Although it doesn't really affect anything, I'm a bit wary of enlisting the entire socialist world to join the Fifth Internationale - even as mere observers. Denouncing the USSR is really the thing that kills it. Given that most of those socialist countries are inspired and/or modeled after the USSR - and likely have Russophile factions within their parties.
Plus, associating a group that explicitly denounces the largest country in the world, that's also a giant oil/arms dealer is something most minor countries would probably rather skip.
Also, even the phrasing of it as an "International" is problematic, as that implies the goal of global revolution.
Irl that's why the Comintern was replaced with the Cominform, and later the IMCWP. The term "International" was intentionally avoided. Especially as the Cold War dragged on, most non-Warsaw Pact socialist countries abandoned the idea of a "socialist block" in favor of friendly neutrality with everyone, albeit the socialist world as preferential trade partners.
This was part of the reason why the Soviets "abruptly" abandoned Somalia in favor of Ethiopia. As the Soviets suspected that the Somalis were playing both sides, given their negotiations with the US. A lot of the other ML countries that suddenly sprang up during the 70s were also viewed as opportunists - since there was the perception that socialist coup would be followed by economic aid from the Socialist Bloc. The USSR did realize this (and also due to financial problems) began scaling down it's policy of fully backing every socialist country in existence to just focusing on the more "reliable/important" countries.
I would say that the most plausible Internationale member (besides Cuba/Angola) are:
Vietnam: They do have Soviet ties - but they were very active in supporting socialist movements abroad, when they could've simply sat it out. With Gorbachev quitting the Cold War, they considered realigning with China to form a new socialist bloc, but China preferred forming ties with the West so that idea died out.
Vietnam could also potentially drag along Cambodia/Laos depending on how much influence they have over it. Laos would be a more willing ally, while Cambodia not so much.
Ethiopia: The Derg is not in good shape, and they probably would be willing to jump teams if the International is willing to bail them out. Since Albania never existed, the TPLF and their friends might have never became Hoxhaist and just stay ethnic-based. Alternatively, they might never abandon socialism with it never discredited IC. Regardless, the TPLF/friends won't be internationalist.
The EPRP is probably more of a model ally for the International, but they're really not that relevant by this point.
Mozambique also needs help with their Civil War, and the circumstances that led to normalization of relations with the West never happen IC.
to my knowledge most of these countries just observed and engaged in the dialogue. Obviously nobody has the power to make these NPCs do anything save for a couple ones like Angola
"denouncing" is a strong word. The point is the sick man of europe- much, much worse off than the USSR in 1990 IRL- should not be calling the shots of socialist policy. Especially with no CCP, global socialism is, at the very least, based on the ideals of (new world) syndicalism and (polish) corporatism which are both inherently internationalist ideologies. The IWW would've played a large role in the 'socialization' of the CSS economies in the 1920s. "Marxism-Leninism" would probably be replaced by like "Debs-James Thought" in terms of global influence. Especially now that the USSR didn't win WWII and doesn't carry the mantle of 'saving the world from fascism'
Its even very questionable whether Czechoslovakia and Hungary would be in the Russian sphere of influence, given Poland. If they ever were, its probably safe to say that 1956 and 1968 went very differently
I’m referring to Africa in particular, given that’s were almost all the socialist NPCs are.
Irl the reason for Russophiles being so entrenched in Africa is that the USSR was willing to actually walk the walk in backing anti-colonial movements in Africa.
I’m a bit confused whether the Syndicalist bloc would’ve been effectively able to do this, given Poland’s alliance with the FBU?
I'm not sure how Poland would've interacted with decolonialism, but my idea was that, especially given that the Spanish-CSS war was basically just a decolonization of Cuba, PR, and the Philippines, the CSS would be very invested in decolonizing nations and trying to help them develop- which most recently is seen in Angola
Also, not sure how UMU would feel about this, but I'm guessing the increased political presence of Black Americans would lead to a sort of Afro-nationalist urge in the American political psyche
But, regardless of lore changes, I'm happy to remove any controversial nations from the invitee list or just mention that they never accepted the invite
My main reasoning for inviting them was to show how controversial different resolutions were, e.g., that almost every nation on Earth opposes Apartheid even in a (non-binding) resolution that offers to use force, but that angering the Chinese and breaking with the Soviets may be unpopular with, say, the Vietnamese
I still find it funny i offered up the French demsoc party, a party that at least ICly *could* have worked with you in the future (I never would of let them win an election OOCly of course)
and instead you incited the British Communist Party who would be Stalinist or at the very least Marxist-Leninist, only to bash the ideology lol
It's more of an unspoken arrangement to cooperate against the Soviets if and when the need arrives - in almost every other circumstance, the FBU and Poland find themselves on opposing sides.
Latest Forum Threads