What is up with Finland and Ireland?
For some reason a lot of ML’s straight annex Finland into the Soviet Union because it was a Dutchy of the Russian empire. Even though it’s extremely ahistoric, flies in the face of self-determination, and neither Finland nor the Soviet Union wanted to be one nation.
Ireland can be chalked up to a failed rebellion much like our timeline. That’s not to far of a stretch as Britain would try to desperately maintain control of the isles.
I mean, about the "self-determination" thing, it is kinda complex, like, the Baltics didn't want to be annexed by the USSR, yet they were forced to do so, same way for Ukraine and Moldova... So, why does the self-determination applies to Finland but not to the Baltics and to Ukraine and Moldova?
And if "self-determination" is the case, then the self-determination was already disconsidered because the wrong side won the Finnish Civil War by the way.
What was the SSP instance on the Soviet Union? At this point, it was against self-determination what the USSR did with Czechoslovakia and with Hungary, without forget about Greece and Austria too.
And also, I've seen this argument of "self-determination" being used by Liberals to defend the Nationalist side on the Yugoslav Civil War and also for defend Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, Kuwait, Kosovo, and so on, and also for defend socialism in one country and socialist isolationism and opposition to socialist geopolitics and to alter-globalism...
Actually, the annexation of Finland into the Soviet Union is mostly because of the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic (FSWR) and also due what happened with the Baltics... At this way, Soviet Union had no right to annex the Baltics nor to annex Kaliningrad as well.
If self-determination matters that much, then the partition of Germany after WW2 was a severe violation to people's self-determination of the Germanic people, as well as the British Settlers from Rhodesia, British Raj, and South Africa also had their own to self-determination as well. And yes, it is a common argument used by liberals to justify why settler/colonial nations have the same right of "self-determination" as colonized/indigenous nations as well.
Ngl, I've even seen US-NATO PatSocs to use the "self-determination" argument for oppose the balkanization of the USA, of Canada and of the UK while advocating for the Balkanization of all of the BRICS+ countries, of all the AES countries, and of most non-Anglosphere countries.
And also, I've seen lots of Brazilian PatSocs using the "self-determination" argument for promoting Brazilian Chauvinism and Brazilian Ethno-Nationalists while opposing a Socialist version of MERCOSUR as well as oppose Socialist Geopolitics and even oppose a Geopolitical Planning of a hypothetical Socialist Brazil in LATAM and in most of the Third World.
That is mildly infuriating how much the right-wing can despite self-determination at will and do geopolitics at will but Socialists and Communists are pratically prohibited to practice geopolitics nor even economical/political blocs because it is against "self-determination"...
I've joined Lemmygrad thinking it would be just like r/TankieTheDeprogram is, but it seens to be even more liberalized than the liberalization of r/GenZedong on Reddit. Well, I am out of here, I just hope one day I will be able to find an actual socialist place online that is as socialist/communist as r/TankieTheDeprogram. And are not liberalized at all.
I've seen Communists online who even say that South Korea and Taiwan have right to self-determination yet they oppose that West Germany had right to self-determination because they support that it was the GDR/DDR that should unified Germany, which goes against the self-determination of West Germany.
turkey would be neutral probably, and idk if franco and portugal would join (but also would stalin still invade anyway?)
would sweden join the montreal faction?
Why Ireland isn't fixed on this map?
Mostly because of Mapchart limitation, I would actually split the UK, but then I kinda thought the UK would still be united so I forgot about this detail.
Yugoslavia would never join the Comintern. They expressly wanted to remain independent .
Further, the Soviet army was already running out of steam by the time they reached Berlin. A longer campaign would have caused a horrific demographics crisis, economic crash, and loss of life. The only way the red army (by far the strongest land army in the world at the time), is making it to Portugal and Spain, is if every single soldier in their path simply evaporates. The Middle East, Turkey, all of Italy? That’s a bit absurd.
If you really want to push it, I could see the red army reaching the Low Countries, North Italy, Norway, and maybe Turkey.
I mean, this is mostly based on some HoI4 gameplays I had with the USSR in The Great War Redux, Thousand Week Reich, and on CWIC. Yeah, I know these mods are very unrealistic for sure. Like, I remember when I played Endsieg as the Soviets for the first time and then all of the allies declared war against the Soviets and the Soviets were able to occupy all of Continental Europe by 1920-1921, despite the war with the Entente (UK and the USA) were still happening, and then I left the game because it started to lag on a lot and then I kept it as an alt-history headcannon I had. The same thing happened with me in a gameplay I had with the Soviets on The Great War Redux and the Soviets were able to form the Iron Curtain by 1919, but the encrypted peace deal made me to stop at the Rhineland, but still, that was interesting to form the Iron Curtain by 1919, but I stopped playing by 1922 due the lack of content after the WW1 on TGWR.