Alexander 2(Moscow, 29 April 1818 – 13 March 1881 in St. Petersburg) of Russia was a man of many reforms. Like for example the Emancipation of serfs and other reforms for example : (taken from wiki) a new penal code and a greatly simplified system of civil and criminal procedure; an elaborate scheme of local self-government (Zemstvo) for the rural districts (1864) and the large towns (1870), with elective assemblies possessing a restricted right of taxation, and a new rural and municipal police under the direction of the Minister of the Interior. Alexander II would be the second monarch (after King Louis I of Portugal) to abolish capital punishment, a penalty which is still legal (although not practiced) in Russia.

But none was more important as the reforms he carried with him , in his coat just when he was assassinated.

His more radical reforms would now , establish a parliament and what could end up looking as a democracy.

However since he died , his successor decided to burn those plans.

Now , some part of the above may be disputed , but let's consider that Alexander 2 was not assassinated and shortly after Russia became a democracy (And as a result communism likely never happened).

How would this had affected world history , and Russias history in the following years ? How would the world look like. Would there still be a Hitler , and ww2 ?

How about WW1 and how about the years of the cold war , how would the world look then ?

And considering that western nations adopted measures in response to communism , how would they be different ?

That's really quite an interesting hypothetical.
Communism snowballed from Russia to China to North Korea to Vietnam.

To answer your question:
Communism wouldn't have been so widely adopted bringing people together by common government and common goals, Russia might have whethered WWI better had this more democratic system been put into effect. The world may look much more peaceful. Kinda iffy here. As long as Germany was left its own state WITH severe restrictions on military and demands to repay war debts then Hitler might have still come to power or some other radical.
The Cold War probably would have happened though maybe even on a larger scale. With all 3 major powers after WWII and just one with nukes and all with the same government then they might have been competing with each other and nukes might have proliferated more.
The US might not have had "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.

I doubt Russia would have done much better in WWI; democracy != winner. Had she come through that with her political system intact - which is tough to ponder: citizens would feel more enfranchised, but perhaps incensed at the defeat that could have been blamed on a civilian government - then Communism as we know it certainly would not have happened.

However, what that leads to is simply more socialism in the west. It was already a growing trend in the West, and without a big bad communist Russia to demonize, there might be more established socialist tradition in the States, like what we see now in Europe.


If WWI had played out the same way it did historically however, and Hitler had still come to rule an angry Germany, Russia may well have been in dire straights come WWII. Though without the West rolling over on the Sudeten-Czech crisis, there might not have been a war at all. Very tough to say.

Of course, regardless of World War I or World War II stuff, in Asia...

1. There would probably still be a big mess of China.

2. Probably still the Japanese Imperialism.

So.

A democratic Russia would probably not have allied with Germany in 1939 to carve up Poland.
It is doubtful whether Hitler would've dared to attack Poland if there was a potential two front war.

A very interesting hypothetical actually.

Let's say Alexander II somehow survives the People's Will repeated assassination attempts (and future ones too) and Russia does become semi-democratic. I don't think we can say Alexander would have given up full power, but for the following, let's say it's enough to call Russia a "democracy." Very heavy Russian nationalism would still be present and we would still have a split between the Westernizers and Slavophiles of Russia. Those would most likely form the two largest parties of this new parliament. Without a rigid Nicholas I trying to avoid his father's fate, Russia stays the course with this "democracy" for several years. In the mean time, Russia's military is still heavily in control (which would not be ended by Nicholas I), which does upset the supporters of the democratic process. Eventually under Nicholas I, the military revolts and ends this democracy. I don't necessarily know if Nicholas I would be restored to full power, but it's very possible. Otherwise, a heavily influenced Alexander III takes control of Russia. Alexander III continues the heavy ruling of his great-grandparents and their successors. During this time, various anarchist and Marxist groups begin to arise in Russia and grow in power. I think we can safely assume the world (for the most part) would stay the same course it did.




(N.B. - Most of this is wrote as I'm watching the Olympics, so the thought-train might be a bit rambling and the grammar might not be perfect, but I think my point is still clear.)

The key would be whether a democratic Russia would industrialise in time to successfully face the Japanese in 1905, and more importantly whether it would be more prepared for WWI. In any case, WWI would still have happened, but if Russia would lose it as it did it real history, then everything afterwards would be the same.

However, if democratic reforms lead to faster industrialization in late 1800's and early 1900's, a more modern military with enough rifles, bullets and shells for everyone, then things could be very different.

Russian success on the Eastern front would lead to a quicker defeat of Germany in WWI, possibly without even US entering the war. Probably even a democratic Russia wouldn't resist making territorial gains at the expense of Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empire.

Eastern European nations such as Czechoslovakia would become independent, but allied to Russia. Generally Russia would wield influence over the whole of Eastern Europe. On the other hand, terms of German surrender could be even harsher.

Overall result of WW1 compared to real history:

1) Much stronger Russia
2) Even more humiliated Germany
3) Weaker USA

In this scenario, Hitler would probably still come to power in the weak and bitter Germany, however he would find it much more difficult to annex Czech republic, because it would be Russia's ally in this scenario. Most likely he would just rule Germany without really invading anyone. So no WW2 as we know it.

The interesting bit is what would happen to Russian-British relations after WWI. Would they be quite friendly like US and Britain after real WWI, or perhaps colonial rivalry would get a new twist, and the result would be a kind of a cold war between Russia and Britain?