radacite social-revolutionary republic

[Radac]

Sun Fo (Kuomintang) (1948 - 1964)
Chang Chun-Mai (Kuomintang) (1964)
Yeh Kung-Chao (Kuomintang) (1964 - 1966)
Chang Chun-Mai (Kuomintang) (1966)
Sun Sui-Ying (Kuomintang) (1966 - 1977)
Kung Ling-kan (Minchongtang) (1977 - 1979)
Hu Yao-Pang (Minchongtang) (1979 - 1980)
Sun Sui-Ying (Kuomintang) (1980 - 1984)
Sun Te-Chieh (Kuomintang) (1984 - 1989)
Hu Chee-Lee (Minchongtang) (1989 - 1990)
Yao Wen-Yuang (Minchu Minchongtang) (1990 - 1991)
Chao Tzu-yang (Kuomintang) (1991 - 1996)
Chao Chun-Hsiao (Ch'ingnien-Tang) (1996)
Pao Tung (Minchongtang) (1996 - 1997)
Yan Ming-Foo (Minchongtang) (1997 - 1998)
Chao Chun-Hsiao (Ch'ingnien-Tang) (1998 - 2004)
Sung Ch'u-yu (Kuomintang) (2004 - 2014)
Li Hung-chih (Ch'ingnien-Tang) (2014 - present)
​

So don't take this one too seriously. It was just a silly thought experiment I had in mind where China and India switched places. India ITTL would probably be some kind of weird mixture of KMT China and modern-day China. In case you're wondering Pakistan is in the Northwestern bits of China, Xinjiang and the Hui bits as well, though like Pakistan it is mostly led by the Hui, who were designated a "martial race" by the British colonialists. I'm still trying to figure out what the fuck Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan would be.

For Chinese speaking people, I am deeply sorry at my atrocious spelling. I didn't invent Wade-Giles but I don't speak any Chinese so I feel like I must atone somehow. I will do more of this "setting" for those interested if you want.

 

[Radac]

Ch'ingnien-Tang/Young China Party
Emerging from the militant nationalistic movements of the 20th century, the "Ch'ingnien-Tang" is a right-leaning party founded as a political arm of Teng Chieh's militant "Chinese Nationalist Youth Corps". The party is ideologically something of a concoction of New Life Movement-esque neo-traditional Confucianism, with a militant rejection of Christian conversion, with inspiration from European right wing nationalism. It became especially popular in the 1990s, and then experienced a resurgence in 2014's election.
The Kuomintang/Nationalist Party
The Kuomintang is in many ways the oldest political party in China, but it is not one without problems. Today, only two provinces are governed by the KMT, though some are still ruled by the KMT-led National Front. The KMT is a big-tent party, far from its centre-left roots, especially after the economic reforms of the early 1990s. Currently, the party is led by the son of Sun Teh-Chieh, though he is not quite popular, both with the public and with his own party - he is expected to step down soon.
The Mei-kejen Tang/Everyman's Party
Led by the current chief minister of the Peking Federal Territory, Po Hsi-Lai, the Mei-kejen Tang emerged from the anti-corruption movement of the early 2010s. They put up quite a fight in 2014's elections, and while dormant after 2014, they managed to gain significant buzz after winning the Liaoning provincial election this year.
The MKT is a weird party, because nobody is quite sure what it even stands for. Beyond promises of anti-corruption, and riding the highs of the "Chungking model", the MKT does not define itself with any actual ideology. Sometimes, they appeal to the YCP's nationalistic base, promising to 'make China number one' - but they still can't quite be called a right-wing party. The MKT, however, has been trying very hard to replicate its success in Liaoning, focusing currently on the Prime Minister's home province and a YCP bulwark, Chilin, which will have elections this December.
Chung-kuo Kung-ch'ang-Tang/Communist Party of China
The CPC were once China's biggest opposition party, even though they never took power outside of two provinces. Today, the CPC has only one province in its direct control - Yunnan. It was once the largest party in Shensi, but today has zero seats in the local legislative assembly.
Yunnanese politics has often been defined by rivalries between the CPC and the local KMT. However, the YCP has been trying to make inroads into the province - and ironically, has been trying to build a base among the local Christian population. Nevertheless, Yunnan's broad left-lean make it much more of a CPC bulwark.

​

 

[Radac]

Hi guys. I've been feeling a little down of late. I have been kind of taking a break from AH for a while now, since I didn't seem to feel like writing very much. I kind of wanted to post here so as to let you know I'm doing fine otherwise.

As the year draws to a close, I hope to work more in althist in 2023, as fantasy and sci-fi stuff is still what I'm more focused on these days, and I don't post about that much because idk who's interested in that on an althist forum. I hope to present something both creative and historically accurate to you. Happy holidays!

 

[Radac]

This is a family tree mock-up I made with draw.io, of the Sukerchakia dynasty who ruled the Sukerchakia misl (clan) and then the Sikh empire. I covered only the main line of Naudh Singh, and did omit some members unfortunately due to space and time constraints. In the future, I might make more of these for other Indian dynasties. If anyone here notices any mistakes, do tell.

 

[Radac]

• Early Christianity is taken over by Judaizers, therefore failing to attract Greeks and Romans to the movement. Therefore instead a Greco-Roman monotheism, Christian-sympathetic develops, perhaps similar to Hypsistarianism?
• The cults of Sol Invictus and Mithras take form, adopting Neoplatonic elements towards later periods.
• Lakhmid conversion to Manichaeism?
• Migration Era; Late Rome etc. etc. What of that period? How would religion developing differently influence the course of Roman history

 

[Radac]

So, this was my prompt.

Imagine in a world in which the US is a parliamentary republic featuring a wide range of parties, ranging from Marxist-Leninists on the left to theocrats and extremists on the right, and parties for certain minority groups as well. There are 10-16 competitive parties covering this whole spectrum. Simulate the results of the 2020 congressional elections. Specify the name of each party, their political views, their leader, their share of the vote, and how many seats they got. Be very creative with regards to the parties' names and views, and make unique choices for the party's leaders, taking care to avoid established politicians and trying to use more obscure figures. Make sure that all of the leaders are real people who actually exist, not fictional ones.

I took this prompt from a friend who used it in GPT-4 but since I can't pay for it I used ChatGPT instead. All things considered it was pretty good at it.

Sure, here are the simulated results of the 2020 congressional elections in this alternative world:

1. United People's Front: Marxist-Leninist party advocating for the working class and economic equality. Leader: Angela Davis. Share of vote: 19%. Seats: 120.
2. Green Alliance: Environmentalist party advocating for sustainable development and protection of natural resources. Leader: Winona LaDuke. Share of vote: 14%. Seats: 90.
3. Progressive Party: Left-leaning party advocating for social justice, universal healthcare, and higher taxes on the wealthy. Leader: Bernie Sanders. Share of vote: 13%. Seats: 85.
4. New Democrats: Center-left party advocating for a balance between economic growth and social welfare. Leader: Andrew Yang. Share of vote: 12%. Seats: 80.
5. Liberty Party: Libertarian party advocating for small government and individual freedoms. Leader: Gary Johnson. Share of vote: 11%. Seats: 70.
6. Christian Democratic Party: Center-right party advocating for Christian values, traditional family values, and limited government intervention in the economy. Leader: Rick Santorum. Share of vote: 10%. Seats: 65.
7. United Front: Far-right party advocating for white nationalism, authoritarianism, and traditional values. Leader: Richard Spencer. Share of vote: 7%. Seats: 45.
8. Workers' Party: Socialist party advocating for nationalization of industries, free healthcare, and a minimum wage. Leader: Noam Chomsky. Share of vote: 6%. Seats: 40.
9. Indigenous People's Party: Party advocating for the rights and interests of indigenous people. Leader: Winona Duke. Share of vote: 5%. Seats: 35.
10. Muslim Brotherhood: Party advocating for the interests of the Muslim community, Sharia law and traditional Islamic values. Leader: Hamza Yusuf. Share of vote: 2%. Seats: 15.
11. LGBT Equality Party: Party advocating for the rights and interests of the LGBT community. Leader: Edith Windsor. Share of vote: 1%. Seats: 5.
12. Transhumanist Party: Party advocating for the use of science and technology to enhance human capabilities and solve social problems. Leader: Zoltan Istvan. Share of vote: 1%. Seats: 5.

The remaining 5% of the vote was split between various smaller parties and independents who did not win any seats in the parliament.

 

[Radac]

silly little wikibox for silly little althist

 

[Radac]

Not althist but I had a bunch of ideas for a silly little fantasy-ish setting. The setting is a newly formed Republic in the early not!1920s.
(I realised now there's a typo. Apologies, mea culpa.)

 

[Radac]

Beginning of hypothesis -

• Red SPD-led Germany (think Orthodox Marxists/Kautskyism, not the OTL post-war 1930s SPD) resulting from earlier World War (with Bebel alive, Burgfrieden doesn't work out as it did OTL; perhaps WW1 begins with Agadir, or Balkan Wars) which Germany loses. Then what?
  • Franz Ferdinand alive, possible red Hungary?
  • Russia? France? UK? Italy? USA? Ottomans, etc.?
  • Denmark goes a whiter shade of red after cabinet crisis and German-influenced strikes bring socdems to power, but a red-tinged parliamentary democracy and not a proper council rep.?
  • What of Italy again?
  • Reactionary France or too cliche? Maybe make Britain the reactionary power? (Tory die-hards, neo-Tories, Rothermere, Mistery, Page Croft etc.) - scenario in India then responding to that?
  • Surviving Second Internationale obviously, what will be the dissident/minority socialist trend

 

[Radac]

• PoD - 1938 or 1939 - In March 1939, Gandhi's fast unto death in Rajkot amidst a period of state-sanctioned repression by the local monarchy is never broken, due to a lack of intervention from the Viceroy. As a result, Subhash Chandra Bose remains President of the Congress after his re-election at the Tripuri session in 1939, due to a lack of Gandhi's intervention in favour of P. Sitaramayya and then, Rajendra Prasad.
• During the war, Bose never escapes to Europe as he did in real life, rather being imprisoned by the British like most of the Congress leadership. After the war, an insurgency-turned-rebellion (think Malaya) breaks out in India, as the Congress remains popular despite British opposition - forcing the British to withdraw and Bose's Congress to come out on top.
• This fundamentally changes the political trajectory of India. Instead of becoming a dominant-party democratic state under Nehru, it becomes a left-ish party-state not dissimilar to (a more leftist variation of) Sukarnoist Indonesia.

 

[Radac]

The Singapore Model: On Singapore's Little-Known Socialist Success
July 17, 2017
by Matt Bruenig

Here in America, "socialism" is still a boogieman for whatever the right doesn't like. Last year's Democratic primaries showed this once more, with the promising figure of Ted Milliband's loss - thus giving us yet another President Bush, woefully. But although our new, gaffe-prone commander-in-chief and his frankly, deranged policy towards the Russians undoing years of Soviet-American de-escalation may suggest otherwise, Americans do in fact want "socialism".

The demands of the American people are really not too far from what a lot of countries already have - and these countries are first and foremost, socialist systems. While we Americans may associate the word "socialism" with Soviet tyranny, or more perplexingly, the very much non-socialist anocracy of our Japanese fair-weather friends, one doesn't need to look too far. The Nordic countries are one such success; but closer to home is Singapore, a remarkably stable Asian city-state right next to Japan-friendly Malaya.

Singapore's successful welfare state has been widely discussed, but the word "socialist" rarely pops up when it's brought up by American commentators. Neoliberal, conservative and libertarian economists - bafflingly - seem to think Singapore's system aligns with their own system. I've heard the argument that Singapore's a bastion of capitalism multiple times, seemingly because these writers don't understand what "capitalist" means and are willing to go to enormous lengths to prove that leftism can't succeed.

But Singapore is openly socialist, having been governed by a socialist party since the 1960s. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, a golden boy to many, stated way back in 1966 - "I believe in socialism because I believe it is one of the most effective ways of mobilising [sic] human resources.". Since the 1960s, the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has taken the endeavor to build a truly democratic socialist state - one that is, today, a shining star in an otherwise relatively bleak region.

Beyond the PAP's open socialist inclinations (the new PM, Mr. Heng Chee How is a union man, something a conservative commentator would probably fear in America), Singapore's success shows evidence of socialism at work. Today, more than 4/5 of housing in Singapore is publicly owned, in stark contrast to here in America. Around 90% of land is owned by the government. At the same time, Singapore is one of the most developed countries in all of Southeast Asia, having gone from a poor fishing hamlet to the international financial hub it is today.

There's an odd amount of doublethink that comes about whenever this is brought up on the right. On one hand, conservatives, in their attempt to disprove the idea that socialism can work, point to the Soviet Union's adoption of a "market" system in the 1980s. But they also point to that as an example of the kind of failure-ridden socialism we can't have in America. This shows another flaw in the right-wing argument - that socialism is consistently thought of as the absence of a self-regulating price system and market, and the dominance of the state over everything. Add to that the idea that Russia's undeniably authoritarian system makes socialism by default, undemocratic. But Singapore - where the government has ruled by popular mandate since the 1960s, not through the usage of force, but through policies that benefit the people - and the Nordics show that there is another way - a truly democratic socialist system, where a democratically elected government oversees collective ownership of the means of production, but using the price system in the allocation of resources.

We in America would do well to learn socialism from countries like Singapore.

OOC: The idea of a world where LKY and PAP kept their initial centre-left credentials is oddly interesting to me. Writing this was unfortunately a test of endurance because it required me to read numerous articles by Bruenig to (attempt) to get his style right.

 

[Radac]

View attachment 69260 Not althist but I had a bunch of ideas for a silly little fantasy-ish setting. The setting is a newly formed Republic in the early not!1920s. (I realised now there's a typo. Apologies, mea culpa.)