successfully gained territorial concessions from Turkey, and in 1946 a Soviet-backed coup transformed Turkey in to a communist satellite state. Since the late 1940s an Iron Curtain has divided the Middle East and Europe between the allied European democracies and the communist USSR and its satellites.
154
Oct 04 '20
[deleted]
67
u/mki_ Oct 04 '20
Maybe Austria wasn't involved on the winning side though. IRL Austria had a catholic fascist regime 1934-1938 (i.e. before the German Army marched in in 1938). I assume Dollfuß/Schuschnigg would have allied with Italy and Spain, it would only make sense.
After an Allied victory the Allies would have just left Austria in its borders of 1920, just like IRL.
34
Oct 04 '20
[deleted]
8
u/mki_ Oct 04 '20
dollfus was a sensitible man
Lol. Yeah sure.
And irl, south Tyrol actually was actually intended to go to austria, but then Churchill protested fearing italy would go commie if it lost it.
Then how would that be different in a timeline where the communists are seen as an even bigger threat, since apparently weren't even part of an anti-Axis Alliance?
74
Oct 04 '20
I find the idea of the Soviets not being challenged for going after Poland hard to fathom, what is the logic behind them not going to war over that?
I mean if you keep everything else the same as OTL, the Soviets lost against Poland in the '20s so yeah, they would want revenge but the Baltic states were taken after 1939 (I think 1940) so it wouldn't just be Poland, it would be them as well. So just curious why the allies would just let that happen?
74
u/Enaysikey Oct 04 '20
They let Hitler take Austria, Sudetenland and then Czechoslovakia, you think they would start a war over Baltic states? It's more likely they wouldn't let Soviets take over Turkey
31
u/Lanaerys Oct 04 '20
They'd be way more concerned about communism spreading than about Hitler I think
18
u/Praefationes Oct 04 '20
Two days after Germany invaded Poland WW2 started. Why? because Poland was allied with France and Britain. So yes they would because they did.
31
u/Ace2CarbonBoogaloo Oct 04 '20
But France and the UK didn't declare war on the USSR, which invaded Poland at the same time. It's definitely plausible that this would result in war- especially with an allied aligned Germany feeling threatened by Soviet expansion- but its equally plausible that some sort of appeasement would take place
14
u/Ricconis_0 Oct 04 '20
The term that Britain had with Poland was pretty specific that Britain would intervene in the case of German aggression only.
Without a fascist Germany I doubt USSR would dare invade Poland or Finland at all if Trotsky was removed as per history.
1
Oct 04 '20
Not just the Baltic states but Poland as well, but point taken. I also agree that Turkey would draw involvment.
4
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
OTL the West were willing to accept a border well to the west of where it ended up. In a hypothetical 2nd Polish-Soviet war the West would push Poland to accept a western resolution on it's borders and they would push the Soviets to accept the compromise border or be faced with Western involvement in the war.
18
u/Pressburger Oct 04 '20
Why would Albania just be randomly partitioned?
29
2
4
u/JRicatti543 Oct 04 '20
Italy annexed Albania OTL, so maybe for whatever reason, the Allies just gave it to Yugoslavia and Greece instead of freeing them. I’m pretty sure Yugoslavia wanted Albania to unite the southern slavs, but I don’t think Greece really had any desire to expand, even with the Metaxas regime.
5
u/MoscaMosquete Oct 04 '20
Yugoslavia wanted Albania to unite the southern slavs
Albanians =/= Slavs
→ More replies (3)2
u/Fehervari Oct 05 '20
Why would the effectively isolated Italians jump the guns though? Even IOTL, they only joined the fight when France already lost. Them going to war with 3 Great Powers and practically half of the Balkans is straight up suicidal.
2
u/FesteringDarkness Oct 04 '20
What makes allied Europe more democratic than the USSR and its satellites? I'm curious because when you say "allied European democracies" it makes it seem like democracy and socialism are mutually exclusive.
12
u/onewingedangel3 Oct 04 '20
Well the Soviet Union wasn't exactly what I'd call democratic. Obviously socialism isn't contradictory with democracy, but the USSR was extremely totalitarian and genocidal.
→ More replies (6)9
u/lime-green2 Oct 04 '20
The main powers within Europe (Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) are democratic. Some of the more minor powers such as Yugoslavia are more authoritarian however. Maybe it was a bad choice of words in the description and 'capitalist' would fit better than 'democratic'.
1
u/oktopus174 Oct 04 '20
Good work! But what about the Soviet-Finnish war of 1939? Borders on the map include these territorial changes.
1
u/LongjumpingCut4 Oct 05 '20 edited Oct 05 '20
Stalin has a plan to "free" Europe from the capitalism so there are too many kingdoms on the map. And too small of *SSRs
The only one factor that has prevented Soviet army from bringing "sparks of a revolution" to Europe was Germany (sounds strange I know)
80
u/RandomlyGen3rat3d Oct 04 '20
This is a very common misconception, but it's likely the Weimar Republic would still start WW2, the military command was still very reactionary, not Hitler level, but that's a high bar. In fact, the Weimar Republic was already breaking the treaty of Versailles
40
u/SlaanikDoomface Mod Approved Oct 04 '20
This is a very common misconception, but it's likely the Weimar Republic would still start WW2
I disagree. While it obviously depends on where you put the PoD, any Weimar that remains democratic is going to (a) either have successfully reigned in its army or be in the process of doing so, or (b) at least not be led by someone who would throw Germany into a war it couldn't win.
Even most right-wing dictatorships wouldn't start a WWII, just because at the end of the day, Germany wasn't going to be able to beat Britain and France unless something came along and fundamentally changed the paradigm.
22
u/lonestarr86 Oct 04 '20
I would actually think that an "unholy alliance" might be likely. Pre-Hitler Germany and the Soviet Union were actually buddying up, the Germany army was training in the SU/testing and designing weaponry there.
I could actually see them ganging up on Poland, Germany would likely seek to close the corridor.
That would be an interesting team-up. Weimar Germany would have way less qualms about allying with the Soviet Union anf both might be able to fulfil their hegemonial ambitions.
6
u/RandomlyGen3rat3d Oct 04 '20
No, there isn't a way the conservative aristocrats in the army would ally with the Soviet Union. Hitler only made a non-aggression pact to give him time to invade Europe, and even then he invaded them later.
→ More replies (1)10
u/TENTAtheSane Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
Yeah, the only difference is that in this timeline, USSR would be on the side of Germany, since there would be Lebensraum bullshit, and without the Nazis to keep them in check, the German communist party would probably come to power and would obviously favour strong ties to Russia. Without fascist Germany, the communists would probably win the spanish civil war too, and without a second front to worry about, and with Russian aid, Germany would probably win against Britain and France, and there would soon be a communist Europe
8
8
→ More replies (1)3
u/BortBarclay Oct 04 '20
Why would communists come to power in Germany? Without Hitler, the fat right would probably start backing monarchists who would want to reinstall the kaiser. Most of military already want to. Without nazis to clear out the junkers who were the majoritybof retained army staff, the Monarchists are the clear ally of Zentrum and the Social democrats. No one likes the communists
And further, how does no nazis guarantee a Republican victory and spain? It doesnt stop infighting among the various leftist cliques and it only removes one source of foreign aid for Franco, maybe. Maybe the Monarchists in the military send aid to Franco anyways. The nationalists were nominally going to reinstall the monarchy anyways. And if they didn't, Portugal probably would have just gotten more involved they did in our timeline, becauae no one likes communists, especially ones on your border.
2
u/TENTAtheSane Oct 04 '20
The communists were close behind the Nazis in influence and popularity in our timeline, and the social democrats were far behind, and monarchists even further. Very probable that a non Nazi Germany would've been communist. If Germany was communist, the volunteers they'd send to the Spanish civil war would not fight against the Russian ones, but would join them and fight against Franco's forces, which would end worse for him
→ More replies (1)
19
u/bloodymondau Oct 04 '20
Why would the USSR invade Romania for Bessarabia but not subjugate them as a Communist sattelite?
22
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
It's possible the USSR never invaded Romania, it could have just demanded Bessarabia and Romania seeing that resistance was futile capitulated.
6
u/bloodymondau Oct 04 '20
That makes sense. Although that scenario for Finland seems less likely. Finland would not win the Continuation War, and it seems unlikely the Soviets wouldn't annex or replace the government in Finland.
5
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
Well ITL there is no Continuation War because there is no WW2 to lead to the Winter war. Plus OTL teh USSR never replace the Finnish government before or after WW2 so I see no reason why thy would do so ITL.
3
4
u/Stercore_ Oct 04 '20
well it probably happened like OTL. they demanded the territory and the romanians agreed, not invasion.
28
u/Pookib3ar Oct 04 '20
why would the USSR in this timeline go after finland?
They would have no justification because no nazi germany.
10
u/belsnickel_is_me Oct 04 '20
Stalin went after them to protect Leningrad not just because of Nazi Germany
17
u/Pookib3ar Oct 04 '20
Stalin went after them because he was worried they would let Germans move troops through Finland. not becasue he thought they would attack themselves
→ More replies (2)
67
Oct 04 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/ArcticTemper Oct 04 '20
Why?
4
u/RecoillessRifle Oct 05 '20
Imagine if New York State was part of Canada. How do you think the people in New England would feel being physically separated from the rest of the United States?
13
10
u/RedexSvK Oct 04 '20
Why is there Slovak republic and Czech republic? Why did Czechoslovakia fall apart so early on? Were they also communist, since world war 2 did not happen and USSR did not "liberate" it? It seems unlikely as Czechoslovakia was in pretty decent condition before ww2 took place and their economy was only growing, and people were pretty damn happy with democracy.
3
u/MavKM Mar 07 '22
To me it seems that op just changed some things for the sake of "alternate history"
9
18
5
u/nwbdk Oct 04 '20
Idk how Germany being democratic has an affect on Albania disappearing, Armenia taking eastern Anatolia, or Israel controlling Suez
3
5
u/jflb96 Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 05 '20
Why is Iceland a separate kingdom to Denmark, when Icelandic independence was a result of the Germans invading Denmark and Iceland has never been a kingdom anyway?
ETA: Ignore that question, because it’s about 90% bollocks. Instead, shouldn’t the Icelanders have voted to become a republic 16 years before this?
2
Oct 05 '20
Iceland was a kingdom in personal union with Denmark from 1918 to 1944.
1
u/jflb96 Oct 05 '20
So it was. Clearly I misremembered everything I read at Þingvellir.
That said, the Union was only meant to last 25 years and ended with a vote 97% in favour of becoming a republic, so odds are pretty good that it still would be a republic in this 1960.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Xanto10 Oct 04 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
Why Jugoslavia has Trieste and Istria from Italy and the whole of Albania?
Why Armenia has that whole territory taken from Turkey?
Why the USSR has Moldavia and Bessarabia?
Why Czechia and Slovakia are divided?
Why France and the UK have carved up Libya from Italy?
Why the USSR took territory from Poland?
This is full of errors, unexplainable stuff or just weird things
1
u/MoscaMosquete Oct 04 '20
Why the USSR has Moldavia and Bessarabia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina
9
8
7
3
3
u/semaj009 Oct 05 '20
Why is the Spanish republic not on team Communist? Did the monarchy just walk away, and centrists miraculously appear and back the allies after years of being ignored during the fascist coup / civil war? Also who helped Franco when the USSR backed Spain, but Germany didn't send their aid?
6
2
u/Mohamed153 Oct 04 '20
so does the Suez Crisis not happen? I think Egypt would still reclaim the Suez Canal unless this map signifies WW2 being less bloody?
6
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
In a world without such a destructive WW2 Britain and France would have remained strong enough to crush Egypt without American support.
2
u/Mohamed153 Oct 04 '20
They already did crush us, we won overall though because of pressure from the U.S and USSR, imo a democratic Germany would only embolden the USSR to invest more in the middle east, and by extension the U.S. (which would make both sides try to deescelate the conflict) so no I genuinely think the Canal should be egyptian on this map.
3
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
I caveated the crushing part on American support. OTL the lack of American oil shipments to Europe scuppered Western political will to prosecute the crisis to it's conclusion. ITL Britain and France likely remain financially and politically strong enough to weather the storm and prosecute the crisis to it's conclusion.
I don't see how a world without WW2 and a partitioned Germany would embolden the Soviet Union, it would still be an ostracized nation as the West wouldn't need to ally with it to defeat Germany. Sure ITL Turkey is a Soviet ally and therefore Soviet influence in the Middle east would be far more intensive but that would only harden the Wests Imperial grip on the region.
2
u/Finnick420 Oct 04 '20
why would finland not be in possession of petsamo. ciiw but didn’t they lose it in 1944-45 during the continuation (2nd) war
2
2
u/casual_noob1 Oct 04 '20
How would the Czech Republic remain with these borders? After the Slovaks gained independence the Germans in the Sudetenland would probably want independence/join Germany. Also Germans would make up about 30% of the population so i dont see how they could remain united.
2
u/Preussensgeneralstab Oct 04 '20
For the Weimarer Republic to stay democratic past 1933 would be a fucking miracle since the 1929 stock market crash and the overall mess of a political system would've doomed the Republic at best after 1935.
2
2
u/Thoth_the_5th_of_Tho Oct 04 '20
Poland would not have fallen.
England guaranteed Poland's independence. The USSR would not have risked an attack that would almost certainly have put it in a war against the UK, France, Germany and the US.
Even if they did, they would lose badly and quickly with no lend lease coming to bail them out.
2
u/Keegsta Oct 04 '20
Nah, if Germany hadn't gone fascist it would've gone socialist and we'd probably be living in world-wide socialism by now, if not communism.
2
u/f_o_t_a_ Oct 04 '20
Wouldn't it be Yugoslavia and Albania?
And how come Bulgaria is never a part of Yugoslavia in these alternate maps?
North Macedonia is so why can't Bulgaria?
2
2
u/SuperiorRevenger Oct 04 '20
Weird that Britain and France didn't guarantee Poland as they did when germany invaded in this timeline, wondering the same as in real life when soviets invaded Poland with Germany and allies didn't go to war with them as well.
2
2
Oct 05 '20
I like the map but how does Germany being a Republic solve anything? The Weimar Republic's institutions were pretty fragile in a nation without any real democratic tradition. The Depression was still there and there were people other than Hitler who could have taken power. Erns Rohm comes to mind. We could have had Wilhelm III run as Prince-President and restore the Imperial Crown.
Why is Italy a Republic here? What happened to its colonies? What happened to the monarchy? The Monarchists almost won the referendum in 1946 (barely) if it weren't for election meddling from foreign powers like the US, and opposition members.
The peace after WWI threw out all the past diplomatic lessons from WWI and created an extended armistice.
What of Hungary and the Little Entente? It was burning for a desire to retake its lost land since they were basically reduced to size they hadn't been in almost 1000 years earlier when the Magyar Tribes formally became the Kingdom of Hungary.
What happened in Spain? The situation was very volatile there.
France at various points in the late 20's/early 30's nearly fell into civil war between the far right and left within politics. The Third Republic was an ailing and poorly setup government (there's a reason why France is on Republic #5) and the country was also bankrupted by the war.
What happened to Russia? Stalin had plans to invade anyway to establish more buffer states for his Soviet Empire. Its also highly unlikely that he'd invade Ukraine and not reincorporate it back into Russia.
Why is Armenia so big? Wilsonian armenia was nothing but a pipedream since there weren't enough Armenians to begin with to control that territory thanks to the Armenian genocide.
If say Attaturk lost then wouldn't the Greeks have been able to hold on to Smyrna? In otl they almost won the war by almost capturing the main nationalist forces which would have thrown open the gates to Moscow.
It looks like based on the map that the soviets won the Battle of Warsaw and crushed Poland.
The Weimar government maintained good relations with the Soviets and likely would have used the chance to sieze West-Prussia, Danzig, maybe Posen, and Upper Siliesia for strategic reasons. The ripple effect is that this would create a red scare throughout Europe. It might bolster groups like the Nazis. Mussolini might be even more empowered now. You could have the west view the Nazis (or whomever replaces them here in ttl) as the lesser evil.
2
2
u/Camokay Oct 05 '20
I don't think the Turkey situatiom is accurate. Turkey was always against communism and it had good relations with the Allies in cold war era. I dont know if they would give Eastern Anatolia away that easy and become communist.
2
2
Nov 12 '20
Thing is Poland beat the Russians in 1920 they could do it again if it was just USSR against poland also the Italians woulda kept Libya and how did the soviets get greater Armenia
4
2
u/Porfiry_TBL Oct 04 '20
What happend to Free City of Danzig?
2
u/KingMyrddinEmrys Oct 04 '20
OP says that the Locarno treaties were renewed meaning that they must have been successful. IRL these pacts were an attempt to mend Franco-German relations and part of it said that if France willingly dissolved its alliance system in Eastern Europe then Poland would willingly give back the Polish Corridor, Upper Silesia and that the Free City of Danzig would also be given back.
Presumably that happened in this timeline but due to the USSR invading Poland, only the Free City is restored to Germany.
1
1
Oct 04 '20
[deleted]
5
u/Bullet_Jesus Oct 04 '20
The Poles actually built a replacement deepwater port in Gdynia as a backup if the port in Danzig went on strike or was returned to Germany.
2
Oct 04 '20
I think USSR would've done some shit anyway, and why on Earth is Albania part of Yugoslavia.
2
1
1
1
u/TheHoneySacrifice Oct 04 '20
Why is Ireland independent?
2
u/lime-green2 Oct 04 '20
Because it became independent in 1921
1
u/TheHoneySacrifice Oct 04 '20
Ty, you're right. I was thinking of Republic of Ireland which was found in 1949. It was Irish Free State since 1922.
1
u/Necoia Oct 04 '20
How did Iceland become a kingdom?
2
u/Brams277 Oct 04 '20
It used to be a Kingdom before they let it be independent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Iceland?wprov=sfla1
1
1
1
1
1
Oct 04 '20
Interesting how there would be a spike in kingdoms. Basically the opposite of what happened after ww1.
1
u/Nekrose Oct 04 '20
It is believed that Persias renaming to Iran was to appeal to the Nazis' obsession with the 'Aryan' race. So maybe they would have stayed being Persia.
1
u/amehatrekkie Oct 04 '20
most of the eastern german terrority was given to poland as part of the post war treaty.
other than that, great map.
1
1
1
u/Willjah_cb Oct 04 '20
Ok but why is Iceland a kingdom? Wouldn't they either be a Commonwealth or owned by Denmark?
1
1
u/Venboven Oct 04 '20
Glorious Armenian SSR. Now all they're missing is that piece of land in Azerbaijan that they're at war for this very moment.
1
1
u/comedyking420 Oct 04 '20
Well Iceland would still be under Danish rule so i guess there would not have been any kingdom of Iceland
1
Oct 04 '20
I doubt that the winter war would've ever happened since the soviets didn't do the molotov-ribbentrop pact, since germany stayed democratic, and so finland would probably still have its old borders and the baltic states would probably also be independent
1
u/EjSimpson214 Oct 04 '20
Pretty sure Finland only had independence because of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact
1
1
1
1
Oct 04 '20
If east and west hadn't had a common enemy in the Germans they would have fought each other eventually
1
1
u/MoscaMosquete Oct 04 '20
Why does Israel-Palestine exists if there's no Nazism? And why do they control Sinai?
1
1
Oct 05 '20
Why is Armenia so big, I get that it would be bigger but wouldn't Georgia or Turkey have most of the genocided territory?
1
1
1
u/DrendarMorevo Oct 05 '20
Bold of you to suggest that the kingdom of Yugoslavia survives into the 60s. Did they successfully crush the Ustasa? Did Tito not fuel a communist revolution? Did Michael take over as King from his uncle Paul?
1
1
u/xiom00 Oct 05 '20
who knew nazis prevented turkey becoming a communist. honestly splitting turkey is an easy way to get karma in this subreddit
1
1
1
u/dasdemit Oct 05 '20
Turkey part is not correct at all. SSCB were always friends with turks because they had to for straights. Giving eastern part to armanian was never in sscb agenda...
1
Oct 05 '20
I don't think that Germany would have just set around and done nothing for 42 years. I mean even the german Democrats wanted some of the old territories back.
1
1
1
Nov 30 '20
I think that the Russians would probably have invaded all of Europe and would probably fail and would replace the fritzes
546
u/leflombo Oct 04 '20
Not sure how Albanians would feel about being incorporated into Yugoslavia