This question must have been asked at this site at least once but if so - looking for the threads is pointless because comments are hidden.

  • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I actually don't think it would have been much different. We probably would have gotten a few new books of theory. NEP might have lasted slightly longer, but the demands for collective land would have forced Lenin's hand to institute more rigid state planning like what happened in our timeline. The early USSR had such immediate hostility from all sides their policies were shaped by the besiegement. Don't know what would happen with Trotsky or Yezhov.

    WW2 might have started a little earlier actually, since uh, Lenin wasn't exactly as polite or cautious in terms of diplomacy as Stalin was. He would have frightened the fascists and allies more than Stalin did. Lenin didn't take shit and he'd call out people to their face. The man was fierce and didn't hold back. He was incredibly brave, confident, and had the sharpest political mind of his time. Call me out for hero worship or whatever, but there's a reason Lenin has such a glittering reputation. The man was a fighter and I can easily see him pushing a more assertive international policy than Stalin did, especially once Germany goes fascist.

    • Bloobish [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I honestly wonder how he would have handled the Spanish Revolution as well

      • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Probably the same. Germany descending into fascism was all but set in stone after the Spartacus revolt failed in 1919 and the civil war in Spain was in part proxy war between the Soviets and Germany. Once it became clear the Spanish Republicans weren't going to win, the USSR pulled back to reinforce the western border. I think Lenin would have made the same decision.