Absolutely crazy to think about that one Russian, born in the year between 1900-1910 was born under the Russian empire, tsar nicholas, then go through ww1 and then the Russian revolution, then under Stalin during ww2, then living peacefully in the USSR 45 years during the cold war. Then experiencing the Soviet collapse, and finally dying after 1999 under the Russian federation under President Putin...
Yugoslavia might have actually survived because they were reliant upon both the Soviet Union and United States for economic aid. This isn’t gospel, just something to consider.
@@supersejkaj3093 Yugoslavia was dead the moment Tito started to create new nationalities as a way to reduce serbian majority (north macedonians, montenegrins, kosovars).
@@ЙованДобройевичь While Yugoslavia existed before Tito, the modern Yugoslav nation was built upon a cult of personality with Tito at it's center. Tito used his power to suppress ethnic tensions in a way that no other political leader would have had the status among both the populace across the country and the political leaders to be allowed to do. The lack of a fit succesor left a sudden power vacuum in the nation, and all presidential solutions up until the Yugoslav wars were half hearted and unstable attempts at trying to save a situation that wasn't to be saved. The only realistic way I could see a prevention of this is if Tito had invested serious time into creating a clear successor as part of probaganda efforts, but this would be a hard task since there were so many politicians and ethnicities to please. Any dismay caused by a switch in leadership would have been disastrous for the Republic, and dismay would be likely. In other words, Yugoslavia was doomed to fall, and Tito would have has to play his cards just right if he was to prevent this. Since he hadn't laid a plan for what was to happen after his death, the country was effectively dead when he died, and the Yugoslavia that we saw in the 1980s was on life support, constantly fighting to avoid the inevitability of the Yugoslav breakup.
You are missing one big point. Without collapse of USSR, there would not be a free for all theft of Soviet property and resources as what has happened in the 90's USA would be in much bigger debt spiral without a way to write off it's currency debt. The economic boom of the 90's would probably not have happened. NAFTA and globalization would not have happened as fast as it have. There is a very real possibility of USSR and China working out their differences of the 70's
Yeah, Gorbachev fixed relations between 2 countries which is why Russia and China are allies today. If USSR and Warsaw Pact survived and managed to reform like in this video we would today have super eastern bloc led by 2 super-powers - USSR and China
Nikita Nosov if USA and allies weren’t able to reach soviet resources I think NAFTA would happen quickly, to secure to Americans control on Canadians and Mexican ones
I would like to see what the miliary technology would be like actually as a lot of programs got canceled or scaled back due to the USSR collapsing in both the east and the west and it would be interesting to see how tech develops with a peer level conflict in mind for 3 decades instead of the war on terror and a third world war perhaps breaking out in February of 2022.
if world war broke out in february 2022 you wouldn't be having internet right now. It's only Russia Ukraine war with NATO desperate to start WW III by supplying Ukraine
the thing is: the PRC had to build up all their production capacity from nothing, meanwhile a Perestroika-only opened USSR would be at the technological level to start being the factory of the world. yes, the USSR's industry was extremely advanced in some areas (Buran > Shuttle), but it was also quite behind Western industry standards in other (see autos). esides that, we have the fact that standards of living were lower in the USSR, & so were wages in 1991. with all that put together, we have a highly educated poor population in a highly technological country, which would be able to put out in 1991 the same level of products that China could in the 2ks+ for a fraction of the wages and better quality, all that right by the side of a major market. my guess is that a Perestroika-only open USSR would have pushed the PRCs boom further down the line.
Looking at how Europe fell in love with cheep Russian energy after the USSR collapsed, one might wonder what direction the EU would have gone with a reformed USSR exporting not just energy but also consumer goods like China does in our timeline. There could even be a scenario where EAST Germany begins to over take WEST Germany in living standards due to subsidized Russian gas coming from their Soviet comrades. And really things were heading in this direction before the 1980s, with the Soviet economy projected to be the world's largest by the year 2000. Things stagnated in the 80s, but living standards were still relatively good and people were relatively happy, so Soviet leaders did nothing to fix the systemic deficiencies in their economy. Gorbachev was the only one who finally saw the writing on the wall and accepted the need to reform, however in my opinion he also had absolutely no idea what the heck he was doing and his advisors were either corrupt, incompetent or both. I believe he genuinely had good intentions for his people, however the agenda he put in place accelerated the stagnant USSR into a full blown decline, leading to a dark age in Eastern Europe which has not only persisted to this day, but has intensified to the point that we now have the biggest ground war in Europe since WWII. Most of the images of starving people lining up for bread under "communism" actually come from Gorbachev's reform era. Ask an old Russian, and they will tell you life was good under Brezhnev. Of course Brezhnev sitting on his hands and not moving the economic project forward set up the conditions which forced Gorbachev to take drastic actions, but the perception of the average Soviet citizen was that there had never in history been that level of relative prosperity in the Eurasian land mass for ordinary working people.
@@draker769 the US would keep investing in China, butthe Europeans already depended on Soviet fossil fuels, so they were in the position to invest even further in their red neighbour
Well ist WW1/WW2 that helped wes or more specificaly USA to cick out otehrs form extremely important dominances suc as USA using WW1 to kick out UK from being the maritime trade monopoly and then USA put itself in that place.Not to mention all infrastructure from civil to industrial NOTHING was destoyed or touched while Europe,Asia,Middle East was DECIMATED especialy Europe and some of Asia. West more precicely USA EXTREMELY PROFITED FROM ALL THE WARS bcs tehre was NON of the devastating damages done to it and insetad USED war to extremely porfit and ramp up ist own indursy empire. Thing is/REALITY IS that what Eurpoe/USA accuse China of (dept trap) is LITETRLAY WHAT USA did to Europe jjust the difference is China didnt go around turning countries into stone age and then rebuild it BUT its an UNDENIABLE FACT that TILL THIS DAY there are MANY European countrie sTHAT STILL DIDNT PAY BACK ALL OF THE LOANS/DEBTS FROM WW1 ALONE CBS IT CANST AND WILL NEVE BE ABLE TO DO SO.Thats why MANY TIME Seven thou its not in their inetrest they STILL follow USAs orders like some puppies its cbs they MUST do it.
What do you mean the standards of living were lower in the USSR? They were actually better than now in Russia. And the standards of living were better for the working class in the USSR compared to the USA. Also the soviets in 1991 had a population really educated. Education was great in the USSR and it was free
I highly kinda doubt the USSR would stay authoritarian since gorvachev's goal has always been democracy and transparency in my opinion and most likely the USSR would rebrand itself into the soviet federation or something But this video is still a very good interpretation of what would happen
If the august coup never happens the Soviet Union would have rebranded into the Union of Sovereign Soviet Republics where the republics didn’t have to be communist
It definitely would have had to have stayed a one party state, though. Not saying that can't be democratic or transparent, because it can. But, the reason is because you cannot expect that the whole structure of government will change every time a conservative economic party was voted in. In a way, the one party state was exactly what kept it together in unity, in one belief. Democracy is still possible in a one party state, to an extent.
I think it would have made more sense if the USSR gave democratisation an other go (as was attempted in 1936-1937 with a new constitution that allowed for non communist to run as candidates in elections etc), abandon market reforms and instead keep the planned economy but instead of basing it on output, do it properly by using computer systems to track demand. Thus making the economy much more effective and more appreciated by the people since it would be a demand based, non profit economy. That could kick of an era of liberty, democracy and economic satisfaction for the people in the USSR. Which in turn would have kept pressure on the western businesses not to let income and wealth inequality grow like it has done in the US, UK etc since the 70s untill this very day. For the average citizen in most countries of the world this could have meant a better position than compared to today's reality?
Very good insight I agree with everything you said except about the democracy part which is actually very important for a communist society, but the USSR wasn't there yet. So I don't think democracy as in letting every candidates from every ideology would be good yet because there always a danger of having a greedy drunken guy like Yeltsin win the elections with western money and influence. And having him destroy the USSR like he did. But I do think that the population should be able to vote democraticaly for some communist candidates and be able to stop any presidents that are not going for the interest of communism which are the interests of the masses
If democracy ever comes to Russia, it is because of the influence of other democratic countries. Russia will become corrupted as hell and obviously the western europeans won't invest in them at times of need that easily.
I think you are wrong with the Yugoslavian wars still happening. Many people claim ethnic tensions as the major reason for the war but in reality the ethnic tensions began just after the Yugoslavian economy hit recession in 1980s. A still economical strong USSR would prevent the recession from becoming an economic disaster like it happen during the 90s where Hyperinflantion happened. And if the Yugoslav wars still happened, I am not sure if an united Bosnian Federation could exist in this timeline duo the Serbs being more supported by the East while at the same time the Bosnian govnerment by the West
they always had tension in the country the only reason why it was held together was Tito and the country turned into civil war before the soviet dissolution at that point nothing could have help the country everything was going wrong and like ww1 its just needed a catalyst to start
Yugoslavia was a failed state held togheter by Tito. The recession didn't rly spark the coflict at least not in Slovenia. It was the people who were more and more desperate for self-governance. After all, the Slovene money was going to Belgrade before and after the economic troubles and Slovenes were sick of that. Slovenia and probably Croatia would most likely declare independence anyways
See, Yugoslavia wasn't likely to have a good economy held on by the USSR, since the USSR was somewhat against the regime in Yugoslavia, even after the death of Tito.
Ussr colapse under the sanctions + the mayor loses on the batlefield like example there only test unit mobile radar who the sadf captured transported to isreali for researtch aswell as other weapons and vechile including up to date migs , also the rhodesia campeign + vietnam + afganistan + the colapse of joegaslavia became the end of the ussr , like ukraine are doing the 4k sadf troops + unita fighters of johanatan savimbi ( nick name butcher of angola " has to be say his tribe was ethnic mayority and betray by fapla who told they would give them the state witch they told to the legendary men of fnla to ( men who were from child till adault soldiers " who would be train by comander of 44 para the pathfinders , and later also 32 bat the angolan bufalo troop becus they would fight like a bufalo ) also the geurila war in afganistan drained ussr wealth
This was super interesting. It would have been great to have seen some rough economic and demographic estimates extrapolated from 80s trajectories or based on Eastern European GDPs
USSR GDP would still be at least 10 times smaller than the USA. Eastern Europe states like the Baltics or Poland didn’t gain prosperity until they joined the west
@@tylerclayton6081 China's GDP per capita is now comparable to Russia's even though it started from a MUCH lower base. It's not inconceivable to think that Russia's GDP could be much higher if had avoided the turmoil of the 90s and implemented Chinese-style reforms.
Eastern Europe wouldn't have the same demographics crisis OTL,In our Timeline before the fall of the 80s, the Eastern bloc country has a higher birth rate than the country of Western Europe but after the fall of the comunist bloc the birth rate collapse.But in this timeline this woudn't happen and if the Eastern bloc succesfuly Reform to market socialism this collapse wouldn't happen,if the USSR still have the same demographics grow of 1991 it would have a population of 356 millions
I think in this alternate timeline China would team up with USSR (like with Russia in our timeline) because of many reasons: 1. Economic ties, both would have market socialism economies 2. USA would be militarily active in Turkiye, directly threatening USSR, forcing it to seek new allies 3. USA would support Taiwan against China (like in our timeline) 4. USA would start focusing on China more than USSR/Russia because China would be surpassing USA in economy and technology (like in our timeline) 5. It was Gorbachev who fixed relations with China, which is reason why Russia and China are allies in our timeline 6. USSR and China both would be seen as a threat by the west, forcing them to work together 7. America would have its bases in Far East, Middle east, Turkey, Europe, Taiwan, effectively encircleing both USSR and China 8. Iran and Pakistan would allign themselves with USA as they would see USSR, China and communism as a threat to their culture and islam 9. Liberal-democratic India would have closer relations with communist USSR (and not with China because of their border dispute) than also liberal-democratic USA and the west because of 1971. but, still would remain non-alligned (like in our timeline) Edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention that in this timeline North Korea, as Soviet sattellite would likely follow steps of USSR like other Soviet-alligned states so it would be able to secularize, modernize and compete with South Korea
Are you sure of Communist Bulgaria was that terrible? I mean you lost like 20% of your population from 2000 to 2020. Most of your young population has left for the West just like the rest of Eastern Europe*
@@bosanski_Cevap Am I sure it was that bad? The standard of living was in the trash, the government was an authoritarian one-party dictatorship, the country was a complete puppet state to the USSR, and much more are the reasons I think it was "that bad. The real reason people are leaving is because life is better in the west. But they couldn't do that under communism, because the country didn't allow people to leave. So, the fact that people are leaving is not stopping me from preferring democracy, no thanks.
@@bosanski_Cevap communism made the country extremely poor and corrupt, today Bulgaria is a fine country in the upper-middle income group, people still leave because much "better" places are almost right next door.
Correction, the soviet union allocated 1.5-2% of its MILITARY BUDGET towards the maintenance of its troops and equipment in Afghanistan. It didnt just randomly take it from its overall budget. There are CIA documents such as “The economic cost of the Soviet Unions invasion of Afghanistan” , which further proves this
The Soviet Union was what kept Europe together… America came into talks with Gorbachev to collapse it… Russia’s shield was officially destroyed. America’s plan was to weaken the Russian economy and military strength and gain access to Europe to expand its NATO.. In fact, Something that America agreed with Russia not to do, Expand their NATO into Europe and former Soviet countries.
Their plan is to get stronger and Invade us to take all our land away and split it into pieces… It drives world leaders insane that we got all this land for ourselves so every hundred years or so, They world goes insane, tries to unite, and destroy our nation together.
They never kept more than 100k troops there (most of the time significantly less). The war in Afghanistan is the most over hyped and overrated war in history, it was almost as irrelevant as US own war in Afghanistan. USSR lost 15k troops in 10 years, that's nothing, USA lost half of that number in Iraq, Russia and Ukraine lose that number per month and even 200 years ago Russians lost 2-3 that number in a single day of Borodino. So the idea that Afghanistan was crucial in demise of USSR is just pure nonsense (and Reaganist propaganda)
@@bdleo300yup, what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union was multifaceted, but primarily due to weak leadership and a Biden in power. Had they taken the route China did with their economy, the soviet union could still be a thing
From listening to my family talk about life under the Soviets, they didn't care about politics and thus were wholly detached from the divisive debates tearing our society apart today. The simply pretended to work, actually working like 3 days per month, would go on mandatory 2-week holidays twice per year to holiday resorts and spas, and pretty much drink and party all day every day, since if there wasn't anyone's birthday to celebrate, you would celebrate their friends birthday (in their name, obviously they weren't there in person) or their friend's friend's friends, and so on. They basically made up holidays to drink and party every day. After work, they'd go feast at each other's homes. I wonder if the internet and computerization would have been the same as it is in China, creating a vast internal market, but generally mimicking western tech companies, or if it would have been like North Korea, where only select families would have the ability to use the internet under strict supervision. At the very least, I know that millions wouldn't have killed themselves, and that USSR would have been a much more equal country. It's similar to when I ask my Chinese friends, and they say that they don't need freedom of speech or opinion, basically just don't talk about politics, and then you can do whatever you want. At least in USSR, everyone had free access to schooling of all levels and good healthcare. Free theater spectacles, artistic shows, etc. But my parents did say that the TV programs sucked, it was pretty much soviet propaganda or war films with intermittent showings of the communist party meetings. Boring shit. But hey, at least it was a simple life that everyone enjoyed. People in my home country often reminisce about the good old soviet days, I'm sort of the weird link between the ultra-radical left youth of today and the old conservative soviet boomers, so it's interesting to view such scenarios to contemplate what could have been.
i'm Vietnamese and yeah have a one party government, communist one. Theretically we are much alike China government in which we follow liberal free market and are free to make money, as long as it doesnt affect the country direction. Infrastructure and healthcare as well as education are owned by government, giving us low cost of living, the life is kinda simple, but for big company, they have to compromise with the government, so basically if the state people are efficient and well trained people, the developpment is garaunted and life is way more simple, cause you just have to follow one direction in general. Now im studying in the West, life is much more complicated. Big privated companies make tons out of people. Freedom of speech is sometimes overrated, pp protesting nonsensely about deconstructivist ideologies and guided by big media companies, its a big mess. Working class have to worry about bill and tax, some prison are not just behind the bar,... Yeah perharps we cannot talkshit about our government, maybe a constructivist argument but the moment you do that you will have special attention and large scale protest are not allowed, but who protest anw when pp are living simple and easy life, and the economy keep growing? The state isn't perfect but neither does the so call the land of Freedom
@@nguyenvuminhkhoi8179 yeah I moved to the states and it's honestly pretty bad, everyone is struggling, whereas the companies as you put, simply play both sides for profit, and yet the people are too stupid to realize that, and get dragged into conflicts with one another, resulting in instability and crime. Almost nobody can change what the government does, so why should we even care? And yet, that's all the talk here in the states, "freedom" and "democracy" they say, but they have neither, and yet they keep deluding themselves. Just like with the "american dream". Everyone keeps dreaming about making it rich, but they work 2 jobs and get a stroke at 50 and die. It is what it is. We exchanged simpler times and social harmony for "capitalism", just another rendition of modern slavery, in my opinion.
@@gwky yeah if the USSR had transformed its economy at a lower speed, and not its politics it may still stand as one of the most powefull and revolutionary model of government. Almost like a smaller version of UN, imo,...
One of the reasons rarely mentioned for the Soviet collapse is the immense amount of resources Russia had to funnel to the Soviet republics, and to the Warsaw Pact countries. In Russia a lot of people assumed that by selling these goods instead of giving them up like they were Russia would be a lot richer. At that theory looked to be correct till about 2014 when the whole Ukraine thing happened, and triggered an immense amount of paranoia from the Russian population that forced a huge post Cold War realignment with the West.
are you crazy :) or just still in russia propoganda...a lot of these countrys were doing much more better then the old good russia...by pacts and other shit...they stoped these countrys...they took best what they could...and put on regime...that stoped they development...
They sucked out more resources than invested anyway. Anti-western paranoia began with Putin in power in early 2000s. Just it was not that visible from outside from the stasrt.
Russian Federation would've been a lot stronger and far richer had they elected a great leader with good intentions to create natural allies rather than creating enemies out of nowhere, like Vladimir Putin did.
It's more like the USA indirectly creating Al Qaeda, but nothing new the USA have always supported terrorists and dictatorships when they thought it was in their interests Furthemore, the USSR intervention was requested by Afghan government (then already socialist) and was initially successful but couldn't keep control and had to retreat as the USA will repeat later (but the American retreat was much more catastrophic and humiliating).
First things first, the Chinese economic reforms began practically when Deng made land reforms stepping back from the collectivization, Moscow saw it as way to drastic, their reforms were set to do the same as the Chinese did, but without the land reform, that's why they failed, Gorbachev himself said that, instead of openness and economic growth they got ultranationalism and recession, which was the opposite from what happened in China, or perhaps Vietnam, which also did similar reforms, people in the west tend to assume that it was the special economic zones, but they came latter in China, and the reason was the land reform, it was a way to prevent speculation, since if you privatize the land, is obvious that real state enterprises would be like vultures all over it, so they made the SEZ to control it. That said, this could even work in the USSR? Theoretically, yes, and funny enough, the USSR had what China lacks and vice-versa, which was the heavy industry, theoretically a company could build facilities to extract materials, build tools, stuff like that in the USSR, which would use their highly skilled work force, to transform in China and sell all over the world, the problem is that the desindustrialization all over the world would be twice as hard, Japan and Germany would be hit hard, the US recession in the beginning of the 2000 would be way worst and soon enough the crime rates and domestic terrorism would be on the rise, so the war on terror would still be happening, in a very different way, but it will, the arms race would probably stall, the microprocessors and telecom races would become the new thing, the cold war would be over by this point since everything is capitalist now, so it will change everything to stay the same.
While the USSR surviving wouldn't have been good, I have always noticed that it seems like America started to lose its edge and allow things to fall apart after the USSR fell. Like, very soon after that we stopped winning things like Field's medals in Mathematics, the space program was put on the back burner, industry started being outsourced more, and in general without the fear of the USSR to pressure our leaders into doing a good job and showing how we were superior, it's like our leaders just... gave up and let us fall behind China which they didn't see as a threat. I think the USSR completely collapsing in the 1980s made everyone overconfident in the idea of world peace. Maybe it would have been better if the collapse had been more gradual, with the Warsaw Pact countries breaking away first, but the USSR itself holding on longer and continuing to be a threat. Enough that the Iron Curtain starts to come down and Eastern Europe is more free, but not enough that our leaders start thinking we're in an era of peace and prosperity and stop worrying about national security.
Why would it be a bad thing? USSR was not as bad as they say it is. Compared to the US especially, it's a much less evil superpower. It was also probably better than current day Russia, since 58% of people regret it's dissolution. Think gulags were bad? They were shut down in the 1955. Guess what? Forced labour (slavery) for prisoners is still a thing in the US. Think KGB were bad? Look at the FBI. Also, the 90s was hell for former socialist countries, as the transition to capitalism left many unemployed. Crime rate rose. Stuff like that.
Exactly. Space Race would innovate human colonization of space early on. Maybe humanity would fix the earth by limiting the population on earth and expanding the population beyond the earth. Satellite colonies. Colonies on the moon, Mars, and the asteroid belt.
Gonna steal this scenario for my own alternative timeline but I'm keeping Yugoslavia alive as well as having Finland, Poland and Romania as non-aligned nations.
if the Soviet Union made it, it would be more like the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics, Gorbachev's idea giving more autonomy to the states but keeping them within the union is the way to go
Exactly. Only allowing 9 republics to stay with Moscow. But the Baltic states, Armenia, Moldova, and Georgia like how it would allow it to be in the real proposed New Union treaty.
12:40 as a Pole it's sad that you didn't mention other costs.And it's stupid to speak that we would get assimilated to russian culture. We were independent. Now we are more assimilating to the American culture than then to the Russian one
@@ciii4361 In the USSR they encouraged Russian people to learn local languages and even to officially change their nationality in their passports. I am not sure if any state in the USA forces to learn any Indian language.
@@mikman7219 yeah sure the Soviets did also some effort to revive minor nationalities in the Union. But the Russian cultural presence was more prominent in the Union than in the allied countries
@@ciii4361 There was no Russian cultural presence in the Socialist countries since the borders were closed for regular people. No Soviet TV. These countries knew little about the USSR. I guess they learned Russian a little at school but not to the level they could speak well. After the USSR collapsed I talked to many people from these countries and found how little they knew about us and how little we knew about them too. They even did not know that we never celebrated Christmas. And for me it was weird that they celebrated it.
In other words for everyone outside of the US and Eastern Europe the world is 100 times better and for Eastern Europe and the US its 50/50 wether things would be slightly better or slightly worse? Fuck sake Gorbachev all you had to do was not rush your reforms and the world on the whole would be a much better place.
Amazing video!I started my channel thanks to your videos and hopefully I can do a good job as well talking about economics.Thank you for inspiring me and keep up the good work.
I haven’t finished the video yet, but I just want to point out something you kept mentioning. How “there would be a return to “an increase of Cold War tensions” as if after the collapse there was less of a divide between East and West. We know for a fact, especially right now, that just isn’t true. Gorbachev working towards better relations with the West was not a policy that was exclusive to Glasnost. He would have continued pushing for peace and prosperity with the West. So I think this whole thing about “increases Cold War tensions” is quite frankly based on nothing
Putin for most of his reign had tried to get closer to the West. But time and time again he was given a cold shoulder by the western powers. This left him with no choice but to eventually take a more confrontational approach with the West. You’re mistaken.
It's easy to forget about now, but after the USSR fell, there were many talks between Russia and the USA about mutual cooperation. Many of these talks actually went somewhere (such as ex-Warsaw Pact nations integrating into the EU and later into NATO), but many failed due to the large prides of the USA and Russia. It took a good 30 years for tensions between Russia and the West to even get near where they were at during the Cold War, and without the USSR falling, I don't think we'd see that 'break' in the tension; the tension would probably simmer down slowly over time as the USSR and USA worked hard to not step on each other's toes, while still trying to fulfill their strategic objectives, which inevitably there'd be a flashpoint where there's overlapping interests which would inevitably spark tensions again.
Ussr had 5 million active army and 30 million reseeve+ 60000 tanks and 100000 trucks + 10000 aircraft and second biggest economy 3rd largest population and world largest land area and superior technology and industry and imagine if its exist after 30 years
The former republics still exists, but it would probably be some where comparable to a resource rich and modern-day European Union with a smaller GDP and population size. The USA and Japan would likely still have the first and second largest economies.
Not, only in just space, imagine technology and science! What would phones be like? Medicine? God that would actually be cool. Not the tensions part of it though. There's also cybernetics and apparently the Soviets were quite ahead.
I don't think so. The Soviet Union was a big sponsor of a lot of Arab regimes. So it can be expected the First Gulf War going to be more like a Syrian Civil War and maybe the Soviets are going to be able again to unite the Arab countries surrounding Israel again to wage a massive war again against Israel. Meanwhile, the West might do more their best to get rid of the ayatollah regime in Iran. There's also a lot more at stake when the Arab Spring is going to be a thing. The Middle East is screwed anyway. Although I've the impression the Middle East is incrementally stabilizing.
In the early year, preferably after stallin, Soviet union need someone like deng ziaoping who can build a grand masterplan to stimulate soviet economy, and to enter the world market like china today. Sadly Soviet higher up doesnt have such people. If only trotsky take over the succesion instead of stallin, i wonder what would happen to our world now
Sonera the thing they needed more after Stalin was a good agricultural reform, especially on the economic point of view, Chruschev tried to make it, but failed, ironically, from my point of view, due to a lack of opposition
If the Soviet Union never collapsed, everything woulda have been better, because the Cold War is what made both sides prosper and it made astonishing advances in technology and research, plus the Military would constantly be advancing and we wouldn't have to worry about 9/11 or any middle eastern wars. It would also be the way we all get space colonization, seeing how the space race would eventually evolve into the colonization of planets, they would have fast Space ships, pretty much the beginning of Star Trek-type tech. Of course, after a while of that, the 2 sides would start to stop feuding and begin to work together, since they both have colonies on the same planets, after many joint endeavors, the 2 would eventually merge or create a United Space program and it will be the beginning of Earth Unity. At that time, both sides would be doing very well economically and Militarily as well as tech-wise too, so the de-escalation of the Cold War would happen and both sides would try to work together, ushering in a new era of Peace and prosperity. Until China starts doing their own colonization of planets and creates a 3rd party, then the peace would slowly die, due to people on the West side being outraged and angry that the government's decision to work with the " enemy" and many riots and revolts would happen in the West as well as fear of China and Soviet Union joining forces once again and going against the West, which would probably cause civil wars in western countries and the installation of Anti-East governments who would try to get the Ring leader, America on board, but America being the leading country of the West to want to join forces with the Soviets, would lead the nations in favor of it causing a rift between Anti-East and Pro-East governments which would probably cause wars and a new Faction to rise up in the West, Neo Fascism. The NeoFascists would most likely focus more on Earth politics than space, so they would cease all space developments and efforts, knowing that they could just steal or copy the Western Alliance and Soviet tech and use it for space. The rising tensions with NeoFascist Coalition and Western Alliance and the Chinese hegemony, it would start the 3rd World War or a smaller regional war for dominance, but since the Soviets and Western Alliance are at peace and working together, they both have become the only superpowers in the world, with China rising to be 3rd and the NeoFascist Coalition trying to reach the status in 4th place. This would affect both the West and the Soviets, which would cause them to get involved in the wars and shift focus on Earth, this would reintroduce the Cold War mindset back into the Soviets and West which would affect the relationship, and eventually cause it to break due to the re-escalation of the now old Cold War that's been going on for almost 200 years. Then, after so many wars and years of it, I imagine there will be a rise of pacifist movements in all factions to try to end the wars and go back to space, it would be another 50 years until that idea would catch on seeing how governments don't really care for end of wars to happen, once they do, the call for Earth Unification would begin and eventually there would be a Loose Union of countries then after a while of that, a fully united Earth Government would be established and the 4 factions would exist as States in this Earth Government and this new Global Government would definitely focus on Space and i believe the start of Star Trek type federation would be in the works of forming with United Earth being the founding Member.
Can you do an alternate history of the Greco-Roman empire, it is a compromise between the Greek and Latin speaking cultures co-exist together like the Austria Hungary compromise in 1867, pls make it happened, pls
I'm curious as to why you neglected mentioning the fate of North Macedonia. Seeing as you have it painted red, you assume it would remain in the Serbian sphere of influence, which makes more sense. It would affect the political situation in Greece, as well. Seeing as the right-wing populist party that's currently in power, the one that is partly responsible for the country's fiscal crisis, won the last elections based on its opposition to the Prespes Agreement, which settled the naming dispute. So a non-independent North Macedonia would change Greece's course, too.
Good video. I think, though, for the premise to be plausible, Soviet economic reforms have to start earlier, during Brezhnev's reign. The period between The Eyebrow's health decline and Gorbachev's ascension was really the nail in the USSR's coffin - a whole decade of inaction and stagnation. Remember during this period there were huge propaganda own-goals from the West in Vietnam, the Iranian revolution/hostage crisis, inflation and the oil crisis, and so on. The Soviets, being an authoritarian one-party state led at the time by a gormless invalid, were unable to take advantage of any of those crises. And then you had Afghanistan, Soviet leaders who dropped dead within months... Gorbachev comes way too late... and then Chernobyl happens which really sealed the public distrust and dissatisfaction with Soviet governance. Essentially, nothing useful was done 1975-1985. For this scenario to be most plausible, Brezhnev dies from heart attack or stroke in 1975, to be succeeded by (probably) Gromyko or Kulakov (NOT Andropov), allowing reform to commence in the late 70s.
This is a fascinating point. And yes, using the West's retreat in the 1970s to do internal reforms seems like the best option. Too bad the Soviets irl just used that as an opportunity to win more pointless victories in the third world, wasting their money and antagonizing various countries around the world.
Without the Fall of the USSR, China never becomes the country it is today. The 90s is when China truly took a step to become what it is today and that's because the fear of communism had fallen by a lot the moment USSR disappeared. With USSR no way US integrates their economy so much with them. More likely we see what we were seeing already by companies at the time and its India that gets a lot more companies over there.
Also, would the Gulf War even still happen in this timeline? It's much more likely that the USSR would rekindle its relationship with Iraq, veto the resolution, and prevent it entirely. Or, if the US persisted in invading Iraq, arming Iraq to the teeth, making victory uncertain...and it'd be a pyrrhic one if it happened.
In the 80's, computers and information technology took root in nearly every business and organization in the West. Without it, the USSR could not compete. But that meant that they could no longer keep a tight control over the flow of information and ideas. That was the conundrum they faced and they fell flat on their faces trying to resolve it: Glasnost' meant more and more people becoming aware of how inefficient and corrupt their outdated top-down system was.
The Soviets did not invade Afghanistan. A pro-socialist government was elected in 1978. Hakim's analysis on "The Deprogram" is that the Afghan government was too idealistic and tried to force too many progressive measures on to a feudal arch reactionary rural population. The party did not have much support in the rural areas. The U.S.S.R. was invited in to help the government to put down the reactionary Islamic mujahideen. It was more and more involved until it realised they were stuck in a morass.
Yes this is true. The Mujahadeen also were nothing without the west, they tried doing a uprising in 1974 but it was crushed and they fled to pakistan. Only when Afghanistan became Communist the west took a interest in funding the Mujahadeen
Fun fact the Chinese also backed the rebel groups in Afghanistan to help hurt the USSR. Since the Sino-soviet split back in the 60s they became more rivals powers towards rather than allies considering the USSR implementing deStalinization which china kinda disagreed with and also being seen a by the soviets as junior partner to them kinda rubbed them the wrong way. One example of them having competing spheres of influence is how N. Korea had closer relations with the USSR and how Albania was aligned with PRC rather than the USSR. The geopolitical relations between the PRC and USSR in that time line would be similar to now where china and the USSR still being allies of convenience though the USSR being not nearly as much of a junior partner (maybe more equal if their economy managed to grow as was predicted back in the 80s if the reforms were successful) to china as in this timeline.
Lots of countries contributed to the funding of the Mujahideen. Pakistan, Iran, India, Saudi Arabia, and several Muslim countries as well. Some say that only 25% of the Mujahideen's support came from the USA while other countries poured in money aswell.
As a Serb I quite prefer this timeline, as my homeland isn't ruined via intervention. Not only that but the space race continuing is great due to the amount of resources we would get from the asteroids and such. This however all coming at a cost of autoretarian governments but personally I think its a fair trade
5:13 problem is whether or not the USSR can get the eastern bloc to copy their economc reforms in this timeline. ceaucescu was very stubborn and romania had bad relations with the USSR. this would probably be fixed after ceaucescus death though.
What make you think Ceausescu would fall in this timeline? the chance that the Westerners had a hand in the Romanian Revolution is quite big, Romania was never a fan of USSR, so i would say probably independent or conquered would be the fate
I'm also thinking that there'd still be that chance that Romania would remain rather independent within the Eastern Bloc in such alternate timeline. Just to be clear, that's precisely the path Romania took in the aftermath of the rest of the Warsaw Pact destroying the Prague Spring. who knows whether Romania would be more nationalistic in that alternate timeline.
I honestly think that to survive, the Soviets wouldve had to have retracted their reach somewhat to re-establish their power at home. At the very least, I do think this would’ve still meant German reunification if not the collapse or at least withdrawal of some other members of the Warsaw pact. I could easily still see Czechoslovakia splitting and both becoming neutral states as well. Possibly Bulgaria or Hungary too? My other critique is regarding an amelioration of ties between China and the Soviets, the two countries who almost nukes each other and came closer to war towards the end than America and either of them. If anything, I think Chinese ties with America would grow stronger in this scenario due to the perceived threat of the Soviets. North Korea preferred the Soviets over the Chinese up until their collapse so they’d likely be a battleground for influence between the two, making the Korean Peninsula less of a competition between China and NK vs America and SK like today. There’s likely still be a lot of tensions, particularly around Taiwan but China would likely feel cornered by both. The difference is while America is sticking to islands outside of South Korea who is basically an island anyways, the Soviets are directly competing with China for influence in countries that China sees as its sphere but all preferred the Soviets. It’s not only North Korea but Vietnam and Mongolia as well. China would also face a lot of competition from in the Middle East from the Soviets, particularly in Iran but widely in general. The Soviets shared borders with much of the Middle East in Central Asia and the Caucasus while also being close with India who we would likely see closer and ties with than in our timeline due to a stronger potential on the Russian end. I would also argue that American willingness to offshore production to China would be greatly reduced without the collapse of the Soviet Union. The electronics factory of the world would likely find its home elsewhere, probably around Mexico, Colombia, the Philippines, or Malaysia. That’s a lot harder to predict though because it wasn’t only America offshoring to China but Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan as well. Supply chains would be super interesting to see in this kind of world.
A tripolar system is the least stable. Two parties always team up against the other. I suspect we would have had a major war between the great powers directly if the Soviet Union survived past 2000.
I really don’t know what this whole obsession with “authoritarianism” term as being so important, just about all countries are authoritarian to continue being a country
Okay so, what happen if the USSR never collapsed? Should the reality of a never-collapsing USSR must be made, what we have to change is that Brezhnev Doctrine is still a vital aim of the post-Brezhnev Soviet chairmen. As following, the Soviet must always engage in their eternal combat against the West and Capitalism in the order to maintain a strong USSR. And said task will require authoritarianism, meaning Gorbachev's idea will not be accepted or approved by the CPSU. The practical authoritarianism of the Post-Brezhnev USSR will essentially be its main source of life support system for the USSR, now without Gorbachev. The economic stagnation of the USSR caused by Soviet-Afghanistan War could be avoided if the Middle East falls under Soviet influence or have Soviet-friendly government. As some results, the oil export to the USA would be cut down, whose oil export takes up 16% of the world's total oil export yet not large enough to sustain itself. By around late 80s and early 90s, a similar Great Depression style economic collapse/stagnation would happen in the West. America would fall into isolation again by whoever is the supposed president. NATO may fall and follow Soviet's path or at least be neutral or non-American aligned. Due to this, Communist movements in America would be real problems. The worst thing could happen is another American Civil War, if not so, it could be something like Yeltsin's Russia in our timeline, yet this time will not end soon. The world may continue as in our timeline, yet with roles reversed and Communism is a popular ideology. Capitalism may fail and could be forced to adopt Socialistic ideas. Though it should also be noted that planned economy in the Eastern bloc may also need to adopt Capitalistic ideals, as in contrast of the remnants of the West. The USSR-China relation may stay deteriorated, and something like the US-China Economic War around 2018 may happen between them, causing effects on the global scale. Should Bahamas/Mexico/Canada begin to shift its foreign policy toward a Soviet-friendly style and begin their path toward Communism, the USA, which may be restrengthened in the order to reclaim its former sphere, much like Putin's Russia IRL, may have to do similar special military operations against the said country.
Romania, Yugoslavia and Albania were countries with real existing socialism, but were not members of the Warsaw Pact and were in complete opposition to the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Another characteristic of these countries was that they had good relations with the West, especially with the USA. These countries also had a large military so that they could fend off attacks by the Warsaw Pact in order to unite the socialist bloc in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe by force. Until 1980, the West granted Albania. Romania and Yugoslavia generous loans and economic aid because these countries were not members of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. Membership of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance applied exclusively to members of the Warsaw Pact. Yugoslavia had major problems from 1980 onwards Josip Broz Tito died, the leader who managed to unite the peoples of Yugoslavia under an iron corset and the West demanded loans back. In Romania and Albania, the leaders aged and the more they aged, the more rigid the state repression became. In Albania, massive demonstrations by the student body in solidarity with the workers put an end to socialism. Romania was a different story, there were smaller demonstrations in Temsvar and other places, but they were suppressed by the Securitate. Nobody knew who opened fire when the old leader of socialist Romania gave his last speech in Bucharest. It is still unclear who fought the army, with armed force in Bucharest, because the army switched sides to the democratic movement.
@7:54 the USA would not have come to the aid of the Kuwaiti royal family after Iraq's invasion in August 1990 if the USSR was resurgent as you say. The US got a reluctant approval from the USSR for military intervention through a UN Resolution. This was only achieved because of a promise of $1B in aid from Saudi Arabia to the cash-strapped USSR. If Glasnost and Perestroika worked then the USSR would not have needed aid, would never take it from a backward country like KSA, and the USA would not have even thought of getting involved in the Gulf. That's the problem with Alternate History, you pull one thread and the whole suit unravels.
I watched this channel bald and bankrupt where the guy actually goes and hunts down the rusted remains of the Bouran soviet space shuttle locked up in the middle of the Kazakh steppes. It was worth checking out if your into this kind of USSR stuff
Another consequence of this would be the EU. Without eastern expansion or the migrant crisis Euroscepticism would never have become as mainstream in some countries and integration projects would have happened far smoother. The UK would have never left the EU and may have even joined the Schengen zone (along with Ireland), its possible that countries like Norway and Iceland could have sought full EU membership. The EU would be far more cohesive and perhaps some things like a joint European army would have come to fruition by now in some form.
I would definitely agree that's where the EU went wrong. Eastern expansion caused so many problems. I would even include East Germany being allowed to just rejoin Germany without having to formally join the EU itself as part of the problem... that created an economically powerful, Soviet-influenced state that really didn't fit well into the EU as West Germany did, but still economically dominated. Worth noting that the UK objected to German reunification from the beginning, but their objections were ignored, and German economic domination of the EU wound up being a rallying cry for Brexit. It was almost inevitable. It kind of worked when it was just Western Europe, because those countries all had historical ties of having been part of the Western Roman Empire in general pretty much, but once they started including Eastern European countries... well, it kind of went like Roman Empire before it. It overextended itself, there were crises related to an influx of people who wouldn't assimilate, and the cultural fragmentation within the empire itself made governing impossible. It's like, you can unify Western Europe, and you can unify Eastern Europe, but bring the two together and whatever you build doesn't last long.
@@jeremyandrews3292 I don't think Eastern expansion itself was a mistake, it was the speed at which it happened. Let's be honest, Brexit only happened due to dissatisfaction with immigration. If the EU only admitted Ex-Warsaw Pact/ Yugoslav countries once they had strong enough economies then immigration would not have been such a large issue in western countries and we may not have seen such a large wave of populism. So I think countries like Poland, Estonia, Czechia and Slovenia probably would have ended up joining by now, but Bulgaria and Romania probably wouldn't.
Remember the European Union didn't actually come into existence until 1993. It was only after the fall of Berlin Wall people started seriously discussing ideas like free travel and a shared currency either positively or negatively.
I wonder: 1. In this universe, does the Soviet Union allowed their citizen to travel abroad ? 2. In Romania, how long Nicolae Ceaușescu was in the power and does he reform his country ?
By the time the reforms happened in this what if it was already the beginning fall of the eastern bloc. By the time Gorbachev was in power Poland had already been in a state of revolution and marshal law for 5 years. Even in this timeline Gorbachev’s best bet would be to let the satellite states go and to divert resources to the union itself not the eastern bloc.
True that. My alternate fantasy world: gta verse. Has Gorbachev having to let go of the Warsaw Pact states. Only to divert resources and man power back to the Soviet Union. He had to deal with economic problems before allowing free speech and expression to slowly happen. Despite the USSR having its republics to vote staying with or leaving Moscow, It improved the livelihood of the Soviet citizens. Even the independent ex Soviet republics would soon join USSR’s newly formed CSTO. Their version of NATO. And the Eurasian economic union. It’s Eurasian version of EU 🚩🇪🇺. The newly Western European federation would become its biggest trading partner. As well as USA, Brazil, China, and Japan to an extent despite their rivalries. The USA has lost Western Europe to the European federation. The USSR survives regional collapse. Even when world war 3 occurred. USSR survived the war and came out victorious and would slowly align with China and this scares the USA, west Europe, and Japan. USSR survived the drone and corporate wars. As well as become the lesser of two superpower evils of the third Cold War.
The Cold War in the gta verse would be three or four way sort of rivalry. Superpowers are USA, USSR, Brazilian Empire, and Domination of Draka. Brazil gain power status because of defeating the dominion of Draka in ww1. Draka became a rivaling superpower because it was the only axis power that never declared war against the ally powers of ww2. Survived with an armistice. Became the axis superpower for it. USA and USSR are powers because of ideology and dividing Europe into two. USA is liberal democracy. USSR is a socialist superstate. Brazil is a constitutional monarchy. Draka is a fascist superstate. USA and Brazil are more allies than USSR and Draka could ever be. The USA. More powerful than Brazil aided Brazil’s war against fascism despite its Cold War with Russia. The USA is the most powerful state of the Americas. Brazil is second. It was third or fourth before ww1. Confederate states were third powerful in the Americas. These three superpowers of the Americas carved their sphere of influence. Wanted to form the pan American federation to drive the super continent into its own destiny. However, the socialist states in the equator region prevent an “imperialist” unity from happening.
Anything that led to the USSR collapsing, look familiar? It sure does, too me. But I don't believe a full collapse will occur. But there'll definitely be a lot of changes on all levels. Just my shared opinion.
This would end up being a BETTER world if the USSR ends up still making democratic glasnost style reforms eventually. But probably in late 90s and 2000s. Likely doing it slower. And still letting the Warsaw pact countries do their own thing in the 2000s as well, eventually ending the Cold War sometime around then
Something like that. A reformed Soviet Union could’ve made Russia more militaristically stronger and more efficient. Maybe an EU type governance could’ve allowed the international community to see how those Soviet republics culturally differ from each other. Even allow flights to those places. I imagine Grozny, Chechnya gets some international flights. Even a Siberian republic would get some tourism. Even Crimea would be a resort spot for Soviet citizens and international tourists. Learning that Russia isn’t this big country we only think of. That it’s already a melting pot of cultures. Both European and Asian. Eurasian even. Moscow would have to be a cultural city state. Independent from the rest of Russia. But remain a capital city of the Soviet Union.
Yugoslavia would likely join the Eastern Block around 2000s and Africa would be divided with China controlling some, USSR controlling some and america controlling some.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Absolutely crazy to think about that one Russian, born in the year between 1900-1910 was born under the Russian empire, tsar nicholas, then go through ww1 and then the Russian revolution, then under Stalin during ww2, then living peacefully in the USSR 45 years during the cold war. Then experiencing the Soviet collapse, and finally dying after 1999 under the Russian federation under President Putin...
Imagine that poor guy under all those brutal tyrants
@@RadikatMLG when u have that many people with large land its easy to be world power.
He was prime minister in 1999 and president in 2000
@Groszek how? its like being alive from king george v to king charles
@@RadikatMLG the pain has not ended, dude...
"They are our brothers, these freedom fighters". That aged well.
freedom fighters when they benefit us, terrorists when it doesn’t benefit them
They just being used by The West Governments just to abuse The USSR!
Lmao…so,so,so right
I forgot So republicans have always courted fringe types like Trump with Kim ding dong from N.Korea
Terrorists friends are also a terrorist.
Yugoslavia might have actually survived because they were reliant upon both the Soviet Union and United States for economic aid. This isn’t gospel, just something to consider.
Yugoslavia was dead the moment Tito died without naming a successor
@@supersejkaj3093 Yugoslavia was dead the moment Tito started to create new nationalities as a way to reduce serbian majority (north macedonians, montenegrins, kosovars).
@@supersejkaj3093 fake history expert
It existed before him, it could have existed after him
@@ЙованДобройевичь While Yugoslavia existed before Tito, the modern Yugoslav nation was built upon a cult of personality with Tito at it's center.
Tito used his power to suppress ethnic tensions in a way that no other political leader would have had the status among both the populace across the country and the political leaders to be allowed to do.
The lack of a fit succesor left a sudden power vacuum in the nation, and all presidential solutions up until the Yugoslav wars were half hearted and unstable attempts at trying to save a situation that wasn't to be saved.
The only realistic way I could see a prevention of this is if Tito had invested serious time into creating a clear successor as part of probaganda efforts, but this would be a hard task since there were so many politicians and ethnicities to please. Any dismay caused by a switch in leadership would have been disastrous for the Republic, and dismay would be likely.
In other words, Yugoslavia was doomed to fall, and Tito would have has to play his cards just right if he was to prevent this. Since he hadn't laid a plan for what was to happen after his death, the country was effectively dead when he died, and the Yugoslavia that we saw in the 1980s was on life support, constantly fighting to avoid the inevitability of the Yugoslav breakup.
@@braziliantsar Tako je!
You are missing one big point. Without collapse of USSR, there would not be a free for all theft of Soviet property and resources as what has happened in the 90's
USA would be in much bigger debt spiral without a way to write off it's currency debt. The economic boom of the 90's would probably not have happened. NAFTA and globalization would not have happened as fast as it have.
There is a very real possibility of USSR and China working out their differences of the 70's
Yeah, Gorbachev fixed relations between 2 countries which is why Russia and China are allies today. If USSR and Warsaw Pact survived and managed to reform like in this video we would today have super eastern bloc led by 2 super-powers - USSR and China
@@zombie19gaming Than soviet would have to abandon india and Vietnam to be pro china
Nikita Nosov if USA and allies weren’t able to reach soviet resources I think NAFTA would happen quickly, to secure to Americans control on Canadians and Mexican ones
I would like to see what the miliary technology would be like actually as a lot of programs got canceled or scaled back due to the USSR collapsing in both the east and the west and it would be interesting to see how tech develops with a peer level conflict in mind for 3 decades instead of the war on terror and a third world war perhaps breaking out in February of 2022.
The US would have way more Seawolf subs and 700 some
F-22s for STARTERS. Also they would of kept shit like nuclear powered cruisers etc
Well the Ukraine invasion would not have happened and china would not be as powerful but still powerful.
@@terrestrialextra4790 USSR would still have way more Nukes than current Russian Federation and more Weapon systems and Personnel
@@JDDC-tq7qm I remember my first beer
if world war broke out in february 2022 you wouldn't be having internet right now. It's only Russia Ukraine war with NATO desperate to start WW III by supplying Ukraine
the thing is: the PRC had to build up all their production capacity from nothing, meanwhile a Perestroika-only opened USSR would be at the technological level to start being the factory of the world.
yes, the USSR's industry was extremely advanced in some areas (Buran > Shuttle), but it was also quite behind Western industry standards in other (see autos). esides that, we have the fact that standards of living were lower in the USSR, & so were wages in 1991.
with all that put together, we have a highly educated poor population in a highly technological country, which would be able to put out in 1991 the same level of products that China could in the 2ks+ for a fraction of the wages and better quality, all that right by the side of a major market.
my guess is that a Perestroika-only open USSR would have pushed the PRCs boom further down the line.
Looking at how Europe fell in love with cheep Russian energy after the USSR collapsed, one might wonder what direction the EU would have gone with a reformed USSR exporting not just energy but also consumer goods like China does in our timeline. There could even be a scenario where EAST Germany begins to over take WEST Germany in living standards due to subsidized Russian gas coming from their Soviet comrades. And really things were heading in this direction before the 1980s, with the Soviet economy projected to be the world's largest by the year 2000. Things stagnated in the 80s, but living standards were still relatively good and people were relatively happy, so Soviet leaders did nothing to fix the systemic deficiencies in their economy. Gorbachev was the only one who finally saw the writing on the wall and accepted the need to reform, however in my opinion he also had absolutely no idea what the heck he was doing and his advisors were either corrupt, incompetent or both. I believe he genuinely had good intentions for his people, however the agenda he put in place accelerated the stagnant USSR into a full blown decline, leading to a dark age in Eastern Europe which has not only persisted to this day, but has intensified to the point that we now have the biggest ground war in Europe since WWII. Most of the images of starving people lining up for bread under "communism" actually come from Gorbachev's reform era. Ask an old Russian, and they will tell you life was good under Brezhnev. Of course Brezhnev sitting on his hands and not moving the economic project forward set up the conditions which forced Gorbachev to take drastic actions, but the perception of the average Soviet citizen was that there had never in history been that level of relative prosperity in the Eurasian land mass for ordinary working people.
Maybe not, with the Soviet still an enemy of the US, the US will invest much more and more liberalize China
@@draker769 the US would keep investing in China, butthe Europeans already depended on Soviet fossil fuels, so they were in the position to invest even further in their red neighbour
Well ist WW1/WW2 that helped wes or more specificaly USA to cick out otehrs form extremely important dominances suc as USA using WW1 to kick out UK from being the maritime trade monopoly and then USA put itself in that place.Not to mention all infrastructure from civil to industrial NOTHING was destoyed or touched while Europe,Asia,Middle East was DECIMATED especialy Europe and some of Asia.
West more precicely USA EXTREMELY PROFITED FROM ALL THE WARS bcs tehre was NON of the devastating damages done to it and insetad USED war to extremely porfit and ramp up ist own indursy empire.
Thing is/REALITY IS that what Eurpoe/USA accuse China of (dept trap) is LITETRLAY WHAT USA did to Europe jjust the difference is China didnt go around turning countries into stone age and then rebuild it BUT its an UNDENIABLE FACT that TILL THIS DAY there are MANY European countrie sTHAT STILL DIDNT PAY BACK ALL OF THE LOANS/DEBTS FROM WW1 ALONE CBS IT CANST AND WILL NEVE BE ABLE TO DO SO.Thats why MANY TIME Seven thou its not in their inetrest they STILL follow USAs orders like some puppies its cbs they MUST do it.
What do you mean the standards of living were lower in the USSR? They were actually better than now in Russia. And the standards of living were better for the working class in the USSR compared to the USA. Also the soviets in 1991 had a population really educated. Education was great in the USSR and it was free
I highly kinda doubt the USSR would stay authoritarian since gorvachev's goal has always been democracy and transparency in my opinion and most likely the USSR would rebrand itself into the soviet federation or something
But this video is still a very good interpretation of what would happen
If the august coup never happens the Soviet Union would have rebranded into the Union of Sovereign Soviet Republics where the republics didn’t have to be communist
It definitely would have had to have stayed a one party state, though. Not saying that can't be democratic or transparent, because it can. But, the reason is because you cannot expect that the whole structure of government will change every time a conservative economic party was voted in. In a way, the one party state was exactly what kept it together in unity, in one belief. Democracy is still possible in a one party state, to an extent.
There is a naming proposal for the Reformed USSR. It's the Union of Sovereign States(USS).
There is also a Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics.
Look into the New Union Treaty by Gorbachev
Gorbachev was a full believer of marxism and it's doctrines. He tried to make it work, and he failed.
I think it would have made more sense if the USSR gave democratisation an other go (as was attempted in 1936-1937 with a new constitution that allowed for non communist to run as candidates in elections etc), abandon market reforms and instead keep the planned economy but instead of basing it on output, do it properly by using computer systems to track demand. Thus making the economy much more effective and more appreciated by the people since it would be a demand based, non profit economy. That could kick of an era of liberty, democracy and economic satisfaction for the people in the USSR. Which in turn would have kept pressure on the western businesses not to let income and wealth inequality grow like it has done in the US, UK etc since the 70s untill this very day. For the average citizen in most countries of the world this could have meant a better position than compared to today's reality?
I doubt the technology for that would even exist until the common era, or China would be doing it.
Ah yes neatling let's make a what if video about the 1936 early democratization actually passed
Very good insight I agree with everything you said except about the democracy part which is actually very important for a communist society, but the USSR wasn't there yet. So I don't think democracy as in letting every candidates from every ideology would be good yet because there always a danger of having a greedy drunken guy like Yeltsin win the elections with western money and influence. And having him destroy the USSR like he did. But I do think that the population should be able to vote democraticaly for some communist candidates and be able to stop any presidents that are not going for the interest of communism which are the interests of the masses
@mike bond that's an interestingly great idea!
If democracy ever comes to Russia, it is because of the influence of other democratic countries. Russia will become corrupted as hell and obviously the western europeans won't invest in them at times of need that easily.
I think you are wrong with the Yugoslavian wars still happening. Many people claim ethnic tensions as the major reason for the war but in reality the ethnic tensions began just after the Yugoslavian economy hit recession in 1980s.
A still economical strong USSR would prevent the recession from becoming an economic disaster like it happen during the 90s where Hyperinflantion happened.
And if the Yugoslav wars still happened, I am not sure if an united Bosnian Federation could exist in this timeline duo the Serbs being more supported by the East while at the same time the Bosnian govnerment by the West
they always had tension in the country the only reason why it was held together was Tito and the country turned into civil war before the soviet dissolution at that point nothing could have help the country everything was going wrong and like ww1 its just needed a catalyst to start
Yugoslavia was a failed state held togheter by Tito. The recession didn't rly spark the coflict at least not in Slovenia. It was the people who were more and more desperate for self-governance. After all, the Slovene money was going to Belgrade before and after the economic troubles and Slovenes were sick of that. Slovenia and probably Croatia would most likely declare independence anyways
See, Yugoslavia wasn't likely to have a good economy held on by the USSR, since the USSR was somewhat against the regime in Yugoslavia, even after the death of Tito.
@@alengrm7488 yes
Because you are a bunch of capitalistic greedy men that dont want to help other region in need
Ussr colapse under the sanctions + the mayor loses on the batlefield like example there only test unit mobile radar who the sadf captured transported to isreali for researtch aswell as other weapons and vechile including up to date migs , also the rhodesia campeign + vietnam + afganistan + the colapse of joegaslavia became the end of the ussr , like ukraine are doing the 4k sadf troops + unita fighters of johanatan savimbi ( nick name butcher of angola " has to be say his tribe was ethnic mayority and betray by fapla who told they would give them the state witch they told to the legendary men of fnla to ( men who were from child till adault soldiers " who would be train by comander of 44 para the pathfinders , and later also 32 bat the angolan bufalo troop becus they would fight like a bufalo ) also the geurila war in afganistan drained ussr wealth
Ronald Reagan:"they owe our help"
Few decades later: *the state of Afghanistan*
He is a good actor though
@@DeKevers Better actor than Obummer?
@@kohank5938 Bush got us into that war, with full support of his party.
@@kohank5938obummer is a new one I’ve heard
This was super interesting. It would have been great to have seen some rough economic and demographic estimates extrapolated from 80s trajectories or based on Eastern European GDPs
USSR GDP would still be at least 10 times smaller than the USA. Eastern Europe states like the Baltics or Poland didn’t gain prosperity until they joined the west
@@tylerclayton6081 China's GDP per capita is now comparable to Russia's even though it started from a MUCH lower base. It's not inconceivable to think that Russia's GDP could be much higher if had avoided the turmoil of the 90s and implemented Chinese-style reforms.
@@tylerclayton6081 USSR was projected to surpass the USA's in the 2000s, around 2005, so no.
@@tylerclayton6081 No way. The USSR's GDP per captia would be at least on the level of Poland in OTL
Eastern Europe wouldn't have the same demographics crisis OTL,In our Timeline before the fall of the 80s, the Eastern bloc country has a higher birth rate than the country of Western Europe but after the fall of the comunist bloc the birth rate collapse.But in this timeline this woudn't happen and if the Eastern bloc succesfuly Reform to market socialism this collapse wouldn't happen,if the USSR still have the same demographics grow of 1991 it would have a population of 356 millions
I think in this alternate timeline China would team up with USSR (like with Russia in our timeline) because of many reasons:
1. Economic ties, both would have market socialism economies
2. USA would be militarily active in Turkiye, directly threatening USSR, forcing it to seek new allies
3. USA would support Taiwan against China (like in our timeline)
4. USA would start focusing on China more than USSR/Russia because China would be surpassing USA in economy and technology (like in our timeline)
5. It was Gorbachev who fixed relations with China, which is reason why Russia and China are allies in our timeline
6. USSR and China both would be seen as a threat by the west, forcing them to work together
7. America would have its bases in Far East, Middle east, Turkey, Europe, Taiwan, effectively encircleing both USSR and China
8. Iran and Pakistan would allign themselves with USA as they would see USSR, China and communism as a threat to their culture and islam
9. Liberal-democratic India would have closer relations with communist USSR (and not with China because of their border dispute) than also liberal-democratic USA and the west because of 1971. but, still would remain non-alligned (like in our timeline)
Edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention that in this timeline North Korea, as Soviet sattellite would likely follow steps of USSR like other Soviet-alligned states so it would be able to secularize, modernize and compete with South Korea
Turkiye is on the verge of leaving nato an increased us presence would make them leave
@@buni1934 This is what if Soviet Union survived, Turkiye joined NATO only because it feared falling under Soviet influence
@@zombie19gaming the fear of the soviets pretty much ended in the 80s
@@buni1934 is that why NATO started Able Archer 83 exercise on Soviet border in 80s?
@@zombie19gaming sorry i wasn't clear of what i said
The fear of the soviets pretty much ended for the turks in the 80s
There is a Russian serial on what if the Soviet union never collapsed. It has time travel and surreal plot points but it's amazing
where can i find it or whats the name?
@@edudev2975 in russian its called "обратная сторона Луны " which is read obratnaia storona lunî and it translates to "the other side of the moon"
Me on every single video: When's the new alternate history coming?
Neatling: What if the USSR never fell?
Me (Bulgarian): Oh HELL no
Are you sure of Communist Bulgaria was that terrible? I mean you lost like 20% of your population from 2000 to 2020. Most of your young population has left for the West just like the rest of Eastern Europe*
@@bosanski_Cevap Am I sure it was that bad? The standard of living was in the trash, the government was an authoritarian one-party dictatorship, the country was a complete puppet state to the USSR, and much more are the reasons I think it was "that bad. The real reason people are leaving is because life is better in the west. But they couldn't do that under communism, because the country didn't allow people to leave.
So, the fact that people are leaving is not stopping me from preferring democracy, no thanks.
@@bosanski_Cevap communism left Bulgaria so poor that now that they're free the youth moves to richer places
@@bosanski_Cevap Why do you think they wanted to leave in the first place?
@@bosanski_Cevap communism made the country extremely poor and corrupt, today Bulgaria is a fine country in the upper-middle income group, people still leave because much "better" places are almost right next door.
Correction, the soviet union allocated 1.5-2% of its MILITARY BUDGET towards the maintenance of its troops and equipment in Afghanistan. It didnt just randomly take it from its overall budget. There are CIA documents such as “The economic cost of the Soviet Unions invasion of Afghanistan” , which further proves this
The Soviet Union was what kept Europe together… America came into talks with Gorbachev to collapse it… Russia’s shield was officially destroyed. America’s plan was to weaken the Russian economy and military strength and gain access to Europe to expand its NATO.. In fact, Something that America agreed with Russia not to do, Expand their NATO into Europe and former Soviet countries.
Their plan is to get stronger and Invade us to take all our land away and split it into pieces… It drives world leaders insane that we got all this land for ourselves so every hundred years or so, They world goes insane, tries to unite, and destroy our nation together.
They never kept more than 100k troops there (most of the time significantly less). The war in Afghanistan is the most over hyped and overrated war in history, it was almost as irrelevant as US own war in Afghanistan. USSR lost 15k troops in 10 years, that's nothing, USA lost half of that number in Iraq, Russia and Ukraine lose that number per month and even 200 years ago Russians lost 2-3 that number in a single day of Borodino. So the idea that Afghanistan was crucial in demise of USSR is just pure nonsense (and Reaganist propaganda)
@@bdleo300yup, what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union was multifaceted, but primarily due to weak leadership and a Biden in power. Had they taken the route China did with their economy, the soviet union could still be a thing
From listening to my family talk about life under the Soviets, they didn't care about politics and thus were wholly detached from the divisive debates tearing our society apart today. The simply pretended to work, actually working like 3 days per month, would go on mandatory 2-week holidays twice per year to holiday resorts and spas, and pretty much drink and party all day every day, since if there wasn't anyone's birthday to celebrate, you would celebrate their friends birthday (in their name, obviously they weren't there in person) or their friend's friend's friends, and so on. They basically made up holidays to drink and party every day. After work, they'd go feast at each other's homes. I wonder if the internet and computerization would have been the same as it is in China, creating a vast internal market, but generally mimicking western tech companies, or if it would have been like North Korea, where only select families would have the ability to use the internet under strict supervision. At the very least, I know that millions wouldn't have killed themselves, and that USSR would have been a much more equal country. It's similar to when I ask my Chinese friends, and they say that they don't need freedom of speech or opinion, basically just don't talk about politics, and then you can do whatever you want. At least in USSR, everyone had free access to schooling of all levels and good healthcare. Free theater spectacles, artistic shows, etc. But my parents did say that the TV programs sucked, it was pretty much soviet propaganda or war films with intermittent showings of the communist party meetings. Boring shit. But hey, at least it was a simple life that everyone enjoyed. People in my home country often reminisce about the good old soviet days, I'm sort of the weird link between the ultra-radical left youth of today and the old conservative soviet boomers, so it's interesting to view such scenarios to contemplate what could have been.
i'm Vietnamese and yeah have a one party government, communist one. Theretically we are much alike China government in which we follow liberal free market and are free to make money, as long as it doesnt affect the country direction. Infrastructure and healthcare as well as education are owned by government, giving us low cost of living, the life is kinda simple, but for big company, they have to compromise with the government, so basically if the state people are efficient and well trained people, the developpment is garaunted and life is way more simple, cause you just have to follow one direction in general. Now im studying in the West, life is much more complicated. Big privated companies make tons out of people. Freedom of speech is sometimes overrated, pp protesting nonsensely about deconstructivist ideologies and guided by big media companies, its a big mess. Working class have to worry about bill and tax, some prison are not just behind the bar,... Yeah perharps we cannot talkshit about our government, maybe a constructivist argument but the moment you do that you will have special attention and large scale protest are not allowed, but who protest anw when pp are living simple and easy life, and the economy keep growing? The state isn't perfect but neither does the so call the land of Freedom
@@nguyenvuminhkhoi8179 yeah I moved to the states and it's honestly pretty bad, everyone is struggling, whereas the companies as you put, simply play both sides for profit, and yet the people are too stupid to realize that, and get dragged into conflicts with one another, resulting in instability and crime. Almost nobody can change what the government does, so why should we even care? And yet, that's all the talk here in the states, "freedom" and "democracy" they say, but they have neither, and yet they keep deluding themselves. Just like with the "american dream". Everyone keeps dreaming about making it rich, but they work 2 jobs and get a stroke at 50 and die. It is what it is. We exchanged simpler times and social harmony for "capitalism", just another rendition of modern slavery, in my opinion.
@@gwky yeah if the USSR had transformed its economy at a lower speed, and not its politics it may still stand as one of the most powefull and revolutionary model of government. Almost like a smaller version of UN, imo,...
How do you expect economy to function if people work actually 3 times a month? That country is doomed to collapse or end up in real poverty
@@mateuszmazurek7991Yeah I was going to say this is a recipe for a country that can’t compete with anyone.
Guess there's no way to know how this would turn out thanks to the beliefs and convictions of a few people. Rest in Peace Mikhail Gorbachev.
No rest in piss to Gorbachev he sold out for Pizza Hut
@@purhepechatumbi3915 glory to communist
Bruh no, Gorbachev wanted to kickstart the economy but failed miserably by kickstarting regional nationalism.
@@miniaturejayhawk8702 🛠️⚒️
@@purhepechatumbi3915 Explain to me communism.
Is official…Neatling is back
One of the reasons rarely mentioned for the Soviet collapse is the immense amount of resources Russia had to funnel to the Soviet republics, and to the Warsaw Pact countries. In Russia a lot of people assumed that by selling these goods instead of giving them up like they were Russia would be a lot richer. At that theory looked to be correct till about 2014 when the whole Ukraine thing happened, and triggered an immense amount of paranoia from the Russian population that forced a huge post Cold War realignment with the West.
are you crazy :) or just still in russia propoganda...a lot of these countrys were doing much more better then the old good russia...by pacts and other shit...they stoped these countrys...they took best what they could...and put on regime...that stoped they development...
They sucked out more resources than invested anyway. Anti-western paranoia began with Putin in power in early 2000s. Just it was not that visible from outside from the stasrt.
Russian Federation would've been a lot stronger and far richer had they elected a great leader with good intentions to create natural allies rather than creating enemies out of nowhere, like Vladimir Putin did.
Makes you wonder why after reconstruction from ww2 they didn’t just annex all those lands, cheaper to rule over and makes economy stronger
They were also funding Cuba's wars of Marxist liberation of Africa when the collapse happened no more wars.
that's nutty to think that if the USSR's Afghanistan didnt go so horribly, it would indirectly cause 9/11 and the whole war on terror to never happen
Aeronaut the war on terror as we saw in our world could also not have happened if Bush jr. was a decent human being
It's more like the USA indirectly creating Al Qaeda, but nothing new the USA have always supported terrorists and dictatorships when they thought it was in their interests
Furthemore, the USSR intervention was requested by Afghan government (then already socialist) and was initially successful but couldn't keep control and had to retreat as the USA will repeat later (but the American retreat was much more catastrophic and humiliating).
oh also cheers, it's almost been 2 years since i started supporting you!
Edit: It's been 2 years :3
Fans who have a membership to this channel l
@@__europa it's been a blast, I'd just hope Neatling actually gets more time and starts moving on with his channel
First things first, the Chinese economic reforms began practically when Deng made land reforms stepping back from the collectivization, Moscow saw it as way to drastic, their reforms were set to do the same as the Chinese did, but without the land reform, that's why they failed, Gorbachev himself said that, instead of openness and economic growth they got ultranationalism and recession, which was the opposite from what happened in China, or perhaps Vietnam, which also did similar reforms, people in the west tend to assume that it was the special economic zones, but they came latter in China, and the reason was the land reform, it was a way to prevent speculation, since if you privatize the land, is obvious that real state enterprises would be like vultures all over it, so they made the SEZ to control it.
That said, this could even work in the USSR? Theoretically, yes, and funny enough, the USSR had what China lacks and vice-versa, which was the heavy industry, theoretically a company could build facilities to extract materials, build tools, stuff like that in the USSR, which would use their highly skilled work force, to transform in China and sell all over the world, the problem is that the desindustrialization all over the world would be twice as hard, Japan and Germany would be hit hard, the US recession in the beginning of the 2000 would be way worst and soon enough the crime rates and domestic terrorism would be on the rise, so the war on terror would still be happening, in a very different way, but it will, the arms race would probably stall, the microprocessors and telecom races would become the new thing, the cold war would be over by this point since everything is capitalist now, so it will change everything to stay the same.
"So the crime rates and domestic terrorism would be on the rise".
You literally described the current US society in this point.
amazing visuals, amazing in depth hypotheticals, very well done. I'd say this video beats all others relating to this topic.
While the USSR surviving wouldn't have been good, I have always noticed that it seems like America started to lose its edge and allow things to fall apart after the USSR fell. Like, very soon after that we stopped winning things like Field's medals in Mathematics, the space program was put on the back burner, industry started being outsourced more, and in general without the fear of the USSR to pressure our leaders into doing a good job and showing how we were superior, it's like our leaders just... gave up and let us fall behind China which they didn't see as a threat. I think the USSR completely collapsing in the 1980s made everyone overconfident in the idea of world peace. Maybe it would have been better if the collapse had been more gradual, with the Warsaw Pact countries breaking away first, but the USSR itself holding on longer and continuing to be a threat. Enough that the Iron Curtain starts to come down and Eastern Europe is more free, but not enough that our leaders start thinking we're in an era of peace and prosperity and stop worrying about national security.
Good too see McCarthyism still alive good on yah
Sorry but america is a big threat to peace. It never cared about peace, only superiority.
Say thank you to the soviets they learn you mathematics soviet education system is and will be the best of the best just see china as example
Why would it be a bad thing? USSR was not as bad as they say it is. Compared to the US especially, it's a much less evil superpower. It was also probably better than current day Russia, since 58% of people regret it's dissolution.
Think gulags were bad? They were shut down in the 1955. Guess what? Forced labour (slavery) for prisoners is still a thing in the US. Think KGB were bad? Look at the FBI.
Also, the 90s was hell for former socialist countries, as the transition to capitalism left many unemployed. Crime rate rose. Stuff like that.
Interesting video and view for an alternative history to our own. But how would the world like if the Sino-Soviet split never happened.
This World is much better than our World TBH. Especially with the Space Race Continuing
Exactly. Space Race would innovate human colonization of space early on. Maybe humanity would fix the earth by limiting the population on earth and expanding the population beyond the earth. Satellite colonies. Colonies on the moon, Mars, and the asteroid belt.
Agreed ;) for the space race continuing on which would be awesome 👌.
better? if you don't have to live in the fcking USSR, may be.
So happy he made this, i always wondered abt it.
Gonna steal this scenario for my own alternative timeline but I'm keeping Yugoslavia alive as well as having Finland, Poland and Romania as non-aligned nations.
Generation Clash Poland would have been a non-aligned nation covered of nukes of its own property and anti-missiles system, just to be secure 😅
@@ciii4361 Same with Romania and Finland!
This is basically for all mankind season four and five predictions
if the Soviet Union made it, it would be more like the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics, Gorbachev's idea
giving more autonomy to the states but keeping them within the union is the way to go
Exactly. Only allowing 9 republics to stay with Moscow. But the Baltic states, Armenia, Moldova, and Georgia like how it would allow it to be in the real proposed New Union treaty.
12:40 as a Pole it's sad that you didn't mention other costs.And it's stupid to speak that we would get assimilated to russian culture. We were independent. Now we are more assimilating to the American culture than then to the Russian one
G0TIMAN I think probably he was talking about soviet republics, not Warsaw Pact’s states
@@ciii4361 In the USSR they encouraged Russian people to learn local languages and even to officially change their nationality in their passports. I am not sure if any state in the USA forces to learn any Indian language.
@@mikman7219 yeah sure the Soviets did also some effort to revive minor nationalities in the Union.
But the Russian cultural presence was more prominent in the Union than in the allied countries
@@ciii4361 There was no Russian cultural presence in the Socialist countries since the borders were closed for regular people. No Soviet TV. These countries knew little about the USSR. I guess they learned Russian a little at school but not to the level they could speak well. After the USSR collapsed I talked to many people from these countries and found how little they knew about us and how little we knew about them too. They even did not know that we never celebrated Christmas. And for me it was weird that they celebrated it.
@@mikman7219 yeah we’re saying the same thing.
I’m saying that outside USSR there was less Russian cultural influence than inside
Birth Rates of a reformed USSR: Soviet Union: 2.5, Poland: 3.1, East Germany: 2.2, Czechoslovakia: 2.3, Hungary: 2.3, Romania: 2.7, Serbia Montenegro: 3.2, North Macedonia: 3.2, Bulgaria: 2.4.
Sounds great but based on what?
@@СимеонНиколов-о9в Economic speculation and the birth rates before the Iron Curtain fell.
@@Kingofportals Can you please site your source(s)?
What does Romania have to do with this? Romania was never part of USSR
@@asasdsaasda Romania was a Soviet Puppet State that was heavily influenced and even controlled by them.
if Gorbachev's reforms were successful, the world would be a better placeif Gorbachev's reforms were successful, the world would be a better place
you repeated that you repeated that
When you forget what you wanted to say:
kid named dementia
Pov: you are joe biden
Gorbachev had no will to reform, in fact he sabotaged the USSR, he was a traitor!
In other words for everyone outside of the US and Eastern Europe the world is 100 times better and for Eastern Europe and the US its 50/50 wether things would be slightly better or slightly worse? Fuck sake Gorbachev all you had to do was not rush your reforms and the world on the whole would be a much better place.
Do part 4 for what if eastern Rome didn’t fall. Ideas for what would they have done during the world wars
Another very interesting scenario. Thanks again, Neatling!
4:48 ah yes, hindsight, truly a spectacle to stun and amaze.
Thank you for your non biased, informative video!
Amazing video!I started my channel thanks to your videos and hopefully I can do a good job as well talking about economics.Thank you for inspiring me and keep up the good work.
"It was real. And it was glorious"
I haven’t finished the video yet, but I just want to point out something you kept mentioning. How “there would be a return to “an increase of Cold War tensions” as if after the collapse there was less of a divide between East and West. We know for a fact, especially right now, that just isn’t true. Gorbachev working towards better relations with the West was not a policy that was exclusive to Glasnost. He would have continued pushing for peace and prosperity with the West. So I think this whole thing about “increases Cold War tensions” is quite frankly based on nothing
Putin for most of his reign had tried to get closer to the West. But time and time again he was given a cold shoulder by the western powers. This left him with no choice but to eventually take a more confrontational approach with the West.
You’re mistaken.
It's easy to forget about now, but after the USSR fell, there were many talks between Russia and the USA about mutual cooperation. Many of these talks actually went somewhere (such as ex-Warsaw Pact nations integrating into the EU and later into NATO), but many failed due to the large prides of the USA and Russia. It took a good 30 years for tensions between Russia and the West to even get near where they were at during the Cold War, and without the USSR falling, I don't think we'd see that 'break' in the tension; the tension would probably simmer down slowly over time as the USSR and USA worked hard to not step on each other's toes, while still trying to fulfill their strategic objectives, which inevitably there'd be a flashpoint where there's overlapping interests which would inevitably spark tensions again.
Nice bit of alt history analysis there. More please!
It would be a better world.
Truly an underrated channel
Ussr had 5 million active army and 30 million reseeve+ 60000 tanks and 100000 trucks + 10000 aircraft and second biggest economy 3rd largest population and world largest land area and superior technology and industry and imagine if its exist after 30 years
The former republics still exists, but it would probably be some where comparable to a resource rich and modern-day European Union with a smaller GDP and population size. The USA and Japan would likely still have the first and second largest economies.
I think the alternate scenario would've been much better.
The only reason I want this scenario to exist is simply for the fact that the space race would be reignited. GOD I wanna see competition in space
Not, only in just space, imagine technology and science! What would phones be like? Medicine? God that would actually be cool. Not the tensions part of it though. There's also cybernetics and apparently the Soviets were quite ahead.
Yeah, ikr a continuous space race would have been amazing for Humanity as a whole 😢 sigh....
*The timeline where the Middle East has true peace.*
I don't think so. The Soviet Union was a big sponsor of a lot of Arab regimes. So it can be expected the First Gulf War going to be more like a Syrian Civil War and maybe the Soviets are going to be able again to unite the Arab countries surrounding Israel again to wage a massive war again against Israel. Meanwhile, the West might do more their best to get rid of the ayatollah regime in Iran. There's also a lot more at stake when the Arab Spring is going to be a thing. The Middle East is screwed anyway. Although I've the impression the Middle East is incrementally stabilizing.
*no*
@@purple.requiem Lol yes.
The USSR be 100 years old in 2022
And year of Gorbachev's death at age 91 and USSR collapsed in 1991
In the early year, preferably after stallin, Soviet union need someone like deng ziaoping who can build a grand masterplan to stimulate soviet economy, and to enter the world market like china today. Sadly Soviet higher up doesnt have such people.
If only trotsky take over the succesion instead of stallin, i wonder what would happen to our world now
Sonera the thing they needed more after Stalin was a good agricultural reform, especially on the economic point of view, Chruschev tried to make it, but failed, ironically, from my point of view, due to a lack of opposition
If the Soviet Union never collapsed, everything woulda have been better, because the Cold War is what made both sides prosper and it made astonishing advances in technology and research, plus the Military would constantly be advancing and we wouldn't have to worry about 9/11 or any middle eastern wars. It would also be the way we all get space colonization, seeing how the space race would eventually evolve into the colonization of planets, they would have fast Space ships, pretty much the beginning of Star Trek-type tech. Of course, after a while of that, the 2 sides would start to stop feuding and begin to work together, since they both have colonies on the same planets, after many joint endeavors, the 2 would eventually merge or create a United Space program and it will be the beginning of Earth Unity. At that time, both sides would be doing very well economically and Militarily as well as tech-wise too, so the de-escalation of the Cold War would happen and both sides would try to work together, ushering in a new era of Peace and prosperity. Until China starts doing their own colonization of planets and creates a 3rd party, then the peace would slowly die, due to people on the West side being outraged and angry that the government's decision to work with the " enemy" and many riots and revolts would happen in the West as well as fear of China and Soviet Union joining forces once again and going against the West, which would probably cause civil wars in western countries and the installation of Anti-East governments who would try to get the Ring leader, America on board, but America being the leading country of the West to want to join forces with the Soviets, would lead the nations in favor of it causing a rift between Anti-East and Pro-East governments which would probably cause wars and a new Faction to rise up in the West, Neo Fascism. The NeoFascists would most likely focus more on Earth politics than space, so they would cease all space developments and efforts, knowing that they could just steal or copy the Western Alliance and Soviet tech and use it for space. The rising tensions with NeoFascist Coalition and Western Alliance and the Chinese hegemony, it would start the 3rd World War or a smaller regional war for dominance, but since the Soviets and Western Alliance are at peace and working together, they both have become the only superpowers in the world, with China rising to be 3rd and the NeoFascist Coalition trying to reach the status in 4th place. This would affect both the West and the Soviets, which would cause them to get involved in the wars and shift focus on Earth, this would reintroduce the Cold War mindset back into the Soviets and West which would affect the relationship, and eventually cause it to break due to the re-escalation of the now old Cold War that's been going on for almost 200 years. Then, after so many wars and years of it, I imagine there will be a rise of pacifist movements in all factions to try to end the wars and go back to space, it would be another 50 years until that idea would catch on seeing how governments don't really care for end of wars to happen, once they do, the call for Earth Unification would begin and eventually there would be a Loose Union of countries then after a while of that, a fully united Earth Government would be established and the 4 factions would exist as States in this Earth Government and this new Global Government would definitely focus on Space and i believe the start of Star Trek type federation would be in the works of forming with United Earth being the founding Member.
That was really interesting. However, I am sure you realize that a lot of unexpected things would have happened in this alternate reality.
Can you do an alternate history of the Greco-Roman empire, it is a compromise between the Greek and Latin speaking cultures co-exist together like the Austria Hungary compromise in 1867, pls make it happened, pls
Excellent video. You have a nice voice for an American.
W timeline, and a refreshing lack of "USSR bad and evil, it will kill us all" that im used to with these types of alt history
nice touch to the "what if" youtube history videos with that intro
hay Neatling what do you think about the tv show for all mankind and it's world (which is also one when the Soviet Union Never Fell) ?
Excellent video :))
I'm curious as to why you neglected mentioning the fate of North Macedonia. Seeing as you have it painted red, you assume it would remain in the Serbian sphere of influence, which makes more sense.
It would affect the political situation in Greece, as well. Seeing as the right-wing populist party that's currently in power, the one that is partly responsible for the country's fiscal crisis, won the last elections based on its opposition to the Prespes Agreement, which settled the naming dispute. So a non-independent North Macedonia would change Greece's course, too.
Yeah
With the Fear of comunist invasion Far right party like Golden Down can have more support
Yugoslavia would never collapse in this scenario, it was the USA proving ground for creating chaos in ex-USSR (as we can see today).
Grease only cared about that because of tourism tho, if it’s part of the iron curtain tourist aren’t going there anyway.
Good video. I think, though, for the premise to be plausible, Soviet economic reforms have to start earlier, during Brezhnev's reign. The period between The Eyebrow's health decline and Gorbachev's ascension was really the nail in the USSR's coffin - a whole decade of inaction and stagnation. Remember during this period there were huge propaganda own-goals from the West in Vietnam, the Iranian revolution/hostage crisis, inflation and the oil crisis, and so on. The Soviets, being an authoritarian one-party state led at the time by a gormless invalid, were unable to take advantage of any of those crises. And then you had Afghanistan, Soviet leaders who dropped dead within months... Gorbachev comes way too late... and then Chernobyl happens which really sealed the public distrust and dissatisfaction with Soviet governance. Essentially, nothing useful was done 1975-1985.
For this scenario to be most plausible, Brezhnev dies from heart attack or stroke in 1975, to be succeeded by (probably) Gromyko or Kulakov (NOT Andropov), allowing reform to commence in the late 70s.
This is a fascinating point. And yes, using the West's retreat in the 1970s to do internal reforms seems like the best option. Too bad the Soviets irl just used that as an opportunity to win more pointless victories in the third world, wasting their money and antagonizing various countries around the world.
Without the Fall of the USSR, China never becomes the country it is today. The 90s is when China truly took a step to become what it is today and that's because the fear of communism had fallen by a lot the moment USSR disappeared. With USSR no way US integrates their economy so much with them. More likely we see what we were seeing already by companies at the time and its India that gets a lot more companies over there.
Also, would the Gulf War even still happen in this timeline? It's much more likely that the USSR would rekindle its relationship with Iraq, veto the resolution, and prevent it entirely. Or, if the US persisted in invading Iraq, arming Iraq to the teeth, making victory uncertain...and it'd be a pyrrhic one if it happened.
They needed their own version of Deng Xiaoping.
Basically, the USSR would have had to hit an golden age.
In the 80's, computers and information technology took root in nearly every business and organization in the West. Without it, the USSR could not compete. But that meant that they could no longer keep a tight control over the flow of information and ideas. That was the conundrum they faced and they fell flat on their faces trying to resolve it: Glasnost' meant more and more people becoming aware of how inefficient and corrupt their outdated top-down system was.
The Soviets did not invade Afghanistan. A pro-socialist government was elected in 1978. Hakim's analysis on "The Deprogram" is that the Afghan government was too idealistic and tried to force too many progressive measures on to a feudal arch reactionary rural population. The party did not have much support in the rural areas. The U.S.S.R. was invited in to help the government to put down the reactionary Islamic mujahideen. It was more and more involved until it realised they were stuck in a morass.
Yes this is true. The Mujahadeen also were nothing without the west, they tried doing a uprising in 1974 but it was crushed and they fled to pakistan. Only when Afghanistan became Communist the west took a interest in funding the Mujahadeen
@XS-03 Apollo I grant upon thine a hundred thousand thanks and congratulations, Comrade.
Thanks to CIA mostly.... although the entire war in Afghanistan is probably the most over hyped and overrated war in history.
Woah, this is very underrated.
Fun fact the Chinese also backed the rebel groups in Afghanistan to help hurt the USSR. Since the Sino-soviet split back in the 60s they became more rivals powers towards rather than allies considering the USSR implementing deStalinization which china kinda disagreed with and also being seen a by the soviets as junior partner to them kinda rubbed them the wrong way.
One example of them having competing spheres of influence is how N. Korea had closer relations with the USSR and how Albania was aligned with PRC rather than the USSR.
The geopolitical relations between the PRC and USSR in that time line would be similar to now where china and the USSR still being allies of convenience though the USSR being not nearly as much of a junior partner (maybe more equal if their economy managed to grow as was predicted back in the 80s if the reforms were successful) to china as in this timeline.
China only backed maoist rebel groups I think
Lots of countries contributed to the funding of the Mujahideen. Pakistan, Iran, India, Saudi Arabia, and several Muslim countries as well. Some say that only 25% of the Mujahideen's support came from the USA while other countries poured in money aswell.
@@feedingtime7059 then my family sh0t all the mujahideen they came across 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
As a Serb I quite prefer this timeline, as my homeland isn't ruined via intervention. Not only that but the space race continuing is great due to the amount of resources we would get from the asteroids and such. This however all coming at a cost of autoretarian governments but personally I think its a fair trade
As a Czech, I would prefer this timeline too....
This sounds similar to the universe in For All Mankind
Can you please reupload your video about what if the Russian revolution never happened?
I'm from Russia, I didn't realise the Soviet Union fell, no change here
fuck you mean no change here you would have the ussr flag up not the russian one
Queen is no more
5:13 problem is whether or not the USSR can get the eastern bloc to copy their economc reforms in this timeline. ceaucescu was very stubborn and romania had bad relations with the USSR. this would probably be fixed after ceaucescus death though.
The Stick does not care about rules it only follows the will of it's Master
What make you think Ceausescu would fall in this timeline? the chance that the Westerners had a hand in the Romanian Revolution is quite big, Romania was never a fan of USSR, so i would say probably independent or conquered would be the fate
Can you do a follow up video with the population and GDP of the Soviet Union and their sphere of influence.
I'm also thinking that there'd still be that chance that Romania would remain rather independent within the Eastern Bloc in such alternate timeline. Just to be clear, that's precisely the path Romania took in the aftermath of the rest of the Warsaw Pact destroying the Prague Spring. who knows whether Romania would be more nationalistic in that alternate timeline.
I honestly think that to survive, the Soviets wouldve had to have retracted their reach somewhat to re-establish their power at home. At the very least, I do think this would’ve still meant German reunification if not the collapse or at least withdrawal of some other members of the Warsaw pact. I could easily still see Czechoslovakia splitting and both becoming neutral states as well. Possibly Bulgaria or Hungary too?
My other critique is regarding an amelioration of ties between China and the Soviets, the two countries who almost nukes each other and came closer to war towards the end than America and either of them. If anything, I think Chinese ties with America would grow stronger in this scenario due to the perceived threat of the Soviets. North Korea preferred the Soviets over the Chinese up until their collapse so they’d likely be a battleground for influence between the two, making the Korean Peninsula less of a competition between China and NK vs America and SK like today. There’s likely still be a lot of tensions, particularly around Taiwan but China would likely feel cornered by both. The difference is while America is sticking to islands outside of South Korea who is basically an island anyways, the Soviets are directly competing with China for influence in countries that China sees as its sphere but all preferred the Soviets. It’s not only North Korea but Vietnam and Mongolia as well. China would also face a lot of competition from in the Middle East from the Soviets, particularly in Iran but widely in general. The Soviets shared borders with much of the Middle East in Central Asia and the Caucasus while also being close with India who we would likely see closer and ties with than in our timeline due to a stronger potential on the Russian end.
I would also argue that American willingness to offshore production to China would be greatly reduced without the collapse of the Soviet Union. The electronics factory of the world would likely find its home elsewhere, probably around Mexico, Colombia, the Philippines, or Malaysia. That’s a lot harder to predict though because it wasn’t only America offshoring to China but Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan as well. Supply chains would be super interesting to see in this kind of world.
A tripolar system is the least stable. Two parties always team up against the other. I suspect we would have had a major war between the great powers directly if the Soviet Union survived past 2000.
You should do what if the Vikings stayed in Vinland?
it would be a better world
no
>communism
>better world
what
@@bloodkelp because lenin said so
@@pivomanslovensko fk lenin fk stalin fk zedong fk marx fk all of them
@@bloodkelp yes communism is good my friend
I really don’t know what this whole obsession with “authoritarianism” term as being so important, just about all countries are authoritarian to continue being a country
If your country doesnt bend over to America its deemed “authoritarian”
It's called western liberalism
This is somehow a much better and much worse timeline depending on who you are
Had Gorbachev succeeded we could see OGAS being implemented making the mix of planned economy and matket econmy more efficient
Okay so, what happen if the USSR never collapsed?
Should the reality of a never-collapsing USSR must be made, what we have to change is that Brezhnev Doctrine is still a vital aim of the post-Brezhnev Soviet chairmen. As following, the Soviet must always engage in their eternal combat against the West and Capitalism in the order to maintain a strong USSR. And said task will require authoritarianism, meaning Gorbachev's idea will not be accepted or approved by the CPSU. The practical authoritarianism of the Post-Brezhnev USSR will essentially be its main source of life support system for the USSR, now without Gorbachev. The economic stagnation of the USSR caused by Soviet-Afghanistan War could be avoided if the Middle East falls under Soviet influence or have Soviet-friendly government. As some results, the oil export to the USA would be cut down, whose oil export takes up 16% of the world's total oil export yet not large enough to sustain itself. By around late 80s and early 90s, a similar Great Depression style economic collapse/stagnation would happen in the West. America would fall into isolation again by whoever is the supposed president. NATO may fall and follow Soviet's path or at least be neutral or non-American aligned. Due to this, Communist movements in America would be real problems. The worst thing could happen is another American Civil War, if not so, it could be something like Yeltsin's Russia in our timeline, yet this time will not end soon.
The world may continue as in our timeline, yet with roles reversed and Communism is a popular ideology. Capitalism may fail and could be forced to adopt Socialistic ideas. Though it should also be noted that planned economy in the Eastern bloc may also need to adopt Capitalistic ideals, as in contrast of the remnants of the West.
The USSR-China relation may stay deteriorated, and something like the US-China Economic War around 2018 may happen between them, causing effects on the global scale. Should Bahamas/Mexico/Canada begin to shift its foreign policy toward a Soviet-friendly style and begin their path toward Communism, the USA, which may be restrengthened in the order to reclaim its former sphere, much like Putin's Russia IRL, may have to do similar special military operations against the said country.
Really happy I found this channel
It would've been better for the sake of balance now the U.S. is dominating and aggressively expanding thier zone of influence
Romania, Yugoslavia and Albania were countries with real existing socialism, but were not members of the Warsaw Pact and were in complete opposition to the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Another characteristic of these countries was that they had good relations with the West, especially with the USA. These countries also had a large military so that they could fend off attacks by the Warsaw Pact in order to unite the socialist bloc in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe by force. Until 1980, the West granted Albania. Romania and Yugoslavia generous loans and economic aid because these countries were not members of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. Membership of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance applied exclusively to members of the Warsaw Pact. Yugoslavia had major problems from 1980 onwards Josip Broz Tito died, the leader who managed to unite the peoples of Yugoslavia under an iron corset and the West demanded loans back. In Romania and Albania, the leaders aged and the more they aged, the more rigid the state repression became. In Albania, massive demonstrations by the student body in solidarity with the workers put an end to socialism. Romania was a different story, there were smaller demonstrations in Temsvar and other places, but they were suppressed by the Securitate. Nobody knew who opened fire when the old leader of socialist Romania gave his last speech in Bucharest. It is still unclear who fought the army, with armed force in Bucharest, because the army switched sides to the democratic movement.
The war in Afghanistan is the most over hyped and overrated war in history, it was almost as irrelevant as US own war in Afghanistan.
USSR could have survived if Stalin or Kosygin or Andropov remained in lived for a decade more
Both of them knew how to manage the economy
@7:54 the USA would not have come to the aid of the Kuwaiti royal family after Iraq's invasion in August 1990 if the USSR was resurgent as you say.
The US got a reluctant approval from the USSR for military intervention through a UN Resolution. This was only achieved because of a promise of $1B in aid from Saudi Arabia to the cash-strapped USSR.
If Glasnost and Perestroika worked then the USSR would not have needed aid, would never take it from a backward country like KSA, and the USA would not have even thought of getting involved in the Gulf.
That's the problem with Alternate History, you pull one thread and the whole suit unravels.
I watched this channel bald and bankrupt where the guy actually goes and hunts down the rusted remains of the Bouran soviet space shuttle locked up in the middle of the Kazakh steppes. It was worth checking out if your into this kind of USSR stuff
Another consequence of this would be the EU. Without eastern expansion or the migrant crisis Euroscepticism would never have become as mainstream in some countries and integration projects would have happened far smoother. The UK would have never left the EU and may have even joined the Schengen zone (along with Ireland), its possible that countries like Norway and Iceland could have sought full EU membership. The EU would be far more cohesive and perhaps some things like a joint European army would have come to fruition by now in some form.
I would definitely agree that's where the EU went wrong. Eastern expansion caused so many problems. I would even include East Germany being allowed to just rejoin Germany without having to formally join the EU itself as part of the problem... that created an economically powerful, Soviet-influenced state that really didn't fit well into the EU as West Germany did, but still economically dominated. Worth noting that the UK objected to German reunification from the beginning, but their objections were ignored, and German economic domination of the EU wound up being a rallying cry for Brexit. It was almost inevitable. It kind of worked when it was just Western Europe, because those countries all had historical ties of having been part of the Western Roman Empire in general pretty much, but once they started including Eastern European countries... well, it kind of went like Roman Empire before it. It overextended itself, there were crises related to an influx of people who wouldn't assimilate, and the cultural fragmentation within the empire itself made governing impossible. It's like, you can unify Western Europe, and you can unify Eastern Europe, but bring the two together and whatever you build doesn't last long.
@@jeremyandrews3292 I don't think Eastern expansion itself was a mistake, it was the speed at which it happened. Let's be honest, Brexit only happened due to dissatisfaction with immigration. If the EU only admitted Ex-Warsaw Pact/ Yugoslav countries once they had strong enough economies then immigration would not have been such a large issue in western countries and we may not have seen such a large wave of populism. So I think countries like Poland, Estonia, Czechia and Slovenia probably would have ended up joining by now, but Bulgaria and Romania probably wouldn't.
@@tomosprice8136 Today's Ukrainian problems are the result of the continuous eastward expansion
@@ouyangon5711 and Putin’s idiocy
Remember the European Union didn't actually come into existence until 1993. It was only after the fall of Berlin Wall people started seriously discussing ideas like free travel and a shared currency either positively or negatively.
You forgot to cover the fact that the Rambo movies would be a lot different.
theyd also need to crush the solidarity movement to prevent poland from declaring martial law.
I wonder:
1. In this universe, does the Soviet Union allowed their citizen to travel abroad ?
2. In Romania, how long Nicolae Ceaușescu was in the power and does he reform his country ?
Thank god the soviets collapsed, i have no problem with the USSR but man Nicolae Ceaușescu was an ahole, his etnic cleanses of my people was terrible
What If Queen Elizabeth never died?
yeah, also i am still thinking how the queen lost all the totems of undying????????
@@olisomething LOL.😆
I literally got the notification for this vid as I learned about her death😪
@@eagleowl833 I found out about her death 10 minutes after it happened while I was still in class swiping through stories on Instagram.
She just did ;-;
By the time the reforms happened in this what if it was already the beginning fall of the eastern bloc. By the time Gorbachev was in power Poland had already been in a state of revolution and marshal law for 5 years. Even in this timeline Gorbachev’s best bet would be to let the satellite states go and to divert resources to the union itself not the eastern bloc.
True that. My alternate fantasy world: gta verse. Has Gorbachev having to let go of the Warsaw Pact states. Only to divert resources and man power back to the Soviet Union. He had to deal with economic problems before allowing free speech and expression to slowly happen. Despite the USSR having its republics to vote staying with or leaving Moscow, It improved the livelihood of the Soviet citizens. Even the independent ex Soviet republics would soon join USSR’s newly formed CSTO. Their version of NATO. And the Eurasian economic union. It’s Eurasian version of EU 🚩🇪🇺. The newly Western European federation would become its biggest trading partner. As well as USA, Brazil, China, and Japan to an extent despite their rivalries. The USA has lost Western Europe to the European federation. The USSR survives regional collapse. Even when world war 3 occurred. USSR survived the war and came out victorious and would slowly align with China and this scares the USA, west Europe, and Japan. USSR survived the drone and corporate wars. As well as become the lesser of two superpower evils of the third Cold War.
The Cold War in the gta verse would be three or four way sort of rivalry. Superpowers are USA, USSR, Brazilian Empire, and Domination of Draka. Brazil gain power status because of defeating the dominion of Draka in ww1. Draka became a rivaling superpower because it was the only axis power that never declared war against the ally powers of ww2. Survived with an armistice. Became the axis superpower for it. USA and USSR are powers because of ideology and dividing Europe into two.
USA is liberal democracy. USSR is a socialist superstate. Brazil is a constitutional monarchy. Draka is a fascist superstate. USA and Brazil are more allies than USSR and Draka could ever be. The USA. More powerful than Brazil aided Brazil’s war against fascism despite its Cold War with Russia. The USA is the most powerful state of the Americas. Brazil is second. It was third or fourth before ww1. Confederate states were third powerful in the Americas. These three superpowers of the Americas carved their sphere of influence. Wanted to form the pan American federation to drive the super continent into its own destiny. However, the socialist states in the equator region prevent an “imperialist” unity from happening.
What if the coup still happened but actually succeeded, with the USSR surviving but being confined to only Russia and Kazakhstan
That wouldn't make sense. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus were the three troublemakers that the ones that signed together to END the union.
Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan and all of Central Asia more likely.
Anything that led to the USSR collapsing, look familiar? It sure does, too me. But I don't believe a full collapse will occur. But there'll definitely be a lot of changes on all levels. Just my shared opinion.
This would end up being a BETTER world if the USSR ends up still making democratic glasnost style reforms eventually. But probably in late 90s and 2000s. Likely doing it slower. And still letting the Warsaw pact countries do their own thing in the 2000s as well, eventually ending the Cold War sometime around then
Something like that. A reformed Soviet Union could’ve made Russia more militaristically stronger and more efficient. Maybe an EU type governance could’ve allowed the international community to see how those Soviet republics culturally differ from each other. Even allow flights to those places. I imagine Grozny, Chechnya gets some international flights. Even a Siberian republic would get some tourism. Even Crimea would be a resort spot for Soviet citizens and international tourists. Learning that Russia isn’t this big country we only think of. That it’s already a melting pot of cultures. Both European and Asian. Eurasian even. Moscow would have to be a cultural city state. Independent from the rest of Russia. But remain a capital city of the Soviet Union.
Yugoslavia would not have collapsed also because of there would be a war, the military from the Eastern Block would intervene it from happening.
Yugoslavia would likely join the Eastern Block around 2000s and Africa would be divided with China controlling some, USSR controlling some and america controlling some.