65
I know this isn't how history works and yada Yada but it really do feel like this sometimes
(lemmygrad.ml)
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2025
65 points (100.0% liked)
GenZedong
4482 readers
147 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've thought about this before as well. If German communists succeeded, then there wouldn't have been a WW2. The rest of Europe would've almost certainly become communists, and the US would not have become the superpower it is today. Instead, the workers in US would've likely overthrown capitalism as well following the example of Russia and Europe. We literally could've been living in the Star Trek future right now.
I wonder if in that timeline Portugal would’ve been able to turn Communist after the Carnation Revolution…
🤔
That's a big If. These are Europeans we are talking about. Theres a reason they supported fascism then, and theres a reason so many Americans support it now. Theyre imperialists to their core. Committing violence against others to profit off them is normalized for them. You can't just undo centuries of colonialism just like that. Sure there will always be some people who see the light so to speak, but the majority of even the proletariat in these imperialist nations are very reactionary, and will always support fascism over socialism.
Thats why its necessary to dismantle the imperialist systems they benefit from first. They'll all collapse into fascism, turn their colonial violence inwards, and then after that collapse process ends they will be ready for socialism.
When a nation becomes organized in such a way that it is propped up by extractive violence via colonialism and imperialism it will always seek to do so more and more. This process won't end until its inevitably turned inward. Or in rare cases where its disrupted by some powerful outside force. The turning inward is the fascist stage. Thats my take on it anyway.
I mean, Russia was an imperialist and settler-colonial country back then, and they still became the USSR. We're talking about right after the First World War, which radicalized many workers even in imperialist nations.
Russia's revolution was led by peasants. The Russian situation vs the rest of Europe was very different. The Russians who led the Russian revolution were not benefiting from colonialism, and in some cases were themselves the colonized people. As Russia conquered lands nearby rather than having far flung colonies. A colony of a European power has socialist potential (Think Vietnam) and Russia while it did engage in imperialism and colonialism did not have a revolution led by the people who benefit from those systems. Its a very different situation.
That is very true as well. The imperialism does a lot to prop up support for capitalism in the west.
This analysis makes a lot of sense to me, well said.
I'm gonna take a guess the stray downvote to your analysis is some European taking offense and to that I say, obviously this sort of thing doesn't apply to every one at all times as individuals. As I see it, it's a broad take on material conditions and how those influence people as a whole, not a condemnation of every European individual. But I don't speak for you obviously.
This is why we disabled them on hex. That way you actually have to voice your disagreement.
I like that. Downvotes have always tended to bother me in places that have them, partly because no matter what anyone tries to say about how to use them (like reddit subs that say "it's not a disagree button"), they still seem to get used as basically passive-aggression rather than openly confronting an issue. On top of that, they can cause a person to feel rejected, but be clueless as to why, which ends up being confusing instead of lending clarity as to why their comment got such a reaction. Of course in life sometimes people disagree and it won't always be resolved to satisfaction, but downvotes don't seem to bring anyone closer to understanding each other. Upvotes are vague in their own way and I'm not sure how useful they are either, but at least they don't hide disagreements or frustration behind a (usually anonymous) button.
ya like i said theres exceptions to everything. But when you have a centuries old societal tradition of colonialism that gets engrained into the culture. Its not like genetic. Its the conditions they exist in. It takes a lot of effort, and usually luck to not fall into that reactionary mindset when your born into those conditions.
I see a massive nuclear war in this scenario.
The US was able to develop nukes because a bunch of German scientists fled there and the war provided the justification for running a massive nuclear research program.
I think there would have been a WW2 it just would have been communist continental Europe versus the UK/Commonwealth-USA alliance maybe with Imperial Japan as a wild card.
Still probably a better timeline but uncertain.
The labour movement in US was very strong after the great depression, and I expect it would've kept growing. Also, if the war was between the US+UK vs all of Europe and USSR, then the balance of power would've been very different as well. The reason the US became so dominant was because it sat out the war while the rest of the world burnt.
I think it's hard to predict as these all have effects on each other. Like the USA could have continued social democratic reforms to appease it's strong labor whole snatching up European colonies in Asia and South America to subsidize the core.
And an anglo alliance might consider Europe lost and pivot to cementing their grip in South Asia and Southern Africa etc
The weird outcome is I think Imperial Japan would probably have at a minium a non aggression pact with Europe and possibly an alliance. Which is an enormous contradiction of Idealogy versus realpolitik. Possibly leading to an Anglo or US aligned Nationalist China movement etc
You're right that there are many unexpected ways things can work out, but many of the advantages that the current US empire is propped up on would not have existed. Even the US and UK together would not have been central to the world economy. The Soviet bloc would've been by far the bigger player in that scenario. It's hard to overstate just how much the US benefited from WW2.