Effects on Latin Am., S. Asia, China & Japan if in 1917 Russia turns Populist instead of Communist?

[Salvador79]

Imagine Russia coming out of 1917's revolution with a Populist regime instead of a Communist one.
Not necessarily a shining example of democracy, but also no comparison to either Tsarist autocracy or Bolshevik terror and Stalinism?
Some non-negotiable characteristics: while the Great War goes horribly for Russia, they remain or return to the Entente fold ere the end. There is a massive land reform, and there was violent unrest, political and ethnic conflicts of all sorts, although not on the scale of OTL's Civil War. The thing calls itself "socialist", but is at best semi-socialist by OTL's standards and would much more aptly be described as "Populist". Religion is being used by the powers that be, like in so many places, not persecuted and marginalised. By the mid-1920s, Russia has recovered from the scars of the Great War and the Revolution somewhat - perhaps it's best if you compare it to a super-sized Mexico (post-revolutionary Mexico back then, not today's).

Now what really interests me in this thread is:
What effects would this super-sized Mexico-like Russia, instead of the Bolshevik one we know, have on
a) Latin America
b) South Asia
c) China and Japan?
Any ideas?

 

[BigBlueBox]

Latin America - Communism would be weaker, as there is no Communist state. At the same time though, the non-Leninist radical left would probably be more prominent.

South Asia - Not much. Socialism had a bit of influence in the Raj but Marxism-Leninism never had any power. The Indian National Congress will probably be Fabian just like OTL.

China - There would still be some kind of radical left, but the Chinese Communist Party would probably not form (If it did, it would be much different). It’s possible that the people who would have joined the CCP join the KMT instead, which either pulls the whole party to the left or causes it to fracture into a left-wing and a right-wing. Either outcome would have significant effects on China. Alternatively there could be a different radical left party, which in turn siphons off Left-KMT members or people who would have joined the KMT. This would lead to a smaller but more right-wing KMT.

Japan - The Japanese are still going to distrust Russia, although the animosity will probably not be as high as OTL. Depending on what your PoD is, the Japanese might have avoided their extremely costly intervention into the Russian Civil War, would would also have significant effects on their domestic politics. There wouldn’t be any red scare though, so presumably the Japanese left would be better off.

It’s unknown exactly how this “Populist” Russia would react to Japanese meddling in China and any takeover of Manchuria.

 

[jerseyguy]

Populism sounds like it would be a vaguely Peronist grab bag of corporatism, social insurance programs, heavy-handed economic interventionism, and maybe some land reform here or there. I don't know if a non-Bolshevik government would keep the village communes intact or rationalize agriculture with small, contiguous individual plots for self-sufficient farmers.

Avoiding the collectivization of agriculture would prevent an immense amount of pain, suffering, poverty, and famine deaths during the twentieth century. The biggest obstacle to democratization is almost always a class of landed aristocracy and absentee landlords, whether in Russia, China, or Latin America. This group is also the biggest losers from economic development as a country urbanizes and industrializes, destroying their social prestige from traditional hierarchies and making them economically obsolete because 90% of the population aren't tenant farmers anymore.

The Prussian Junkers' are the quintessential example of this phenomenon. People from noble lineages with minor titles like Julius Evola were somewhat typical supporters of fascism's warlike and hierarchical values.

It's worth noting how bizarre the US coup in Guatemala is as well, it was more motivated by Red scare paranoia than some economic stake in keeping Guatemala poor. Arbenz's land reform policies were pretty much the same measures implemented by the US's east asian allies at the time (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), and land reform in the latter case is widely credited with legitimizing democracy and undercutting support for communism.

 

[BigBlueBox]

It's worth noting how bizarre the US coup in Guatemala is as well, it was more motivated by Red scare paranoia than some economic stake in keeping Guatemala poor. Arbenz's land reform policies were pretty much the same measures implemented by the US's east asian allies at the time (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), and land reform in the latter case is widely credited with legitimizing democracy and undercutting support for communism.

The United Fruit Company wasn’t operating in Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan.

 

[Salvador79]

Thank you for your feedback!

Now, so far we've considered the change primarily being LESS Russian influence, which I think is adequate, but what if we factor in influences from a half-coherent populist / narodnik state ideology to the mix?

 

[lukedalton]

No communism revolution and in general the socialist will remain much more moderate than OTL, or if there is a schism, the communist part will be the minority...the success of the russian revolution give them a lot of street creed that was succesfully capitalizated in influence in foreign socialist parties.
Plus if they remain with the entente till the end and behave like you said, there will be a general less fear of this new regime...and a very different war