For Want of a Word – Stolypin endures

[alexmilman]

I could understand the potato revolt, if the government was pushing it on the peasants regardless of consent as well as punishing the non-cultivation of such crops (as far as a cursory search on Wikipedia can tell), but why the hostility towards medics and census takers?

Government was not pushing non-cultivation of anything: potato was something just for the personal gardens, not a cash crop. The 1st attempts had been made during the reign of CII with a stress on a persuasion. Needless to say, they failed. NI, who had a better understanding of a subject, used enforcement and after the revolts had been suppressed and the necessary education (aka, flogging) performed the peasants recognized potato usefulness and it became the most popular product in Russia.

As for the medics, isn’t it obvious? They were poisoning wells and rivers (taking samples of a water). The census was not a welcomed exercise because it was revealing various irregularities in the family arrangements and, in general, the peasants hated when the outsiders poked their noses into the peasants’ affairs. Providing, of course, that they were not from the “law enforcement” structures. A local police representative could come to a village, mobilize the Russian version of the “sheriff deputies” and to do pretty much whatever he wanted: place people under arrest, order having them flogged, whatever. But a defenseless civilian census volunteer (official status unclear to the peasants) was a fair game.

 

[Zrttr]

The article is seemingly implying that after Stolypin’s death government’s enthusiasm in supporting this program was gradually declining. IIRC, it also mentions shortage of money. But this may be just my interpretation.

Since Stolypin was alive for far longer (Russia's war economy pretty much had his picture printed on it), then would it be too irrealistic to expect that the movement of settlers was facilitated? Also, I don't see why NII (or some sort of revolutionary government, if it comes to power) would roll back any of the policies Stolypin implemented, although they might try to take credit for them. In the end, I'm just trying to figure out what will be the path taken by TTL's Russia to "lessen" the demographic burden of its European side's southern band. The number of Russians moving east would never be enough to solve the issue on its own, even if the government doubled down on colonization of CA and Siberia. But, maybe, industralists would push NII to bring peasants to the cities to work on the newly formed factories?

 

[alexmilman]

Since Stolypin was alive for far longer (Russia's war economy pretty much had his picture printed on it), then would it be too irrealistic to expect that the movement of settlers was facilitated? Also, I don't see why NII (or some sort of revolutionary government, if it comes to power) would roll back any of the policies Stolypin implemented, although they might try to take credit for them. In the end, I'm just trying to figure out what will be the path taken by TTL's Russia to "lessen" the demographic burden of its European side's southern band. The number of Russians moving east would never be enough to solve the issue on its own, even if the government doubled down on colonization of CA and Siberia. But, maybe, industralists would push NII to bring peasants to the cities to work on the newly formed factories?

It was pointed out more than once that, providing the population growth in the empire remains more or less the same, even addition of the new agricultural lands would not provide a long-term solution. It is not quite clear to me if, even with Stolypin alive and in power, the program would be as successful in a long term as it was in a short term: it was very expensive and probably most of the true enthusiasts took advantage of it on the early stages. Anyway, this is a subject to speculation.
The only plausible direction would be combination of the intensive industrialization (a flow of peasants to the industrial cities) and growing efficiency of agriculture (easier said than done because communal model in its existing form was counter-productive). It was not a function of NII to bring peasants to the cities but industrial development would induce them to go voluntarily as was already happening in OTL: pool of the poor peasants amounted to few millions and for them conversion into the factory workers could be an attractive alternative.

 

[Zrttr]

It was pointed out more than once that, providing the population growth in the empire remains more or less the same, even addition of the new agricultural lands would not provide a long-term solution. It is not quite clear to me if, even with Stolypin alive and in power, the program would be as successful in a long term as it was in a short term: it was very expensive and probably most of the true enthusiasts took advantage of it on the early stages. Anyway, this is a subject to speculation.
The only plausible direction would be combination of the intensive industrialization (a flow of peasants to the industrial cities) and growing efficiency of agriculture (easier said than done because communal model in its existing form was counter-productive). It was not a function of NII to bring peasants to the cities but industrial development would induce them to go voluntarily as was already happening in OTL: pool of the poor peasants amounted to few millions and for them conversion into the factory workers could be an attractive alternative.

Yes, of course. Just to be clear: I'm not saying moving people to beyong hte Urals would solve the issue on its own. I'm just saying it might provide a faucet through which the Russian state can "leak off" European Russia's peasant population, so it doesn't grow further during the interwar. I don't know how translatable the data is, but the German Empire experienced some insane urbanization in the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth.

For example, the number of people living in localities with over 5000 inhabitants, who are most surely not peasants, grew from 31.3% of the population in 1885 to 48,8% in 1910, a period of 25years, which I'd say is fairly similar to the time this Russia will probably have before the next world war. If urbanization and industrialization picks up after the war, which it probably will if it the massive growth of the war years isn't halted by a civil war, the process might be similar or more dramatic. Colonization pulling away peasants from European Russia is the icing on that cake.

By the way, AM I THE ONLY LITERATURE AFICIONADO HERE? Does no one else want to know how will literacy develop in TTL's post-war Russian Empire?

 

[McAuslan_in_the_Rough]

By the way, AM I THE ONLY LITERATURE AFICIONADO HERE? Does no one else want to know how will literacy develop in TTL's post-war Russian Empire? [/QUOTE]

I think there was a brief discussion about this some pages back, but I am likewise interested. My random thoughts:

Pretty much everyone who had to emigrate in OTL stays in the country (maybe a bit of back and forth, but nothing permanent).

Great War fiction actually exists, in OTL there is almost none of this and all is overshadowed by the Civil War - I would bet Mikhail Zoshchenko, provided he survives come up with some good war memoirs, since he was a decorated officer in OTL but kept that part on the dl for obvious reasons. Bulgakov, Kataev and Gumilev do very well, Alexey Tolstoy always does well, no matter what the regime. I wonder if someone like Nabokov even gets into writing or just sticks to butterflies.

 

[Zrttr]

I think there was a brief discussion about this some pages back, but I am likewise interested. My random thoughts:

Pretty much everyone who had to emigrate in OTL stays in the country (maybe a bit of back and forth, but nothing permanent).

Great War fiction actually exists, in OTL there is almost none of this and all is overshadowed by the Civil War - I would bet Mikhail Zoshchenko, provided he survives come up with some good war memoirs, since he was a decorated officer in OTL but kept that part on the dl for obvious reasons. Bulgakov, Kataev and Gumilev do very well, Alexey Tolstoy always does well, no matter what the regime. I wonder if someone like Nabokov even gets into writing or just sticks to butterflies.

If this world butterflies Lolita out of existence, that's fine by me, although I would in fact miss Ada or Ardor. If he had written that stuff in the conservative society that would have been a prolonged Tsarist Russia, the shit show would be hilarious to see.

 

[alexmilman]

If this world butterflies Lolita out of existence, that's fine by me, although I would in fact miss Ada or Ardor. If he had written that stuff in the conservative society that would have been a prolonged Tsarist Russia, the shit show would be hilarious to see.

Why do you think that pre-wwi Russia was noticeably more conservative than the rest of Europe? The “Decadents“ (Russian term for "L'art nouveau") were present in force and quite popular even among the middle class; period is called “Silver Age of the Russian literature”. There is no reason to assume that in this ATL there would be rollback to the cultural past.

 

[Zrttr]

Why do you think that pre-wwi Russia was noticeably more conservative than the rest of Europe? The “Decadents“ (Russian term for "L'art nouveau") were present in force and quite popular even among the middle class; period is called “Silver Age of the Russian literature”. There is no reason to assume that in this ATL there would be rollback to the cultural past.

I'm not assuming such a thing because of our world's history, but what Ithink is going to happen in this. Like I said, most of the push for alphabetizing Russia used the Orthodox Church as a conduit, which would continue to be the trend in this world. Thus, the church is going to have a very tight grip over education in the Russian Empire. Certain books will prohibited from libraries in order to protect "Christian values", priests will be reluctant to teach students about women's history, etc. I'd expect the Russian state of this world to persecute many of the authors that the Bolsheviks themselves persecutated, although be it for a different reason.

 

[alexmilman]

I'm not assuming such a thing because of our world's history, but what Ithink is going to happen in this. Like I said, most of the push for alphabetizing Russia used the Orthodox Church as a conduit, which would continue to be the trend in this world. Thus, the church is going to have a very tight grip over education in the Russian Empire. Certain books will prohibited from libraries in order to protect "Christian values", priests will be reluctant to teach students about women's history, etc. I'd expect the Russian state of this world to persecute many of the authors that the Bolsheviks themselves persecutated, although be it for a different reason.

Sorry, but you are seemingly somewhat confused about the situation. The Church provided a set of the parish schools that were giving very basic teaching and this was only in the rural areas. Most of the school education (male and female) even in the rural areas was not in the Church hands and, while it included a course of religion, this was nothing like the fantasy you described. Neither was censorship in the hands of the Russian Church (which was itself subordinated to the government and administered by a secular bureaucrat). Now, as far as “women’s history” is involved, sorry but you are fundamentally anachronistic: realities of the late XX century did not exist in the early XX (anywhere) and, actually, in presumably progressive SU they did not exist either. Anyway, teaching history was done by the professional history teachers, not by the priests, even in the mid-XIX.

 

[Fernan3451]

How in God's name are you going to "give the land to the people who work on it", when they already control that damn land?

IDK. Maybe in the kicked member's logic the peasants:
1. just come to receive land they already own, which makes 0 sense.
2. the peasants didn't actually own the land (maybe nobles own them), which makes sense with HIS argument, but not with the quote he posted.

 

[Zrttr]

Sorry, but you are seemingly somewhat confused about the situation. The Church provided a set of the parish schools that were giving very basic teaching and this was only in the rural areas. Most of the school education (male and female) even in the rural areas was not in the Church hands and, while it included a course of religion, this was nothing like the fantasy you described. Neither was censorship in the hands of the Russian Church (which was itself subordinated to the government and administered by a secular bureaucrat). Now, as far as “women’s history” is involved, sorry but you are fundamentally anachronistic: realities of the late XX century did not exist in the early XX (anywhere) and, actually, in presumably progressive SU they did not exist either. Anyway, teaching history was done by the professional history teachers, not by the priests, even in the mid-XIX.

Interesting, I didn't know that. The comment about women's history was referring to far into the future, obviously not the twenties. I was basing my assertion on my knowledge of the Catholic Church's roll in education in Latin America, where it owned the best schools and chose the subjects far into the 20th century (I'm talking 1970's and 80's here). The point about alphabetizing Russia still stands, though, since the Church was in fact the institution wdoing most of the work in that field.

 

[alexmilman]

Interesting, I didn't know that. The comment about women's history was referring to far into the future, obviously not the twenties. I was basing my assertion on my knowledge of the Catholic Church's roll in education in Latin America, where it owned the best schools and chose the subjects far into the 20th century (I'm talking 1970's and 80's here). The point about alphabetizing Russia still stands, though, since the Church was in fact the institution wdoing most of the work in that field.

The Orthodox Church played some role in the initial education but only in the rural areas and even there since the time of AII there was a growing network of the secular schools. Of course, religion was a part of a curriculum but a priest was just one of the teachers and the course was pretty much basic.

Analogies with the Latin America are inapplicable because, besides other numerous differences, the Russian Orthodox Church, unlike the Catholic Church, was not an independent institution (if you are so eager to build theories based upon superficial similarities, the closer analogy would be with the Anglican Church because in both cases the ruler was a head of the Church 😜). Advanced Church-sponsored education was available only in the religious seminaries which had been preparing the priests but the best schools were state-run гимназии (middle-level education) followed by various types of the rural and city primary and middle-level schools sponsored by state, zemstvo, city, etc. The Church-run primary schools were pretty much bottom level as far as quality is concerned.

 

[AlexG]

Decided to fill in a base world map of FWoaW after the peace treaties are signed.

I assumed that for outside of Europe and the ME, that the peace would be identical to OTL's. For Europe I used the map provided by @Stenkarazin as a guideline to draw the national borders.

Anyways, hope you guys enjoy!

 

[Sarthak]

I still don't think a Turkish majority 'pontus' and Armenia here is going 5o be sustainable for long. They were around 70 percent of the population in the areas depicted in the map. That would require killing around 5 million Turks and Kurds to make the lands actually pontic and Armenian majority.

 

[Adeimantus]

I still don't think a Turkish majority 'pontus' and Armenia here is going 5o be sustainable for long. They were around 70 percent of the population in the areas depicted in the map. That would require killing around 5 million Turks and Kurds to make the lands actually pontic and Armenian majority.

Not necessarily because there would surely have been a large exodus of population from those areas when the Russian and especially Armenian armies took over the land. I'd say it wouldn't be far fetched for there to be at least a Christian majority in these areas after a decade, with Russian and Armenian immigration.

Also great map, however i would guess that Romania as on the winning side would take southern bukovina which was majority romanian.

It seems the author has unfortunately dissapeared, I hope he comes back, it would be a shame for the TL to stop here.

 

[Sarthak]

Not necessarily because there would surely have been a large exodus of population from those areas when the Russian and especially Armenian armies took over the land. I'd say it wouldn't be far fetched for there to be at least a Christian majority in these areas after a decade, with Russian and Armenian immigration.

Russian Armenians don't have the numbers to swamp those lands. And ethnic Slavs in the Russian empire didn't settle the southern Caucasus throughout their rule there in any noticeable numbers due to the inhospitability of the areas and the general economic backwardness. While an exodus may have happened, the fact remains that the 5 million Turks, Kurds and around 0.5 million Jews (who were very pro-Turkish) will remain a majority. The Pontic Greeks were also by and large loyal to the Ottomans until 1918 making them a problem for the Russians as well.

 

[Lalli]

Holy shit with that Turkey. Screwed really badly. It faced its own Trianon. Now rise of Turkish Islamo-fascism is very inevitable. At least Italy got pretty much what it wanted so perhaps no Mussolini here.

Anyway, why Italy has Corsica?

 

[AlexG]

Holy shit with that Turkey. Screwed really badly. It faced its own Trianon. Now rise of Turkish Islamo-fascism is very inevitable. At least Italy got pretty much what it wanted so perhaps no Mussolini here.

Anyway, why Italy has Corsica?

Fixed! Also fixed or cleaned up some of the borders to make them look better