• Post made for three hours last night (9pm-12am EST) have been deleted. This was necessary due to some problems with server maintenance. Anyone who had problems logging into their account during this time should be fine now.
I mean if Kornilov goes strongman Russia will be fine, but no the monarchists in Russia kept the people as serfs and sure they abolished it but that is unforgiveable and they should have been shot long before Nicholas II.

So lets go Kornilov, authoritarian democracyyyy.

Also whats Sternberg up to?
 
Local loyalty and identity is also a thing. If the government of russia proved incapable of being able to govern the wide area, things could very well break down.

I don't think a deletion of Russia is going to happen in this timeline or RL, but it would be the best outcome for the Russian people.
It really wouldn’t not now and certainly not a century ago or even further back.
If human history has taught us anything it’s that the weak suffer what they must and the strong do what they will.

the primary reason for nationalism was to unite under a common ‘nationality’ with similar culture, language, history, etc. The secondary reason was in order to protect themselves by being part of a greater whole.

The only benefit a divided would bring would be to those who would seek to exploit the weakness of these many new states in much the same way that outside powers elected to divvy up the near East so that it could easily deal with many (generally poor or incapable of resisting them) states instead one big one that could potentially become a superpower or have the strength to defend itself from foreign interests.

The idea that dividing one nationality across multiple states would be beneficial to them is simply naïve.

There are many examples of why this idea is just plain wrong but most especially for Russia who had nearly been annihilated by a foreign power which invaded its wealthy but divided principalities and ruled over them for 300 years. That sort of thing being beneficial is not only mistaken it’s just never going to fly with the most important group of all: the Russian people who would naturally want to live in a state which could protect their entire nationality instead being a part of a minor provincial state that couldn't hope to protect themselves without being backed by foreign powers which would then use that as leverage against them.
 
Last edited:
For a start: 200 pages! I was awed at 100... twice that is something else! I'd like to thank all of my readers, whether you've been with me since August or just joined, for helping get Place In the Sun this far. You inspire me to write every single day, and I look forward to inaugurating a new thread with you one day...

states don't have to be divided by ethnicity. There's absolutely no reason there can't be multiple russian-ethnicity states running around, in more manageable chunks.
Have you considered having the result of the Civil War being a divided Russia? Maybe a Russian Republic (or USSR) in Europe and a rump Russian Empire in Siberia, backed up by the aforementioned Japanese and maybe Germans?
This reminds me greatly of the discussion several dozen pages back on the merits (or lack thereof) of Balkanising France. If you ask me, such a thing would only be possible with Great Power backing. For example, the two Germanies remained divided in OTL... because it was what the USA and USSR both agreed upon. Once the USSR weakened, the German people immediately wanted to reunify. Same with the Vietnams and (hopefully without WWIII) the Koreas, one day. My point is that forcibly maintaining a divided Russia would require an extreme German military presence to overcome the natural desire of Russians for unity... which I doubt many in Berlin would want to do.

As I've said, the most I can see happening here is a small Japanese-backed Siberian state, which places tremendous emphasis on being Siberian, not Russian.
In the age of nationalism? willing tear apart their own nation fookin doubt. that would require asb's to get involved. the only way it happens is if another country was to force it and i don't believe that there is a strong enough hegemony that would be wiling, capable and able to justify it. the fact is russia isn't going anywhere.
^^^
I mean if Kornilov goes strongman Russia will be fine, but no the monarchists in Russia kept the people as serfs and sure they abolished it but that is unforgiveable and they should have been shot long before Nicholas II.

So lets go Kornilov, authoritarian democracyyyy.

Also whats Sternberg up to?
As of right now, Kornilov is cooperating with the Republicans and is commander of the defences of Petrograd. He's not in the cabinet, but has a fair bit of quiet power thanks to controlling the troops around the capital. As to 'authoritarian democracy', we'll have to see what happens postwar... Kornilov might get shot for treason by the Tsarists, after all.

Sternberg? The answer will probably be a bit of a dissapointment but I think it's realistic:
Baron Roman von Ungarn-Sternberg was a fierce opponent of Tsar Michael II's liberal reforms. Totally devoted to Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality, he gave his vocal support to the 15 April 1918 attack on the Duma which killed Michael, though he didn't actively participate. This was a serious blunder, as it put him in the new regime's black books. Von Ungarn-Sternberg was one of those arrested in the wake of the attack, though he wasn't executed. Once the Russian Civil War broke out, the inmates in Von Ungarn-Sternberg's prison camp revolted and killed the guards. He refused to have anything to do with his fellow inmates, believing them traitors (even though they'd just freed him). Travelling to Vladivostok, he presented himself to the Tsarist governor in August, and recieved command of a cavalry company (though his title, 'Baron', was not formally restored). As of right now, he's a minor, unimportant, not particularly popular, cavalry officer in the Tsarist army.

It really wouldn’t not now and certainly not a century ago or even further back.
If human history has taught us anything it’s that the weak suffer what they must and the strong do what they will.

the primary reason for nationalism was to unite under a common ‘nationality’ with similar culture, language, history, etc. The secondary reason was in order to protect themselves by being part of a greater whole.

The only benefit a divided would bring would be to those who would seek to exploit the weakness of these many new states in much the same way that outside powers elected to divvy up the near East so that it could easily deal with many (generally poor or incapable of resisting them) states instead one big one that could potentially become a superpower or have the strength to defend itself from foreign interests.

The idea that dividing one nationality across multiple states would be beneficial to them is simply naïve.

There are many examples of why this idea is just plain wrong but most especially for Russia who had nearly been annihilated by a foreign power which invaded its wealthy but divided principalities and ruled over them for 300 years. That sort of thing being beneficial is not only mistaken it’s just never going to fly with the most important group of all: the Russian people who would naturally want to live in a state which could protect their entire nationality instead being a part of a minor provincial state that couldn't hope to protect themselves without being backed by foreign powers which would then use that as leverage against them.
"The weak suffer what they must and the strong do what they will". That's how it goes, alright.
You are spot on about how the only ones to benefit from a divided Russia would be foreigners (by which I of course mean the Central Powers and to a lesser extent Japan). It would have adverse economic effects, be a constant source of strife between fellow Russians, and something of a humiliation. With a country the size of Russia, it would also be just about impossible to maintain against the will of the inhabitants.

An excellent analysis.
 
For a start: 200 pages! I was awed at 100... twice that is something else! I'd like to thank all of my readers, whether you've been with me since August or just joined, for helping get Place In the Sun this far. You inspire me to write every single day, and I look forward to inaugurating a new thread with you one day...
but yeah 200 pages wow 300 more pages to go🥳
 
Holy crud I didn’t even notice but 2 hundred pages!!!!!! Ahhhhh! Congrats man :)

I will selfishly be hoping for 200 hundred more!
 
Congratulations on 200 pages.

Will there be updates on what happening in Italy and I like to know more about Charles Hughes' domestic agenda?
Thanks.
I know nothing about Italian politics (for a TL which has Italy, not Germany, as its namesake!) so any advice there would be welcome. Perhaps @Marco Rivignani might be willing to help me out?

We will discover the political fate of Charles Evans Hughes on Sunday....
but yeah 200 pages wow 300 more pages to go🥳
Holy crud I didn’t even notice but 2 hundred pages!!!!!! Ahhhhh! Congrats man :)

I will selfishly be hoping for 200 hundred more!
Thanks to both of you. I only hope I can deliver....
 
This reminds me greatly of the discussion several dozen pages back on the merits (or lack thereof) of Balkanising France. If you ask me, such a thing would only be possible with Great Power backing. For example, the two Germanies remained divided in OTL... because it was what the USA and USSR both agreed upon. Once the USSR weakened, the German people immediately wanted to reunify. Same with the Vietnams and (hopefully without WWIII) the Koreas, one day. My point is that forcibly maintaining a divided Russia would require an extreme German military presence to overcome the natural desire of Russians for unity... which I doubt many in Berlin would want to do.

As I've said, the most I can see happening here is a small Japanese-backed Siberian state, which places tremendous emphasis on being Siberian, not Russian.
Eh, the superpowers kept Germany in 3 pieces, and there's still 2 left. Sure, Austria has history behind it which no Russian split will, but fundamentally it worked to split 'german-ish' people over 2 states (some would even call it 4 or 5, adding Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Luxemburg - but in that case counting Belarus and Ukraine as Russian-ish would be appropriate).
 
Eh, the superpowers kept Germany in 3 pieces, and there's still 2 left. Sure, Austria has history behind it which no Russian split will, but fundamentally it worked to split 'german-ish' people over 2 states (some would even call it 4 or 5, adding Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Luxemburg - but in that case counting Belarus and Ukraine as Russian-ish would be appropriate).
I don't think Austria counts as a fair example here...Austria as a seperate nation has a very long history, while the unification with Germany was very short in comparison...

Any kind of split in Russia just will not have that kind of history and tradition stretching back centuries
 
Eh, the superpowers kept Germany in 3 pieces, and there's still 2 left. Sure, Austria has history behind it which no Russian split will, but fundamentally it worked to split 'german-ish' people over 2 states (some would even call it 4 or 5, adding Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Luxemburg - but in that case counting Belarus and Ukraine as Russian-ish would be appropriate).
The superpowers +Britain and France (and the three German states) would never have entertained even the notion of another Austrian “Anschluss.” I’m not certain but I’m pretty sure it’s illegal for Germany and Austria to unite, either constitutionally or through international agreements.

Furthermore, I tend to think that Switzerland is an exception to the rule based on its unique geography which has allowed it to easily defend itself as well as to disallow other powers from undertaking a costly invasion with little upside.

Meanwhile for a more pertinent and currently ongoing example: in the one disputed area that didn’t see ethnic cleansing of Germans after WW2, Trento/Trentino has continually voted for a German nationalist party seeking independence from Italy and annexation into Austria since the moment Austria became independent after the war.

So think about that: Italy a functioning democracy, a solid economy, and still you have a German ethnic group that seeks to unite with a larger German state on the basis of language and culture.
 
I’m not certain but I’m pretty sure it’s illegal for Germany and Austria to unite, either constitutionally or through international agreements.
I know the Treaty of Versailles banned any Anschluss, but I am unaware of any other laws or agreements against it.
 
I don't think Austria counts as a fair example here...Austria as a seperate nation has a very long history, while the unification with Germany was very short in comparison...

Any kind of split in Russia just will not have that kind of history and tradition stretching back centuries
Austria was considered part of ‘Germany’ the national region if not Germany thr state for centuries. It was only the stigma of Nazis that discouraged the idea of Austria being part of Germany in the minds of Austrians
 
It’s as @Tertius711 says. There’s a famous (or perhaps not) quote by Metternich that goes something like “Italy is a mere geographical expression”

The same sort of thing applied for Germany but no would seriously dispute (laugh at me while you point to north and south divide) that say Lombardy isn’t an integral part of Italy (both the state and the national union of Italian people).

In fact for much of history...Austria was Germany. At least in the sense that the Austrian monarch was the leader of the Holy Roman Empire, itself the go to Germanic state.

Despite this long history of cultural union and language, Austria remains separate from Germany not because of some great love of an independent Austrian state, but because of internal and external controls put in place by outside forces that prevent such a ‘reunion’ from taking place.

Austria wasn’t willingly annexed into Germany out of some great love for National Socialism. It tried to unite into a greater Germany twice (one of those times being right after WWI) before then, only to be prevented by conservative monarchies and external powers seeking to avoid a super Germany respectively.
 
Austria wasn’t willingly annexed into Germany out of some great love for National Socialism. It tried to unite into a greater Germany twice (one of those times being right after WWI) before then, only to be prevented by conservative monarchies and external powers seeking to avoid a super Germany respectively.
Considering it's implied the Habsburg Empire will collapse at some point ITTL's future, Austria is probably a federal German state in TTL's 21st Century Germany.
 
I hope not. Austria joining Germany in CP victory timelines has been overdone to a massive degree that it gets stale. Also as some who has been to Austria and read its history quite extensively, Austrian nationalism isn't just 'we're not Germany!' and is far more complex than that and did exist before 1918. In fact pre-1918 Austrian nationalism based itself of the Habsburg Dynasty, which was why the deposition of the Habsburg Dynasty was such a great psychological event in Austrian history. With the events here, I found Austria joining Germany highly improbable. Not only have they retained the Habsburgs, they have also won 2 wars, which means more romanticism which means more nationalism.
 
Considering it's implied the Habsburg Empire will collapse at some point ITTL's future, Austria is probably a federal German state in TTL's 21st Century Germany.
No doubt about it.

While there’s always going to be minor exceptions in history to historical trends (Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Monaco, etc) they’re still exceptions.

Austria, in an TL where the Weimar Republic managed to limp on through a conservative-nationalist government would have been unified with Germany by the 1950’s at the latest.

But heck, we don’t even have to come up with scenarios. Even in our TL, we don’t know that given recent geopolitical trends and the fraying of the old order that Austria and Germany won’t reunite at some point in this century.

(That’s all I’ll say and only as an example because I don’t wan’t to start a modern day politics discussion here)

It’s easy to see why people with a shared history, culture and language would seek to unite with each other. Historically what has kept this from occurring is the introduction of God blessed monarchies, sponsored by the Roman Catholic Church which kept these forces in check and focused elsewhere. But note that as Church power declined, Protestant demands for self-rule/governance gave way for national demands for the same.

Even the dispute for Bibles being printed and translated to local Languages could be argued as being proto-nationalist!
 
Top