For the Republic: A History of the Second American Civil War

[The Angry Observer]

Oh god, I can very much see Trotsky attempting to organize some International Brigades compromised of anti-Stalinist leftists and leading them into battle. Would be funny but I doubt this'd happen for a variety of reasons.

Sounds like CPUSA's ideology is something he'd get behind, so I can see him figuring out a way to coordinate with them.

I honestly hope Trotsky does survive to become a player in the USA's left wing politics. Especially since the Spanish civil war seems to have been butterflied

I did not consider Trotsky personally supporting the Republican cause, but that idea is actually really cool and we might run with it. There are certainly all sorts of Trotskyists volunteering for the CPUSA. What I didn't mention is that one of the CPUSA's big strengths in terms of bartering with the Republican authorities is that it is bringing all sorts of volunteers from around the world, not just Russian engineers or whatever.

CPUSA is well organized, good at keeping secrets, and happy to do dirty work. So, even if you're not a communist, if you want to kill Natcorps you might end up going through CPUSA one way or another.

 

[Whiteshore]

Speaking of which, how much have events in America influenced military doctrine and figures in Europe?

 

[The Angry Observer]

Speaking of which, how much have events in America influenced military doctrine and figures in Europe?

Obviously a lot. There's this huge war going on employing armored warfare on this massive level, right in the heart of the U.S. Like with the last American Civil War, the world is intently watching and since everyone knows there will be another European war in the near future, adapting their tactics accordingly. We're still trying to game out what that looks like, but we generally agree that this takes away a lot of the elements that favored Hitler so strongly in the beginning.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

In addition, unlike the Spanish Civil War, Hitler cannot deploy as many people to test his new weapons and tactics, nor can he place warships near the American coasts, and he will have a difficult time evacuating his volunteers. This is leaving out the fact that THEY WILL LOSE...

 

[MagicalPhantom345]

After all of this is over, as other people have said, politics are going to be less urban-rural/conservative-liberal and more about regions, as regions are going to be more ideologically homogenous thanks in part to shared experiences in the war. The kind of polarization we have today just wouldn't happen, for better or for worse, but parties would have total monopolies on many states.

In a way this will parallel the situation between the Canadian Federal Government and it's provinces like Quebec and Alberta. Honestly this makes me wonder if the Electoral college will even survive in such political situation.

The mugshot is from 1930. Capone was seen by some, before the Valentine's Day Massacre, as a Robin Hood like figure that stole from the rich and gave to the poor. The war would definitely help to rehabilitate him, like you said. Big Bill Thompson is also arguably the most corrupt man in Illinois history, a very high bar indeed, and he's getting the Churchill treatment too.

There's also the fact the DOJ's war crimes makes the actions of the mafia like comparing drunk driver to a rampaging toddler.

CPUSA is well organized, good at keeping secrets, and happy to do dirty work. So, even if you're not a communist, if you want to kill Natcorps you might end up going through CPUSA one way or another.

To quote a popular anime "You can't change the world unless you get your hands dirty".

 

[Cudymcar]

The Russians obviously don't really care all that much about furthering the Revolution, and are more just happy America and Britain are in shambles

You project 1947 Stalin attitudes into 1934. 1934 is the peak of industrialization in the USSR, and American technical cooperation is indispensable.

In February 1930, between Amtorg and Albert Kahn, Inc., a firm of American architect Albert Kahn, an agreement was signed, according to which Kahn's firm became the chief consultant of the Soviet government on industrial construction and received a package of orders for the construction of industrial enterprises worth $2 billion (about $250 billion in prices of our time). This company has provided construction of more than 500 industrial facilities in the Soviet Union.[26][27][28]

A branch of Albert Kahn, Inc. was opened in Moscow under the name "Gosproektstroy". Its leader was Moritz Kahn, brother of the head of the company. It employed 25 leading American engineers and about 2,500 Soviet employees. At that time it was the largest architectural bureau in the world. During the three years of the existence of Gosproektroy, more than 4,000 Soviet architects, engineers and technicians who have studied the American experience passed through it. The Moscow Office of Heavy Machinery, a branch of the German company Demag, also worked in Moscow.

The firm of Albert Kahn played the role of coordinator between the Soviet customer and hundreds of Western companies that supplied equipment and advised the construction of individual objects. Thus, the technological project of the Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant was completed by Ford, the construction project by the American company Austin Motor Company. Construction of the 1st State Bearing Plant in Moscow, which was designed by Kahn, was carried out with the technical assistance of the Italian company RIV.

The Stalingrad Tractor Plant, designed by Kahn in 1930, was originally built in the United States, and then was unmounted, transported to the Soviet Union and assembled under the supervision of American engineers. It was equipped with the equipment of more than 80 American engineering companies and several German firms.

American hydrobuilder Hugh Cooper became the chief consultant for the construction of the DneproGES, hydro turbines for which were purchased from General Electric and Newport News Shipbuilding.[29]

The Magnitogorsk Metallurgical Plant was designed by the American firm Arthur G. McKee and Co., which also supervised its construction. A standard blast furnace for this and all other steel mills of the industrialization period was developed by the Chicago-based Freyn Engineering Co.[30]

Industrialization in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There were 70.000 American engineers and qualified workers in the USSR at the time (Walter Reuther was one of them).
Oh no, Stalin does not want USA to be in shambles. Midwest being wrecked is a real tragedy for him.
It's very interesting, what effect SACW would have on Soviet industrialization. More American specialists fleeing war make it to Russia? Is Ford still willing to cooperate?

 

[Mitridates the Great]

In fact, I would say that Stalin can benefit from the United States being in ruins because now contracts with the USSR have gone from being an interesting business to becoming the only lifeline for many of these companies.

I would say that he is likely to adopt something in between: for both ideological and pragmatic reasons Stalin needs Rumpublic to beat NatCorp, but if Rumpublic is weakened in the process, there is no reason to refuse...

 

[Fleurs de Merde]

I did not consider Trotsky personally supporting the Republican cause, but that idea is actually really cool and we might run with it. There are certainly all sorts of Trotskyists volunteering for the CPUSA. What I didn't mention is that one of the CPUSA's big strengths in terms of bartering with the Republican authorities is that it is bringing all sorts of volunteers from around the world, not just Russian engineers or whatever.

CPUSA is well organized, good at keeping secrets, and happy to do dirty work. So, even if you're not a communist, if you want to kill Natcorps you might end up going through CPUSA one way or another.

Going off Spain as an example, Trotskyists engaging with "official Communism" is sort of unlikely. Internationally, the Comintern pre-screened people for joining the International Brigades - that's why Orwell didn't get in - and in Spain it pushed a very rigid line defending the bourgeois government as part of the "popular front" model, which committed Communists to propping up bourgeois liberals and moderate social-democrats. There were also Chekists in the Party whose job was more or less to screen out ideologically suspect elements. You absolutely did get plenty of people joining both the Brigades and the Party because they were seen as the most disciplined and organized game in town, but Trotskyists would not be among them.

I think a better place for Trotskyists would probably be the Midwest - Trotskyist strategy in Spain and elsewhere was pretty consistently to join forces with the leftmost available elements and push a transition towards Communism as part of the process of the war. They consistently called for radicalized war efforts by nationalizing industry, raising people's militias, and increasing worker control. Their alliances were also both more "principled" - IE more consistently leftist - and far less rigid. Finally, while official Communists would tend to rigidly obey the Soviet line and therefore link closely to Republican strategy, Trotskyists have no such incentive. So while Trotskyists fighting for the Republic in the Northeast isn't a natural place - more likely than not the CPUSA tries to hand them over to the Secret Service - in the Midwest, where the environment is far more radical, the situation more desperate, republican legality more strained, and existing CPUSA structures more heavily battered by the FBI, - there's a far stronger place for Trotskyists. Trotsky himself also consistently called for a stronger and more consistent policy of support for progressive forces internationally. And the fact that official Communism wouldn't be focusing there - when they'd be far more heavily invested in the Pennsylvania front and underground work - just makes it an even more natural arena.

Other place for official Communists, BTW, would actually be trying to organize Black resistance. The CPUSA invested a lot of work into trying to organize sharecroppers in the 30s, had good relations with black intelligentsia, and had a pretty developed line on civil rights and political autonomy for Black people in the South. Given that nobody else would be organizing there, and that the CPUSA has an endless supply of idealistic white people willing to organize undercover, there's a natural opportunity.

Actually, gets me thinking - would love an update on African-Americans and other minorities.

 

[boredviewer1234]

Admittingly given the tone agree the American communist party would not be dominant partly because they actually by the sound of it might of had a chance of becoming the new government and the history of the United states does have not have a ''united'' feel to it of a one state government being in power for a while writing the books.

That said, the hard left being divided could be harmful in different ways besides not being majority enough to force radical change on the Republic. Could say for example lead it in a general more autonomous direction.

By that seems the unified identity of American has taken a serious blow that might never recover from, not just from this war but the many regions that sat on the side lines ranging from doing nothing to profiting off the suffering ect well regional identity and left wing regionalism (The Mid West needs a strong socialist state to defend against exploitive corporations ) to various strong men/local groups who are more than a little red in their local fiefdom might both be a thing and they also might be more than a bit unwilling to move from their local areas once secured to march a thousand miles to a area they feel little connection to unless forced.

Copying a bit from the Russian civil war of how plenty of people where opposed to the Whites once they where on their doorstep or looked like they could win would join/cooperate but once they were gone would range from ignoring the Soviets, disobeying, trying to be independent ect once the threat was gone.

 

[MxCokoko]

By that seems the unified identity of American has taken a serious blow that might never recover from, not just from this war but the many regions that sat on the side lines ranging from doing nothing to profiting off the suffering ect well regional identity and left wing regionalism (The Mid West needs a strong socialist state to defend against exploitive corporations ) to various strong men/local groups who are more than a little red in their local fiefdom might both be a thing and they also might be more than a bit unwilling to move from their local areas once secured to march a thousand miles to a area they feel little connection to unless forced.

While I do think that in the short term regionalism takes precedent over nationalism in the post-war world (because I believe we already know the Republic will stand triumphant, it's just a matter of the steps taken to get there and what exactly happens), we've gotten teasers that the Midwest and Northeast sort of solidify into a left-wing bloc post-war (just different flavors of left), and it stands to reason that over time the sins of the South and the inaction of the Pacific create a cohesive national identity with this left-wing bloc to sort of create an anti-capitalist and anti-fascist state that doesn't forget the sins of the past.

 

[boredviewer1234]

While I do think that in the short term regionalism takes precedent over nationalism in the post-war world (because I believe we already know the Republic will stand triumphant, it's just a matter of the steps taken to get there and what exactly happens), we've gotten teasers that the Midwest and Northeast sort of solidify into a left-wing bloc post-war (just different flavors of left), and it stands to reason that over time the sins of the South and the inaction of the Pacific create a cohesive national identity with this left-wing bloc to sort of create an anti-capitalist and anti-fascist state that doesn't forget the sins of the past.

Fair enough, just thinking of a way that keeps the ''status quo'' by that I think the sound of it temporary regionalism could say last 5-10 years prevent any left wing block from outright dominating the Republic in the aftermath of the civil war and completely altering it. At least that's what I suspect the revolutionary fever will cool to the point of not being a secondary revolution but a rising shift overtime in politics.

After all being to anti Fascist might make it a bit harder to secure a peace in the USA.

 

[The Angry Observer]

In addition, unlike the Spanish Civil War, Hitler cannot deploy as many people to test his new weapons and tactics, nor can he place warships near the American coasts, and he will have a difficult time evacuating his volunteers. This is leaving out the fact that THEY WILL LOSE...

Hitler benefited from a lot of luck OTL. I don't see why all of it would disappear, but a solid chunk of it is gone and that was very important for his early successes.

 

[The Angry Observer]

You project 1947 Stalin attitudes into 1934. 1934 is the peak of industrialization in the USSR, and American technical cooperation is indispensable.

Industrialization in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There were 70.000 American engineers and qualified workers in the USSR at the time (Walter Reuther was one of them).
Oh no, Stalin does not want USA to be in shambles. Midwest being wrecked is a real tragedy for him.
It's very interesting, what effect SACW would have on Soviet industrialization. More American specialists fleeing war make it to Russia? Is Ford still willing to cooperate?

Very interesting points! I didn't know any of this. Thanks for sharing, we'll be taking this into account for what we eventually do with Russia. The 2ACW is bad for Russia for a lot of reasons, the one that we'd considered being Lend-Lease, but that's all far future stuff that Stalin hasn't thought about yet.

 

[The Angry Observer]

In fact, I would say that Stalin can benefit from the United States being in ruins because now contracts with the USSR have gone from being an interesting business to becoming the only lifeline for many of these companies.

I would say that he is likely to adopt something in between: for both ideological and pragmatic reasons Stalin needs Rumpublic to beat NatCorp, but if Rumpublic is weakened in the process, there is no reason to refuse...

I think Stalin forgetting that the fascists winning is bad for more people than just the capitalist west is perfectly in character.

 

[Mitridates the Great]

Fair enough, just thinking of a way that keeps the ''status quo'' by that I think the sound of it temporary regionalism could say last 5-10 years prevent any left wing block from outright dominating the Republic in the aftermath of the civil war and completely altering it. At least that's what I suspect the revolutionary fever will cool to the point of not being a secondary revolution but a rising shift overtime in politics.

After all being to anti Fascist might make it a bit harder to secure a peace in the USA.

Alternatively I could see the Government of the Republic deciding that, if angering people who are considered borderline traitors anyway is the price to pay for being anti-fascist, it is good to anger those people so that we can identify them and remove them from any possibility of repeating the NatCorp disaster.

As an added benefit, it makes it possible to keep the left bloc loyal to the Republic or at least thwart its attempts at revolutionary campaigning by accusing the Republic of being "complacent and weak to the fascists who tried to murder us all."

Given that this time they were domestic fascists, rather than foreigners with useful knowledge, I doubt there will be much inclination to forgive them, especially since it will be possible to point out "we forgave the Southern bastards and they 'thanked' us by siding with NatCorp and letting the Republic die ".

 

[The Angry Observer]

Going off Spain as an example, Trotskyists engaging with "official Communism" is sort of unlikely. Internationally, the Comintern pre-screened people for joining the International Brigades - that's why Orwell didn't get in - and in Spain it pushed a very rigid line defending the bourgeois government as part of the "popular front" model, which committed Communists to propping up bourgeois liberals and moderate social-democrats. There were also Chekists in the Party whose job was more or less to screen out ideologically suspect elements. You absolutely did get plenty of people joining both the Brigades and the Party because they were seen as the most disciplined and organized game in town, but Trotskyists would not be among them.

Fair points. I don't know much about the Trotskyists as a group. I did kind of figure ideological purism would be a big obstacle with Trotsky himself.

I think a better place for Trotskyists would probably be the Midwest - Trotskyist strategy in Spain and elsewhere was pretty consistently to join forces with the leftmost available elements and push a transition towards Communism as part of the process of the war. They consistently called for radicalized war efforts by nationalizing industry, raising people's militias, and increasing worker control. Their alliances were also both more "principled" - IE more consistently leftist - and far less rigid. Finally, while official Communists would tend to rigidly obey the Soviet line and therefore link closely to Republican strategy, Trotskyists have no such incentive. So while Trotskyists fighting for the Republic in the Northeast isn't a natural place - more likely than not the CPUSA tries to hand them over to the Secret Service - in the Midwest, where the environment is far more radical, the situation more desperate, republican legality more strained, and existing CPUSA structures more heavily battered by the FBI, - there's a far stronger place for Trotskyists. Trotsky himself also consistently called for a stronger and more consistent policy of support for progressive forces internationally. And the fact that official Communism wouldn't be focusing there - when they'd be far more heavily invested in the Pennsylvania front and underground work - just makes it an even more natural arena.

Yeah, that's what we had in mind. The radical Midwest is where most of the International Brigades are going to end up being, and the fact that it's out of Smith's supervision means it's the most likely candidate for an actual Revolution of some kind.

Other place for official Communists, BTW, would actually be trying to organize Black resistance. The CPUSA invested a lot of work into trying to organize sharecroppers in the 30s, had good relations with black intelligentsia, and had a pretty developed line on civil rights and political autonomy for Black people in the South. Given that nobody else would be organizing there, and that the CPUSA has an endless supply of idealistic white people willing to organize undercover, there's a natural opportunity.

The south is hardly the first priority, so I personally wouldn't imagine a ton of communists would be down there, but we've got lots of big ideas for the racial situation in the south and how it's reacting to Long's new order. I'm hoping to go back over Long again sometime soon.

Actually, gets me thinking - would love an update on African-Americans and other minorities.

We definitely should do this. Not sure when, but we definitely should. There's a lot to say both in the north and south.

 

[Fleurs de Merde]

Fair points. I don't know much about the Trotskyists as a group. I did kind of figure ideological purism would be a big obstacle with Trotsky himself.

Kind of the opposite, really - Trotskyism was basically just for anyone who wasn't an official Communist, given that Trotsky had been in practical politics since 1905, in government since 1917, in opposition since the early 20s, and in exile since the late 20s - and during that whole time, he was constantly adjusting his politics to fit the moment. You could call yourself a Trotskyist and be right if you basically disagreed with anything the USSR did after 1922 and have some Trotsky quote or action to back you up. There wasn't really such a thing as "Trotskyism" beyond nominal personal loyalty and "dissident Communism" - everyone from the ultraleftist James Cannon to the right-deviationist James Burnam - who ended up as a paleoconservative - was at some point considered an orthodox Trot. You can 200% get goofy with it. And the man himself lost the power struggle as much because of inconsistency as anything else - he was (in)famously flexible and constantly pivoting on his line based on practical circumstances even to the point where it alienated some natural allies. Trotskyism is a giant mess of competing purists now precisely because it's impossible to divine a coherent life-long position out of the man himself. He wasn't even a Bolshevik until after the revolution IIRC.

 

[The Angry Observer]

Kind of the opposite, really - Trotskyism was basically just for anyone who wasn't an official Communist, given that Trotsky had been in practical politics since 1905, in government since 1917, in opposition since the early 20s, and in exile since the late 20s - and during that whole time, he was constantly adjusting his politics to fit the moment. You could call yourself a Trotskyist and be right if you basically disagreed with anything the USSR did after 1922 and have some Trotsky quote or action to back you up. There wasn't really such a thing as "Trotskyism" beyond nominal personal loyalty and "dissident Communism" - everyone from the ultraleftist James Cannon to the right-deviationist James Burnam - who ended up as a paleoconservative - was at some point considered an orthodox Trot. You can 200% get goofy with it. And the man himself lost the power struggle as much because of inconsistency as anything else - he was (in)famously flexible and constantly pivoting on his line based on practical circumstances even to the point where it alienated some natural allies. Trotskyism is a giant mess of competing purists now precisely because it's impossible to divine a coherent life-long position out of the man himself. He wasn't even a Bolshevik until after the revolution IIRC.

Makes sense 👍 There is, after all, no Trotskyist Party. This kind of vacuum is what I imagine making Olson the main player among the so-called "electoralist left", while leaving the far radical fringe to the CPUSA.

 

[Fleurs de Merde]

Makes sense 👍 There is, after all, no Trotskyist Party. This kind of vacuum is what I imagine making Olson the main player among the so-called "electoralist left", while leaving the far radical fringe to the CPUSA.

100% - and Communists during the 30s were often instructed to join coalitions with stronger bourgeois or socialist forces. That's where you get the French and Spanish Popular Fronts, the CPUSA's own attaching itself to New Deal Democracy, the Canadian Communist devotion to sabotaging socialists in favor of the Liberal Party, the CPGB's Labour's tailism, and even the Chinese United Front. Big Trotskyist-official disagreement was with who to actually attach to! Official Communists were often told to team up with left-liberals electorally to defend against fascism and support the USSR, while Trotsky thought this was goofy and wanted to form more lasting, meaningful coalitions with non-Communist workers parties who could be pulled towards a transformative program. CPUSA makes a perfect adjunct to the more progressive side of the Democrats and progressives in the Rumpublic, complete with its line about "constitutional socialism" and "Communism is 20th-cwntury Americanism" and organizing for legalistic trade unions like the CIO and fetish for giant busts of Abe Lincoln, while the Socialist Worker's Party - being the main Trotskyist group of the time - is probably a really natural fit for Olson himself and a more thoroughgoing radicalism.

Thanks for humouring my rambling lol

 

[GaysInSpace]

While I do think that in the short term regionalism takes precedent over nationalism in the post-war world … create a cohesive national identity with this left-wing bloc to sort of create an anti-capitalist and anti-fascist state that doesn't forget the sins of the past.

When we discuss the aftermath of the war, the personalities of those who will lead the United States (in whatever form it will exist) are going to be key. Angry and I have been plotting that leadership stretching pretty far out, and those leaders are going to very much influence what form of national identity comes after this conflict. This war has expanded the powers of the executive regardless of who wins, and as a result, the imperial presidency—and the bully pulpit that comes with it—is a reality much earlier ITL compared to our own. This will matter.