From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:10:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy
and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet >>Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

Not sure what is meant here.

The Guinness Book of World Records of years past used to recount
the myths of extreme longevity among Georgians/Abkhazians having
been fed by Stalin's desire to believe he would live a very long
time...by 2000 he would have entered his 120s like a number of
those exaggerated claimants.

But for sure Stalin played a huge role in 1941 - not all positive -
and you can't draft a plausible scenario with him able to both play an important role in 1941 AND 1991.

If we are talking about the historical figure born in 1879 the POD has
to be based on his real history being continued by his not dying,
at whatever point his health departs from OTL toward the dreams of longevity-propaganda.

Obviously the "de-Stalinization" of the mid-late 1950s would not have
happened in the USSR or in the satellite states,and Malenkov, Khruschchev,Brezhnev,and so on would have had power only to the
extent and time he permitted it...but would his constant purging
have led to collapse?

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

On 12/07/2025 03:27, Louis Epstein wrote:

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:10:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy
and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet
Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him
through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

Not sure what is meant here.

The Guinness Book of World Records of years past used to recount
the myths of extreme longevity among Georgians/Abkhazians having
been fed by Stalin's desire to believe he would live a very long
time...by 2000 he would have entered his 120s like a number of
those exaggerated claimants.

But for sure Stalin played a huge role in 1941 - not all positive -
and you can't draft a plausible scenario with him able to both play an
important role in 1941 AND 1991.

If we are talking about the historical figure born in 1879 the POD has
to be based on his real history being continued by his not dying,
at whatever point his health departs from OTL toward the dreams of longevity-propaganda.

Obviously the "de-Stalinization" of the mid-late 1950s would not have happened in the USSR or in the satellite states,and Malenkov, Khruschchev,Brezhnev,and so on would have had power only to the
extent and time he permitted it...but would his constant purging
have led to collapse?

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Personally I believe he would either have resigned, as did Molotov who
did live to a ripe old age, or be forcibly removed from office (possibly through having had an unfortunate accident involving a third-storey
window). In either case, it is doubtful (IMAO) that he would have had
much significance beyond, say, 1965 when he would be 86 years old.

Glasnost and perestroika would still have happened at about the same
time, plus or minus 10 years, because Ronnie's SDI initiative, aka
economic warfare, would have had either the same effect as we saw, or a
Soviet first strike while it was still possible for them to do so. The
latter scenario would have had major changes to subsequent history.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

Paul Leyland <paul.leyland@gmail.com> wrote:

On 12/07/2025 03:27, Louis Epstein wrote:

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:10:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy
and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet >>>> Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him
through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

Not sure what is meant here.

The Guinness Book of World Records of years past used to recount
the myths of extreme longevity among Georgians/Abkhazians having
been fed by Stalin's desire to believe he would live a very long
time...by 2000 he would have entered his 120s like a number of
those exaggerated claimants.

But for sure Stalin played a huge role in 1941 - not all positive -
and you can't draft a plausible scenario with him able to both play an
important role in 1941 AND 1991.

If we are talking about the historical figure born in 1879 the POD has
to be based on his real history being continued by his not dying,
at whatever point his health departs from OTL toward the dreams of
longevity-propaganda.

Obviously the "de-Stalinization" of the mid-late 1950s would not have
happened in the USSR or in the satellite states,and Malenkov,
Khruschchev,Brezhnev,and so on would have had power only to the
extent and time he permitted it...but would his constant purging
have led to collapse?

Personally I believe he would either have resigned, as did Molotov who
did live to a ripe old age,

Molotov(1890-1986) and Kaganovich(1893-1991) were both purged by
Khrushchev in 1957 before living to old ages.

or be forcibly removed from office (possibly
through having had an unfortunate accident involving a third-storey
window). In either case, it is doubtful (IMAO) that he would have had
much significance beyond, say, 1965 when he would be 86 years old.

So what would have made the difference that made him lose control
at last?

Glasnost and perestroika would still have happened at about the same
time, plus or minus 10 years, because Ronnie's SDI initiative, aka
economic warfare, would have had either the same effect as we saw, or a Soviet first strike while it was still possible for them to do so. The latter scenario would have had major changes to subsequent history.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.


This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=430154423#430154423
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy >> and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet
Union lasting until 2024?

This is a response to the post seen at: >http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=430154423#430154423

--
pyotr filipivich
"History rarely repeats herself" is the cliche. In reality she just
lets fly with a frying pan yelling "Why weren't you listening the first time!?" --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:10:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy >>> and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet
Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him
through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

One thing I've learned since my wife's passing a little over three
years ago is that we have a finite but unknown number of days on this
earth and that while I hope mine are many, I have my fingers in so
many areas (I just came home from a local community association board
meeting before I sat down here) that some of what I have built is
bound to survive even if I don't know which part.

And I am especially hoping my children and grandchildren (only 1 so
far) remember me the way I remember my grandparents - the last of whom
is 25 years gone.

But for sure Stalin played a huge role in 1941 - not all positive -
and you can't draft a plausible scenario with him able to both play an important role in 1941 AND 1991.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> on Thu, 13 Mar 2025 20:12:05 -0700
typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 16:10:55 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

mummycullen@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (MummyChunk) on Mon, 03 Mar
2025 13:26:43 -0500 typed in alt.history.what-if the following:

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy
and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

If Stalin had lived (great photo of him OP) until 2000, I seriously doubt that Vladimir Putin would be the problem that he is now.

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet
Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him >through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

That's kind of my point. Stalin transformed the USSR into an industrial nation. At gunpoint true, but ...

A problem Stalin faced was that children of the revolution (those
who had grown up under the Communists) were starting to wonder when
the good results would start. The Great Patriotic war ended that
issue, after the war everybody was busy rebuilding. But the same
issues started showing up again when the post war generation began
wondering "what's in it for us'.

Stalin was planning on pogroms when he died. You can see how
killing off the educated would do wonders for the Soviet Union.
--
pyotr filipivich
"History rarely repeats herself" is the cliche. In reality she just
lets fly with a frying pan yelling "Why weren't you listening the first time!?" --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 13:02:35 -0700, pyotr filipivich
<phamp@mindspring.com> wrote:

If Stalin had not died in 1953, that are the odds of the Soviet >>>Union lasting until 2024?

I'd say very small since the odds of him living long enough to get him >>through the crisis of 1991 leaves him NOT there in 1941 which means
much of Russia (if not all of us) would be speaking German.

That's kind of my point. Stalin transformed the USSR into an
industrial nation. At gunpoint true, but ...

A problem Stalin faced was that children of the revolution (those
who had grown up under the Communists) were starting to wonder when
the good results would start. The Great Patriotic war ended that
issue, after the war everybody was busy rebuilding. But the same
issues started showing up again when the post war generation began
wondering "what's in it for us'.

Stalin was planning on pogroms when he died. You can see how
killing off the educated would do wonders for the Soviet Union.

As an example of the sort of thing I was talking about Trotsky likely
would have been the Soviet leader had Stalin died around the same time
as Lenin and I'm skeptical Trotsky would have been as draconian as
Stalin in the 1930s era industrialization of Russia - particularly the
increase steel production that was so precious in 1941-42. (I'm also
convinced Trotsky would have been more aggressive in 1941 leading to
even heavier manpower losses which would have made maintaining a front
in 1942 problematic even had they survived 1941)

I knew about Stalin's plan for pogroms - no question a side-effect of
that would have been to eliminate the Soviet dominance in Chess - in
the 1948-1980s era about 40-45% of the world's grandmasters were from
the USSR and I'm not sure what proportion of them were Jewish but at
least 30-40% of them including world champion Botvinnik and his main challengers David Bronstein and Vassily Smyslov were
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.history.what-if

Representative Trantis wrote:
Let us for the moment suppose that somehow Stalin manages to remain healthy and lives until 2000.
How would Soviet and world history be different?

OP - that photo is great. TY for sharing.


This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=430154423#430154423
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2