ISIS Nukes Brussels, The Seljuks Beats the Mongols, and Stalin Joins The Axis

Although I'm still self-banned from posting on the biggest alternate-history forum on the Internet, I do visit the public sections to see what interesting actual alternate history (as opposed to the endless political arguing I quit the forum to avoid) is being discussed.

This led to my finding three more interesting timelines in recent weeks. One takes place in the modern day, the second in the days where Turkish power expanded into Asia Minor at the expense of the crumbling Byzantines, and the third during World War II.

The Sultanate of Rumistan: An Alternate Anatolia-The Seljuk Sultanate of Rum was established after the defeat of the Byzantine Empire by the Seljuk Turks, which began the process of Turkifying and Islamizing Asia Minor and the Byzantines' long decline. The Sultanate was eventually defeated and forced to pay tribute to the Mongols after their defeat at the Battle of Kose Dag, but in this timeline, the Seljuk sultan listens to his experienced commanders and waits for the Mongols to come to him rather than attack them immediately. The Mongols are defeated and the decline of the Seljuk Sultanate--which ultimately led to the rise of the Ottoman Empire--is averted. This is going to make life rather difficult for the Byzantines, but the author knows a whole lot about the workings of the Seljuk Sultanate, the neighboring Kingdom of Georgia, and the Byzantine secessionist regime in Trebizond and it's really quite interesting.

The Maw: When the Lights of the World Went Out-This story begins with agents of the infamous Islamic State somehow getting hold of a nuclear weapon--just how they got it hasn't been explained yet--and they smuggle it from the Middle East into Belgium. They set it off in the downtown area of Brussels, killing tens of thousands (if not more) immediately and provoking France to nuke ISIS's capital of al-Raqqa in reprisal. A straight-up World War II level obliteration of ISIS soon follows. It looks like the author was setting up a much darker scenario based on the hints he was dropping, but the timeline hasn't been updated in some time. Given how the real-life migrant crisis in Europe has been, well, a crisis, a world where ISIS agents snuck into Europe via Greece and ripped a chunk of a major EU city out with a nuke, I suspect the people getting the worst of it are going to European and refugee Muslims.

The Twin Vipers-Stalin joins the Axis. Although given Hitler's ultimate desire to conquer the Soviet Union, exterminate "Jewish Bolshevism," and turn the Slavs into helots for German Spartans and how in general fascism and Communism are opposed ideologies make this sound absolutely insane, there were talks to that effect. Rather than refusing to deal more than the bare minimum with people whom he viewed as racial enemies, the Germans were actually willing to admit the Soviets to the alliance to help defeat Britain. That would have made life very difficult for the Western Allies, since the Soviets could menace the Middle East and India in a way the Germans could not.

However, this timeline begins somewhat earlier than the real-life talks that took place after the defeat of France when the 1939 border conflict between the Soviet Union and Imperial Japan that ended with the Battle of Khalkin Gol escalates into a full-blown war. This leads to Mussolini getting sidelined, the British and French fighting the Soviets in Finland, and even Operation Pike, an Anglo-French plan to bomb the Soviet oil fields that didn't happen in real life.

The Imperious Chairman, Or Someone Other Than Stalin Takes Command

My alternate-history forum has produced another interesting road not traveled. It's called "The Imperious Chairman" and diverges from our history when Yacov Sverdlov, one of the early leaders of the Bolshevik movement, survives rather than dying in 1919. The author (whose handle is Napoleon IV) goes with the idea that the official story of his death--he got the Spanish flu coming back from a trip to Kharkiv--was accurate. He doesn't go to Kharkiv, and so he survives.

The main thrust of the timeline is that someone other than Stalin becomes leader of the USSR. I find the notion that Stalin's horrors were necessary to defeat Hitler rather aggravating--the book Bloodlands shows Hitler actually used the horror stories coming out of Stalin's USSR as fuel for his demagoguery and I posted a friend's essay on Bukharin (part one here, part two here) to show another realistic path--and Napoleon IV gives this leader a chance to prove his mettle against the Great Evil One.

Some highlights...

*With a surviving Sverdlov, the internal factional politics of the Bolsheviks are rather different. I did take a class on Modern Russia at the University of Georgia, but I don't remember if we ever got into that much detail.

*Sverdlov's survival in turn causes some other earlier Soviet leaders to die--not due to anything he does specifically (like warning them about an assassination plot or inviting them all to dinner some night so they avoid a doomed plane), but due to the butterfly effect (changes spawning more changes). This makes the period between Lenin's death and what would have been the rise of Stalin more complicated.

*The Soviet Union pursues a more aggressive foreign policy during the interwar period. Although the isolationism of "socialism in one country" is greatly exaggerated--in We Know Now, historian John Lewis Gaddis describes it as something more akin to Russian imperialism than something truly international--someone other than the very cautious Stalin at the helm could done some serious meddling. This will have its consequences, both in the short-term (the lead-up to WWII) and presumably in the long term.

*Hitler still comes to power in Germany, albeit rather differently than in our history.

*With no Stalin we have no purges, meaning the Soviet military isn't the "stumbling colossus" that the Nazis spent the first years of the Eastern Front kicking around. There's still collectivization, although it's done in a more competent and less insane fashion. Many, many people still die, but no Holodomor. Not only does the USSR have millions more soldiers to fight the Nazis, but there won't be so much hatred for the regime for the Nazis to gather allies with.

*There's no cult of personality comparable to Stalin's--the alternative leader seems to view the adulation he gets as kind of a joke.

Prime Minister Halifax, or an Amiens-type Peace with Hitler

A lot of time in alternate-history fiction, the fall of Winston Churchill and his replacement with Lord Halifax (or Halifax becoming Prime Minister instead of Churchill in the first place) is considered the death knell of the (Western) Allied cause. Hitler is left to dominate the Continent, with Britain eventually (or even immediately) doomed to become a Nazi satellite. This section of the Wikipedia article contains several such instances.

However, if you want a different look at what Halifax might've done as PM, there's a timeline on my alternate history forum simply entitled "Halifax." Halifax does seek to negotiate a peace with Hitler during the dark days before the evacuation at Dunkirk, but this is no supine surrender to the Forces of Darkness. Instead it's something like the Peace of Amiens, which ended the War of the Second Coalition against Revolutionary France. Everybody knows there's going to be a rematch--Hitler wants to secure his western flank before his long-awaited invasion of the Soviet Union and the Western Allies (Paris has not yet fallen and so France is still in the war) need time to reorganize and rebuild after the drubbing they get.

Some interesting bits of the timeline include the Nazi implementation of the Madagascar Plan, which is an improvement (but by all that much) over the Holocaust--Soviet Jews are still murdered en masse and Madagascar is basically one giant pit of deprivation and forced labor for German and Polish Jews. There's also the earlier deployment of British jets, which give the Luftwaffe quite a hiding, as well as a pro-Nazi insurgency (that in our history didn't really accomplish much).

If you liked "Halifax," the story continues with a sequel entitled "Clem's Vision." It seems to fizzle after three pages, but it does set the stage for some interesting future developments.

Enjoy!

AnachroCon Post #1: Christians Should Tip Better

I just got back from AnachroCon, an Atlanta-area alternate-history and steampunk convention, and one of the topics discussed at the panel this morning really stuck to me.

It was a panel about cyberpunk, but at some point, Allan Gilbreath started talking about how servers hate it when certain Christian conventions are in town because they complain about everything and don't tip well, in contrast to the genre fans (people who go to conventions like AnachroCon I guess) who do tip well and tend to be more easygoing. A later conversation with him and another panelist included the claim that many people from these conventions try to game the system by complaining about the air conditioning at hotels in hopes of getting discounts and that they feel they're owed something because of their "long-suffering." The other fellow even made the claim that only 1 percent of the people in those groups are humble, kind, generous, etc.

The first thing that came to mind was Romans 2:24 in which the Apostle Paul said the words, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Although the passage is referencing Jews (who had God's law revealed to them) who did not follow the Law and those brought their faith into disrepute with outsiders, the principle expressed in this passage just as easily applies to Christians today.

For the record, I do not deny having done things that have given people cause to mock our faith. I will not go into detail here, but those who know me will know. That being said, that does not affect the wisdom of my point one iota. Hitler and Stalin, two of the most evil men who ever lived, both thought the other a monster and both were right. And the purpose of this post is not to brag about how good a tipper I am.

For starters, the Bible says that Christians are to be ambassadors of Christ (see 2 Corinthians 5:20). One role of an ambassador is to make the country who sent them look good. If an ambassador acts like a fool, it rightly or wrong reflects poorly on their whole country, not just them. Jesus Himself says in Matthew 5:16 that Christians should let their light shine before men so that people would see our good deeds and praise God.

Secondly, the Bible exhorts believers to be generous. There are many, many Bible verses exhorting us to be generous with our money. There are so many that rather than posting them individually, I will simply post this article here that references a whole bunch.

Thirdly, the Bible exhorts Christians to remember the poor. One account of the coming Judgement Day states that the nations will be judged by how they have treated "the least of these my brethren." Here is a list of dozens of verses exhorting the good treatment of the poor. Servers are not paid minimum wage; instead, they're paid a significantly-lower figure (in Utah, for example, it's $2.13 per hour) and expected to make the rest of the money in tips. If people tip poorly, wait staff do without. In fact, servers rely on food stamps much more than the rest of the population.

Fourthly, if you're trying to get discounts in a dishonest way (like complaining about problems that don't exist or are really quite minor), that's lying and stealing. There are lots of verses condemning such things--here's a selection. Remember, it is written that the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil.

I am not suggesting tipping waiters/waitresses more if they do a poor job. I once tipped a particularly bad waiter $0.10 on a $3.00 Steak and Shake milkshake to make a point. That being said, most restaurant staff who've served me have done a decent job and should be tipped at a proper rate (I was always taught to tip 15 percent).

One objection to my argument I can think of right off the bat is that times are tough and one might not be able to afford to tip as much. Well, if you need to cut expenses, why are you eating out in the first place? If you're already going out to eat at a restaurant where there's a wait staff attending to your needs, you can afford to tip decently. Doubly so if you're going to a religious convention in another city.

And lest anyone think I'm making too big a generalization from the claims one or two people are making, here's an article on why servers hate Sundays. Here's another one with more links.

The Death of Stalin and a Different WWII

Here's a alternate timeline from my message-board for your entertainment. It's entitled "Funeral Games" and was written by the user whose handle is Gemellus. It begins with Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin suffering a pulmonary embolism soon after the German invasion of Poland, an invasion made possible by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and dropping dead. The new Soviet government repudiates the deal Stalin made and things get interesting...

I'm not going to give away details, but the timeline features...

*A short Nazi-Soviet War instead of our world's swift annexation of the Baltic States and the Winter War with the Finns.

*A peace treaty ending said war that involves a population swap of three million Jews for millions of ethnic Germans living in Soviet territory. The one time I have ever actually used the phrase, "good job Commies," considering what would happen to these Jews if history had continued as it did in our world.

*Japan's land empire in Asia is dealt with a few years ahead of schedule.

*Germany still manages to pull off Battle of France in a similar fashion to our history and establish their Vichy puppet regime. However, the Italians do something rather unexpected...

*The Soviets don't ignore all evidence of the coming German attack and take certain steps...

*The German Resistance is about to do something. Let's hope it works out better than in our history...

I think it's pretty interesting and well worth a look. I'd definitely read a book set in this timeline.

Hitler's Secret French Love Child?

On my alternate-history forum the other day, someone posted an article from the Huffington Post citing the claim of a deceased Frenchman that he was Adolf Hitler's illegitimate son, from an affair with a French girl Hitler had while a soldier in WWI.

Although the evidence in the original article was somewhat scanty, MSNBC posted this article featuring some more solid stuff, including the German military giving the man's mother money during the occupation of France and the mother having signed paintings created by Hitler.  Not to mention the woman's account of the young Hitler seems rather plausible--he's artsy, but really strange.

(It was a bit surprising to see Hitler doing something resembling The Right Thing by his ex and kid.  I say "something resembling" because he never agreed to meet the boy and take fatherly responsibilities, but it's better than refusing to take responsibility entirely.)

What's the most amusing part of this story is that the deceased man's lawyer is making noises about trying to lay claim to the royalties for Mein Kampf on behalf of the man's kids.  Given the brutality of the German occupation of France, having French people as Hitler's legal heirs is downright amusing.  The only way the irony could be more perfect is if Hitler's heirs were Polish or Russian.

(The Nazis viewed Slavs as the lowest of the low and planned to kill tens of millions of them and enslave the rest had they won.  Even before that, they were the worst recipients of Nazi brutality--millions of Soviet prisoners of war died because the German army didn't bother to feed them, while I think in Belarus the Nazis took the food out of the area and then offered bounties for dead "insurgents"--in effect paying starving people to kill each other.  The French, on the other hand, were "Latins.")

Let's hope some vengeful anti-fascists don't come after the kids, or neo-Nazis don't seek them out to try to worship them.  Of course, if the latter takes place, maybe the kids can enlighten them about evil and idiocy of their belief system.

Two More Alternate History Scenarios...

Here are a couple more alternate-history scenario from my message-board that some of you might find entertaining...

The first one is entitled Up With the Star, by the board member whose handle is Snake Featherston (an allusion to the Confederate Hitler-analogue Jake Featherston from Harry Turtledove's "Great War" novels--the first one is American Front, although Featherston does not achieve Hitlerian power until much later in the series).

The tale begins with Lincoln choosing General Benjamin Butler to be his Vice-President and Andrew Johnson to be his Secretary of State instead.  This means a different commander of the Army of the James and an earlier end to the Civil War that, among other things, sees black Union troops capturing General Lee and some other top Confederate commanders.  This leads to a different Reconstruction in which the Southerners grudgingly acknowledge pre-war free blacks and black soldiers from the Civil War as deserving of the rights of citizenship but pre-war slaves are not, a different World War I in which Hitler abandons much of his anti-Semitism due to the influence of a Jewish colonel who shares in his soldiers' suffering, and ultimately, a World War II where the instigator is a fascistic (but explicitly non-anti-Semitic) Russia under the command of General Lavr Kornilov, who rules through a puppet Czarina Olga (daughter of Nicholas II).

It's a really good, very detailed timeline and Snake is able to update it fairly often.  Plus I'll give Snake credit--he's one of the few people who has ever defeated me outright in an argument.

(It's about the democratic credentials, or lack thereof, of the Confederacy.  It wasn't just blacks being oppressed, who would have been oppressed anyway if the South hadn't seceded.  He knew a whole lot about Unionists and other Confederate citizens getting persecuted, white paramilitaries occupying legitimately-elected state legislatures, and other abuses.  Given how much cheating and shenanigans went on with the Confederate government, one could make the argument that the secession did not have democratic legitimacy even if there is a constitutional right to secede.)

The other scenario is The Caesariad by the user whose handle is EdT.  It's more of a short story with maps than a narrative timeline and it's really interesting.  Basically, although Julius Caesar's daughter Julia dies in childbirth per our history, her son with Pompey Magnus survives.  This keeps the Caesar-Pompey alliance together and "butterflies away" the civil war.  The main story begins with Caesar's grandson having just massacred a Germanic tribe to tighten Roman control of the region suddenly sensing that Julius is dead.  We then bounce to Mesopotamia where Caesar has just died of a stroke after defeating the Parthian king and pouring molten gold down his throat, in the same manner the king had killed Crassus, and securing Mesopotamia for Rome.

His commanders all squabble about who exactly Caesar's successor will be.  One of these commanders happens to be Caesar's grand-nephew Octavian, our history's Augustus...

Right now, it's in the pre-1900s forum and non-members can see it.  I'm going to suggest he do that if he intends to publish the story as a novel because in the general-access forum, it will count as "published" in many publisher's eyes.  If this was just a timeline, I wouldn't bother, but since this looks like it will become a novel, that's a different matter.  I've got to look out for my fellow writers, after all.

This means you all might have only a few hours to read it before you have to join the site.

In a post from several days ago, I linked you all to Europe of the Three Empires.  I think that the situation described in The Caesariad could, assuming Rome isn't permanently fragmented by various real or claimed children of Caesar fighting for dominance, lead to something resembling this scenario--Rome controls Germania and Mesopotamia and isn't likely to simply abandon it, given how it was conquered under the authority of the deified Julius Caesar.  Roman control of Germania eliminates one source of the barbarians who attacked in our history and provides a better border to defend against the rest; Roman control of Mesopotamia greatly weakens Persia, Rome's other great enemy.  Rome is not likely to be seriously challenged, but on the other hand, there could still be internal problems...