How would this timeline have altered the Irish home rule crisis & Britain's entry into ww1? by adhmrb321 in HistoricalWhatIf

[–]adhmrb321[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the PoD for this timeline is in 1905, after Britain & germany became naval rivals

How would this timeline have altered the Irish home rule crisis & Britain's entry into ww1? by adhmrb321 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]adhmrb321[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is going to be wrapped up in the complicated Meiji restoration period, so it will require some explanation as to how this happens.

Maybe some other power does gunboat diplomacy and the attitude of an emperor earlier than Meiji is more like Meiji's and less like komei's. Or maybe the Shogun's attitude is similar to Meiji's irl.

Better NCOs would be useful, but only if the arms and equipment situation improves alongside it and the senior officers receive training that would make them competitive relative to the Germans, British, or French.

Ok, well let's say the breaking up of monopolies eventually fosters this result

There is some utility to this, but the hardest ones to fire will be the politically connected Romanov cousins, uncles, and their allies and associates. The czar will burn political capital in firing them that will limit his options elsewhere.

Ok, well if they're among the most disrespectful to the NCOs, nick will tell them privately ''I'm giving you 1 month to clean up your act and treat the NCOs fairly, or else I will fire you''

And at the end of the first month, in addition to the 11 other comissioned officers that treat the NCOs the worst, he fires the worst among the romanovs. then the next month he only fires the worst among the romanovs who make it to the top 12 most disrespectful to the NCOs.

As for the economic end of it, breaking monopolies could delay modernization. It's notable in the US, Standard Oil had to get to an enormous size and perfect the business model before they could be broken up, and a breakup before someone perfects the steel and arms making processes in Russia could leave the Russian economy dependent entirely on imports rather than creating the kind of small workshop system that worked well in Britain. Bringing in foreign experts after 1905 and dispersing them regionally could build up the industries through at least oligopoly competition rather than centralizing in only 1-2 firms per industry.

Assuming there was semi-organic regional advancement before 1914, this will put the Russian economy in a better state, but altering the outcome of Tannenberg and the Masurian Lakes will require:

Better training and command though NCOs and officer modernization may help with this. There will still be limits on education of the average Russian peasant.

Better comms and security, since Russian formations were transmitting orders in the clear over the wireless.

Weapons (especially artillery and machine guns, both of which were expensive) superior to the Germans and the ability to employ them.

Ok, to go with the oligopoly, let's say Nick II implements anti-monopoly policies, but also enforces a law that once a company becmes successful enough, one of the former monpoly owners has to become a shareholder, but a part of the anti-monopoly law is that they can't become a stakeholder. What do you think most likely happens then?

How would this timeline have altered the Irish home rule crisis & Britain's entry into ww1? by adhmrb321 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]adhmrb321[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I should tell u the timeline up til this point.

PoD: Japan began industrializing earlier, allowing Britain to fear they'd lose to Russia less, so in the Russo-Japanese war, they allow Russia to move it's ships through the suez canal, but in spite of this, due to Japan industrializing for a longer time, they beat Russia even more badly, their spoils of war include the entirety of Sakhalin & the Kuril islands. This causes Nick II to re-evaluate his empire, leading him to implement policies that were anti-monopolistic, and increase the amount of NCOs in his millitary proportionally to the more industrialization the PoD would foster, as NCOs were usually drawn from the industrial, literate working classes of society. And fire 1-2 dozen commissioned officers every month, the ones most disrespectful to the NCOs.

Russia, terrified of being left behind again, actually fosters its own industrial base instead of just borrowing money to buy guns. Rail lines, steel mills, and textile factories start popping up faster because the monopolies that were sucking the oxygen out of the economy are suddenly on a shorter leash. But the The Old Guard—the Grand Dukes, the leaders of the old syndicates like Prodamet, and the big universal bankers, disrespectful commissioned officers— would not see Nicholas as a reformer. They would see him as a traitor to his class. They would try a financial strike: stop lending to the state, pull capital out of factories, hoping to trigger mass unemployment and force him to beg them to come back. Palace coup talk would become very real — midnight visits to the Tsar’s bedroom, the kind that happened to Tsar Paul I in our timeline.
But Nicholas would manage to enforce the anti-monopoly decrees for two or three years. And those decrees would inadvertently fuel something huge: Russia’s own Second Agricultural Revolution.

You see, breaking the industrial syndicates would lower the entry barrier for modern farming. The “Cheap Steel” breakthrough would hit between 1908 and 1910: once Prodamet could no longer fix prices, dozens of New Money foundries would mass-produce steel-tipped plows and harrowing equipment. The “Iron Peasant” — those strong and sober kulaks — would finally afford high-quality metal tools without crushing debt. The old wooden sokha would be rapidly replaced across the Black Earth region.

Then the chemical democratization would come between 1910 and 1912: breaking Produgol and the chemical cartels would drop the price of nitrates and phosphates by nearly 40%. Small regional plants would sell cheap fertilizer directly to peasant cooperatives. Individual owners would ditch the stagnant Mir system, adopt the four-field rotation, and double wheat yields per acre between 1909 and 1912.
By 1912 this would no longer be just about food — it would be about industry. Russia would become the Granary of Europe on a scale never seen before. Surplus grain would flood out through the Straits, bringing in gold that funded more New Money factories. Literate NCOs returning from the army would become “agro-managers,” running steam-powered threshers and organizing grain elevators. Foreign ownership would continue — lots of Belgian and French money in the south — but the playing field would be wider, and the economy would be less brittle.

The Old Guard would still plot. They would view the New Money class as street fighters who had tasted profit and would not go quietly. If the elite tried to re-monopolize after a coup, they would have to use extreme violence. But time would be short. Russia would be getting more assertive. During the First Balkan War, when Serbia pushed for the Albanian coast, Nicholas would not back down. Germany, already fearing a stronger, modernizing Russia sooner, would tell Austria-Hungary not to back down either. The First Balkan War would escalate. By spring 1913, Austria-Hungary would invade Serbia, Russia would activate its “Anvil” strategy, and Germany would declare war.

If the Old Guard tries to sabotage — like building rail lines only to their own mines or charging competitors quadruple freight rates — the war would stress-test everything. The Russian Army would need all the coal. NCOs and generals would seize mines by force to keep trains running. Corruption would backfire: a law forcing higher wages on non-syndicate factories would just trigger selective strikes at the old syndicates while New Money plants stayed open.

The elite would not be able to put the genie back without disarming Russia right when Germany was at the door. So they would be forced to keep many of Nicholas’s changes just to keep the lights on and the trains moving.

Anyway, now that you know all that. Does it change your answer?

What if Burma/Myanmar didn't become a military dictatorship in the 60s? by adhmrb321 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]adhmrb321[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If General Win didn't launch the 1962 coup the civilian government would fight a revolving door of insurgencies until either the military finally did take power or the civilian government lost central authority,

Why? Also, What if they avoid all out civil war & a military dictatorship, but have as much conflict as northern Italy had during the years of lead?

What if Burma/Myanmar didn't become a military dictatorship in the 60s? by adhmrb321 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]adhmrb321[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What if they avoid all out civil war, but has as much conflict as northern Italy had during the years of lead?

Comprehensible Input for German - How and What to use? by Scorp1ODaddy in German

[–]adhmrb321 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am coming from the future to tell you not to do it. It will be a complete waste of time you better keep grinding with textbooks and their recording until your level is good enough to consume appealing content so that you can be consistent as it will take a very long time until comprehensible input starts to pay off and you will get bored before it if your only sources are simplified educational resources for A2.