How would you change history?

Classic Liberalism is Laissez-Faire economics. Modern liberalism is the democratic party, destroy married families, abortion on demand, mass immigration, multiculturalism. Liberalism used to be about freedom for the individual against the authoritarian conservatives, now it is social democracy.

Mussolini was a socialist but than though his Italian worldview it morphed into Fascism. Fascism is more socialist economically than people are led to believe. Read the BNP manifesto it is 19th century marx! The idea of them being the opposite is wrong imo.

:goodjob:

polar-bear-face-palm_thumbnail.jpg
 
Classic Liberalism is Laissez-Faire economics. Modern liberalism is the democratic party, destroy married families, abortion on demand, mass immigration, multiculturalism. Liberalism used to be about freedom for the individual against the authoritarian conservatives, now it is social democracy.

Mussolini was a socialist but than though his Italian worldview it morphed into Fascism. Fascism is more socialist economically than people are led to believe. Read the BNP manifesto it is 19th century marx! The idea of them being the opposite is wrong imo.

:goodjob:

The classical liberals supported social freedom and the free market. Immigration, abortion, same-sex marriage, and multiculturalism are part of that. And not to mention that not a single Democrat is a socialist or anti-capitalist.

Fascism is not socialist. Sure, it involves interventionism, but interventionism is still capitalism. Not to mention that Social Darwinism and anti-communism are also core tenets of fascism. Fascism is a capitalistic doctrine.
 
I'd kill Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, causing Roman morale in Britian to plumet, and have an early withdraw from Britian of the Romans. I would also warn the Tsar and his children about their assasinations, and get them out of Russia fast. It would keep the familiy going, which could be a driving force in the collapse of USSR.
 
I'd kill Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, causing Roman morale in Britian to plumet, and have an early withdraw from Britian of the Romans. I would also warn the Tsar and his children about their assasinations, and get them out of Russia fast. It would keep the familiy going, which could be a driving force in the collapse of USSR.

Exactly when will they flock back to the Tsar?

Heck him getting shot made him more loved now than when he was alive.
 
Basileios Lekapenos needed to have a bit more trouble slipping the poison into Ioann Tzimiskes' food and drink. :p
I'd kill Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, causing Roman morale in Britian to plumet, and have an early withdraw from Britian of the Romans.
Why, might I ask?
 
The classical liberals supported social freedom and the free market. Immigration, abortion, same-sex marriage, and multiculturalism are part of that. And not to mention that not a single Democrat is a socialist or anti-capitalist.

Fascism is not socialist. Sure, it involves interventionism, but interventionism is still capitalism. Not to mention that Social Darwinism and anti-communism are also core tenets of fascism. Fascism is a capitalistic doctrine.

"Liberals" of the 19th century would be Libertarians today. The liberals of today want giant state, high taxes, radical social change, aggressive egalitarian policies, always pushing and tugging at society, the long march though the institutions, until it unravels into a wreck ripe for communism. That is the aim read: Frankfurt School.

Fascist countries have tight control of the Economy and own large swathes of corporations. Its not quite Western Capitalism or Command-Control of the Soviets but it is more to the left.
 
That's not true. Libertarianism developed in the 60s. Liberalism today IS liberalism of the 19th Century by and large. Liberals supported free trade. Who was it who supported NAFTA? Bill Clinton. Who supported women's rights and an end to slavery? Liberals. Who supports feminism and affirmative action today? Liberals. There is not a single Democrat in government today who is a Marxist. Not one. They are all capitalists.

About fascism, that's not true. It was state interest tied to corporate interest. A military-industrial complex, you might say. And there still were private corporations. Fascism is a capitalistic doctrine. Period.
 
Who supported women's rights and an end to slavery? Liberals.

Abraham Lincoln and the Republicans of the 1860s would be closer to today's conservatism; though this is misleading since modern conservatism is technically "liberal conservatism," whereas modern liberalism is sometimes qualified as "social liberalism."
 
How was Lincoln conservative?

"But you say you are conservative - eminently conservative - while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by 'our fathers who framed the Government under which we live;' while you with one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting something new. True, you disagree among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the fathers."

- Abraham Lincoln
 
...aggressive egalitarian policies...

Yes, those damn liberals and their insane belief that everyone should be treated fairly! If it hadn't been for Marx, no-one would have thought of that.

On a marginally more serious and on-topic note, I think that socialism has quite different historical roots from communism, although obviously they share certain similarities and, again historically, many people have espoused them both. The biggest difference is obviously that Marxism was an avowedly materialistic philosophy, while socialism was hugely influenced by Christianity. So rather than say that communism came first and then socialism developed from it, it seems to me more accurate to say that communism and socialism originally emerged as distinct movements (although they were similar responses to the same social conditions, of course) and the distinctions between them later blurred as individuals or groups recognised that they had, to varying degrees, common aims or ideals.

I really don't think any of this has got anything to do with fascism either. It's true that the "big statism" of fascism is similar in certain respects to that of communism, but they obviously don't have the same purpose. The big state of communism is intended, at least in theory, to ensure that everyone has the same amount of material goods. So the state is a means to an end, at least in theory. But the big state of fascism is an end in itself even in theory. The whole point of fascism is that the nation is a worthy ideal in itself, and the big state is intended to put all the resources of the people at the disposal of the nation. That's nothing like communism, which is concerned with the struggle between classes, not that between nations.
 
I'd somehow manage to disolve the HRE, and make Germany into 4 or so states. Bavaria, Rhineland, Saxony and Brandenburg. Hamburg get's annexed into Denmark.

I'd go back even further after the battle of Grunwald and when everyone was celebrating after the battle, i'd tell them that it would be in our best interest to destroy the Teutonic Order once and for all (rather than just heading back to Poland celebrating). Poland takes the last Teutonic stronghold(Malburg was it? Don't remember) and banish all non-Polish people in the area and repopulate it with Poles. Only for the benefit of the future.

I Make sure both Muscovy and Novgorad continue fighting all the way to fairly lately, letting Poland take more of Belarussia and Ukraine. When I was done with that, i'd advise the Polish king that a war against Bohemia would be best, to reclaim territories such as Breslau and Silesia, as both will prove valuable in the future. Poland allies with Austria after they agreed on a proper division (which favored Austria, to get them into the war) and than we divided up Bohemia as planned, leaving only a buffer state of Moravia behind.

By now it should be somewhere in the 1600's, so I make the Ottomans more succesful and let them invade Hungary decisively. I tell Polish king (as his advisor) to take advantage of this, and annex some former Hungarian land, such as Slovakia.

I at the same time, told the king that it would be best to sponsor rebels in former Byzantine and Romanian territory against the Ottoman Empire following the battle of Vienna. The Romanians regroup themselves into Transylvania, Moldova and Wallachia, and shortly later as a united Romania. In Greece, nationalist revolts occurred when the populous were finally against their oppression. All this also sparked revolts in Serbia.

I told the Polish kind, as his advisor, that perhaps setting up some colonies could prove to be beneficial to Poland. Colonies Poland could profit from where noted in Panama and Coastal Texas in the American mainland. Colonization of Tobago and Antigua and attempted to colonize Dominica, but the French became controllers of the land. Unsatisfied, the Kings advisor(me) decided to colonize a portion of coastal Brazil, which will later be known as Polish Guiana. The French settled next to Polish Guiana, and called it French Guiana. Poland also took several colonial possessions in Africa, most notably Southern Angola. (Polish Angola) As well as several other ones from time to time, but the only long lasting one was in Angola. 3 nearby Indonesian Islands fell rule to Poland, as well as a colony in India. Poland opened the Polish East Indies Trading company.

With this new colonial wealth, back in mainland europe, was used to sponsor the collapse of the Brandenburg. Poland gained territories on it's western front, as well as the western bits of Pomerania. Brandenburg became a buffer state between the Polish power and the nations on the Atlantic Coast.

Ottomans fall in power even more at the start of the 1700's with more revolting provinces such as Albania (who like other balkan nations, missed the period of islamic missionaries, and thus remained christian) Greece and newly created Bulgaria pushed the Ottomans back to the Anatolian side of Thrace.

I than change Poland's political system so fighting back won't be to hard like it was in real life, just in time for the Swedish invasion. 5 years before, I order the construction of a larger navy. Sweden invade and our navy will be outnumbered, but once our reserve troops from other parts of the country reach the coastal regions, Swedish forces are decimated.

1700's continue as is.

1800's so no partition of Poland. Poland remained neutral in the French Succession wars. In this century, Poland was fairly peaceful but gained military strength as neighbors Muscovy united Russian lands, and Austria gained in power as they swallowed parts of the Balkans. (down to Albania, so they have a border with Greece) Romania became a worthy ally or enemy as well. To the West, Germany and Italy are united following Napoleon's campaigns. Germany is strong as a threat to Poland, they already invaded Denmark and took back Hamburg. England is having it's little colonial goldenage and France is as powerful as ever. Spain doesn't fall in power either following the annexation of Portugal and it's colonies. (something it could not do in real life).

The latter of the 1800's saw Italy skirmish with it's new african colonies, the Ottomans fall even more in power, and Germany also gained some colonies. The 1800's were fairly quite in Europe after the first 25 years or so (which saw much war following Napoleon, the Balkans and Russia), but what was making noise and keeping Europe occupied was it's colonies, seeking independence. America gained independence a bit later in this history, as England kept it with a tighter grip. However, Napoleon sponsored an American independence which succeeded, most Spanish territories gained independence as well, Most famously Simon Bolivar and his quest in Spanish independence. Polish Texas gained independence as well. Panama stayed under Polish control however. Britain took the resources to throw out all other colonies in India, and united the land now known as British India. This included Polands colony... :\

1900's came with increasing tensions in Europe, Ferdinand's assasination in Sarejevo still takes place, and becomes the spark. The Central Powers are Germany, Austria-Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and the Ottomans. The war was bloody, in the west, it commenced as normal, trench warfare. In the East, Italy, and Poland fought Germany and Austria. Austria facing much independence revolts in the Balkans, succumbed easily. Germany was finally defeated after some help on the Eastern Front from Russia, in a joint Polish-Russian-Italian side. Poland and Russia than fought against Romania and they were decisively defeated. Following the defeat of Germany, England had the resources to start a land invasion in Turkey. Turkey were defeated in a joint Russian-British-Italian-Greek side.

Treaty of Versailles saw Poland lose possestions to an independent Lithuania, and Russia and Poland create a Ukrainian buffer state as well as a Latvian one. Russia gave up it's Baltic states. Austrian empire was no more, Hungary and all of it's balkans were destroyed. Ottomans also were no more, Turkey was the new state to come out, with Ataturk taking power. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was formed. Germany lost many colony's in the treaty. A new country, Czech Republic was formed.

Following the war, there was the Spanish Civil war, which saw an independent Brazil, Portugal and Basque Republic, as well as a couple of colonies overseas.

Than there was a madman called Hitler, who came in power in Germany. He annexed Czech Republic and Austria. Poland was much to strong for Germany at this point, so he continued annexing small countries like Denmark and the Netherlands, as well as allying with Italy, Romania and Hungary. He than made the pact with Russia in 1940 to invade Poland. Poland was invaded and lost after nearly 4 months of war, it could not defend an invasion from all sides by two world powers and a minor power. Although the consequences of this was Britain and France getting into the war. Hungary, wanting the territory of Vojvodina, invaded Yugoslavia, and Germany had to help them after Yugoslavia started to fight back. Yugoslavia brought Bulgaria and Greece into the war. Albania was invaded by Italy. France was defeated and the battle of Britain started. Hitler also invaded Norway and Sweden. Finland occupied Russia with the much longer lasting Winter War. Finland was more victorious in this war and it actually gained territory controlling Murmansk. Russia had to make a make-shift treaty with Finland, ceding Murmansk as they had to put troops against Germany, which had just broken their pact and invaded Ukraine, Belarus and Latvia. Germany and Russia were now at war. America got involved after Pearl Harbor. Germany was a little more succesful in this timeline againt Russia, but they had to retreat due to the Polish Uprising.

Yugoslavia defeated Hungary and put them out of the war. The German retreat allowed Russia to effectively defeat Romania. Invasion of Normandy happened a month later, and the allies moved into german occupied territory, than German territory as the crossed Alsace. Sweden and Norway gained some help from America and started to beat down the Germans. Italy surrendered soon afterwards and Germans were forced to invade Italy and battle the allies. Russia invaded German occupied territories. The Allies reached Berlin, but the fighting continued, as Hitler escaped to Poznan. The Allies marched and reach Poznan, where Hitler was shot down by troops. They continued through Polish territory to Warsaw crushing any resistance, and met the Russians in Warsaw.

WWII ended in Europe in September 1946, exactly 6 years after the war started. Milllions of lives were lost. To weaken Germany, they forced Bavaria independent, Alsace to France, as well as some minor border territory all around. Poland lost even more territory to the Ukrainian state, including it's territory in the Black Sea.

The Cold war happened regardless of the USSR being less powerful (Yugoslavia, Czech Republic, Germany, nor Poland ever became communist, and Finland gained territory on Russia and never became communist) USSR found new friends in Communist Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Thailand, Cambodia, Burma, Philippines and Indonesia as well as several African countries. Cold war ended 10 years later than it did in real life, as China, Iran and Saudi Arabia ended Communism, and all the European countries(and Indonesia) under it revolted and killed it's commie leaders. Most African states under communism descended into Civil War as did Cambodia.

Poland let go of it's last colonies, South Angola, Panama and Antigua in the 1970's.

Will you guys like a map? :D
 
Yes, those damn liberals and their insane belief that everyone should be treated fairly! If it hadn't been for Marx, no-one would have thought of that.

Now yer talking! Bleedin' heart liberals always moaning ;)

On a marginally more serious and on-topic note, I think that socialism has quite different historical roots from communism, although obviously they share certain similarities and, again historically, many people have espoused them both. The biggest difference is obviously that Marxism was an avowedly materialistic philosophy, while socialism was hugely influenced by Christianity. So rather than say that communism came first and then socialism developed from it, it seems to me more accurate to say that communism and socialism originally emerged as distinct movements (although they were similar responses to the same social conditions, of course) and the distinctions between them later blurred as individuals or groups recognised that they had, to varying degrees, common aims or ideals.

I really don't think any of this has got anything to do with fascism either. It's true that the "big statism" of fascism is similar in certain respects to that of communism, but they obviously don't have the same purpose. The big state of communism is intended, at least in theory, to ensure that everyone has the same amount of material goods. So the state is a means to an end, at least in theory. But the big state of fascism is an end in itself even in theory. The whole point of fascism is that the nation is a worthy ideal in itself, and the big state is intended to put all the resources of the people at the disposal of the nation. That's nothing like communism, which is concerned with the struggle between classes, not that between nations.


Checking out WIKI page for Socialism I concede that it isn't an outgrowth of Communism. But as you say it does share largely the same aims. The new-left (anything left of centre) dress up their revolutionary agenda in typical newspeak, like classic new labor buzzwords of "equality" and "diversity" which is the 21st century equivalents to "class struggle". In fact the left has opened up a whole new front and the supposed conservatives barely even see it and some even embrace it. That is the social and cultural changes brutally enforced though the most intolerant system of thought - political correctness - since the 3rd Reich. All the stuff I've mentioned like abortion, marriage and multiculturalism, these are just to strip people of their cultural identity. So Englishmen become just "-men", Frenchmen become "-men" and so on till they stop defending their traditions and culture because they have none and succumb to a "workers state" ....hmm have I gone off-topic a bit?

I stick to my point Fascism is derived from Communism. No one sat down and wrote a book called the "Fascist Manifesto". Concentration camps, classifying opponents as mentally ill (coming back into fashion), secret police, relentless propaganda, zero freedom of speech, gun control, banning of any other political parties I could go on but they all share these ideas.
 
Hmmm... I would either

1) Make sure Bismarck is never ousted from power, that would really change the world, it'd be fun to see what would happen :D

2) Make sure that once Huyana Capac dies, that there is no civil war between his two sons for control of the Inca Empire. And with the massive death and destruction of the civil war out of the way, the Inca might have a much better chance at taking down the Conquistadors of Spain once they invaded.

3) I'd like to try and convince the Mongol generals, after their invasion of Russia, to take their armies all the way into Europe. I know this isn't for the better, but of the Mongols made it farther into Europe than they did, I'd really (once again) like to see the results, after a mass depopulation of Europe (this is also pre-black plague, so it would kinda be a double-wammy on Europe after the Mongols were through).
 
Carolingian Empire stays intact.

Western Europe and Central Europe is united in peace and prosperity.
 
Back
Top Bottom