Post by bevis on May 11, 2017 23:24:31 GMT
Authoritarian societies in the period of general crises are highly motivated and united, the society itself extinguishes collabrationism, and specifically after the WW2, the Cold War and the collapse of the USSR, Russia has plans for such cases. At the same time, the country is quite self-sufficient, and the population has experienced these crises for the entire 20 th century and is constantly waiting for the worst. In short, the population is ready for much worse living conditions, a card-based supply system, and generally lifting everything from scratch. It has already simply experienced this all for the past 100 years. Therefore for us decisive is the destruction of the main centers of industry and population. The destruction of social ties in our country usually occurs during peace periods of stagnation. Under your option, Russia, on the contrary, copes with the crisis of the 90th faster by an even faster growth of authoritarian power and entry to the market with cheap nuclear technologies. At the same time, in the 2000s the population lived in an ongoing crisis, and it would be simple to rally it around the idea of protection.
Perhaps, if you give a link to your alternate history, we can find for ourselves a very acceptable point of bifurcation, the mention of which will help many Russian participants believe in such a scenario)
In general, the main problem is that most of the Slavic fragments of the USSR as a whole are fairly stable (except for Ukraine, but this is because of not the best policy of the USSR in the territorial division of the republics), and all really tough variants of the internal collapse were possible precisely as a consequence of further development The internal political crisis of the USSR, for example, if it had broken up under the Yugoslav scenario.
Well, again, we do not forget the very idea of the formation of the USSR, on whose heritage Russia lives - the outpost of the Marxist revolution. Outpost in the literal sense, self-sufficient, oriented inward. External crises do not affect us so much, for our economy a big crisis is usually entering the world market, rather than isolating from it.
Perhaps, if you give a link to your alternate history, we can find for ourselves a very acceptable point of bifurcation, the mention of which will help many Russian participants believe in such a scenario)
In general, the main problem is that most of the Slavic fragments of the USSR as a whole are fairly stable (except for Ukraine, but this is because of not the best policy of the USSR in the territorial division of the republics), and all really tough variants of the internal collapse were possible precisely as a consequence of further development The internal political crisis of the USSR, for example, if it had broken up under the Yugoslav scenario.
Well, again, we do not forget the very idea of the formation of the USSR, on whose heritage Russia lives - the outpost of the Marxist revolution. Outpost in the literal sense, self-sufficient, oriented inward. External crises do not affect us so much, for our economy a big crisis is usually entering the world market, rather than isolating from it.
