Visions of alternate history - a critique

The video on the Dunkirk timeline was atrocious, self-contradictory and making no sense
© Adûnâi (2025-10-04)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nxn7gd/the_video_on_the_dunkirk_timeline_was_atrocious/

Talking about the June 12 2025 video by Alternative History Hub where England signs peace with Germany in June 1940. Points of contention (the first 2 I gleaned from the comments):

1, Coby kind of “forgot” that Germany occupying the French coast was to enforce the naval blockade of England, and with the English suing for peace, there would’ve been no need for the occupation of France.

2, The peace settlement would have indeed prevented the emergence of the Free French paramilitary, but Coby forgets yet another crucial point - namely, the Dutch East Indies would’ve been made to supply the Japanese war effort with petroleum and rubber without a need for an invasion of all Malay archipelago, so the US oil embargo wouldn’t have forced Japan to attack them.

3, Coby randomly forgets that Europe has been at peace since 1940, and makes America go for the Europe first strategy...

“The looming German threat means that Japan is treated more as a side quest”, “no concluded operations in Europe” (35:40) - even if we assume that Japan has to attack the East Indies and Pearl Harbor, saying that a peaceful to England Germany is equally a threat as in our timeline is completely insane. There is no way America would not have put its whole might against Japan when the war in Europe is literally officially over.

Again, this reads like a hysterical anti-Nazi diatribe. Whereas in reality, Germany was a country like any other, and both America and Soviet Russia were much closer to the Nazi ideology at the time, too, so even the cultural differences were minor. (See the racist American anti-Japanese propaganda, the concentration camps for the Japanese, the Russian genocide of the Chechens and the Tatars.) This crusading mentality just sounds immensely off. (Churchill did have it, but even the English had hopes in Russia - without Russia threatening Germany anymore, such a sentiment would’ve made even less sense.)

4, Then after defeating Soviet Russia, acquiring the Living Space in the East (the lack of which had forced 50 mil. Germans to emigrate to America throughout the 19th century, thus draining their human capital), Hitler randomly restarts the war in the West in 1945, invading England, a nation at peace, a nation which the Nazi ideology was treating as an equal “Nordic” civilisation, a linchpin for keeping the Asians under European suzerainty (the meeting between Hitler and the Jerusalem mufti occurred on November 28, 1941, long after England had refused the peace deal)? And it’s treated as a completely natural turn of events? And being unable to invade through the sea is also an argument for why Germany could never win WW2?

5, I couldn’t continue listening to this rubbish, but I’ve forced myself, and now... Coby randomly thinks the nuclear weapons would’ve been used against German cities? Did he miss our actual history where the savagery of the civilian bombing raids had to be ramped up over many years? Whereas in this timeline, not even the Battle of Britain was waged? Yeah, obliterating Köln and Hamburg would’ve been a PR disaster... To an even greater degree that Coby posits because event the Anglo-Americans wouldn’t have gone for it without the period of appropriate moral radicalisation.

6, There are other minor points, like England not financing the terrorism in German-occupied Europe would have somehow hurt said Europe... even though said terrorism prompted brutal German reprisals, no no terrorism - no Lidice incident.

7, The end of the video was literally Rise of Skywalker type of rubbish (I know, JJ is living rent-free in my head) with the “free people of Middle-earth” taking up arms to defeat le evil Nazis? Like wtf, no, French resistance never even began in this timeline, Yugoslav partisans make no sense if Bolshevik Russia has been destroyed, and yes, Russia being destroyed means Russia cannot be liberated because it’s been destroyed. In our timeline, there were no random uprisings even in Formosa or Korea or Manchuria even when Japan was nearing collapse. In this reality, Germany would not even be teetering on the brink in the first place.

I know, it’s actually a dull scenario when Germany wins and that’s it, but it’s simply misrepresenting the truth when Germany keeps facing threats after Russia has been defeated. In actuality, Russia was the only threat to Germany. England would never have been able to invade without Germany having been bled dry by Russia. England wouldn’t have reached total air superiority if Germany had peaceful years upon years of undisturbed aircraft production.

8, Then Germany conquers Egypt, and America invades Morocco... even though England had lost Gibraltar back in 1940, thus rendering the Suez Canal useless, and the Germans have a base on the Azores, thus making the US communications precarious... This is just a stream of consciousness of rubbish at this point, legit amateurish. Coby evidently admits to this much considering his original idea was an American invasion through the Pyrenees.

9, 01:26:00 He literally talks about Americans “retaking Europe” - taking the American occupation of Europe for granted. Even though half of Europe was pro-Nazi out of their volition.

10, Claiming that the Führer had syphilis and the Parkinson’s disease and would’ve collapsed by the late 1940s is really myopic considering that his health took a terrible toll managing the unwinnable war for about 4 years. In fact, the often-decried prescriptions by Dr Morell would not have been needed as, you know, the war would’ve been won. A minor point, but a microcosm of the nonsense.

In conclusion, our WW2 had three parts:
1) German-Polish war;
2) Anglo-German war;
3) Russo-German war.

Coby effectively concludes the former two, then wraps up the whole conflict in the submission of Russia, and then randomly restarts it by making both Germany and England fight to the death over nothing. Making the Germans willing to sacrifice everything and ASAP to take an island which is controlling an empire that might serve them as a counterweight to the Americans or the future Asians. And the English are hellbent on trying to massacre the Germans in untold numbers just to invade Europe... That is simply not how humans work.

The much likelier scenario would have been a cultural collusion between Germany and England, similar to what has transpired between the US and UK in our timeline. Just as how the Beetles with their neo-Christian message of love were a factor in American desegregation, so too England might have been inspired by the German treatment of the Russians by never decolonising India and, as Hitler told Halifax in our reality, finally “shoot Gandhi”.

© Strastvuitye (2025-10-03)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nwkysz/what_if_germany_became_neutrallike_austria_in/nhhkw0n/

So the question we have to answer, is by what mechanism is Germany reunited? If we assume it happens exactly the same as in OTL, then there’s basically no change to the course Germany goes down, as you’re still dealing with the same political structure that lead to the events as they happened.

Personally, I think your best bet for a neutralized, reunited Germany is a change to the East German elections of 1990.

In the lead-up to the elections on 18 March, 1990, East Germany’s ruling party- the SED, split, leaving a vacuum in its place, where it had once dominated the “National Front” of the GDR. Though the National Front was officially constituted of 5 parties (including the SED), the one that’s most relevant here is the East German CDU, which, thanks to West German money, became, basically a Front organization for West German entry and influence into East German politics.

By January of 1990, pro-reunification sentiment had grown so popular, that attempts to avoid it would have been straight up political suicide- however, that didn’t mean everyone was on the same page about what reunification meant.

For the CDU, it meant an invocation of Artikel 23 of the West German Grundgesetz, to incorporate the East German Länder into the Bundesrepublik, along the precedent established by the reincorporation of the Saarland in 1957.

On the reverse side, the PSD (successor to the KPD), had been advocating for a sort of “German Confederatation” in which both Germanies would have a Free Trade Agreement and free movement of peoples between them, as well as a joint foreign policy and a fixed exchange rate on German Marks, pending a formal unified monetary policy. Why go through all that hassle? Because the PSD was adamant about keeping the integrity of the East German Kombinate- the state employment agency that managed pretty much the whole of the East German economy- worried that reunification would bring with it the hostile takeover, and resulting liquidation, of many East German industries (spoiler alert, it very much did).

However, this was seen by some as being potentially too slow to make reunification feasible, and raised a lot of questions to its functionality when the rubber hit the road.

But polling showed there was another program that outpaced the other two, at least in theory by far before the 1990 elections; that was the program of the SPD.

Having broken off from the SED to once again formally establish itself as an independent party of its own, the SPD was looking for a plan that didn’t involve basically letting West Germany annex the East and have a free hand in letting vultures pick clean the East German economy, while also unmistakably pushing for full, formal reunification, and their strategy, considering the circumstances, was, IMO, genuinely brilliant. See, in 1949, when the Bundesrepublik was founded, the drafters of their “Basic Law” (Grundgesetz) deliberately avoided the use of the word Verfassung (German for “Constitution”), with the implication that the division of Germany was a temporary settlement, not a permanent state of affairs. So the SPD in East Germany campaigned on going into government with the West German parties on the platform of invoking Artikel 146 of the Grundgesetz, which would nullify the Basic Law, as the East German SPD would be demanding a new all-German Constitution be drafted and then put into effect. They viewed this as a way to ensure (and possibly even territorially expand) East German Union and Kombinate rights into the future, among all German states, while making reunification inevitable and impossible to deviate from.

Of course, thanks to massive interference from West German parties, some trying to quash the remnants of the KPD, others trying in a bid for increased national representation (CSU in particular), the AfD won the 1990 elections and invoked Artikel 23.

But let’s say the SPD wins. Artikel 146 is invoked, and Germany- all of Germany, drafts a new constitution, in which the divisive nature of public opinion regarding geopolitical orientation, and fears of retaliation from either bloc, lead to permanent neutralization as the only feasible political option.

This is our setup- scenario continued in replies.

France is not coming back into the unified-command-structure fold of NATO, but that’s hardly a surprise. Their re-entry in 2009 had more to do with their needing access to NATO resources to enact their designs for regime change in North and West Africa, aiming to keep their economy afloat with the infusion for cheap raw materials, post 2008 Great Recession/Euro Crisis.

But that also begs the question- what of the Euro? A reunited Germany is a massive shift in European politics, and the late 80s trend of Neoliberal deregulation and Free Trade Agreements was in full swing at the time, so if we’re presuming that East German opinion is so rock solid that it can genuinely change the dynamic of the whole continent, you’re going to first see a massive uptick in labor militancy to prove it. Perhaps you’ll see a General Strike at some point in 1991 in East Germany, steadfastly defending their unions and Kombinate, while also demanding to just get reunification done, long after it reasonably should have been accomplished.

The Americans are not going to be happy about German Neutrality- France isn’t about to play host to a major American Air Base, and if a full withdrawal of troops is mandatory for full neutralization, the US is going to have to find somewhere else to serve as a new Ramstein. That’s not likely to happen, just from a logistical standpoint, and again, we’re basing this on the idea that either East German or all-German public opinion is so solid that it becomes impossible for the US to keep a troop presence there.

But if that presence is truly impossible to maintain, as in France throws its weight in to move the US put of Europe, so as to formally dissolve NATO (or at least push towards it), then I think the US would make moves towards stationing its Naval and Air forces for operations in Europe/MENA out of Malta.

Malta was already the site of the conference in which Gorby and H.W. declared the official end of the Cold War. It’s not too inconceivable to me that the US would have their delegation hang around a little while longer to pressure the Maltese government into reopening HMS Falcon as an air and also naval base, under a new name, of course.

How successful would this be? Well for starters, Malta had declared itself a neutral state in 1980 and told the British to get out, so not off to a great start, but if the US is serious about not accepting the loss of bases to the spectre of neutrality sweeping the continent, and can make the honestly very small jump from the “Rollback” of Communism, the the “Rollback” of Neutrality, Malta would be an easy state to bully.

Or maybe not- maybe the US would look at making Italy its new outpost, but in any case, it’s not just letting its military alliance collapse under the weight of neutrality- it has to be defeated by arms. That’s how SEATO died, thats how METO died, and it will have to be how NATO dies.

If the US is truly forced off the continent, then you’re likely going to see an accelerated shift towards multi-polarity, American policy starts to see Europe as a hostile trade competitor 20 years earlier than in OTL. If the rest of the Eastern Bloc comes apart, Poland might make an easier for American military hardware, but that’s also assuming the Soviet Union dissolves, which is dependent an a number of factors, namely whether or not there’s still an August Coup to galvanize the smaller nations of the USSR into making moves for independence, as the March Referendum of 1991 was definitely in favor of maintaining in the Soviet Union, in every constituent Republic where it was held.

Really the butterflies are far too numerous without more information, but that there is just a starting point.

© -SnarkBlac- (2025-10-01)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nu8yeo/would_you_agree_with_the_united_states_leaving/nh4xnr9/

I can sorta speak on this. My best friend just got back from doing major tech work and research in Shanghai and meanwhile I am doing the same sorta stuff over here in the US (I have a lot of colleagues from China).

We both independently have come to the same conclusion that the Chinese are likely at the point where a large amount of their technology is equal to our own or perhaps even now better than it. Save for perhaps military tech where the US still commands a slight edge (hard to say as stuff is still pretty classified). My friend put it more colorfully “We are fucked.”

I think ending straight competition with the Chinese and instead opening up more collaboration would be beneficial now before the tech gaps widens to such a paint where the Chinese have significant leverage over us. Down the line China will use any large gap in technology to force us out of alliances with Taiwan, Philippines, Japan and South Korea. China can theoretically hold both Pakistan and India hostage as they control the Tibetan Plateau which is where both India and Pakistan’s main sources of water originate from.

So overall maybe not straight up abandoning Europe but prioritizing China more than other nations might eventually be a wise move down the road. I’d much rather work with the Chinese than fight them both in trade wars, the tech race and god forbid in a war. Overall we both have had very positive interactions with the Chinese and agree that American Propaganda has really misled the general public on how both China proper works and how their people truly are. Sure they give up a lot of their personal freedoms but in exchange they are extremely safe, advanced technology wise and have some of the best and brightest people in the World… of course I am excluding those who live in Western China and Tibet…. Kinda rough for them.

© Tomas2891 (2025-10-01)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nu8yeo/would_you_agree_with_the_united_states_leaving/nh9praq/

Eh I don’t know it’s not simple as that. Japan caught up and surpassed the US in the 80’s. Taiwan still builds the best superconductors in the world than the US. The Soviets beat the US during the early space race. The US has never been at the forefront for every piece of tech but China is catching up. But technology isn’t everything a superpower could be. Soft power like culture is important and Japan is way more influential right now with their anime. South Korea is a close second and the US is a level above everyone. Alliances like NATO is important and China’s alliances so far has been weak. They didn’t do much when Iran got fucked over by Israel as one example. China is still surrounded by western allied countries like the Philippines, Japan and South Korea. Russia always puts themselves first and China does the same. North Korea is barely a regional power too.

© -SnarkBlac- (2025-10-02)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nu8yeo/would_you_agree_with_the_united_states_leaving/nhfqrx3/

Well Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines are all that advanced because the US rebuilt them. China rebuilt China (through blood but they did it). China also self isolated for a long time and the Sino-Soviet Split made it worse. Their alliance building is as recent as their technological development so they are again catching up here.

Post WWII Japan and South Korea were rubble. Their growth is directly tied to the US building them to guard against the Soviets and Chinese. It’s why they are still closely allied today.

As for USA on the tech tree we are agreed. I’ll make a point. China has always historically been the center of global trade and power. Going off of the Dynastic Cycle they have a few hundred years of great success and growth before they break into warring states for a century or two and then the process repeats. China has just come out of a warring states and stagnation period (relatively speaking in the grand scheme of 7,000 years of history) and now we are seeing the rebuilding process before the next golden age. Think of the PRC as a new Dynasty (with a lot similarities to the old ones at the core of it) but with no “emperor” tho Xi is basically one kinda. They have to be careful not to overextend at the moment but I predict as time goes on this will change down the road. They have reached their peak yet. When they do and they will soon, it’ll change.

They got the natural resources, rare earth elements, place in the global economy, technology, population and geography to return to their historical super power status (think of the Han, Tang and Ming Dynasties). The US if it doesn’t crack under the current cultural tensions and politics will remain a powerful counterweight for a long time due to geography and natural resources alone so you could see a dual relationship work in global trade and influencing geo-politics in the long run. I don’t predict a Cold War. The ideological battle isn’t there. It’s more like the Han Dynasty and Roman Empire each doing their own thing on their sides of the World. Only difference is now that same World is much more connected (duh). So expect high levels of competition or cooperation to dominate every market and society.

It’s up to the Americans and the Chinese what this eventual relationship will look like. Cooperation or Competition. I am for Cooperation.

Also there is the whole debt owed to China issue which is super complex and I’ll admit I couldn’t do it justice explaining it. I got like 70% of the knowledge down but economics is fucking hard to learn and explain in highly accurate detail. Also that’s not my field of expertise. I am much better at historical data, geopolitics and predicting future trends based on data analysis of the past hence why my argument leans heavy in that

© Adûnâi (2025-10-04)
https://old.reddit.com/r/AlternateHistoryHub/comments/1nu8yeo/would_you_agree_with_the_united_states_leaving/nhps553/

China rebuilt China (through blood but they did it).

Seems like a knowledgeable post, yet is this statement in particular true? To what extent can the Maoist era be credited with the post-Nixon collusion achievements? While I’m personally biased towards totalitarian dystopias, I have to admit that even to me it seems like China in the 1950s-60s was still a feudal anarchy state. And only in the 1980s the American capital started pouring in, deindustrialising the whole West for the benefit of China (for whatever nefarious reason) - the stream that never stopped despite Russia collapsing in 1991, continuing until the mid-2010s. (Was the Western elite’s intent really aiming at corrupting China’s morals? Wouldn’t it have been simpler simply to cut off all foreign aid in 1991 and enact a blockade? It’s such a disastrous for the West decision that the Western elite is either secretly treacherous or incredibly stupid and anarchic.)

I don’t predict a Cold War. The ideological battle isn’t there. It’s more like the Han Dynasty and Roman Empire each doing their own thing on their sides of the World.

One Russian youtuber is constantly crowing that America is hellbent on a nuclear war with China (whose nuclear arsenal is too tiny for deterrence when America gets desperate), so the current war with Russia is merely a ploy to destroy the Russian nuclear arsenal, thus removing China’s actual nuclear shield. Also, the Three Gorges Dam seems somewhat tempting for attack.

Down the line China will use any large gap in technology to force us out of alliances with Taiwan, Philippines, Japan and South Korea.

Those countries are literally occupied by America, can they ever side with China? Isn’t it the case similar to Germany’s where America can destroy their gas pipelines to Russia and Germany simply starts gearing for slaughter, no questions asked? Operation Gladio is ancient history at this point.