Stalin - what if?

ejmaztec

Caught a BBC programme a couple of nights ago, "Watching The Russians", hosted by ex MI5 head Stella Rimington. She was in the East End of London where some local historian was talking about a time in 1907 when Stalin, Lenin and a few other revolutionaries were in London for a meeting. One night, Stalin was getting a hankering for female company and went looking for a prostitute. He apparently started talking to an Irish woman. A group of Irish dockers nearby obviously didn't like what was happening and laid into him. One of his colleagues managed to drag him away from them, and he made it back to his lodgings.

Had these dockers finished the job, tens of millions of people wouldn't have died over the next 40 odd years, unless there was another psycho waiting in the wings.

I don't know whether the story was fabricated or embellished, for whatever reason, but it reminds me of several WW1 yarns where various people said that they could have shot Hitler in the trenches and let him go etc...

Morlar

I think thats a brilliant story - one good punch or wrong fall and scores of millions of people would have lived. Communism would probably not have survived. Actually russia may well have lost wwII also. Regardless of the WWII issue the world would be very different today in any event. Can you remember the name of the documentary ?



*ps just read in wiki that Johnny Cash (yep the man in black) was allegedly the first westerner to hear of Stalins death :

Assigned at the time to a U.S. Air Force Security Service unit at Landsberg, Germany as a morse code decoder on Russian Army transmissions, Johnny Cash was the first American to discover that Stalin had died.[100] Stalin's body was preserved in Lenin's Mausoleum until October 31, 1961, when his body was removed from the Mausoleum and buried next to the Kremlin walls as part of the process of de-Stalinization.

Fratton Fred

Then Germany would have won the war, with no Eastern front, Germany would have soon overrun Britain and the Americans wouldn't have got involved because the war in Europe would be over.

All thanks to a tart and a few navvies:D

ejmaztec

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Then Germany would have won the war, with no Eastern front, Germany would have soon overrun Britain and the Americans wouldn't have got involved because the war in Europe would be over.

All thanks to a tart and a few navvies:D

And then we could have had one big united Europe - oh hang on a minute..............:D


auf wiedersehen

csk

Isn't there a similar story about Hitler nearly being killed in WWI? Similar one about some Irish fellow I can't remember too?

Stories like this are two a penny.

Morlar

csk wrote: »

Stories like this are two a penny.

Not quite two a penny imo - but it is interesting enough to see how in extreme cases the smallest things can have the most incredible effect.

csk

Morlar wrote: »

Not quite two a penny imo - but it is interesting enough to see how in extreme cases the smallest things can have the most incredible effect.

If they are true that is.

Morlar

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Then Germany would have won the war, with no Eastern front, Germany would have soon overrun Britain and the Americans wouldn't have got involved because the war in Europe would be over.

All thanks to a tart and a few navvies:D

Your assuming that if the eastern front had fallen and russia imploded that Germany would have kept to its initial gameplan and not been tied up in administering a new territory the size of america and then some.

There was talk that russians were to be pushed to the far side of the volga and treated like the settlers treated redskins in america. A whole new territory for lebensraum would have been an enormous undertaking. They may even have sated their appetites with that.

With no russia to create the enviornment that they needed, and with germany now having access to unlimited resources the american and british gameplan would have had to change drastically too. Terms of cessation would have been on the table in my view. Nor could you rule out the possibility - that america could have eventually pulled back and went atomic (once developed futher down the road).

But for that street fight (yes ok if true) the map of the world could probably have been different. Who is to say how many other trivial events led to it turning out exactly the way it did though. Pretty interesting stuff imo.

Shutuplaura

What if's in history are a load of ****e - what if Stalin decided to srick with religion, what if Hitler got run down by a drunk driver in Munich in 1913 what if the greatest monster that ever lived, responsible for World War Three hadn't been killed in a freak accident on this day in 1946?
Sure most people come close to getting themselves killed a few times in their lives at least.

Edit: Have to admit though it is an interesting story.

brianthebard

I'm with Shutuplaura, every time Stalin crossed the street was a "what if he was hit by a speeding carriage" incident if you think about it a bit. Actually that's how Gaudi died afaik.

Tenger

To go further back-

What if Napoleon wasn't ill (with gout)on the day of Waterloo and thus able to properly command his troops?

What if the Chinese hadn't stopping their sea exploration in the 1420s due to to a lightening strike which set fire to the Imperial Palace?

What if Alexander hadn't been saved by one of his soldiers (Clitus-got name from wiki)during the Battle Of Granicus in 334BC.


I love the fact that so many seemingly small things could have has such a huge impact on history and the world we live in today.

purple'n'gold

What if, after the reformation Ireland had embraced Protestantism and totally rejected Catholicism?

ejmaztec

Ignoring the "what ifs", some perverse thinkers might say that Ireland shares in the responsibility for the tens of millions of deaths occurring during Stalin's lifetime, by it's citizens not finishing off the midget psychopath. It would certainly take some of the heat off the Germans in the historical numbers game.

McArmalite

Good link on the life of 'Uncle Joe' http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/stalin.html

One of the interesting things I have found when you ask people from Eastern Europe about their grandparents experiences of Stalin, Hitler etc. Everyone of them I have asked, automatically states Stalin was worse then Hitler. Not one yet has said otherwise to me.

I remember drinking with a Jewish guy whose father had been in the Red Army, crossed lines and smuggled his way to France at the end of the war, where he married and settled down. I got talking about the war etc and the Jewish bloke told me that his father reckoned that Stalin was even worse than Hitler - and as I said, he was Jewish. Stalin - what an evil b@stard.

Shutuplaura

Oddly enough a lot of Russians don't mind him. At least thats the impression I got from some russians I used live with. I could see why the rest of eastern europe really hate his guts though.

Tenger

Shutuplaura wrote: »

Oddly enough a lot of Russians don't mind him. At least thats the impression I got from some russians I used live with. I could see why the rest of eastern europe really hate his guts though.

Thats strangely true. My mate lived in Volvograd for about a year. Had a Russian girlfriend,was teaching Einglish there. He said that most people especially the older generation still called it Stalingrad,to them it was a pride thing.

Jack300

Bramble wrote: »

Thats strangely true. My mate lived in Volvograd for about a year. Had a Russian girlfriend,was teaching Einglish there. He said that most people especially the older generation still called it Stalingrad,to them it was a pride thing.

This is a very interesting point. Memory is usually socially framed so I'm not suprised to hear such a thing.

damonjewel

If Stalin hadn't existed then would so many people have died in the USSR? I think that there still would have been many of millions who would have died under a different leader. When you look at some of the others around then e.g. Beria, or Dzerzhinsky and even Trotsky werent shy of handing out mass murder and terror.

Fratton Fred

damonjewel wrote: »

If Stalin hadn't existed then would so many people have died in the USSR? I think that there still would have been many of millions who would have died under a different leader. When you look at some of the others around then e.g. Beria, or Dzerzhinsky and even Trotsky werent shy of handing out mass murder and terror.

Stalin only gave the orders, there were plenty willing to carry them out, so it is simple to presume someone would have filled his boots had he been thrown in the Thames.

The thing about most of these what-ifs is that the assumption is made that those individuals actually changed the world.

In many cases they were the figurehead of a ideal that would most likely have continued with another person of similar thinking, it was the social environment of the time that made the man.

scruff321

ejmaztec wrote: »

Caught a BBC programme a couple of nights ago, "Watching The Russians", hosted by ex MI5 head Stella Rimington. She was in the East End of London where some local historian was talking about a time in 1907 when Stalin, Lenin and a few other revolutionaries were in London for a meeting. One night, Stalin was getting a hankering for female company and went looking for a prostitute. He apparently started talking to an Irish woman. A group of Irish dockers nearby obviously didn't like what was happening and laid into him. One of his colleagues managed to drag him away from them, and he made it back to his lodgings.

Had these dockers finished the job, tens of millions of people wouldn't have died over the next 40 odd years, unless there was another psycho waiting in the wings.

I don't know whether the story was fabricated or embellished, for whatever reason, but it reminds me of several WW1 yarns where various people said that they could have shot Hitler in the trenches and let him go etc...

yes this storey is true as far as i have read before,but there isnt much point in looking back and saying what if?? that could really be said for a thousand scenarios?i personally would think that some other mad man would have assumed stalins role there were plenty of them in the russian communist ere.

scruff321

scruff321 wrote: »

yes this storey is true as far as i have read before,but there isnt much point in looking back and saying what if?? that could really be said for a thousand scenarios?i personally would think that some other mad man would have assumed stalins role there were plenty of them in the russian communist ere.

Yep, we could be having a discussion about "Zibloski* what if" had been killed as a young man.


*random madeup name.

ejmaztec

Deleted User wrote: »

The thing about most of these what-ifs is that the assumption is made that those individuals actually changed the world.

In many cases they were the figurehead of a ideal that would most likely have continued with another person of similar thinking, it was the social environment of the time that made the man.

As I understood the situation, Lenin was interested in a left of centre government, which was the way it went for the short time up until his death. Stalin took over and took Russia as far left as it could get.

mikemac

Very interesting but kinda pointless at the same time. Everytime Stalin crossed the road could have been a "what if" moment.

Come to think it, Churchill was almost killed by a taxi in New York in the 1920's afaik

Edit: It was 1931 and they're actually making a computer game about it!
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/fallofliberty/news.html?sid=6185792

ejmaztec

micmclo wrote: »

Very interesting but kinda pointless at the same time. Everytime Stalin crossed the road could have been a "what if" moment.

Come to think it, Churchill was almost killed by a taxi in New York in the 1920's afaik

Edit: It was 1931 and they're actually making a computer game about it!
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/fallofliberty/news.html?sid=6185792

Codemasters was started donkey's years ago by two teenage lads, with their father as manager. I suppose if he'd a vasectomy before the two lads were born, that game would never have been made. It makes you think............:D

guinnessdrinker

Maybe he was so pissed with those Irish dockers and held a grudge against Ireland and that was the real reason the Soviet Union blocked Irelands application to join the UN in 1946! :eek:

ejmaztec

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

Maybe he was so pissed with those Irish dockers and held a grudge against Ireland and that was the real reason the Soviet Union blocked Irelands application to join the UN in 1946! :eek:

Or, had he been killed, his pals would have put off the October revolution, so that they could invade Ireland first - and build the Kremlin in Dublin after wiping out the British and Anglo-Irish..................... I wonder what the first 5 year plan would have been..

Perhaps the what-ifs should be left to Hollywood.:o

damonjewel

ejmaztec wrote: »

As I understood the situation, Lenin was interested in a left of centre government, which was the way it went for the short time up until his death. Stalin took over and took Russia as far left as it could get.

It really doesnt matter about left or right, way before Stalin took control, Lenin and his Bolshevik chums presided over a brutal regime that needed to make permanent the revolution they had started which led to mass murder and atrocity. Read up on the Kronstadt uprising were Thousands of sailors were executed by Trotsky, the civil war in Ukraine where the red army after beating the whites turned on their allies the Makhnovists. Then there is Dzerzhinsky founder of the Cheka which later became the KGB, Lenin gave him extraordinary powers to combat 'enemies of the revolution' which of course led to thousands of executions. Thankfully he died of a heart attack in 1926 but what ever way you want to look at it, the bolsheviks weren't the nicest bunch of guys, even without Stalin

Tenger

ejmaztec wrote: »

Codemasters was started donkey's years ago by two teenage lads, with their father as manager. I suppose if he'd a vasectomy before the two lads were born, that game would never have been made. It makes you think............:D

I believe I lost many hours of my teenage years to Codemasters games. Imagine if I had studied instead?

brianthebard

Deleted User wrote: »

The thing about most of these what-ifs is that the assumption is made that those individuals actually changed the world.

In many cases they were the figurehead of a ideal that would most likely have continued with another person of similar thinking, it was the social environment of the time that made the man.

Good post. Thats always been my thinking, it just suits people to talk about individuals rather than groups. Left over from the enlightenment days?

--amadeus--

What if's can be entertaining...

Id Stalin had shuffled off early then it is entirly possible that Trotsky would have followed Lenin as the leader of the Bolsheviks. One of the key battlegrounds in the fight to succeed was ideological. Trotsky emphasised "October", the idea of a permanent revolution and a swift worldwide move to a socialist world.

Stalin differed - he proposed Socialism in one country. Everyone (Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin) agreed that they must start to create a socialist society in Russia. Stalin now argued that this could be an end rather than a means.

Had there been no Stalin and had Trotsky taken over the leadership then the emphasis would have been outward (rather than inwards as under Stalin).

It's not a wild leap to see opportunities presented to an expansionist USSR in the Weimar Republic. Stalin instructed the KPD not to co-operate with other leftist paries for example, had they done so then thier 89 seats after the 1932 election would have given the left a majority over the DNVP and the Nazis. With a flow of arms, men and material support it's possible that a full communist revolution would have followed.

Without the support of Germany (especially the huge economic assistance) Franco would have faced an enemy vastly stronger as the new, enlarged, communist bloc throws it's weight into the Spanish Civil War.

So by 1938 you could have a communist bloc stretching from teh Pacific to the Atlantic and the strong left wing movements in France (and to a lesser extent the UK) would have been emboldened.

Faced with dissent inside it's borders and sandwiched between hostile left states France must have fallen. An internal incident leading to repression and invasion.

Parallel with this you have Mao in China who was in thrall to Stalin. With a more friendly regime in place (with Trotsky at the helm) they would perhaps have co-operated more closely.

So basically by now we'd all be waving red flags!

brianthebard

Wow interesting thought. You can add that internal socialist movements in France could've pushed the republic over the edge, meaning they wouldn't even need to be invaded.