“Kenya, and almost every African country, was birthed by the ending of empire. Our borders were not of our own drawing. They were drawn in the distant colonial metropoles of London, Paris, and Lisbon with no regard for the ancient nations that they cleaved apart. Today, across the border of every single African country live our countrymen with whom we share deep historical, cultural and linguistic bonds. At independence, had we chosen to pursue states on the basis of ethnic, racial or religious homogeneity, we would still be waging bloody wars many decades later. Instead, we agreed that we would settle for the borders that we inherited. But we would still pursue continental political, economic and legal integration. Rather than form nations that looked ever backward into history with a dangerous nostalgia, we chose to look forward to a greatness none of our many nations and peoples had ever known. We chose to follow the rules of the OAU and the United Nations Charter not because our borders satisfied us but because we wanted something greater forged in peace. We believe that all states formed from empires that have collapsed or retreated have many peoples in them yearning for integration with peoples in neighboring states. This is normal and understandable. After all, who does not want to be joined to their brethren and to make common purpose with them? However, Kenya rejects such a yearning from being pursued by force. We must complete our recovery from the embers of dead empires in a way that does not plunge us back into new forms of domination and oppression. We rejected irredentism and expansionism on any basis, including racial, ethnic, religious or cultural factors. We reject it again today” 

-Representative of Kenya to the United Nations, Martin Kimani - February 21st 2022 on the eve of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

The African continent may be perhaps one of the most intriguing regions in the Cold War and for good reason. Behold as you will, the decline of European imperialism directly led to the establishment of one of the largest political experiments that would decide the fate of millions in the most economically dynamic and ethnically diverse region of the world. The consequences of European colonialism on the defining of borders, legacy institutions, economic systems of exploitation & the creation of unequal and stratified societies based along ethnic and religious lines have led to many nations in Africa falling into the fires of civil war, interstate conflict, revolutions, and rampant coups and have defined the politics of the continent for decades to come. However, it would be a mistake to assume that due to the preceding colonial experience that African nations endured, that these countries were destined to ruin, or that these countries were completely beholden to the material conditions of the time. Indeed, the 1970s in Africa were an inflection point, a time of great change and political upheaval independent of its underlying circumstances that would usher in the politics that would dominate African geopolitical affairs until the fall of the Soviet Union and beyond. 

Contrary to popular opinion, Africa in the 1950s-1960s was rapidly growing in its economic sophistication and development. With the dramatic rise of European industrialization and the meteoric rise of living standards in the old continent, so too did the rise in demand for raw materials, luxury goods, and commodities. The post-war world saw the colonial powers invest hundreds of millions into their remnant colonial territories both to exploit the rich lands of Africa to fuel their economic growth but also to slow down the rise of independence sentiment in the colonies. These investments later increased into industrial development schemes in sectors such as textiles, fertilizers, glass, concrete, and other light industries with some even developing local steel industries, necessary for greater industrialization. The high profitability of the commodity market enriched the colonial administrations and the African landed elite who owned stakes in mines, plantations, and factories across the region. Even once the aforementioned countries eventually became independent, most African nations retained their colonial-era economic growth figures and stability save for outstanding political circumstances (see Congo Crisis of 1960.) 

By 1970, the average GDP per capita in Sub-Saharan Africa was nearly double that of the GDP per capita of Southeast Asia, and even in colonies such as Portuguese Angola and Mozambique which were territories notoriously underdeveloped and were embroiled in an already decades-long insurgency war, had greater and far more sophisticated industries and development than most countries in Asia precisely because the Portuguese regime invested an enormous portion of its budget to build up the colonies in the (futile) hope that the lands would remain loyal to Portugal. The general assumption of the time was that the nations of Africa were on track to become wealthy nations while Asia would remain lagging behind Africa in living standards and economic growth precisely because the average growth of African independent nations & colonies remained consistently performing well in economic indicators.

So what went wrong? If things are going very well in Africa, why is Africa not under a similar development status today as Latin America or modern-day Asia? As always the devil is in the details. Every country in Africa has a different reason for its plight than the other and none are created equally, there are nevertheless some commonalities amongst them that would explain this. 

Most African countries that enjoyed respectable standards of living and economic development at the time were sharply skewed due to the residence of white settlers from the metropole who served as the country’s educated middle class and skilled workforce. Due to colonial policy, few natives were allowed government positions or served key roles in the civil service, industry, and bureaucracy. Thus when colonialism ended, most of these settlers would make their way back to the homeland, either due to ostracization from the majority for their role in the colonization, an exodus due to a failure to establish minority rule, a desire to return to the metropole, or just simple racist fear and economic anxiety over losing their privileged status in the newly independent territories. Regardless, their exit would cause an imminent crisis of government as the newly independent nations would suddenly struggle with a shortage of skilled personnel in order to help manage the state and the economy in an efficient manner. Without a well-developed state apparatus, these countries could not operate adequate legal systems, enforce property protection, and provide security to its people which would force people to use clientelist relationships with interest groups and political forces independent of the state, weakening the grasp the state has over the country and hampering development. This occurred in basically every single African country post-independence, some faster than others. Not to mention most of the time, if the withdrawal of the colonial elite is by nature chaotic and unplanned, the sudden exit of these personnel more than likely leads to a complete breakdown of government which results in civil war as what happened to the Congo in 1960 and the Portuguese colonies in 1974. 

Another factor is the long unresolved ethno-religious and political disputes that were left simmering in these nations that would burst shortly after independence. Nearly all African nations are ethnically and religiously diverse in some way which while not exactly an essentialist detriment to a nation as there is a history of ethno-religious coexistence in Africa, decisions made by the colonial elite such as creating a collaborationist class by uplifting one of the ethnic groups as part of a divide and conquer strategy such as what the Belgians did in Rwanda by uplifting the Tutsi over the Hutu will subsequently create tensions between the groups as the uplifted group would desire to retain their privileged status post-independence and the underclass will seek either equality or to topple the ethnopolitical order of the country. The reality for most African nations at this time is that nationalism is a pretty novel concept pushed mostly by the few educated native intelligentsia that would lead the early stages of independence in these countries, most people in these newly independent countries will supersede their loyalties to their country in favor of the interests of their tribe, clan or faith. Thus the national project for most African countries is a slow and costly affair, both in lives and in resources. Some nations such as Botswana managed to overcome its diversity through shrewd execution of political skill and compromise. Most nations however relied on using force and favors to clamp down on separatist sentiment as well as clan and tribal power structures. This had the side effect of most democratic regimes established right after colonial rule collapsing into authoritarianism either through ambitious commanders of the former colonial army sensing weakness and installing military coups, militant communist movements filling the power vacuum, or simply key statesmen slowly accumulating political powers in their respective governments and eroding democracy. 

Lastly, a key factor is the broader context of decolonization in the backdrop of the Cold War. It would be a mistake to assume that European imperialism is the only reason for the lack of development in African nations, but it's absolutely the most important factor. The regimes that were allowed to emerge in the immediacy of decolonization were governments that had the consent of the imperial metropole to continue on and usually were already established elements of the colonial regime, such as the army, bureaucracy, landed elite, etc. There is a reason why for example, nearly all the colonies in French West Africa: Senegal, Dahomey (now Benin), Ivory Coast, Guinea, Upper Volta (now Burkina Faso), Togo, etc. followed the governing principles of the French Union with similar constitutional and presidential systems and were decolonized all around the same time. Another example being the former British colonies of Tanzania, Kenya, Botswana, Uganda, Malawi, and Zambia, (not mentioning Rhodesia since it is a unique case), all inheriting the Westminster model of governance and staying within the British Commonwealth. Obviously these policies were implemented by the metropole to be able to retain influence in the now-decolonized countries through elite socialization and the power dynamics of these countries will preclude them from seeking aid or development from said former metropole. 

Nevertheless working with the metropole as a newly decolonized country is a very unpopular and risky endeavor as these governments eventually had to contend with an empowered and politically conscious citizenry. Now that they no longer had the direct support of the metropole and the threat of force was marginal, it became much easier for anti-government elements, such as regional separatists, religious militants, and ideological militias to fight and claim fiefdoms of their own or topple the regime wholesale. These conflicts will eventually draw the interest of the global major powers as in the broader backdrop of the international contestation that was the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union sought to advance their commercial, military, and geopolitical interests in the African continent. Communist governments in Africa would align with the Soviets and become proxies in multiple wars in Africa especially later in the 1970s and 1980s, while the US-backed anti-communist governments and interest groups in Africa to help contain the spread of Pan-Africanist and communist ideals in the continent. Admittedly the impact of foreign interference by both major powers has not been as decisive as the influence the former colonial powers had (and still have) over these nations. For example, the French continued to maintain a sizable economic and strategic interest over West Africa, helping install military coups which they saw as crucial to maintain their power bloc in Africa, the Belgians regularly intervened in the Congo Crisis and in Rwanda/Burundi during the 1960s. Nevertheless the majority of the high-profile conflicts in Africa during this time: The Ogaden War, the Angolan War, the Mozambique Civil War, the Western Sahara conflict, etc. all had the prints of the major powers in some shape or form.  

So, now that I have shared this “brief” intellectual discussion about Africa in the 1970s, let's now talk about how the geopolitics of Africa will be moderated in CWP. When CWP’s history is concerned, Africa has remained very much an afterthought by the player base, which mostly boils down to a few reasons: First the start dates being during the early Cold War meant most of the gameplay in Africa was focused around state-building as a colonial government and asking the metropole for investments which is not exactly that engaging nor interesting, and it will often devolve into problematic implications as to the player base’s conception of playing as a colonial government. Second is the fact that sadly, there is a drought of academic sources in the subject, especially hard economic data and sources on the politics of certain African countries, at least those that are accessible on the internet, which makes it hard for players to interact with the countries they are playing. Third is also the lack of socialization with other players in the region. Let's face it, few people play Africa and that makes it boring since there isn't much to do. 

Now the 1970s start date is a completely different story. By the 1970s, most African nations have already decolonized and have gone through the immediate tumult of post-decolonization politics, and thus have established a diverse array of colorful regimes, parties, and governments that have reasons to like and oppose each other. The Cold War is also vastly more asymmetric than in the early start dates due to the emergence of China as an alternative Communist power bloc in competition with the USSR in currying favors from the Third World. European powers are on the retreat but have the capability to claw their way back into retaining influence in the region while distinct African regional powers emerge: (Egypt, Libya, South Africa, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Zaire, Algeria, Tanzania, Rhodesia.) This new geopolitical reality, and the very acute security dilemma that occurs in the continent, allows for African nations to do what I call the “Mobutu Moment” where you can play along the interests of the great powers to enrich themselves through careful diplomacy and balance of interests. By playing the three sides of the Cold War and walking the tightrope, you can secure tremendous amounts of support, economic development, loans,  military equipment to eliminate your domestic rivals (or foreign enemies), and cash to help finance your wife’s weekly trips to Paris! Obviously, if you choose a side in the Cold War you can’t exactly swindle the three great powers as much, for example, you can't simultaneously ask for loans from China when you are the Derg and have Cuban and Soviet troops in your borders. Interstate warfare in Africa is also not uncommon, it actually happens a lot during this time and many African countries intervened in conflicts they had little business being in. Of course, if someone wants to invade another country or intervene, they will have to deal with the consequences of that decision and make a good justification as to why they have to go in. 

My goal for Africa this season is to make it a very interesting region for players to enjoy playing and has all the rich value of espionage, great power intrigue, interstate wars, and geopolitics that a Cold War game has to offer. Thus much like last season, a system of Diplomatic Chains will be implemented with emphasis in Africa. In principle, how it works is that if a [CRISIS] or [CONFLICT] post drops detailing a certain major civil war, conflict, coup d'etat, or civil unrest and government crisis in a country occurs, a clock starts ticking where players in certain regions that they are eligible to be involved in are given the choice to intervene or stay neutral. Said intervention could be a myriad of choices, depending on the initiative of the player, be it volunteers, economic support, military aid, humanitarian aid, UN assistance, etc. Player involvement is up to the discretion of the mods but due to the wild nature of African conflicts during this time and allowing some ahistorical wiggle room, there is some permissibility to do so. (read the CWP Realism treatise when it comes out.) When the clock ends, the chain stops and the conflict/crisis resumes and is resolved through reso. If a power begins neutral during the diplomatic chain but wants to get involved later, it will be considered an escalation, which will start another short diplomatic chain involving other powers. There are incentives for the player to get involved in Diplomatic Chains, notwithstanding the drama value but, with the implementation of an upcoming “Power Bloc system” in the works (more on that in a later mod post), individual countries, big and small, can extend or consolidate their power in the region which will help it strengthen among the power rankings. Another key implementation is the elevation of certain African nations into “Regional Powers” due to their relative outsized influence in the continent: These are the following:

The Regional Powers of Africa:

Egypt: Led by General Anwar Sadat who took office as President of Egypt in 1970, is embroiled in preparations for its upcoming war with Israel to retake the Sinai. In sharp contrast to his predecessor Gamal Abder Nasser who pursued Nasserist ideals in Egypt and in the wider Middle East, Sadat began the Corrective Revolution in 1974 which indicated a split from Egypt’s historical alliance with the Soviet Union and toward rapprochement with the United States and Israel. Nevertheless, some factions would like to see Sadat fall, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and left-wing officers within the Egyptian Army who would like to take Egypt in a radically different direction…

Algeria: Led by the FLN as a one-party dictatorship, Algeria pursued close ties with the Soviet Union but ostensibly remained a nonaligned power in the Middle East and Africa. Historically mostly concerned with its strategic rivalry with Morocco over its borders with Western Sahara and irredentist claims from Morocco. Nevertheless, through changes in administration, the Algerians could look elsewhere…

Nigeria: Just coming out of the devastating Nigerian Civil War, the Nigerian military dictatorship under Colonel Yakubu Gowon is now focused on consolidating the powers of the Nigerian federal government and cracking down on internal dissent and regional separatism. While internally fractured, the size of the country and the potential of its economy could lead Nigeria to become a powerful force in African politics.  

Zaire: Under the iron fist of President Joseph Désiré Mobutu also known as “Mobutu Sese Seko”  he managed to consolidate power over the Congo through his party, the Popular Movement for the Revolution, and renamed the country “Zaire” directing the country towards a non aligned, nationalist direction. Historically supported by the West, he also built ties with South Africa, Israel, and China to counterbalance Western interests for his enrichment. Strategically keeping the Angola Crisis under arm's length, he is mostly focused on internal matters in the Congo. 

South Africa: During the 1970s, the apartheid National Party lay at the zenith of its political hegemony in South Africa, becoming the strongest bastion of white minority rule in Africa while enjoying some of the most sophisticated militaries and industries in the continent. The rise of communism in Southern Africa has led to the country engaging in multiple wars to forestall its spread through supporting proxy regimes and anti-communist militias in these regions as well as directly sending troops to fight the SWAPO, MPLA, and FRELIMO.  [NOTE: South Africa is only claimable through application under mod review.]

Rhodesia: After declaring it’s UDI from the British in 1970, Rhodesia is one of two white minority-ruled independent states in Africa, with the other being South Africa. Led by Prime Minister Ian Smith, the country is embroiled in a bush war with the ZAPU and ZANU communist rebel groups. Historically the Rhodesians engaged in multiple proxy conflicts alongside South Africa to stop the spread of communism. Both Rhodesia and South Africa are isolated from the international community and have to cope with the pressure of progressively drying up support and strengthening militancy among their territories. [NOTE: Rhodesia is only claimable through application under mod review.]

Ethiopia: Currently ruled under the Abyssinian Dynasty under Emperor Haile Selassie, the Empire holds distinct prestige and influence in the international community but it’s lackluster economy and conservative politics keep the nation underdeveloped, leading to the rise of nationalist and anti-monarchical elements within the armed forces. The Emperor’s position in the government is very insecure, a failure to address reformist concerns amongst the intelligentsia such as land reform, separation of church and state, weakening of unions, and radicalization of the officer corps. While it is only a matter of time before a coup d’etat occurs in the country, there is a tight window of opportunity where the royal government could attempt to wrest control and reform or succumb to Revolution. 

Senegal: Led by President Leopold Senghor, Senegal is one of the few examples of democratic institutions and the rule of law surviving the tumult of decolonization and is thus largely respected by the international community. In 1972, the Senegalese are engaged in a dispute with the Portuguese military over violations of their sovereignty due to their war with the PAIGC in Portuguese Guinea. Under his leadership, it will be difficult for autocrats to take over the country and thus can pursue democratic state-building in itself and in other countries in the region.

Libya: Led by Muammar Gadaffi, the Libyan Arab Republic is one of the wealthiest countries in Africa due to its vast oil reserves and is the strongest economic power in terms of purchasing power in Africa. This has allowed the Revolutionary Command Council to field a large and powerful military compared to its neighbors. Geopolitically aligned to the Soviet Union while a nonaligned power, Libya is perhaps one of the most interventionist-minded powers in Africa precisely due to Gaddaffi’s personality as a revolutionary ruler, participating in multiple conflicts abroad. With power consolidated among the council, Gaddafi now aims to concentrate power on himself. 

Morocco: Under the rule of King Hassan II, the royal government of Morocco consolidated power shortly after independence and established a new constitutional order with the King at its center. Throughout the 1960s, the King’s government brutally repressed any demands for democratic suffrage and continued the state of siege until 1970 when he approved token concessions towards democratic institutions, nevertheless, the King’s regime was at risk of coups from a restless military whose proclivities stand with the democratic movement. Morocco is locked in a bitter struggle for territory against the Polisario Front in Western Sahara and the Algerians over territorial disputes in their bid to establish a “Greater Morocco” 

Tanzania: Under the rule of Julius Nyerere and the TANU party, Tanzania was transformed from an ethnically diverse and fragmented polity into one of the most politically stable regimes in Africa. Tanzania along with Zambia during the 1970s quickly became a staunch ally of Chinese interests in Africa, taking a turn to the left after the Arusha declaration of 1967 and enjoying a strong economy due to massive Chinese investments. 

This is not an exhaustive list, as many other countries in Africa pursued ambitious policies of their own such as Somalia under Mohammed Siad Barre and Uganda under Idi Amin. In principle, what is being posited here is that there is a wealth of options and potential for gameplay in Africa that do not limit themselves to econ posting or working with global powers. It is a mistake to assume that just because one country is economically destitute or politically fractured, does not have options to change its future for the better or worse, if anything the African experience is extremely diverse in outcomes. The hope is that as the system grows more sophisticated, players can enjoy their time playing in Africa and help increase player interest in playing this fascinating continent!

https://preview.redd.it/oiunta0rkqvd1.png?width=835&format=png&auto=webp&s=c955015500bf1ccc40f96b1d0205cb8e937f20df

Of all the features involved in making a season work, nothing is more critical than user posts. Serving as the backbone of a nation’s direction, economic success, and political stability, it is probably the first thing you notice when you become a part of the community. The issue inherent in that relationship is it might become the least important part, as you move along, but this shouldn’t be the case. While interacting with the community and making deals in the Discord server is an important tool, always remember:

It’s not official if it’s not in a post.

First, let’s assume, if you are planning to claim for any upcoming season, that you have read our rules and guidelines for activity and posting. If you haven’t, it’s imperative (extremely important) that you do so, but I’ll give you the cliff notes. Activity is paramount in keeping your claim. You must make an [EVENT] (or [DIPLOMATIC], [MILESTONE], and [ECON]) post once per week in order to keep your country, or you run the risk of losing your claim to inactivity. That means if you can’t post over a week’s span, another player has the right to take that claim from you, and if you go two weeks without a post, you lose the claim altogether. 

Now, this is harsh, but it has to be a part of a claimant’s reality for the season. 100-200 words can be daunting for some players, but it must be stated that players who post more often tend to have more success generally with their claim than someone who simply posts once a week to keep their claim afloat. What this creates, functionally, is a time bomb that forces players to often get creative (or anti-creative) with their posting, and several concerning splinter effects have come to the attention to the mod team:

• Claimants becoming fatigued by the word count and losing steam midway into the season.
• Co-claimants dropping from their claims, making the weight of posting fall on one user on majors.
• Claims lagging behind on posts falling behind economically.

The mod team understands that these issues are inherent to how the community deals with posts. No one is going to be perfect, and we can respect users who are just more suited to discussion and conversation, but as it remains, we can only reinforce what is already a part of our ruleset, while encouraging players to add more to their experience through more posting.

You may be thinking “Wait, wouldn’t that mean more verbose or creatively inclined users have a distinct advantage over users who are just as passionate but are less inclined to more posts, are busier, or simply have a rough grasp on the English language?”, and the answer, in short, is yes. Kind of.

Longer posts are not a guarantee of success, and a shrewd sense of storytelling and narrative, while engaging and greatly appreciated by the community, is flavor in the face of how the moderation team takes decisions into consideration. What we mean by this is very simple: the more you keep your country engaged, you ensure the mods feel less tempted to throw events or crises at you to get you engaged.

We will never make it harder on a claimant artificially to punish them for inactivity, especially if that inactivity is excused. This is why [META] posts are so important, they allow claimants to make it clear when they won’t be able to make deadlines or the reason for excused absences. You are allowed up to 14 days of a hiatus, and while we allow you to use discord player announcements for this purpose, it’s simply fail-proof to do both, while not taking any time. Please don’t think that you can abuse this to simply autopilot your claim, as we are quick to remove claimants that may be sitting on important claims without serious consideration for their lack of action.

How you interact with the community is up to your personal preferences, but a large part of the organized community revolves around the Discord server. It’s an important tool for us in consolidating information, reaching out to users, and serving the community at large. While we try our best to make the experience on Reddit self-reliant, we’ll never be able to organize the seasons we do without it.

Ensuring claimants understand how to use Discord and Reddit is a big focus for us, as there is a tendency for claimants to solidify economic, military, or civilian agreements between nations through our tickets, but actions without a supplemental [DIPLOMACY] post may be lost in the shuffle for users not able to effectively scour the Discord for details.

No one sees your tickets but you, the other claimant, and the mod team, so keeping the community in the know, even as a [SECRET] post, need-to-know basis details add to the season’s narrative. Again, we are wary of metagaming, and we’re quick to slap down those who use information they shouldn’t have. Feel safe knowing that if you want to post about it, put the right tags on it, and you’ll be secure.

Overall, what we’d like to see out of our claimants this season is a focus on activity as a key part of users’ success plans. As previously stated, when a claim seems to be just going through the motions as a nation, the mods feel that the issue must be boredom, a lack of something to engage in, and will find something for your nation to do. That’s artificial, it’s frustrating, and it shouldn’t happen.

Narrative is good, dialogue is good. As long as you make sure what you’re trying to bring to the table for your nation is clear and somewhat concise, you will find that success comes quick and often. If you’re busy, or the kind of person where 100 words is a tough task any time of the day, don’t worry, we aren’t all screenwriters and English majors. What this is about is exploring the world situation, making changes, and trying to succeed through careful planning and execution. We, the mod team and the community at large, see what creative solutions claimants have come up with, and we want to encourage it. But again, put it in a post!

May the road rise to meet you all!

• SeanMillerWriter

They're pro-communist which is super epic and they fully understand socialism or communism as well. The North Vietnam's economy was far more efficient than capitalist economy and command economies have just as much production capability or more than capitalist countries, which is exactly what mods say. Also, mods reject the lie that communism is a 'zero sum game' which doesn't make any sense. In fact Romania socialist economy was far better than current lame capitalist Romania. Also as well as what mods claim, North Vietnam did not destroy the economy they made it a lot better, Vietnam has one of highest GDP growths in the past 50 years and north Vietnam victory wasn't a loss for Soviet Union, which is what mods claim. Soviet Union were very happy to help Vietnamese free themselves from oppression.

They're pro-capitalist which is super lame and they don't understand socialism or communism either. The North Vietnam's economy was far more efficient than capitalist economy and command economies have just as much production capability or more than capitalist countries, despite what mods say. Also, mods falsely claim communism is a 'zero sum game' which doesn't make any sense. In fact Romania socialist economy was far better than current lame capitalist Romania. Also despite what mods claim, North Vietnam did not destroy the economy they made it a lot better, Vietnam has one of highest GDP growths in the past 50 years and north Vietnam victory wasn't a loss for Soviet Union, despite what mods claim. Soviet Union were very happy to help Vietnamese free themselves from oppression.

Welcome, one and all, to East Yemen, a charming reminder of the way Asia used to be. The screams of malaria victims echo through the thatched, fire-prone rooves of the quaint rural villages, while this year fifty children (boys, of course) are able to seek higher education through the good graces of the Catholic Church, with this graduating fifth grade class having over a dozen members! Convenient travel maps are available in the London Geographical Society, if you pay to use their Xerox machine; and there’s one white fellow in the country by the name of Kurtz, somewhere deep in the jungle, past the communist rebels equipped with the latest K98k rifles, only lightly used.

So you’ve got your developing country. That’s most of the world in 1972, at least by land area and population. And for that matter, it still is today, at least according to the World Trade Organization. You want it to be not developing, but rather developed. Good. The 1950s and 1960s are a time of great prosperity for the global south, in which the entire world enjoys the fruits of the postwar boom, with everywhere from Europe to Latin America enjoying major improvements in their quality of life–oh, that was the 60s. It’s the 70s now? The decade of misery, poverty and despair? Right, so it’s going to be a little bit harder. 

In the 1970s, essentially, all the methods used for industrialization and development–sponsored by the World Bank, used by India, and such–break down. It’s really in this decade that one sees a wild divergence between the Asian Tigers–the only nations to escape the trap of poverty and middle income–and everyone else, especially Africa, which was once thought to be ahead of Asia when it came to development, but also Latin America, and even Eastern Europe. Why, precisely, this happened, is still a question there isn’t a definitive answer to–economics is seldom that simple. What I’m here to do today though is help you build some tips and tricks to understand the dos and don’ts of running your developing economy, and perhaps why every developing country doesn’t just follow our seemingly simple advice. 

Models of Growth

In the aftermath of decolonization–and indeed before–a variety of approaches towards economic development emerged. I’ll go over some of them here. Notably, these aren’t mutually exclusive, and to a significant extent overlap with each other. However, I’ve listed them to give you an idea of some of the broad outlooks and ideas circulating around the globe in this time period relating to the subject. 

Import Substitution Industrialization

This is probably the most famous, and for good reason–it’s tremendously popular. Virtually all of Latin America engaged in ISI, as it is known (no relation to the Pakistani intelligence agency), and much of Africa and Asia did as well–most notably, India. 

The overall principle is in the name. It involves substituting the imports with domestically produced goods. In that regard, it’s essentially a descendant of mercantilism, and sounds very appealing to the casual person–as well as the politician who is increasingly worried about their shallow foreign-exchange reserve, and who wants to reward his cronies with de-facto monopolies on certain goods.

However, there’s a fundamental flaw with ISI–and that’s the logic of comparative advantage. In essence, your country will never be the best at some things–there will be someone else able to do it better and cheaper than you. But with ISI, you can’t just import them, you have to use the expensive, shitty domestic version. And this hits everything. Lee Kuan Yew recounts how, when meeting Indian delegations, you always offered gifts of golf balls, because the Indian ones were worthless rubbish. ISI means running much of your country at an economic loss, and as a result, it never tends to end well–but it remains incredibly appealing to this very day politically, which is why it keeps happening regardless. 

Export Oriented Growth

Something of a novelty actually, in this time period, and one that largely still is. Only a few nations actually ever try it–the Germans, the Japanese, Koreans, Taiwanese, and eventually a few others like the Turks (sometimes–I think Erdogan is trying to manually reset back towards the export economy he started with, and it’s getting weird). 

Export oriented growth supposes that the only way to get rich is to utilize your labor to the maximum. In order to accumulate capital, you need foreign currency. In order to get foreign currency, instead of borrowing money, you should export. When you get foreign currency, you then spend it on capital that allows you to export more. The cycle keeps going as GDP climbs, even as quality of life domestically lags behind–but it will get you to the status of a developed country, eventually. Export-oriented economies don’t care about imports per se, they just make them expensive, usually by artificially suppressing both the value of their currency and wages. 

Generally, the MO of the export-oriented economy (at least the classic version) is to start out by specializing in labor-intensive industries with minimal capital requirements–stuff like textiles manufacturing, but as we enter the 70s and 80s, increasingly new areas like food processing and electronics assembly. As revenue from these initial ventures piles up, the owners of these small corporations will form larger conglomerates, borrowing money internally to begin expanding into new sectors that are more sophisticated and capital-intensive. Using the revenue from other areas of their business, they’ll start producing a new good at a loss, eventually figuring out how to make a profit off of it. There’s often a significant role for state “guidance” in the process, and engagement with international trade is, understandably, a top priority, with these companies often aggressively marketing abroad and setting up offshore factories at surprisingly early stages in their growth. 

Debt Financed Growth

Ah, a somewhat ambiguous one again, but there’s a certain kind of growth that is reliant essentially entirely on borrowing money–in the very stable USD, of course. This is less on a state, and more a private level. Today, the model is probably most closely associated with Turkey, but in the 1970s and 80s Thailand is its greatest champion, with some of the other Asian economies engaging in similar shenanigans. If you’ve ever heard of the Asian Financial Crisis, that’s what happens when this model goes wrong.

The underlying premise is pretty simple, actually. Ensure that cheap, dollar-denominated credit is available to your businesses, set up a stable environment politically and economically, and watch the magic happen. It tends to particularly result in very heavy construction, and tends to be relatively socially popular (free money!) relative to some other methods of development. It makes it easy for “titans of industry” to emerge, along with developers on a grand scale, you see rapid urbanization, shopping malls, skyscrapers, and with them the development of domestic industry–to an extent, anyway. Domestic industry is something of a side benefit rather than the main show, although it certainly enjoys the cheap credit too. 

The problem comes when that dollar-denominated credit dries up–often in dramatic fashion. This is triggered by the strengthening of the dollar, and investors also realizing that you don’t have that much in the way of foreign-currency reserves. Your currency plunges in value, you’re unable to defend it, and suddenly all your businesses have to repay their dollar-denominated debt using worthless baht, won or lira. That being said, you can get a good twenty or thirty years out of this method, and it can get you to that Mexico tier of GDP, which is very respectable for a country that may start out the economic equivalent of working-class. It’ll also ensure you have a very shiny, modern looking city or two to show off to foreign dignitaries and for you, yourself, to live in, which is something of a nice perk. Also good for tourism. 

Communist Growth

Sort of like the others, but less motivated by “profits”, at least on paper, and more by abstract targets of where the economy “should” be going. Without going into great detail on the precise details of the pricing mechanisms and flaws of communist organization (starting with their lack of it–GOSPLAN is embarrassingly small), communist regimes in practice tended to function a bit like ISI regimes–fixated on heavy industry output, on substituting for imported goods, and trying to export as much as possible. They also had a tendency to borrow large sums of money in the process to attempt to finance this. 

As gross generalizations, communist nations were never terribly concerned about buying Western technology–largely machine tools and other important, complex pieces of capital and heavy equipment, really anything they could get their hands on with the export controls implemented and… loosely… followed by the West. Imports of western consumer goods, though, were rare, with scarce hard currency reserved for only the most important things. Indeed, the paucity of hard currency is one of the driving factors behind all the Eastern Bloc economies by the 1970s, only aggravated by the fall in oil prices (for the USSR) and the rise in the dollar. This results in a peculiar sort of export-oriented growth where communist countries would dump their goods on whatever foreign markets they could find to earn hard currency–especially their more refined and sophisticated goods. These products were often subpar, but they were very inexpensive due to the desperation for hard currency at the time, so many would overlook their flaws–especially in the developing world, which was hard up for forex itself. 

That being said, export-oriented growth may be the wrong word, as in reality this seems to have typically been looting domestic products for sale abroad–ultimately, an American was paying more for his Yugo than a Serb, and with the limited production capability available in command economies it very much was a zero-sum game. In extreme cases, like Romania, the country practically died as a result of these games. This export growth also, not being driven by profit factors, was sometimes itself unprofitable–although these calculations are difficult because of all the indirect subsidies provided to Eastern Bloc exporters, mainly in terms of energy, labor and transport–but that’s a whole different thing. 

Shocks to the System, Oil and Otherwise

The Oil Shock

The first great economic shock of the time period, and the one that would really be the death knell for the postwar economic order, even if it had already been decaying as early as the late 60s under LBJ. In the aftermath of 1973, oil, a good which–through collusion and coercion–had been kept at remarkably low prices for decades, suddenly became orders of magnitude more expensive. With the entire world tuned towards an abundant supply of the cheap, convenient liquid, in ways it could not easily turn away from, the constricting of supply by the OPEC nations–aggravating what would have probably been a tightening supply even under natural market conditions–led to oil increasing in price by a factor of almost ten from 1970 levels by the end of 1973. Sean will go into the details here once his oil dev diary is posted, but from a developmentalist concern, the main issue the oil shock causes is a massive balance of payments deficit–the amount of money you’re paying for oil to supply your economy has skyrocketed, which in turn directly impacts heavy industry and production of fertilizer and agricultural goods. As many developing countries are very energy poor, they have no alternative but swallow the new, higher prices for fuel oil, fertilizer and gasoline–and this triggers social unrest and economic slowdowns across most of the developing world. 

The second oil shock, in 1979, only worsens the situation, though with the low oil prices of the late 1980s just around the corner–that is, in otl–there’s somewhat less to be concerned about. Nevertheless, the supply shortages, combined with national policies, means that those nations that have built heavy industry dependent on imported primary materials largely fail–with the notable exceptions of Japan and South Korea, which actually manage alright. 

Commodities don’t love you

Then there’s the converse of that, which is that the 1970s see very high commodity prices generally. Peak oil is the talk of the town, as is peak copper, peak phosphate, and peak any number of other things. However, these high commodity prices are a very short term thing in reality–but the temptation to disregard the possibility that prices might go down, and plan out policies based on the price always going up, is high, and leads to overambitious programs for development both economically and socially from Chile to Iran. Most notably, the Soviet Union bets heavily on high oil prices and by doing so ironically is one of the primary causes of the crash–the development of the Siberian oil reserves opens up a huge amount of non-OPEC supply, destroying the pseudo-monopoly that OPEC was able to exert for most of the 1970s. 

This isn’t a problem that’s remained in the 70s, either–you can see it to this very day, with the dramatic wave of economic slowdown and collapse when American shale oil came online in the mid-2010s, that turned Venezuela into an economic wreck and launched the Arab Spring when oil revenues couldn’t cover the generous subsidies provided to their subjects. 

While collusion can keep commodities prices high for a time, there’s always, always someone who won’t play along. The incentives to cheat are simply far too great, and the politics of the Cold War means that inevitably, someone will. OPEC was undermined by European, Soviet and American oil, while the attempt to establish a copper cartel failed even more miserably. Even if you do maintain higher prices somehow, substitution will inevitably get you–whether that’s the brief spate of aluminum wiring or the usage of natural gas and coal. 

Putting the capital back in Capitalism

Another major shift in the 1970s and 1980s is that, with the death of Bretton Woods and the end of capital controls, capital suddenly becomes mobile–in a way that it had never really been before, even going back to the era before tight currency controls. While some countries still maintain controls on foreign-exchange and capital outflow, Western Europe and America reject them. In this atmosphere, foreign direct investment, or FDI, suddenly became much more practical–as did external, international trade. In many ways, the great economic shift for developing countries in this time period is away from a debt-based mode of growth and towards one based on the idea of attracting Western capital to your nation. While some of the principles are the same–maybe don’t change your government every other week–suddenly things like “labor protections” and “investment law” and “property rights” become much more important, versus whether you can get some British toffs to lend you money. 

However, FDI doesn’t work one way. One of the downsides of the massive relaxation in capital controls is that it proves remarkably easy for the wealthy and powerful of developing countries to move their cash into more desirable investment destinations, away from where it can be snatched, in developed countries where it can yield higher returns with less risk. So keep in mind that FDI is a two-edged sword. 

The Volcker Shock

Were it just a matter of the commodities market playing its usual tricks, developing countries might have straggled through the 1980s well enough. But the real villain for the aspiring developmentalist is none other than Chairman Volcker. When he was appointed by President Jimmy Carter, he was appointed with a singular mission: Beat inflation, no matter the cost. Armed with the latest in monetarist theory, he immediately raised interest rates–dramatically. 

With the American dollar the primary currency in which loans were issued, and the American financial system by far the world’s largest, this spike in interest rates would have global consequences. While American consumers would have to pay double-digit mortgage rates and auto loans, foreign countries would find that the dollars they had once been able to borrow for very favorable rates in the 50s and 60s had suddenly become very expensive. The rise in bond rates started with American treasuries and rippled across the globe. Ultimately, this massive spike in interest rates was a significant factor in the catastrophe that arose in the Eastern Bloc, as their debt loads far outpaced their ability to earn foreign currency–and similar situations would occur worldwide, as Volcker’s interest rate hikes would strangle developing economies in their cradle, as those who had taken on too much debt found their economies gasping for breath.

To add insult to injury, this rise in interest rates made American companies, some of the most interested in investing abroad, less likely to borrow money to do so–and it acted as a giant magnet for capital globally. The United States already had a very compelling economy, and the high interest rates and hence, rates of return meant that it would soon become a top destination for FDI from Europe and Japan that might otherwise have gone to riskier investments in the third world. 

Common Mistakes

Magic Money Mountain Minerals

This is a certified xpowers classic, and a pretty easy one to deal with from a mod perspective. Basically, you seize upon a report that indicates that your country has however many “billion dollars” of minerals, and you then proceed to develop the mines, earning a fortune and propelling your development forward. 

The problem is that, for the most part, mining is an activity that can happen even in the most fucked up, backwards regimes. While some capital intensive mining may tend to favor more politically stable regions, there’s still mines in North Korea and the Congo. So generally, if those minerals weren’t mined otl, there was a damn good reason for not doing so–and that reason is that either they don’t exist to the extent early surveys suggested, they are too difficult or too expensive to extract, or the market for those minerals is simply poor. 

Now, mining may still be worthwhile from a development perspective–but only, I think, in two situations. The first is, of course, a major market disruption differing from otl–for instance, if Chile becomes Maoist and the global copper supply dries up, your otherwise-worthless copper reserves might suddenly become economically viable. The second is–actually–development of your country itself. A large part of the cost of many minerals is actually transportation, and if your country is industrializing, it might make more sense to tap the local reserves than import them from halfway across the globe. A coal mine in Afghanistan might be non-viable on its own, but make a great deal of economic sense when there’s a desperate need for coal power plants. 

Assuming people “want” development

Ah yes, this is a very, very common misconception. Everyone assumes that the whole world wants to be rich, like America (or even, say, Italy or South Korea). Broadly speaking, this is true, in a sort of abstract sense–everyone would love a McMansion and a new Chevrolet Suburban. But what they don’t want is what comes with it, and they definitely don’t want what it takes to get there. 

In nations where you simply ignore the desires of the proletariat, this isn’t so much of a problem. But there’s a reason the only nations to transition from developing to developed status were psychotic Leninist dictatorships. Quite simply, economic development is unpleasant. It means massive disruptions to your traditional way of life and customs–the soul of India is in her villages, but her wealth is not. It requires significant suffering by the first generation of laborers, with only their children really able to realize the gains of economic growth–perhaps their grandchildren. It involves selling out to foreign corporations, which is never popular. And it means that welfare will be largely nonexistent [and people love welfare and handouts–while these systems usually appear to be undeveloped in poorer countries, in reality they’re accounted for in subsidies for fuel and food, among other goods, which essentially act as indirect transfer payments]. 

From a politician’s perspective, it’s far safer to provide steady, moderate economic growth than shoot for the wild climb of the Asian Tigers. It’s much less disruptive to people’s lives, it doesn’t require “selling out” to the imperialists, it doesn’t upset the religious authorities, it doesn’t lead to rapid, uncontrollable urbanization. And perhaps most critically, it means that you don’t have to worry about the revolutionary tendencies that tend to develop during periods of early rapid industrialization that have toppled more than one regime before. Of course, this “moderate” economic growth means that at the end of the day, you’ll maybe go from dirt poor to poor, but such is the political economy of most of the world. It also means you’ll be able to play-pretend Western state, and that’s something a lot of developing-world politicians desperately want to do. 

The Nasser Maneuver 

1. Borrow money.
2. Use money to build factories, railroads, and other infrastructure and heavy industry.
3. Factories aren’t profitable
4. Borrow more money
5. Repeat steps 1 through 3 until creditors won’t lend you more
6. Default

I shit you not, this has happened to Egypt alone something like three times. If you’re going to borrow money, as a developing country, you should be pretty sure that what you’re doing with the money is actually commercially viable. It’s also something of a cautionary tale when it comes to megaprojects, and why they’ve somewhat gone out of fashion in the developing world–it’s really easy for that singular ten billion dollar project to turn out to be a boondoggle and cripple your growth for literal decades. 

Coal Force One

Continuing on the point above, building projects that far exceed what your nascent nation is able to actually utilize. A giant dam that provides 10GW of power is nice, but if you have about three houses wired for electricity, it’s essentially equivalent to shredding a billion dollars. The massive scale of Soviet construction is very tempting, but with a few rare exceptions, simply isn’t worth it–even for the Soviet Union. “Build it and they will come” is not a good way to build infrastructure when you have a GDP of banana. Have a plan for what will need all that energy, steel, paper, whatever before you build it. 

Thomas the Tank Engine

Okay, this is another specific postwar one, but building railroads because you like trains and train > car. This is not to say that building railroads is always a bad move–the most profitable railroad in the United States, for instance, is actually built in around this period, connecting the Powder River Basin subbituminous coal to the rest of the country. However, for most places, building railroads is simply not worth it–it’s significantly more expensive than building a road, and with trucks much cheaper and more reliable, they’re viable competition for most types of good. If you’re planning on moving bulk mineral freight, railroads are still the way to go, but for most other applications roads are preferable. That includes transporting people, for the most part–especially since you probably haven’t built out transit in the cities on either end. 

Plus, in the late 20th century especially, but still to this day, the car is sort of the ultimate aspirational goal of any self respecting citizen. They might ride trains, but they’d much rather be in their own car. There’s a reason so much effort in the Eastern Bloc is devoted to car production, even though their transit networks are fairly well developed. 

Mystical SEZs

As with the Nasser Maneuver, this is one that’s actually pretty common in real life as well. Take a random plot of land, announce that it’s a Special Economic Zone, and call it a day. It worked for Deng, so it’ll work for me, right?

Wrong. When it comes to SEZs, people are seldom willing to put in the mileage required to make their zone a real success. You need something that foreign corporations will happily operate in. And that means two things. First, you need to provide a compelling “story” for why to invest in the SEZ–yours in particular, in that place. Usually, this means cheap labor, yes, but also stuff like reliable port access, existing networks of suppliers, a skilled workforce, inexpensive energy and primary inputs, and even the seemingly mundane (but difficult for poorer countries) business of things like providing electricity for twenty-four hours a day. Second, you need to convince foreign corporations that you’re a reliable partner politically–that they aren’t going to be surprised by some odd domestic law, that you aren’t going to abruptly seize their factory when you decide that you dislike them, and that you aren’t going to abruptly be hostile to the United States and result in their business getting sanctioned. 

If you can do both of these things, great–there’s a lot to be said for SEZs, though frankly I think they’re something of a kludge for countries that can’t truly reform completely. If not, though, your SEZ will remain essentially empty, and the entire project will have been a waste of brochures. 

“Winning the Vietnam War: Why On Earth Would You Want To?”

obligatory accompaniment 

Vietnam is a land of contrasts. South Vietnam, for instance, contrasts against North Vietnam. This small, democratic state is a beacon of freedom in southeast Asia against the communist menace of the–look, I’ll shut up. It’s not even like starting while Vietnam was still running was my idea.

Anyway, you all know the Vietnam War. If someone on CWP doesn’t know that the Vietnam War exists, there’s something deeply wrong. The problem is that the accumulated cultural and anecdotal accounts of the war, largely developed in the United States and the West, and aggravated by the victorious Vietnamese Communist Party, are largely erroneous. And thus it’s fallen to me to provide a brief, useful explanation of the state of the Vietnam War circa 1972. I’ll just go down country by country for your outlook. We intend to have North Vietnam and South Vietnam be application-only countries in this upcoming season, at least at the start, due to their salience (and to make things easier for us). At least, last I checked. 

North Vietnam

Actually much as the popular culture would have you think; with Ho dead, North Vietnam is led by Le Duan and his clique of ultra-hard-liners. Le Duan is a sincere communist (in perhaps the worst possible ways) and seeks to implement communism across all of Vietnam as rapidly as possible; and will stop at nothing to see the capitalist South fall into his hands–if not all of Southeast Asia. In that regard, we find the typical xpowers player entirely realistic. It’s important to note, though, that North Vietnam is almost totally dependent on foreign aid–not just to run their military, but their entire economy, despite extensive measures taken to attempt to defend it against American bombing. With the dawning of 1972, they’re starting to run a little short on manpower, with Chinese soldiers manning many of their air defenses; but are focused on the prospect of large conventional Soviet-style operations to defeat South Vietnam, with more pro-China and pro-guerrilla leaders on the outs. The fighting from around 1971 on is largely conventional in nature, and the Viet Cong are long dead–any “VC” in the South are, almost universally, Northerners who’ve slipped through the porous Laotian and Cambodian frontiers. These fighters do not employ guerrilla-style tactics, instead employing large amounts of heavy weapons–especially mortars and anti-aircraft artillery to directly fight American and ARVN forces in pitched battles, heavily relying on infantry infiltration tactics. 

South Vietnam

Still politically fractured, under Thieu’s tenure, South Vietnam is once again in the hands of essentially Diem’s successors, as they’ve proven pliant to American interests–or so the theory went in Langley. In reality, South Vietnam has no interest in peace, but has little choice but to ultimately yield to American interests in the matter. While most American forces are on their way out of Vietnam, South Vietnam remains reliant on American aid to keep their armed forces operating, and will not be able to sustain operations without American spare parts and American fuel. American airpower also remains a decisive edge for the South Vietnamese, which is currently freely employed to advance America’s political interests in Indochina. Long term, South Vietnam may harbor ambitions of retaking the North, but at the moment, its objective is merely to survive. Its opposition to peace is largely reflective of distrust and fear of abandonment by the US rather than coming out of a belief they could win a conventional war with the North, especially after the disaster of Lam Son 19. South Vietnamese troop quality and morale is relatively high, but the country and military suffers from poor leadership. 

Laos

The Pathet Lao are little more than a fig leaf for the PAVN to operate under. In their guise, the North Vietnamese have seized control of much of Laos, establishing a secure trail from North Vietnam to South Vietnam and Cambodia. While the CIA, in combination with Hmong fighters, other local auxiliaries, and a plethora of Thai “mercenaries” fight an inexpensive rear-guard action. Despite intensive American air support (actions that saw substantial criticism domestically), the Royalist forces are clearly losing, though slowly. While victory in Laos for the West may actually be a relatively inexpensive achievement, the nominal neutrality of the state and reluctance to invest more resources in Vietnam make this impractical–and American proxies seem to be insufficiently capable, as the disastrous Operation Lam Son 19 showed. 

Cambodia

In essence, similar to Laos, but in an even worse state. The abrupt removal of King Sihanouk left Cambodia in a tenuous situation, and its weak armed forces were no match for the North Vietnamese, who quickly shattered them. American funding is trickling into Cambodia in quantities only sufficient to maintain a rear guard action. American troops are not allowed to operate in neutral Cambodia, but American air support is available, though it can only do so much, as in Laos (and is again controversial at home). For the moment, FANK (the Khmer Rouge) and the North Vietnamese are nominally tightly aligned, but FANK is already broaching out and building its own power base, with its ties with Sihanouk and the North Vietnamese already beginning to fray. Despite this, though, the war in Cambodia remains intimately tied to the fate of North Vietnam. 

United States

The anti-war movement is dead. Long live the anti-war movement. The raucous 1968 convention and the election of Richard Nixon have sealed the fate of the anti-war movement, or so it seems, with Nixon’s pragmatic policy of focusing on simply withdrawing American troops extremely popular among the American public. Democrats are, of course, turning away from offering continued support, although certainly not categorically. The idea that Vietnam should be just abandoned is unpopular. And yet, a few short years later, with the Paris Accords a failure and Richard Nixon gone, Gerald R Ford is powerless to stop the removal of aid to South Vietnam or to deploy airpower to sustain their resistance. America is going to leave Asia to its own devices eventually; Nixon’s visit to China, establishing a Sino-American rapport against Soviet influence that most of America’s partners are happy to join in with, ensures that–but how precisely that plays out is up in the air.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

The Vietnam War is a very important conflict for the USSR, sure. It has huge political ramifications–it’s the decade’s iconic battle of communist resistance, and success or failure would both reflect directly back onto the USSR. In addition, the strongly pro-Soviet leadership of the Vietnamese Communist Party almost forces them to take a stance on that basis alone.

And yet. The Soviets are looking towards peace, rather than victory, in 1972. The reasons are, in retrospect, quite obvious. First, the Soviets were trying to turn their attention elsewhere; detente was in full swing, with the arrival of Nixon in China resulting in deep concerns regarding their southern border and new commercial opportunities opening up in Europe–while Africa was rapidly decolonizing and showing itself vulnerable to Soviet influence. Detente with the United States at this time is a wise move for the Soviets, as they stand on the cusp of great success (and yet their ultimate downfall).

China

The Chinese have been involved in Vietnam from the very start, with communist aid flowing in after 1949 proving decisive in the Vietnamese victory in the First Indochina War and Chinese generals and soldiers fighting in theater to support the Viet Minh. However, by 1972, the pro-Chinese elements of the Vietnamese Communist Party are very much on the outs. The Chinese capability to render aid to Vietnam has been reduced by the tumultuous Cultural Revolution, while the Sino-Soviet split has left China deeply suspicious of what it (correctly) sees as a bastion of Soviet influence directly to its south. While China is still providing aid and soldiers–and perhaps more importantly allowing Soviet and Eastern Bloc aid to pass through it, this is largely on account of the continued importance of Vietnam to the international communist struggle and China’s desire to lead the global communist movement. The unprecedented opportunity opened by Richard Nixon’s visit to China is also the culmination of years of a slow drift towards the Western Bloc commercially and politically, with ties with Europe and Western-aligned states in Asia increasing in turn. As a minor note, though, China still holds close ideological links with the Khmer Rouge in this time period and will seek to continue supporting them regardless, as a Chinese-aligned communist force in the region–though were South Vietnam not to be dominated by Soviet communists, it’s doubtful they’d do so with any enthusiasm.

Headline: South Vietnam can win

South Vietnam isn’t going to be marching into Hanoi any time soon, of course, barring an eventual Soviet collapse. However, by 1972, South Vietnam is internally safe from communism, even if it remains politically fractious–regardless of what you may have heard, the Viet Cong were deeply unpopular, and the length of the war itself has only strengthened the resolve of the mix of northern refugees, Catholics, businessmen, ethnic Chinese and others who make up the key populations of the South. What ultimately leads to South Vietnam’s downfall is conventional military defeat at the hands of the North–caused by a cessation of American aid and incompetent Vietnamese leadership. 

However, there are several ways that South Vietnam can, in fact, pull off a win, although they’re largely not dependent on Saigon per se:

1. Convincing the Soviets to more stringently enforce the peace agreement. Moscow doesn’t want to see the North taking the South–more on that later–and without a continued influx of Soviet arms and economic aid, a Northern offensive will be difficult to impossible.
2. Convincing China to aggressively support South Vietnamese “neutrality”. Hostility between the North and China is already building, and China in the 1970s is keen to build closer relations with free Southeast Asia. 
3. Politics in the United States shifting such that continued support for South Vietnam is acceptable in the timeline, especially after the Paris Accords or equivalent fail.
4. Finding some other basis to keep the South Vietnamese military funded, spare parts in supply and perhaps most importantly fuel available (the 1973 oil crisis is a major contributing issue here). However, this will be difficult to say the least. 

At CWP, abiding by our realism standards, we would like to make clear that this is an entirely acceptable outcome to the conflict, although we should stress that all else being equal, South Vietnam will tend to lose if no effort is put in and most actors remain close to their otl positions. We reserve the right to prod other players who take wildly ahistorical positions on Vietnam. And that leads to my last point…

Do you want North/South Vietnam to win?

There are few victories quite as pyrrhic as Vietnam. The North Vietnamese, sticking to the strict Soviet line (and disregarding the advice of the Soviet Union itself repeatedly), upon taking the South, proceed to promptly destroy the entire Vietnamese economy. Just the costs of keeping Vietnam running are a massive albatross around the Soviet Union which it seeks to offload to the Eastern Bloc–not helped by the Vietnamese doing the most incompetent things imaginable with their aid money.

Vietnam’s victory also drives home a wedge between the Soviets and Chinese that doesn’t even start to heal until the late 1980s as the Soviets stand on the brink of collapse and China's focus turns almost entirely towards economic development. Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia, often called “Vietnam’s Vietnam”, only adds to the economic turmoil, ensures that vast quantities of Soviet military aid are needed to keep the country running, and costs countless Vietnamese lives, in addition to inciting a brutal war with China that only aggravates the paranoia of the Vietnamese Communist Party. 

The Vietnamese assertion of themselves as the “Prussians of Asia” for beating an enemy that had literally run out of gas also terrifies the rest of Southeast Asia and pushes them quite happily into the arms of the Americans and Chinese and away from the Soviets–from Indonesia to Thailand, the fear is that the Vietnamese will be coming there next. 

It isn’t exactly unreasonable to assert that North Vietnam’s victory was, in fact, a catastrophe for the Soviet Union. So maybe consider that before feeling too satisfied with the pictures of American helicopters departing Saigon. Just a thought. Or for that matter, feeling too dejected about it.

The history of the twenty years after 1973 is that of a world which lost its bearings and slid into instability and crisis.

Eric Hobsbawm — “The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914–1991”

A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. [...] Must one point out that from ancient times a decline in courage has been considered the first symptom of the end?

Alexander Solzhenitsyn — Harvard Commencement Address, 1978

The Golden Path

The 1970s could reasonably be called the end of the postwar era, and the beginning of the modern one. As societies emerged from the end of the Second World War, three decades of catastrophe had discredited the multipolar free-trading system of the Belle Epoque. The world system that replaced it was totally shaped by the needs of two World Wars and a Great Depression.

Governments were larger and more powerful than ever, capable of mobilizing a totally unprecedented portion of national resources. Bureaucrats, technicians, scientists, and other professionals and experts had ascended to the commanding heights of society, and their institutions — the research university, the statistical office, and the industrial lab — now directed policy and thought at the highest levels. Industrialized nations maintained the highest levels of peacetime military spending since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. International finance operated under ever-stricter capital and exchange controls. Expansive social welfare systems, created first to reverse a perceived decline in physical fitness (and thus military readiness) and subsequently expanded to stabilize the macroeconomy and gain the necessary political capital for total war mobilization, now supported citizens from the cradle to the grave.

The subsequent thirty years were, and by some measures still are to this day the greatest period of prosperity in human history. Virtually every developed economy experienced a combination of full employment, low inflation, and rapid income growth. In the United States, already the richest country in the world, national income tripled. The change was even larger in Europe, where at the end of the war the median household lacked indoor plumbing or electricity. By 1975 the median household possessed a television, a refrigerator, and an automobile.

In the developing world, progress was far more uneven. But in general the story was of rapid convergence with richer countries. In those days, countries like Mexico, Brazil, Pakistan, and the Ivory Coast could be counted as economic success stories on par with Japan (which was doubling its national income every eight years). It was widely thought that large portions of the world, perhaps even a majority, would converge to developed world living standards by the end of the century. When John F. Kennedy said that “man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty,” he fully expected that goal to be achieved within his children’s lifetime, perhaps even his own.

Progress was not just limited to the capitalist world. The states of the Communist bloc likewise experienced their greatest period of economic prosperity. The Soviet Union and her Eastern Bloc allies were in the process of rapid economic convergence with the developed West. Even China, despite suffering the largest famine in history, had rapidly improved living standards. More than that, the flood tide of world communism had seemingly arrived — not through the revolution of the industrial proletariat, whose hopes had been dashed once in 1918 and again in 1947, but through the mobilization of the Global South. The rising forces of the postcolonial world would clear the way for the final liberation of man.

It seemed, then, that in that narrow path between a hot war and a cold peace, humanity had solved the key social and scientific problems of the future. Atomic power, too cheap to meter, was right around the corner. Welfare systems in the West had made massive strides in reducing the curse of poverty and unemployment, and their methods were spreading East and South. Medicine had greatly improved — from the antibiotic to the pill — and even the prospect of a cure for cancer seemed within reach. Man had landed on the moon, and his permanent settlement of space seemed not all that far off. Economics was a solved problem —the correct application of fiscal policy, in line with Keynesian guidance, could ensure that no recession would ever be more than a brief interlude. Even politics seemed to be on a settled track — in the West, centrist coalitions had delivered decades of responsible governance and seemingly eliminated the specter of class struggle, while in the Communist bloc and the Global South it seemed even autocracy could have a human face.

So where did it all go wrong? Where did we lose our future? Where is my flying car?

The World of ColdWarPowers ‘72

The postwar Golden Age died with a whimper rather than a bang. Even the realization that it had ended at all was unsatisfying — only after years of disappointments did the consensus finally emerge that what had occurred was a true paradigm shift as opposed to a temporary interruption.

In the developed world, there was no catastrophe at all for the most part. Thirty years of macroeconomic stability ended with recessions in 1973-1975 and 1979, but overall, economies continued to grow, albeit at a more sluggish pace than before. Unemployment rose, but never to the levels reached during the dark days of the 1930s. The postwar political consensus was severely weakened, but remained powerful.

Elsewhere, outcomes were more uneven, and generally more dire. The worldwide rise in energy costs and interest rates, which placed considerable burdens upon developed-world industries, was practically fatal to a huge number of inefficient and highly indebted developing-world industries. Entire regions of the world, most notably Latin America and Africa, essentially stopped growing economically. On the other hand, a small group of natural resource exporters, most prominently the OPEC nations, were on the receiving end of the largest transfer of wealth in human history — in 1980, with the price of oil peaking at $40 a barrel, payments to OPEC exporters alone were 3% of world GDP.

An even more concerning development, even (especially) for newly-wealthy petrostates, was an increasingly anarchic international scene. The great powers, facing increasingly severe domestic burdens, generally scaled back their commitments to large parts of the globe, often empowering increasingly independent, and irresponsible, middle powers to take their place. Many nations found themselves fending for themselves, surrounded by envious or resentful neighbors, with no way out but to raid their seed corn to purchase arms of their own.

A proliferation of minor wars and civil conflicts was not the only assault faced by fragile states. Private entities were beginning to assert increasing influence on international affairs, constraining the options available to previously maverick regimes. With the end of the tightly controlled Bretton Woods system, the purse strings of international finance were increasingly held by private financiers, who were less inclined to adopt generous terms in exchange for influence. And any leader which found themselves on the bad side of the newly empowered environmental and human rights movements could risk a barrage of negative press and even sanctions for activities previously considered absolutely mundane. Even France, that great bastion of “I do whatever I want,” found itself on the losing end of squabbles with bond traders (in 1982) and environmentalists (damn you, Greenpeace).

In the end, the world survived the material challenges resulting from the fragmentation of the world order, bruised but more or less intact. The more lasting illness was what Jimmy Carter called a “crisis of confidence.” For thirty years, a single vision of technocratic development and rational progress had been the singular world ideology, wholeheartedly adopted by both the East and West, and every secular nationalist strongman (my god, there were a lot of them) in between. The promise of a bright future had maintained social systems based on strict central control and mass mobilization. With the system no longer able to deliver the promised prosperity, its supporters simply deserted en masse, to find new paths through the wilderness.

In the end, no single ideology fully converted the former adherents of the old order. Instead, a whole host of sectarian and particularist movements emerged, invariably deeply in opposition to Whiggish concepts of history and secular universalism. Attempts at national programs and great societies were replaced by innumerable ethnoreligious and class squabbles. The great ideological conflicts of the previous three decades — Communism versus Capitalism, Arab Nationalism versus Monarchism, even Maoism’s addiction to picking fights with anything that moved — all receded in favor of a new age of cynicism and pessimism.

States had to adapt or die. Many, in the end, chose the latter. Others rode the wave to unprecedented success. But for most, what occurred was neither the coming of the apocalypse or the immanentization of the eschaton, but rather a slow receding of expectations.

Briefly said, then, ColdWarPowers ‘72 is not business as usual. The intention behind the coming season is to confront players with a set of economic and political circumstances radically different from typical ColdWarPowers gameplay. Gone are the halcyon days of development dreams and global ideological victory. Here to stay is insecurity, instability, and insolvency.

In order to accurately represent this decade that saw the birth of modern economic and cultural globalization, moderation in ColdWarPowers ‘72 will be taking a more global perspective. We aim to ensure that claims are caught in the overarching historical currents that are sweeping the world, and are given the choice to stubbornly resist the avant garde, follow the current wherever it takes them, or attempt to shape a tenuous middle path.

Without the Mod Team, there would be no ColdWarPowers ‘72

This might sound like a lot, and we fully intend to give this time period the attention it deserves. To aid in that, we are opening up a pre-season Claim Interest Form to let players share their knowledge and ideas for the coming season. The purpose of the form is primarily to gauge areas of interest. There are a lot of potential areas of interest in the 1970s, and we can’t possibly cover them all. Having a better idea of player intentions at an earlier time will allow the mod team to focus our efforts and think more deeply about the paths and events that are most likely to actually occur in game.

We are not opening up claims for the coming season, and the claim interest form has no bearing on your likelihood of receiving your preferred claim when that time comes. Furthermore, players are fully encouraged to submit new claim interest forms as they learn more and develop new ideas, and to open direct communication with the mods about anything relating to the season. We are accepting entries for all available claims in the Season Claims Sheet. However, there are some claims that we are particularly interested in hearing about:

• The United States
• The Soviet Union
• The United Kingdom
• France
• The People’s Republic of China
• North Vietnam
• South Vietnam
• Saudi Arabia
• Iran
• Iraq
• Egypt
• Portugal
• South Africa

Furthermore, in order to provide some key points for players to think about during this process, we have planned an upcoming series of Dev Diaries confronting what we see as the key historical trends and changes of the 1970s. These Dev Diaries are intended to provide a clear guide for how the season will proceed, and give players ideas for their claims. We do not intend to give the impression that the path of the world will be the same as the real 1970s, and in fact we fully encourage players to attempt alternate paths. Truth is, after all, stranger than fiction. But we hope that a clear focus and a better understanding will create more engaging and detailed stories.

Some topics that we hope to cover are listed below. This list will continue to be updated as Dev Diaries are posted.

Dev Diary: Here's How Saigon Can Still Win (And Other Things To Know About Indochina)

Here's how Saigon can still win this guys!

Seriously though, you probably don't want to win this war. In fact, there's a strong argument for both sides to throw it. It's probably best to know this fact, and factor it into your calculations, to understand why the Soviets and Chinese didn't want the North Vietnamese marching south after spending so much diplomatic capital on the Paris Accords.

The Oil Crisis

Arab Nationalism and Islamism

The Last African Colonial Wars

The End of Bretton Woods and the Great Inflation

Revolution and Counterrevolution in Latin America

MOSCOW, RUSSIA, SOVIET UNION

A show of force has been held today in Moscow during the annual May Day Parade. Attended by General Secretary Lukashenko, Chairman Prigozhin, and President Nikonov. The speeches by the Soviet troika were relatively moderate, in contrast to the usual hardline and aggressive rhetoric spoken by Soviet leaders. This comes only weaks after Chairman Yevgeny Prigozhin's fiery speech threatening Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev following reports of further Azeri attempts of infiltration of the Nagorno-Karabakh of the Armenian S.S.R., which is claimed by Azerbaijan.

Also in attendance for the May Day parade were respresentatives from the Soviet Union's allies in the Warsaw Pact, further heeding Western fears of Soviet military build-up in the Byelorussian S.S.R. and Russian S.F.S.R. on the border of the Baltic states. N.A.T.O. leaders have further denounced the military build-up by Soviet Union and other "neo-Warsaw" states, fearing that the Soviet Union may be preparing to invade Azerbaijan in the near future.

BHARAT EPILOGUE PART 1

(In this post: Beef Bans, Ethnic Tensions, Recession, and Elections)

More than a decade of independence, the 50s in Bharat was a time of prosperity and growth for the country. With the death of Nehru, the INC undertook a massive shift away from his Fabian vision for the country. After a number of contingencies, the Liberal C. Rajagopalachari was selected as the Prime Minister of Bharat. His tenure in the first few years was shaky, but PM Rajaji was able to pass his trophy legislation, The Swatantra Act, releasing Bharati citizens from the possibility of a “Permit Raj” as described by Rajaji. The economy expanded almost three-fold in the following years, with the government developing transportation and capital goods manufacturing to facilitate the movement of money.

The Roaring 50s, as it has been called, was a time of great change and relative stability in Bharat. While the country was developing, the secessionist neighbor, Pakistan, was developing alongside Bharat. The Indus River development, mediated by the United States, facilitated the building of state-of-the-art hydroelectric and irrigation dams along the Indus River and its tributaries, providing electricity to Punjab and irrigating the arid lands on either side. Indo-Pak relations were unwavering in this time, with more development projects cooperatively supporting both economies. In the late 50s, the Union of Hindustan was established, building upon the Customs Union put to law at partition and allowing other states to join. Though it was limited in scope for much time, it was the first big leap in the cementing of friendship between the two brotherly nations.

The end of the 1950s would serve as the prologue to a time of crisis in the 1960s both economically and politically. The first struggles were clear when the CM of Uttar Pradesh signed into law a ban on the slaughter of cattle for beef, violating the implicitly secular nature of the constitution of Bharat. Ethnic tensions, especially in the south of Bharat would prove to be a flashpoint for political change, while the supercharged economy was much overdue for a slowdown. These issues would define the 60s for the country and for the INC.

Uttar Pradesh Parliamentary Crisis, 1959

The riots in UP and the scandal in Chief Minister Sampurnanand’s government caused a strong anger in the office of the Prime Minister. Rajaji ordered a federal investigation into the actions of the police in failing to contain sectarian riots against Muslims, claiming a necessity to enforce the Rule of Law and ensure that public servants will serve the entire public. Sampurnanand criticized this move by Delhi as overreach by the government, but the investigation continued as planned.

Meanwhile, the legislature in UP stirred with talk of replacing Sampurnanand, with the Socialists taking the strongest stance against him and his allies in the INC. His INC rivals too, in reaction to the investigation and the criticism of him from the INC leadership, began negotiating with INC MPs in UP to mutiny against the CM and remove him from power. His popularity, though, limits the success of these negotiations, but the triumvirate of Charan Singh, Kamlapati Tripathi, and Chandra Bhanu Gupta succeeds in rallying under half of the INC MPs to their side. The Socialists, already united against the CM, make for natural allies in this maneuver, and they agree to vote together on any motion to remove Sampurnanand from his position.

The federal investigation, which lasted for three weeks, found that the police chief did in fact have private sympathies for the riots against Muslims and did not deploy riot control as necessary or call on help from Federal forces. The investigatory committee ruled that the police chief was at fault for the excess deaths of Muslims in the riots and advised for his removal and replacement. At this news, the Triumvirate and their Socialist allies moved for a vote of no confidence against Sampurnanand to remove him from his position as Chief Minister, succeeding with just two votes for removal.

This move was previously unprecedented in Bharati history since independence, creating new precedents in politics, that the national leadership can interfere with the politics of the states, and that the INC may successfully mutiny against itself. The dangers of such a precedent were clear to the triumvirate and the Prime Minister, but to them the precedent of allowing the state to be ruled by a nationalistic and vigilante government was more dangerous. After the fact, the INC in conjunction with the socialists negotiated to elect Charan Singh to the position of Chief Minister, where he spearheaded land reform efforts in the state and conceded some political favors to the Socialists and to the industrialists led by Tripathi. Additionally, the Singh government reversed the Beef Ban put in place by Sampurnanand.

Ethnic Tensions, 1959-1961

The South of Bharat was ethnically diverse, and several movements for autonomy and even secession were followed and advocated for, though typically by a minority of people. However, in the 1960s, this trend would grow to political relevance. Particularly Tamils in the south were particularly strongly for the reorganization of states for the creation of ‘Tamil Nadu,’ a state made entirely of Tamil people. Similarly, Marathas, Telugu, and – in the northeast – Assamese movements were on the rise and calling for autonomy. For the most part, the INC leadership saw this as inefficient and only leading to further bloat of the Bharati state. However, Delhi knew the dangers of keeping the status quo as it is. The 1953 Andhra movement led to a clash that killed several and injured thousands, something that did not bode well for the future of the country. As such, the parliament passed an act that mandated the printing of all literature in states in the local language as well as English – rather than Hindi – so that the local populace could live and work with their native language and understand a shared national tongue in the form of English.

Of course, this did not solve all problems. The multilingual state governments had linguistic roadblocks as well, leading to frustration for voters and MPs alike. In an attempt to solve this issue, New Delhi provided resources for the hiring and use of translators and new translation methodologies in state parliaments, though there was trouble in their implementation which did not fully assuage the concerns of the delegates. This frustration manifested itself as protests for the reorganization of states, though not of an unprecedented size.

Prime Minister Rajaji, a Tamil native, made speeches in Chennai and other Tamil cities advocating against the linguistic division of Bharat, recalling the British use of divide and conquer to keep the Bharatis subjugated and fighting amongst themselves. However, he recognized the importance of not subjugating one language or people to another simply due to their residing in that state. He spoke in full support of the linguistic and cultural freedom of people within the states, especially directing the audience’s attention towards the Telugu in the north of Madras as brothers and fellow Bharatis. He received a standing ovation from the crowd, but his efforts were still in vain to maintain Madras as it was.

Madras was not the only problem area with linguistic issues. Bombay, the city and the state, was feeling its own movement for reorganization. The movement came to a head when protests in Bombay led to the deaths of 100 people in riots when they were shot by police. The various Marathi samitis, which advocated for the annexation of Bombay into the union state as its capital, staged various protests burning effigies of Chief Minister S.K. Patil, – a disciple of Morarji Desai – Minister Desai, and Prime Minister Rajaji in the streets, and the momentum against the INC in Marathi-speaking portions of Bombay has grown.

This police violence has been to the detriment of S.K. Patil, a man who was considered to be a candidate for top political office for the next generation of political leaders in Bharat. He has been pinned as a potential leader of Rajaji’s pro-free market, liberal caucus in the INC and has made a name for himself in this regard. He as well as Desai and Rajaji have been vocally against the incorporation of Bombay city into the wider state, citing the cosmopolitan nature of the city and the various benefits that independence has had for the city. In fact, Marathi first-language speakers do not make up a majority of residents of Bombay, with only 40% of people using it in the home on a daily basis. 27% of people use Hindustani – either Hindi or Urdu – on a daily basis, and 15% of people use Gujarati primarily. The remaining 18% of residents speak languages ranging from Tamil to Assamese to Kashmiri and even foreign languages like Arabic. English and Hindustani make up the vast majority of second languages in Bombay city. This fact, they claim, more than justifies its union territory status in Bharat and makes its incorporation into a theoretical Marathi linguistic state unnecessary.

Socialists in Bombay state and city have allied with the Marathi advocates, mostly due to the potential of unseating the pro-capitalist Patil from his influential position in the city. Though the image of Bombay city independence has not been helped by the endorsement by the Bharata Jana Sangh and M.S. Golwalkar, claiming that linguistically organized states would “sap the soul of the Hindu people and divide them among themselves,” though not explicitly for the benefit of the pro-reorganization peoples. Patil, Desai, and even Rajaji to some extent, denounced the BJS and Golwalkar as motivated by impure and unfounded positions, and denies their backing for the independence of Bombay.

Patil is strongly for the independence of Bombay city, and in his tenure so far improved Bombay with the intention of making it a model city. For the most part, this has come true, with tens of thousands of Bharatis and foreign workers moving every year. He presided over one of the largest growth periods of the city’s history, gaining almost 50% new residents in the course of the 1950s with the help of national developments in transportation to facilitate it and the importance of Bombay as an industrial and commercial hub. His influence on the city has weight, and his camp has the support of several national INC leaders.

In January 1961 the State Reorganization Committee was formed with the task of devising a reorganization of the administrative divisions in Bharat. It was clear that some reorganization needed to be done, and this was the decisive moment that the divisions would be redrawn. First, the enclaves and exclaves were simplified, leading to an enlarged Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh. Bombay state remained mostly unchanged save for a few adjustments. Bombay city remained an independent union territory, to the dismay of Marathi activists. Most significantly, Andhra Pradesh was split from Madras, creating a mostly Telugu state. Andhra Pradesh was decided to be split mostly due to the overextension of Madras, and the increased autonomy would allow for greater development at the cost of more bureaucratic red tape.

Assam was treated differently. Instead of splitting it into many small states, the autonomist regions were granted a special status that allowed for a degree of autonomy without the de facto division of the state. Nagaland and other tribes were granted autonomy within Assam, allowing for the central organization of the state alongside linguistic and semi-political autonomy.

Protests inevitably followed the State Reorganization but subsided in due time.

Economic Stagnation, 1960-1962

Though it was monumental in the post-independence history of Bharat, the Roaring 50s had to come to an end at some point. The release of the Bharati market after the Swatantra Act led to an explosion in economic activity, especially in the region of manufacturing. Though the government made efforts to ensure the continued functioning of the economy and its access to resources to build high-value-added products, the unprecedented growth in Bharat forced enterprises to import much of their needed goods to maintain production. This increased costs of goods produced domestically, in turn incentivizing the purchase of goods made abroad. The Bharati economy, which to this point enjoyed a significant ~15% yearly GDP growth on average, had effectively slowed down to a crawl.

It was not the high-end goods that were being imported in mass per-say, but the raw industrial goods that domestic production simply could not keep up with. Iron and food for canning, copper for electrical components, coal and oil for energy and manufacturing; all of these were for the most part imported from elsewhere since the domestic extraction industries could not keep up with the pace of growth so far. Bharati steel manufacturing more than sextupled in the course of the 1950s, allowing for the export of steel to other countries like Ceylon, the Philippines, Nepal, and Pakistan, and capital goods like heavy machinery and precision milling tools had begun manufacture and grown healthily for years. However, the resources that these machines were made of were in desperate shortage, necessitating the import from abroad.

The Partition-enabled Customs Union with Pakistan allowed for economic expansion in Bharat to continue, with raw resources from Pakistan fueling the creation of high-value goods to be brought back to Pakistan. However, this would not be enough. Pakistani extraction operations were less efficient than Bharati ones simply due to the red tape not present in Bharat, and the expansion of operations was not nearly as fast as necessary to fuel the exponentially growing economy of Bharat.

Stagnation led to the depressing of wages and the increase in the price of good in Bharat, which many began to blame the INC leadership in New Delhi for causing. Some criticized the government for not having the foresight to speed up resource extraction while others railed against the free market as a whole, advocating for the nationalization of industries to be better planned by the government so as to not run into problems of shortage. Prime Minister Rajaji, the pioneer of the free-market caucus in the INC, was a true believer in the ability of the free market to correct itself, which in this case would mean the expansion of domestic extraction enterprises to fulfil a niche in the Bharati market, but this did not come to pass fast enough.

Already embroiled in a sectarian crisis in UP and a communalist uprising elsewhere, the economic crisis only exacerbated the protests and movements of the early 60s. People who once saw the country going in a good direction now were cynical and saw the INC as not doing enough for the people. Additionally, this sentiment only enflamed the right-wing of the INC, which had Hindu Nationalist sympathies as seen in UP.

1961 Election

1961 was an election year, right as the crises were at their inflection points. Prime Minister Rajaji had announced in December of 1960 that he would not be seeking reelection in 1961, choosing to retire after an eventful decade of governance. In his announcement, Rajaji cited his age as the primary reason for stepping down, saying that he could not in good conscience continue leading any longer and hoping that this would set a precedent for future leaders of Bharat to limit their terms as Prime Minister. In his speech, he mentioned the development that Bharat had experienced under his watch and emphasized the dear necessity for the government to respect the freedom and dignity of all people, privately, politically, and economically.

The Socialist Praja Party and Hindu Nationalist splitters took this announcement in stride and began ramping up their campaigning efforts across Bharat. Jayaprakash Narayan, the leading figure behind the Socialist Praja Party, began his tour across the country visiting major rural centers and rapidly expanding industrial cities being hurt by the overheating economy. In February of 1961, Narayan announced an electoral coalition of left-wing and Hindu parties for the unseating of the Indian National Congress from power. This coalition was based in the unrest surrounding the heightened income inequality, difficulty for smallholders to effectively sell their goods on the market, and the frustration from Hindus following the INC’s crackdown on the Uttar Pradesh Beef Ban. Political spectators and media figures commenting on the coalition wrote that the various views expressed by politicians in the alliance have little in common other than a unity against the INC, serving as a point of attack for INC nominees.

As the date of the election was coming around, some political scientists in universities around Bharat wrote pieces critical of the INC and the corruption that plagued many electoral districts around the country. Some pointed out the machine-like nature of some local party organizations, receiving bribes from individuals, companies, and even criminal organizations in return for looking the other way on illegal activity or regulatory oversight. However, a change in power via the election of the anti-INC coalition, they wrote, would not be the solution to the problem of corruption. They predict that entrenched patronage networks have two likely futures in the event of an INC unseating: first, the patronage collapses and takes whichever local economy it was propping up, and second, the newly elected government continues the system of patronage. These academics were almost universally criticized by political figures on the whole political spectrum, but their theories would live up to scrutiny in the future, almost certainly too late.

The election came and went in a particularly hot August. It was a troubling election cycle, with protests across the country aligned with both sides of the electoral battle. However, to the surprise of some, the Narayan-led coalition won a majority of the seats in the Lok Sabha. The election was not a fully left-wing victory. The Narayan coalition required the support of some BJS MPs in order to ensure an uncontested government, meaning it would be at the whims of local Hindu policymakers. This was not ultimately an issue for Narayan since he was not publicly against Hindu lawmaking as the INC had been.

For the next four years, the Narayan Coalition would be responsible for the future of Bharat. Globally the 60s was a critical and chaotic time, and Bharat would certainly not be spared from this fate.

January-April, 1961 - United States of America

After a bruising election cycle that saw the first dual contingent election in American history, the coming Nixon Administration was coming together. With Nixon being effectively guaranteed as President after the election thanks to the House stacking favorably for the Republicans, he began assembling nominees for the Cabinet. Nixon’s initial Cabinet appointments spanned the ideological width of the Republican Party, though had an expected moderate bend. The last pick to be announced, Attorney General William P. Rogers, was noted as a confirmation of Nixon’s expected wide-ranging Republican civil rights agenda, with Rogers having been a crusader for enforcing Brown during the Dewey Administration. After Ford was confirmed as Vice President and the Senate seemed favorable to working with him, Nixon felt the pressure slightly lower. While the kooks had tried to deliver a devastating blow by nearly embarrassing him in November, he had fought back and secured a stable pool of political power heading into the inauguration. The feelings of paranoia, though ever present, receded little by little as he began to set the narrative of what the moderate, in-tune Nixon Administration would look like. An immediate bevy of civil rights action from the White House to continue the promise Lincoln made to America’s blacks, Federal funds for school construction & expanding post-secondary education, and expanded funding for basic scientific research, missile development, and NASA, a new farm bill. Those basic goals would comprise the goals of the Administration in the “first hundred days” (an attempt to emulate FDR’s first hundred days, in order to play up Nixon as a man of action compared to Eisenhower) and more broadly consume the priorities of the Nixon Administration for the first term. More privately, Nixon also plans to pursue welfare reform and reforms to Social Security, though these efforts are best not publicized.

Inauguration day came and went without any problems, with Nixon promising America will close the “missile gap” and stating that the United States will launch the first man into space. After all the festivities ended, Nixon immediately began signing executive orders reorganizing the executive. He tore down Eisenhower’s governing structure in favor of one that will ensure the President is making all major decisions, instead of the hands off policy of his predecessor. As was known in the Senate, Nixon was a man who liked to play his cards close to his chest, consulting only with a few trusted advisors instead of building a wide array of close supporters. He continued this trend into the White House, which was expected to rely wholly on Nixon. However, most outside observers did not realize his close friendship with the man on the bottom of the ticket. While back at the 1960 Republican National Convention, Gerald Ford was chosen for his appeal to the Midwest and inoffensive nature, he also was a personal friend of Nixon. During the Eisenhower Administration, Ford was one of Nixon’s insiders in the House, helping him coordinate a Republican united front on both Civil Rights Acts and keeping tabs on House leadership. Though kept a good distance from the personal Nixon, a man unable to open up to anyone except his wife and, when drunk, his closest friends, Ford was one of his closest friends in politics. This afforded Ford a degree of trust that Nixon scarcely handed out and, when paired with his deep knowledge of House politics, gave Ford the chance to make history. After they had won the election off the back of good returns in the Midwest (despite their opponent being from the region), Nixon ensured Ford that he would win the contingent election and promised him an active role in the Administration. After the contingent election was finished, Nixon more thoroughly discussed with Ford what his role would be. Unlike Vice Presidents of the past, Ford would be given an office in the West Wing and a full staff at the White House, lead the Administration’s outlook on women’s rights and conservation, be in regular contact with Nixon, and would be consulted on any interactions the Administration has with the House. This strong set of responsibilities and office in the West Wing would see future historians label Ford’s Vice Presidency as groundbreaking and made Ford’s time in the office a template for future President-Vice President power sharing. In the time of Nixon’s presidency this power sharing resulted in the Administration being closely affiliated with the mainstream push for women’s rights and pioneering the Federal Government’s role in environmental protection.

After ensuring the executive was set-up in a way that allowed for coordinated, quick decision making, Nixon immediately began work on accomplishing his ambitious domestic agenda. While promises, speeches, and internal plans are one thing, actually executing them or getting them passed through Congress is another. House Republicans and Ford’s guidance will likely push through Administration-friendly House bills with ease, but getting them past the Senate is another challenge altogether. While individual Senate Republicans will have their own issues with Nixon, they are not the issue. Senate Democrats, ever consumed with trying to preserve party unity, win back the White House, and present a strong record on preserving and expanding the New Deal, will be a difficult group to work with. While Senate Majority Leader Johnson and Nixon have a cordial relationship (largely revolving over their shared backgrounds and mutual dislike of then Vice President Kennedy), Johnson is assuredly eying the White House in 1964 and has little incentive to hand Nixon easy policy wins. However, as Nixon and Ford both are insiders from Congress, and have a good command of both branches, they are perhaps the best President-Vice President duo for a divided Congress. Using some of Ford’s recommendations, the Nixon White House assembled the best Congressional staff in modern American history. Every phone call from a Congressman was returned within the hour, every patronage recommendation by Republican Congressmen is accommodated or thoroughly explained away, and the White House regularly goes above and beyond to create events to ensure no Congressman feels left out of White House events. To ensure Republican unity, the White House also hosts frequent “consultative” sessions with House and Senate Republicans to ensure every wing of the Party feels respected and heard by the Administration, while both Nixon and Ford worked to expand Republican leadership roles and personally talk to Congressman from both parties on a regular basis. Compared to Eisenhower or Dewey, this level of work to ensure Congress stays greased and pliable to work with Nixon is far above his predecessors.

To test the waters and begin achieving parts of the Republican agenda, the Nixon Administration crafted and sent two bills to Congress, the Consolidated Farmers Home Administration Act to reward the Plains for their loyalty, as well as the American Education Act (A mix of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Higher Education Act minus the ESEA’s Title 1, but with subsequent inclusion of a 50% increase in school construction grants in the education budget & applying HEA funding for vocational schools) which would massively overhaul teaching & American education, while preserving local control over education. Both combined would prove Nixon’s legislative prowess, deliver results for the base of the Republican Party (which won off the backs of rural voters and the college educated in the North), and also greatly enhance America’s ability to continue being the world leader in innovation. As expected, House Republicans supported the President and passed both bills with broad bi-partisan support, but the Senate took some work. Senate Democrats were by-and-large against the farm bill, though excellent whipping by Republicans saw the GOP unanimously support it, while both sides of the aisle had issues with the AEA for different reasons. A coalition of moderate Republicans and Democrats could easily pass both, but Senate Majority Leader Johnson had reservations about AEA’s lack of specific funding for low-income families, and had had to balance Southern resistance to the Farm Bill, referring both to committee to be hashed out. After extensive negotiation with Northern Democrats, the Nixon Administration got both out of committee before the end of March, managed to prevent unwanted major amendments to the AEA, and worked with Senator Johnson to add minor provisions about expanding state Departments of Education to address underperforming, low-income schools.

In an early Administration highlight, Nixon signed the AEA and the Farm Bill of 1961 in a televised event in April. The Administration had made hay out of the AEA especially, calling it a response to the continued overcrowding of schools across America unaddressed by the prior administration. The AEA’s passage impacting trade schools also promised much needed logistical support for hastening construction of quality, affordable housing & community buildings, which played into the Republican platform’s promises of rapid construction to make up for shortfalls in the 1950s. Republicans across the country also locally publicized their support of the Farm Bill, reaffirming the Republican Party’s support for farmers. Their swift passage also quickly moved Nixon past the near disastrous election and shifted perspective of him immediately as a President who can deliver, something the 1950s largely lacked.

While Nixon on the campaign trail voiced strong support for civil rights legislation (despite his own misgivings on the true electoral viability of enforcing civil rights and personal racism towards America’s minorities), he was not under any illusion of passing substantive civil rights legislation through a Democratic Senate. Any bills with teeth would be immediately held up in committee or made as powerless as the Civil Rights Acts under Eisenhower, if that. Instead, any action taken would have to be purely through the Executive, with Nixon issuing Executive Order 10925 only two months into his term, appointing Secretary of Labor George Shultz to lead the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. When the Freedom Riders began organizing early into 1961, Nixon directed Attorney General William P. Rogers to assign Federal Marshals to protect them, rather than risk the political fallout of sending Federal troops to protect them. Nixon also worked with Congressional Republicans to secure several Federal judicial appointments for African-Americans, with Bill Coleman being nominated and appointed via recess appointment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as the first African-American Federal appellate court judge (Dewey’s election would butterfly Hastie’s appointment) and Maryland Republican Harry A. Cole becoming the first African-American district court judge after receiving a recess appointment to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Both would face severe delays in actual confirmation in the Senate owing to Southern Democrats refusing to hold hearings, but pressure from the White House and Senate colleagues would eventually see both confirmed after grueling hearings. After these initial appointments, the Nixon Administration continued to appoint African-Americans to various judicial and governmental positions throughout the Administration, with an additional six black Circuit court judges appointed throughout the term. This effort had two positive effects, making every black federal judge* a Republican (creating great inroads with African-Americans of all stripes) and developing a pool of Black judges with the experience necessary to be appointed to the Supreme Court later. To make good a promise on pushing for substantive civil rights legislation (within the previously mentioned confines of Congress), Nixon and Ford worked with Congressional Republicans to present and pass legislation to propose an amendment to the US Constitution that would abolish poll taxes. The Administration put the odds of the Amendment eventually passing as almost certain, but believed it would take over a year to work its way through Congress and would probably not be ratified until the end of the presidential term.

With two major legislative accomplishments under his belt, nominal action on Civil Rights, and making history appointing African-Americans to Federal Circuit and Appeals courts, as well as additional legislation coming through in the wake of other events occurring outside the United States, Nixon has firmly planted himself as a President who gets things done. Despite the relatively weak position he faced at first, his quick work has boosted national perception of him, while his delivery of positive legislation for farmers and the college educated/middle class has assured Republicans he will solidify the Republican base. As 1961 carries on and midterms come near, Nixon is looking to show the American people a strong return on their support for the Republicans. Though his initial actions have caused grumbling from conservatives, believing he is continuing a trend of liberal Republicanism from the East Coast, which will need addressing.

[M] As this post is very, very domestic focused, I will note I plan on addressing Nixon’s foreign policy in its own post, using broad strokes to paint an image of a decently successful foreign policy that is broadly popular at home, focused on diligent anti-communism, and restoring the USA’s respect in global diplomacy after the disastrous Eisenhower (and, honestly, Dewey) debacles at the UN. As Nixon was never Vice President and spent the 1950s as Senate Majority Leader, he has a far greater appreciation for, and ability to craft, domestic policy. [/M]

*Irvin C. Mollison was appointed to the Customs Court in 1945, but that goes against the Nixon Administration’s narrative.

Mid-Late 1960 - United States of America

As the Republican Party emerges from its relatively successful National Convention and the Democrats came out of their own primary divided worse than 1960, the stage was set for America to really enter into election season. The Republican Party has largely stuck to its 1959 plan on who to target [M] I am retconning parts of the domestic policy focus, Republicans are still facing a nation very supportive of the New Deal, after all [/M]. Republicans were hitting on Democrats being weak on defense via the construction of a “missile gap” narrative, while Nixon himself continued to associate himself with civil rights and campaigned heavily with VP nominee Gerald Ford throughout the Midwest and Northeast (Nixon made no promise to visit all 50 states, seeing as the South was a lost cause). Democrats, led by the unabashed liberal that was Senator Hubert Humphrey, attached his campaign to the idea of repealing Taft-Hartley, passing a universal health insurance program ( heavily promoting his history and Democratic oversight of civil rights), and a drastic federal expansion of aid to the states and American people to overcome the plight of hunger, lack of access to education, and low-income support for families. Both campaigns tried to make a case to forgive the previous foreign policy failings of the 1950s. While Dewey had many failings in foreign policy: Korea, Vietnam, China’s islands, Guatemala, and numerous smaller events, Eisenhower had his own failures which made any Democratic efforts to attack the Republicans more tenuous. Nixon had a reputation as a hardline anti-communist with the voting record and committee assignments to back it up, while Humphrey was considered weaker on his anti-communist record. While both endorsed the domestic accomplishments of their respective predecessors, Humphrey and Nixon made sure to downplay any involvement in the foreign policy decisions of the White House for the whole past decade, instead focusing on the future.

These initial arguments would continue to form the basis of both campaigns until election day, but it was a series of outside events that heavily impacted polling. President Eisenhower personally thought Humphrey’s liberalism went too far and only endorsed him off-handedly at a press conference, while privately declining to do any campaigning on behalf of the Humprey campaign. Eisenhower even quipped that he couldn’t remember a single time Humphrey had impacted his Administration’s civil rights policies or, for that matter, any policies. This rebuke of Humphrey both hurt the Senator personally (to be called weak on civil rights after all the pain he had endured in the Senate) and caused much hurt to the campaign itself. The Nixon campaign, itself facing problems caused by the last incumbent from the Party, downplayed President Dewey’s endorsement owing to his unpopularity and limited appearances with him to a couple joint events in New York. A more defining part of the campaign, and one that saw Nixon’s slight polling lead solidified, had Nixon and Humphrey face off in a series of four debates, with the refined Nixon (helped by advice and preparation from his media consultants before appearing on TV) being deemed the winner three times, with the fourth (and last) debate being deemed a draw.

One cannot talk about the 1960 elections without mentioning the insurgent State Freedom Party (SFP) and the state of civil rights in the country. Since bolting from the convention and forming their party, the segregationist has consistently polled high in the former Confederacy, with the entire Deep South + Tennessee and North Carolina expected to be carried relatively easily by the ticket. Intense vote splitting in East Texas and Virginia have also brought the Republicans up to contention in both states, which isn’t helped by Humphrey’s own abandonment of the South. Whipping Southern whites into a frenzy over the betrayal of the South by the Democratic Party, the Deep South is threatening to rapidly flash over into a phase of militancy not seen in 100 years. In state legislatures across the South, many Democrats are running primarily off their allegiance to the SFP rather than the Democratic Party, while the state parties that seceded begin entrenching themselves as parties of the South, not the Democrats. As this tension increased, so too did the civil rights movement. In October, Martin Luther King, Jr. (a noted civil rights activist and soon to become the public face of the march for equality) was arrested for participating in a non-violent sit-in in Georgia. After a perfunctory trial, he was sentenced to four months of hard labor, which caused great uproar across the nation. Humphrey, while publicly condemning the sentence, tried to get Eisenhower to intervene and lobbied other Democrats to Georgia to release King, but owing to the SFP and fears of backlash, the Georgian government refused to back down. Nixon was far more forceful, issuing a press statement calling for the state government to immediately release King, calling King’s wife to offer any help he or the Republican Party can be in releasing him immediately, and holding a public press conference with famous African-American Jackie Robinson just before November condemning Georgia’s decision not to release King and reiterating his support for the enforcement of desegregation in the South. All of these measures combined saw Martin Luther King Sr. endorse Richard Nixon over Humphrey and allowed Nixon to firmly outflank Humphrey on the civil rights front (while not alienating Northern whites in the process). The SFP, for its part, condemned King’s “rabble rousing,” with the press at one rally capturing an effigy of the minister lynched and burned, something quickly ingrained into American popular consciousness.

Despite Nixon’s strong campaign, the fact that Humphrey didn’t have to defend or mend fences with the Southern Democrats blunted much of the potential spillover of Democratic voters to the Nixon campaign. While Nixon led in most polls and was expected to secure an outright victory in the Electoral College, continuing doubts over the Northeast and three way splits in the border states left it just as likely that Humphrey could squeak out a win or that there would be no clear majority in the Electoral College. With the South expected to take around 80-100 electoral votes and Humphrey’s personal popularity with labor (despite suffering general setbacks on the campaign trail) it is believed that the border states and much of the Steel Belt will be decided by margins of less than half a percent.

In down ballot races, “Dewey” Republicans were busy recapturing the Northern electorate, while Republicans in the West and the border states mounted serious campaigns in light of a weakened, split Democratic congressional warchest. Polls seriously suggested a Republican takeover of the House and coming close to taking the Senate, though as November approached, Humphrey re-energizing a somewhat deflated Democratic core electorate who were discouraged by the lack of progress by the Eisenhower Administration was seen as helping in down ballot races. Going into November, Republicans still had the polling advantage, but it was seen as slim. Of course, given that the American people have only elected a Republican House once in the past 30 years, even that slight edge might be enough to make history.

Results

As November 8th came and over 70,000,000 Americans went to the polls to decide what path they wanted the country to go down, both sides were hopeful for a surprise landslide or, at least, the avoidance of a contingent election. Given that Nixon and Humphrey were likely splitting the Northeast and Midwest, the news covering the election had begun discussing the possibility of a contingent election and how pivotal the Senate and House races of today might impact who will become the president. CBS and NBC even covered party control of House delegations to keep audiences informed on the likely outcome of any contingent election. As polls in the East began to close, the first returns revealed that Nixon and Humphrey would be in a dead heat for the votes of the Northeast, with them trading places several times in New York, though Pennsylvania and New Jersey were quickly seen as the closest states by far. In the South, Byrd led the entire Deep South with counties averaging 80% to 90% for Byrd across the Deep South. Humphrey overtook Nixon in the popular vote temporarily before the Midwest and Plains returned strong results for Nixon, while Nixon picked up a small lead in Virginia due to vote splitting. New York was declared for Humphrey while the Nixon campaign appeared to be in a position to sweep the Midwest outside of Missouri and Minnesota. At this point, many pundits began to speculate that due to Humphrey’s strong performance in the Northeast, he might be able to deny the Nixon campaign an electoral college victory, though Nixon’s lead in Kentucky, Delaware, and Virginia dispelled some speculation. By the time the final polls closed in the West, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and New Jersey were too close to call, with Humphrey and Nixon being within a few thousand votes of each other in each. Byrd also had a chance to win Virginia as he was only 1% below Nixon and Humphrey. New Jersey was called for Nixon on the morning of November 9th, with a strong nationwide farmer vote for Nixon being credited for his 1,749 vote lead in the state. Most papers, radio stations, and television broadcasts were now speculating that a contingent election, the first in over a century and only one to feature both the House and Senate, was becoming increasingly likely. Byrd proved the South’s strength by getting near 100 electoral votes, though did not stop Humphrey from winning Texas nor Nixon from edging out both in Virginia. Pennsylvania would become the pivotal state, being too close to call as a strong union vote for Humphrey fights against a very strong rural and college educated turnout for Nixon. Humphrey took a slight lead by the afternoon, which would guarantee a contingent election, then he was determined to have won the state by a mere 221 votes. Many across the nation were shocked as no one candidate won the electoral college and the President would be determined in January. Nixon was the leader with a plurality of the popular vote, Electoral College vote, and having carried the majority of the states, but a strong union turnout in the Northeast thwarted an outright win. Less talked about was the loss of Nevada by less than .2%, which if it had gone to the Senator would have allowed him to have a majority of the Electoral College.

Electoral College Votes

Just as followed were the House and Senate races across the country, with the Republicans having an unusually strong performance in a seeming rebuke to the lack of major domestic accomplishments outside of civil rights across the Eisenhower Administration. By midnight of election night, the Republicans were projected to have a 30+ seat majority in the House, while flipping at least half a dozen Senate seats. Vice President Kennedy was also confirmed to have won the Massachusetts Gubernatorial race. As November 9th came, the few uncalled races, especially the closely contested two seats in Utah as well as Delaware’s sole seat, became especially important as it appeared the Republicans might be able to command a majority of state House delegations with victories in both states. Indeed, the Republicans were able to come away with a majority of delegations due to Northern fears of America’s “faltering” missile development and the West’s rebuke of the Eisenhower Administration’s lackluster support for farmers and natural resource development. As long as no House Republicans broke from Nixon, he would sail through the first ballot of the House contingent election, which due to the Republican Party’s unity was essentially assured. The Humphrey campaign, on the other hand, was expected to barely scrape ahead of Byrd in the contingent election, with most Southerners expected to vote for the Byrd ticket in protest of Humphrey’s forceful policy ideas on desegregation.

The Senate was another matter entirely, as Senate Democrats, though battered, maintained a 4 seat majority. The issue, however, was that segregationists controlled 17 of those seats and a majority of them declared they would never vote in favor of avowed anti-segregationist Stuart Symington. This led to an uncomfortable situation where neither Ford or Symington had the 51 needed Senate votes (with the Constitution specifying a majority of the whole Senate must elect the Vice President, any absence or abstention effectively counts as a vote against both candidates). As November turned to December and eventually January, Nixon worked with Senate Majority Leader Johnson and others in the Senate to come to an agreement on what to do with the contingent election. Symington’s candidacy was effectively dead on arrival, as Democrats would need over a dozen Republicans (when all were firmly behind the idea of the Nixon/Ford ticket being robbed) due to Dixiecrat opposition, while Ford only needed five Democrats to cross the aisle. For Nixon, the talks also delayed his resignation from his Senate seat until at least early January to minimize issues in the contingent election, much to the consternation of Pat Brown, who wanted his pick to have seniority. Democrats themselves were facing overwhelming pressure to end the contingent election on the first ballot as Republicans and the press began to frame the issue as 9 states holding 41 hostage in a bid to end civil rights and weaken the Presidency, causing many letters of support for Ford to come even from traditional Democratic constituencies. Given their situation, most accepted that Ford being elected over Symington was an inevitability, but Senate Democrats still sought concessions from the coming Administration in return for “letting” five Democrats cross the aisle to vote for Ford. In a secret agreement with Senator Johnson, the Nixon Administration agreed to place a massive spaceflight laboratory in Texas, not interrupt the awarding of pork barrel spending projects to Democratic strongholds, and give “fair review” to judicial nominees from Senate Democrats in traditionally Democratic strongholds. Such a deal would allow Nixon to save face by not outright changing policy, while providing Senate Democrats (and their House colleagues, to a smaller extent) some relief in providing for their constituents even as Democrats lose the White House.

So it came to pass that on January 3rd, after the 87th Congress had been sworn in and well after the electoral votes had been certified as producing no clear winner, the House of Representatives voted by a margin of one state delegation to elect Richard Milhouse Nixon to the Presidency of the United States and the Senate voted by a margin of two Senators (6 Democrats ultimately “defected” out of “patriotic duty and to protect national security”) to elect Gerald Ford to the Vice Presidency. All throughout the process, from election night to January 3rd, Nixon had been stewing. This was no 1956, the kooks and communists hadn’t prevented him from winning, but how could so much of America still not see? He could feel the weakness that emanated across the world, where the incoming Leader of the Free World could not even pass muster with a majority of the country. He may have scraped by, just barely, but he still had to give up some concessions to the opposition and be made a laughing stock of by political cartoonists. Even when Senator Humphrey offered his concession to Nixon in the Senate after his election by the House had been confirmed, he felt weak and exposed. But, as he did in 1956 and before, he steeled himself, vowing to ensure this mess never happens again and that he never face such a humiliation again in his life. He would make sure of it.

Presidential Results

Senate Results

House Results

Political Spreadsheet

葉隠入門 | Hagakure Nyūmon | The Old Man | Epilogue: Japan

^(January 1999, Chiyoda, Tokyo)

“When I was twenty years old Japan was less than the shell of a nation, it is more accurate to say it was less than the shell of a clam. Now I am seventy-five and Japan is the finest nation on earth; a leader in bioscience and technology, with a robust economy and a deep respect for human rights. Now at last I feel I can rest easy, alongside the Emeritus Emperor, and let a new generation lead us into the 21st century. Thank you Japan, thank you all the people of Japan. Now I can proudly announce I am stepping down from the Office of Prime Minister and leaving the Diet.” Prime Minister Mishima Yukio, Resignation Speech

Theme Music: 1980's Japanese City Pop Playlist

----

Contents

1. The Old Man: Mishima Yukio's Resignation
2. Kuril Islands Dispute, 1964
3. Computing Technology, 1970
4. Defence Rearmament, 1976
5. Emperor Akihito Abdication, 1983
6. The Economy Collapses, 1993
7. Post-Cold War, 1999 onwards: Inluding, Bharat, South Korea, Anime, HSR, Latin America

----

The Old Man

Mishima Yukio had been young when the bomb had brought hell on earth to Hiroshima and Nagaski. He was not young any more. He had held his father's seat, the Tokyo 3rd District, since the early 80’s, the same year as his father’s passing. He knew at nearly seventy-five he could no longer keep ruling Japan, he had been her Prime Minister for nearly twelve years. There was a time and place for all men, and it was his time to step down. The opening of the new Imperial Museum of Japan had been the perfect opportunity. Now in front of a class of eager eyed under graduates from the Emperor’s College Gakushuin, he was being asked to reflect on his years.

He stood at the podium, Minister for Foreign Affairs Koike Yuriko and new Prime Minister Koizumi Ichiro sitting in the crowd before him. Mishima’s determined eyes looked at the young graduates behind his friends. He had never been a shy man, he had demanded obedience from all those who worked for him. Now he commanded the room just by standing at a podium, even as a retired old man he had this power. It started when he was Prosecutor-General, staring down Yakuza leaders like Omori Shogen and his Black Dragon society in the wake of the failure in the Korean War. It continued when he was the deputy for Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro, The Shogun, and the liaison between Nakasone and Reagan.

Prime Minister Mishima had been a hard man, with hard eyes, but now he was also an old man, with old eyes. Once he had seen people his own age, now he saw a new generation sprouting through the ground, and ready to take their place in the sun.

His hands gripped the podium in front of the old Tokyo Station. It was a beautiful building, black scallop-tile roof, crimson brick facade, and white detailing on the columns, and accents. It served the city well as the Marunouchi-side train station. It had seen just about everything from post-war recovery, to mid-year boom. The Government had elected to make it a museum, and open a new station directly opposite. It was a trillion yen project, but it would ensure smooth operation of the train lines beneath Tokyo for decades to come. It was the site of his resignation.

Mishima cleared his throat and returned to the great lecture hall of Gakushuin. Koike started the applause, she had been the youngest Foreign Minister in Japanese history, and first woman. Prime Minister Koizumi joined her, his silver mane of hair catching the light and reminding Japan why he was called Lionheart. The applause caught on like a gust of wind and Mishima raised his hand to thank them and quiet the room down. He smiled and tapped the mic.

“Thank you, it has been some time since my resignation, and I am surprised that anyone cares what I have to say. Thank you to Gakushuin, thank you to the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, and thank you to all the freshmen of the class of 2008 who are just starting their university degrees. Today I am proud to give my special lecture on the History of Japan. As many of you know, I have been involved with the Government since the early 50s, and today will be a highlight reel of sorts. I encourage you to be critical, to view my moments with an analytical mind and a poetic heart. I am an old man with an old man’s memories and fondness.”

He smiled and pressed the clicker in his hand, the slide behind him flicking off the title screen and onto his first moment.

Kuril Islands, 1964

Yoshida looked down at the islands from aboard the Prime Ministerial plane, smoke billowing from several areas of the city even as the plane began to descend.

“Is this a good idea?”

He turned to his advisor.

“It is not an idea, it is a plan.”

He replied coolly.

The local population had risen up in riots against the Soviet forces, a dozen Soviet soldiers were dead, many more had fled the four islands that Japan had once called its own. Self governance had been the objective of the rioters, Japan had been forced to respond, the Soviet Union had massed a police force in response. Yoshida had called on the Self Defence Force mobilised in Hokkaido. Escalation after escalation was occurring, a spiral of chaos Japan and the Soviet Union were on the brink of war.

The plan landed with a jarring thud and Yoshida re-read through his speech once again. It made no reference to the referendum that Japan had stoked on the islands. It made no mention of the census Japan had conducted with the support of the coast guard. It was silent on the old treaties which referenced the islands.

Yoshida’s mouth was a thin line, they were playing a dangerous game. Behind him Omori Shogen, the Architect, sat with his high collared black suit, his mouth a smirk.

Hours later Omori sniffed and breathed out a blast of frosty air, his smirk turned into a smile. The trap had been laid, set, and then sprung perfectly. The Black Dragon Society had weaved Japanese flags through the crowd gathered to hear the Prime Minister speak.

The critical line of the speech had sent the crowd into a roar of support - The Kurils are Japan, Japan is the Kurils, and Japan will not leave her sons and daughters of the north alone any more.

The Soviet call had come not an hour later, the police force had withdrawn, and an American aircraft carrier force had sailed through the straits.

Omori had moved his pieces, entraping the Soviets and the Americans. Japan would gain the Kurils back, America beholden to the San Francisco Treaty, and the Soviets forced to back down else risk American involvement in North-Asian Atlantic affairs. History would record this day as the day that Prime Minister Yoshida started the path of Japan back to full territorial integrity.

Computing, 1970

As the Japanese economy surged in the 1960s and 70s, it leapt ahead in technological advancement on the back of Sony's groundbreaking development of transistors. If Sony was the leading goose, then Hitachi, NEC, and Sharp were closely following. Together the four companies competed against one another and their US competitors. The result was the formation of the eight-bit gosanke personal computers. They were the formation of the Japanese second wave technological revolution, and the mass transition away from old style business and by the late 70’s Japan was on the cutting edge of global innovation. The widespread adoption of Sony computers, particularly by the elite in India and Latin America, not only strengthened Japan's economic ties with these regions but also positioned the nation as a technological powerhouse with a profound impact on global markets.

The personal computer uptake in Japan was miraculous and in large part led by the forge-ahead doctrine of the Sato Administration. Sato with his fascination for all things technologically advanced pushed all government agencies, at great cost, to transition off paper based reporting and onto modern computers. Computing power became the overriding objective of the newly formed Ministry of Technology which was headed up by Ohga Norio. Computer programming was added into the national curriculum, and computer engineers were brought in from the United States and Europe to deliver university courses. Technology literacy across the country soared and with it a demand for computer based mass entertainment. Enter the video game. Nintendo and Sony entered the home entertainment market with colour TV connected consoles in the late 1970s and kicked off the great console wars. By early 1980 the NES had taken over as the dominant video game console, and by mid 1980 Sony had released their Playstation to roaring success.

The age of the computer had arrived and for Japan there was no going back. As home computing took primacy for most Japanese, the Soviet Union and America took to the stars and the Space race of the 1970s kicked off properly. Not to be left behind, Japan was the fourth country to put a satellite into orbit, and with American help the third nationality into space. As the Americans put the space race front of mind, their minds reaching for a lunar landing ahead of the soviets, Japan turned to more earthly affairs and the pursuit of smaller more powerful computing. A dream was born in Japan amongst this surge in technological innovation, a series of interconnected computers, a web of sorts between the universities of the country, to share research and academic papers.

Defence, 1976

Admiral Uruhara stood on the deck of the JSDN Fuji, the first aircraft carrier to be put to sea by the country since the early 1940’s. In front of him sat the heads of state from a collection of nations calling themselves ASEAN. The American Ambassador had joined them, along with Australia, India, and a handful of South American partners. Japanese ship building was back at full capacity after a decade of rebuilding, the Kure Naval Arsenal leading the way for construction of ship building facilities from Sapporo down to Chishima Rettou. Japan was now the largest ship builder in the world, her naval self defence force rebuilding the hights of the Japanese navy.

The Americans had been forced to accede to rearmament demands following Chinese nuclear tests in 1964. The Kuril Islands affair spurred Soviet Support for North Korea’s and Communist China’s development risk taking.

Admiral Uruhara in his maiden speech declared that Japan would support all free and independent south east Asian countries to construct complementary navies. ASEAN would be free, fair, and independent. Japanese naval capacity would ensure that the region never felt the pressure of the Communists. Japanese manufacturing would elevate Indonesian, Thai, and Singaporean manufacturing through complementary programs, to new heights. Japan as the leading goose would ensure South Korea was supported in its struggle against the dangerous north, and the Republic of China would forever resist the cross-strait tension.

Japan in rearmament would ensure East Asian and Southeast Asian security from the forces best upon them. Japan in rearmament would be the single most important partner for the United States in weighing the scales of world peace in democratic favour.

The media afterwards had been dramatic, the Soviet Union and China had lodged a protest in the UN. The Admiral was called to speak before the Security Council, and the Japanese ambassador to the United Nations had been called on to explain Japanese civilian control to a body of democratic nations styling themselves as the Democracy-10. The frost had formed and the world had held its breath while the JSDF had recovered its strength. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Nishikawa Motors, and others came online, Japanese manufacturing roared to life.

Across the Pacific Australia under the fear of communism embraced this new Japan, and a free trade agreement set the stage for a North-South channel of trade in raw materials from the southern continent. Democratic ASEAN with the same fear embraced the supply of easy to manufacture parts in exchange for economic uplift. As the US and Japan turned their engines towards the high end, ASEAN took up the slack in cheap and easy manufacturing, and the motorcycle entered Southeast Asia. The Pacific under the fear of Chinese military potential, and Soviet expansion of the Pacific Fleet coalesced into an economic machine. Fears of a renewed Japanese military were eclipsed by economic growth through the early 80’s and into the 90’s. Japan surged upwards into the highest echelons of GDP growth, democratic ASEAN empowered by the US Washington consensus followed suit.

Years later the Admiral would reflect that perhaps his speech went too far, that he had forced a wedge wider which had been opened by the Chinese. But he had been unapologetic, the crisis spawned from that day were the result of chain events no reasonable man would have foreseen. His tomb bears the phrase “From the Kurils to Bangkok, from Tokyo to Canberra, Japan will ensure peace across the sea.”

Emperor Akihito, 1983

The Emperor was not all that old, but he wasn’t young, he had three sons who he loved, and a country he had seen returned to prosperity from destitution. He had seen the world, studied at Harvard, and Cambridge, visited more countries than any Japanese monarch before him. He had delivered speeches in Wellington, Sydney, Washington, Paris, and Delhi. Akihito had become affectionately called The Boy. He had guided a half dozen Prime Ministers through their challenges, and befriended world monarchs from Brunei to England. He had a particular affection for Elizabeth II. They were not that different in age, and royals had a tendency to find comfort with one another.

Akihito sat and listened to the Imperial Household doctor, a man he had graduated from college with. The diagnosis was bleak, not dangerous, but bleak, the cancer was spreading.

Beside and around him sat more than two dozen advisors and half his close family. His wife, and his lover looked at one another. The shadowy back rooms of the Imperial Palace had reconciled the Emperor’s sexuality long ago. The Empress had managed the daily affairs for months ahead of this diagnosis. The Imperial Lawyer was the official title, but in truth the handsome man had been close to the Emperor well before then. The Empress has ascended only on ground that she be given control of the affairs of the children.

The decisions had been considered and then decided after that meeting. Akihito would, like his father, abdicate for his son. Ahead of the word of his cancer, and his lover spread into the public, because no secret could hold forever in the age of modern communications.

The abdication was announced on 1 April 1983, the 35th anniversary of Akihito’s ascent, it would take effect on 1 April 1988 the 40th anniversary. It would preserve the dignity of the Imperial office, the Emperor would take up his late father’s title Emperor Emeritus. Akihito would then retreat to a life out of sight of the public on the Izu Peninsula and the so-called Blue Palace where the last Korean King had lived out his days. Empress Yume would take to life behind her son, the incoming Emperor Naruhito, as an expert advisor on media matters, and women’s affairs. There she would ensure continuity of the Imperial line in the search for a wife of suitable stature.

In his retirement Akihito was visited by many former friends, the closest of which, the Kennedys and Kissingers came more than once. He published more than two dozen journal articles on medical research in his retirement. He is most famous for his pioneering new ideas in mental health for Japanese businessmen including paternity leave, and yearly mandatory cancer tests for men over forty. At the time of his death in the mid nineties Akihito held the highest approval rating of any leader in Japan, save his wife. His scandals had leaked of course; his male lover, his escapades at Harvard, and these had hurt his image, but in the end it was hard to hate a man who stepped in at the right time, and stepped out before his welcome had expired.

The Emperor had an autobiography published under the moniker Momotaro. In it he covered geopolitical struggles, Imperial Household operations, his time abroad, and his hopes for the future including same-sex marriage. It was published after his death, and public sentiment on his scandals turned around soon afterwards. The second print was retitled to his name, and a forward was added by his wife expressing her deep love of him, and his love for the new Japan that was coming into its own.

The Economy, 1993

The early 1990s brought an unprecedented milestone for Japan's economy when, for a brief period, it surpassed the United States as the world's largest economy. This moment of economic triumph, however, proved ephemeral as Japan witnessed the burst of its economic bubble. The subsequent three-year recession tested the resilience of the Japanese economy, ultimately leading to a return to limited growth. The Japanese miracle of annual 10% growth through the 70’s and 80’s was floated on the back of speculation, anti-competitive mergers, outrageous land valuations and unregulated banking practices. So hilariously out of touch had Japanese firms become before the burst that at one stage the land valuation of just the Imperial Palace in Tokyo alone was more than that of the entirety of California. The Emperor of Japan was the richest man in the world for all of 3 minutes before the markets corrected.

The bubble burst was spectacular. It started with a failed bank in Hokkaido, over leveraged to high risk ventures in Northern Pacific tuna, Hokkaido dairy, and grain. A drought crippled the entire northern agricultural market, and warmed sea water halved the amount of tuna caught in a single season. The bank collapsed overnight, and under the weight of its debts brought a dozen large firms with it. The market was spooked, and across Japan people went to withdraw their yen. A bank run formed, markets reevaluated their debt, and realised the entire structure was over leveraged both domestically and internationally.

In 1993 at the height of the economic period Japan had some 300+ banks, by 1994 it was 230, at the end of 1995 it had shrunk to just 70. The recession was severe, and a total contraction of 20% forced many of Japan’s best and brightest out of work. International reputation was their only saving grace and across the Pacific Japanese talent found new employment. Into Southeast Asia, Bharat, Australia, and the Pacific they went. What precious little work remained in the Home Islands was swallowed up quickly. Major firms consolidated and a return to Zaibatsu was on the cards, the Government stepped in to force large banks to keep companies separate, selling instead to preferred international firms. The Japanese market was at last broken open and with Microsoft, JP Morgan, Shell, and the European majors came English and French language skills. Despite the setback, Japan retained its position as the second-largest economy globally, solidifying its reputation as an economic powerhouse if also a warning sign of hubris and unregulated behaviour.

English became the second most spoken language in the country, with over 50% of Japanese citizens speaking limited English and 30% speaking confident conversational English. The French took a romantic third place. On account of the high school language programs set up in schools the Japanese English accent is heavily skewed to Australian English. Japanese-English as it came to be known follows British spelling traditions much to the chagrin of the American companies who entered the country. By the turn of the 20th century almost all university courses had made English a compulsory language for completion.

Post-Cold War, 1999 onwards

In 1999, Japan celebrated its 20th anniversary as a key development partner for ASEAN, marking two decades of collaborative efforts and shared growth. As the leading force in the region, Japan's commitment to ASEAN strengthened diplomatic ties and positioned the nation as a vital contributor to the bloc's economic and strategic development. Beyond ASEAN, Japan's role as a moderating voice within Western alliances' strategic thinking against the Soviet Union garnered international recognition, establishing the nation as a pivotal player in global diplomacy.

Latin America

Japanese relations with South America were a tumultuous affair. Privately, Washington had warned Japan against further investments on the continent. These warnings were countered by the free trade bloc Japan had formed at the start of the cold war. What South America gained in access to Japanese markets though, was tempered by Japanese revulsion for Latin Socialism. As the continent went through cyclical embraces of left wing socialism, Japan went through cyclical distance making. This included refusal to allow defence contracts to empower the regimes that came and went. The South Americans once again started looking north for their economic future. All except Peru that is, and today the largest proportion of overseas Japanese live and work in the country.

Bharat

The subcontinent became to Japan the closest of possible friends, it was Bharat who moved the UN to allow Japan entry. A geopolitical melting pot of issues, Bharat faced concerns both neighbourly and trans-oceanic that it could not tackle alone. The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and International Cooperation Agency put Bharat in the highest of engagement echelons. From Mumbai and Delhi to Gujarat and Sri Lanka, Japanese firms found cheap land, and labour to mass produce for the booming population. Across Bharat Yamaha, Suzuki, and Toyota sold their cars and motorcycles. Along with this came the great road network, and the engineering power of Japanese rail.

Indians with all their creativity, and culture were the first group to be given longer term VISA status in Japan. Ethnic tensions followed, Japanese xenophobia was a constant complaint, but it did not stop the migration. Shibuya 3rd ward became India town, and like the China towns found across the world in the 80s and 90s, Japan helped Bharat export this cultural phenomena. In time Japan embarrassed certain elements of the sub continental culture, Japanese Golden Curry foremost amongst this, but so too fashion, and art. Across Japan desi-culture found its niche, and colour exploded through women's fashion in a vibrancy not seen ever before.

The High Speed Rail

Japanese development through the Cold War was miraculous, but infrastructure was where things made the developed world stop and take note. The Japanese rail network from Tokyo north to Sendai and onto Hokkaido, and south to Osaka and then down to Shimonoseki was the envy of the world by the late 1970’s. The establishment of a unified rail gauge worked miracles in streamlining development costs and planning. The crowning jewel was truly the Type-0 shinkansen, the fastest train in the world when it launched in 1963, travelling from Tokyo to Osaka at 220km/h. Built specifically for the Tokyo 1964 Olympics the shinkansen took the rail world by storm.

As Japan electrified its rail network during the rebuild of the 1950s so did it progress the expansion of it. If the Pacific coast was the original rebuild and the planned construction path of the shinkansen, the Sea of Japan coast was the luxury line. The so-called Blue trains and their sleeper cars took on new meaning and the eponymous ‘blue’ name came to reflect the floor to ceiling views of the Sea of Japan possible on the carriages.

These trains through the 1990s were taken up by developed countries, first in Australia, and then Canada. It was on the back of rail technology that Japan escaped her economic conundrum, and the export of this technology saved manufacturing and industry jobs in the millions. Eventually Japan came to fully dominate the high speed rail network until France entered the foray and then China afterwards. By the time of the early 2000s while she was head and shoulders above the competition, competitors had commenced the catch up in Europe and Eurasia.

Anime

In the late 1980s Japanese animation took a leap forward that launched it from a local domestic production of Mega-man and Sailor moon, to global prominence. Dragon Ball burst onto the TV scene in 1986 and captured the hearts and minds of a generation of young men across Japan and the English version across America, UK and Australia. Its sequel series Dragon Ball Z in 1992 was a cultural touchstone and translated into some 38 different languages for broadcast around the globe. This success though was just the precursor, these were Japanese manga transformed into tv cartoons for children. April 1 1997 changed the world forever when across Japan, the United States, Europe and Australia a new anime captured such a vast swath of children it sparked security concerns inside the CIA and MI5, it was called Pocket Monsters, or Pokemon.

In the original airing wake came the portable handheld gaming device explosion, the Gameboy and the headline games, Pokemon Red and Pokemon Blue. Catch ‘em All Fever consumed children across the planet, Nintendo was forced to front Senate hearings and submit technical specifications of the Gameboy to security agencies. Perhaps one of the most ludicrous moments of the late 90’s though was during the 1998 election in Australia where Mr John Howard dressed up as the character Pikachu. It was an effort to sell his vision of new investments in children’s programming, early childhood education, and regional relations. Unfortunately technical issues with his suit caused a power malfunction, and he was electrocuted to death. Kim Beazley went on to win the election, Paulin Hanson’s One Nation Party stealing away for the first time the balance of power in the federal House of Representatives. Until she too was felled by a pokemon scandal, an illegal trading card ring smuggling drugs in so called “booster packs”.

South Korea

The peninsula and the failure of the Korean War haunted Japan well after the cessation of hostilities. It bubbled away problematically between South and North for 50 years, the South moving its capital to Busan, a bastion of Japanese culture in the new nation. From military dictatorship to democracy, the Miracle of the Floating Port, and the formation of chaebols by the late 2000’s South Korea was well ahead of its languishing partner in the North. Japan’s role was the signature and leading trade partner, the older brother, and until the exposure of Japanese interventions in the Korean war, the former colonial master.

Tensions were never resolved between the two, but Mishima’s overtures and compensation to comfort women, and the ethnic Koreans who had called Japan home helped. The death spiral of post Cold-War Peace was on the peninsula though, a series of miscalculations, miscommunications, and accidents leading to the resumption of hostilities between South and North; Japan was quick to send aid, the Japan Self Defence Force learning the lessons of the First Korean War, joining only second behind the United States.

The Beating Heart of Asia

By the turn of the century Japan had retained its position as the second largest economy, become the central trade hub for Asia, and occupied a pivotal position in regional affairs. Following the bust of the mid 90’s the economy buckled but it did not break. France, Germany, and most impressively China were all on the surge towards Japan’s lofty second place. Storm clouds on the horizon though in the US debt market and Russia’s view on Georgia threatened the global economy though. Action on the Korean peninsula had put nerves to just about every major market across the globe. The Nikkei however was in recovery mode as the countdown ticked over to the year 2000 and in classic Japanese fashion, there was no issue to talk about, until the house was on fire.

Regionally Japan was the lead development partner for ASEAN and partnered with New Zealand and Australia for the Pacific. The US had retreated inward during the term of President Weinstein, made in America had brought manufacturing back to the mid-west. The cost had been ASEAN cooperation with the regional power to start up their own manufacturing and progression towards advanced production lines. The durability of these programs was unclear but incoming President Jobs had made strong commitments to return to free market economics. ASEAN, and the Pacific, looked to Japan to negotiate new deals.

The trading giants of PO-TEPCO, Nippon Yusen, and Port Authority Terminal set the standard for Asian trade. Together they controlled more than 60% of all incoming shipping containers in Japan, and a combined 15% of all global shipping trade. The ports of South Korea, China, Taiwan, and southeast Asia all adhered to Japanese monopolistic demands. Japan had once again become the beating heart of Asia.

Early-Mid 1960 - United States of America

As the United States continues to tackle issues of inequality and voting rights, the issue of nearly one million Americans in the capital city of the United States not being represented nor able to vote for any federal office has become a pressing matter. Residents of Washington, D.C. have long called for increased autonomy from Congress and the ability to vote in national elections, though their calls until recently had scantly been taken seriously. However, freshman Republican Senator Kenneth Keating of New York offered a thorough amendment to an unrelated act of Senator Kefauver to completely overhaul the way Washington, D.C. operates, utilizing the little known power granted to Congress to allow the citizens of the federal district to vote in state the land was retroceded from, as seen in the 1801 Organic Act to completely restore the voting rights of Washington, D.C. residents as if they were residents of Maryland, allowing for Washington D.C. to be made its own House district as part of Maryland, and giving residents of Washington, D.C. the ability to run for federal office (but not any state offices) as if they were inhabitants of Maryland. This legislation would remove the need for modifying the Constitution, keep Congress in control of Washington, D.C., and restore the voting rights of residents of the capital for national office. It would also nearly ensure a citizen of D.C. would be elected to the House, as the capital had more than enough residents to have one House seat wholly located in the capital, while also being the majority of the electorate for a second seat. Combined with being able to vote in Maryland's Senate elections, this will wholly restore the representation of residents of the district. [M] For specifics on the way this would work, I will co-opt the relevant parts of the 2004 proposal. [/M]

Following some back and forth with amendments, eventually the DC voting retrocession was passed in both chambers of Congress by itself, with the resolution to take effect immediately, with an additional two Representative temporarily given to Maryland (bringing the House total to 437) to reflect the capital's population, with the additional members to be removed after apportionment following the 1960 census. Both House seats would invariably be dominated by Democrats, while the Senate seats all of a sudden had a massively Democratic tilt; though Senator Beall was already planning on retiring from office after his term, it was now all but a certainty his replacement would be a Democrat. State offices weren't impacted, but the Maryland Republican Party lamented its newfound irrelevance in federal politics outside of a few House seats. In Washington, D.C. itself the residents were ecstatic to finally be able to vote for President and have Congressional representation, though the goal of home rule still had yet to come, at least oversight of the District would now have the input of DC. In Maryland, the response was muted, though Maryland's state government did not fight the legislation, most saw the intrusion of DC's voters as an unwelcome surprise.

Early-Mid 1960 - United States of America

After President Eisenhower announced he would not seek or accept the nomination of his party to serve a second term a year before the 1960 National Convention, the Democratic Party has been abuzz about possible replacements. After the bruising midterms decreased the Democratic House majority to barely 20 seats and the eagerness of Republicans to make civil rights a major issue in 1960 became apparent, many congressional Democrats were bracing for a tough election. After several public foreign policy missteps further hampered the credibility of Democrats and Southern Democrats became increasingly frustrated and militant at President Eisenhower’s attempts to force through civil rights enforcement, the number of Democrats who were looking for the nomination seemed slim. Few Congressional Democrats appeared to have interest in seeking the nomination for 1960, with Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson (at one time considered the most likely nominee owing to his “moderate” stance on segregation and decent relationship with all sides of the Party) bowing out of consideration early. His thinking, along with that of other Democratic incumbents, seems to be a lack of confidence in the Democratic Party’s electability and lack of desire to try and prevent a split with the South.

As December rolled around to January, speculation and internal Democratic discussions had become centered on three men, Vice President John F. Kennedy, Minnesota Senator Hubert Humphrey, and Secretary of State Adlai Stevenson II, with some discussion also put on an ongoing Draft Russell movement from disaffected Southerners. For his own part, ever since he learned that Eisenhower wasn’t going to be running for a second term (something he only learned about in a news flash, since Eisenhower rarely informed the Vice President of his business) Kennedy had been in consultation with his father and brothers on if a run for President was advisable. He was only 43 and had made many connections over the past four years, running in a year where Democrats seemed poised for defeat and the South seemed likely to split like it had in 1948 did not seem necessary. Even more so when, unlike Nixon, he had little to gain from it. While he couldn’t immediately go back to the Senate, with Saltonstall all but certain to win re-election, he could make a run for Governor of Massachusetts and likely win it with ease. Furcolo couldn’t run again and he would not face serious opposition for the nomination, while the Kennedy machine could likely overcome even the best Republican challenger. Still, Kennedy was internally debating the merits of going for the nomination on the off chance he could emerge victorious.

After much debate with Robert, Ted, and his father over the winter, as well as a frank conversation with Jacqueline, Kennedy called a press conference in Washington to announce he would not seek the Democratic nomination and instead stated he was planning on running for Governor of Massachusetts. He refused any questions, but most Democratic insiders saw the move as a purely strategic decision. The Kennedy clan were known for their cunning and strategy, if they deemed the presidential race as a doomed cause, there was no need to rush a nomination. Contenting themselves with dominance in Massachusetts and biding their time for a more favorable shot at the White House was doubtlessly the decision of Joseph, though the Kennedy brothers seemed relieved to not have to fight a losing battle on the national stage.

With Kennedy and Johnson both officially out of contention, that left Secretary of State (and former Governor of Illinois) Adlai Stevenson II and Senator Hubert Humphrey, as well as an insurgent Southern run by Richard Russell. Unlike 1948, the Dixiecrats seemed more organized and ready to wage a real fight for the South, in the aftermath of the Southern Manifesto and Eisenhower “betraying” the South, many insiders feared that the whole South could bolt unless they were placated at the convention. Senior party officials and insiders, though, found such a compromise hard to implement in 1960, with Republicans already touting their record on civil rights and promising more legislation. Thus, as the primaries began in March, there was unease over what the convention would bring, especially as there were talks of state parties seceding from the Democratic National Committee and forming a more cohesive successor to their successful 1948 break away party.

As campaigning for the primary began, the Stevenson campaign was trying to strike a moderate tone on civil rights to appease the South, while the cash strapped Humphrey campaign came out swinging in favor wide ranging civil rights legislation and repealing Taft-Hartley in a bid to overcome Stevenson in grassroots support. This gambit partially paid off, as the South endorsed favorite sons or Richard Russell outright, while Humphrey won several contests in the Midwest off the back of heavy union support and black turnout. Stevenson, for his part, won the Illinois primary and those in New England, as well as winning delegates in all other non-Southern contests. Though this did weaken his position going into the convention, he still held out hopes of coming up with a compromise with the Southern Democrats to preserve party unity.

the 1960 Democratic National Convention

By the time the Democratic National Convention met in July, all hopes of compromise with the South had died. After the last primary in early June, President Eisenhower, with Republican support, managed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1960. On top of the volatile situation in the South prior, the suddenness of the Civil Rights Act passing and its proximity to the Democratic National Convention caused immediate chaos (as predicted by Republican agents). President Eisenhower did not even attend, saying ill health forced him to stay in Washington, while many other senior Democrats looked on in horror at what now seemed like an inevitable split. Humphrey’s delegate slate was made up of New Deal progressives, who began clashing with the “Fire-Eaters” from the Southern delegations. Stevenson, for his part, was desperately trying to put out the fire by trying to play up his moderation on civil rights to his Southern counterparts, though it was a losing battle as the embattled Secretary of State was already being threatened with the hemorrhaging of Northern support to Humphrey’s floor managers.

On the first ballot, Stevenson led with 508 ballots to Humphrey’s 348 and Russell’s 330, with a smattering of favorite sons taking up the rest of the ballot. Well short of the 762 votes needed to win the nomination, Stevenson’s floor managers tried to strike a bargain with the South by promising to place Senator J. William Fulbright of Arkansas on the ticket and working to moderate the civil rights plank on the platform, which seemed to be on the path to perhaps finding a temporary accord with the South, but an unknown (presumed Stevenson-affiliated) delegate leaked details of the bargain to the floor, which caused a Northern revolt against Stevenson. By the second ballot, shifts had seen Humphrey leading with 674.5 delegates to Stevenson’s 321 and Russell’s 280 (with most of Stevenson’s newfound support coming from Arkansas and some Southern delegates switching over). Party bosses figured Stevenson’s bid was now dead and tried to cobble together a dark horse candidate, but the newly invigorated Humphrey campaign continued appealing to Northern and Western Democrats. By the third ballot, Humphrey got 803.5 votes to Richard Russell’s 318 and Stevenson’s 270, with a late attempt by some party officials to get “Happy” Chandler the nomination as a compromise candidate soaking up most of the rest of the delegates. Despite coming in with a fundraising disadvantage and against a divided group of party insiders, Humphrey had managed to clinch the nomination by outmaneuvering Stevenson’s moderation and the South’s discontent.

the State Freedom Party

The fallout of this turn of events was immediately apparent, with the entire Deep South bolting from the convention amidst near brawls between delegates. Party officials were now projecting that, outside of the border states and Texas, the entire Solid South would likely vote for a Dixiecrat ticket. Shortly after the convention ended, the state parties of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia all voted to sever ties with the national Democratic Party and instead created the State Freedom Party. The Florida Democratic Party suffered a serious split even as loyalists were able to prevent severing ties, as several local branches left to join the newly made Florida State Freedom Party. The SFP also opened party branches in Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Oklahoma, though with only varying levels of support from local Democratic apparatus.

As with its predecessor in 1948, the State Freedom Party was created largely as a vehicle to allow for a Southern presidential run, but unlike in 1948, dozens of Democrats in the South (outside of those running for federal office) adopted the branding and imagery of the SFP in addition to the state Democratic Party, mostly to boost turnout statewide. Governor Orval Faubus rejoined the Arkansas Democratic Party after it split with the national party and ran largely under the SFP’s banner. Federal incumbents and primary winners who had supported the Southern Manifesto offered token support to the SFP, though most were conscious of their committee assignments & seniority and didn’t heavily commit to the SFP. Internally, many Southerners saw the Democratic Party as having twice over betrayed the “loyal” South and there was a growing bed of grassroots support of forming some kind of regional party divorced from either the Republicans or Democrats, at the impromptu convention for the SFP there were several speeches endorsing such a position, though largely coming from state officials. The Southern Freedom Party backed a segregationist platform decrying the Republicans and Democrats for “totalitarian attempts to unconstitutionally centralize the country” while nominating Senators Harry F. Byrd and Herman Talmadge for President.

the 1960 Democratic National Convention, Continued

Following the South bolting from the convention, remaining Democrats began crafting one of the most liberal party platforms ever seen, with repealing Taft-Hartley, passing civil rights legislation protecting voting rights, passing legislation to adopt universal healthcare, and a plethora of similar liberal ideals giving Humphrey plenty to campaign on in the North. Humphrey for his part tried to mend fences with the Stevenson campaign, securing a strong endorsement from Stevenson, ever the party man. Of course, much of the platform was buried under chatter about the South’s walkout and the fallout such a situation could have. Humphrey seemed fine removing the segregationist vote from contention, as it was not an impossible task to sweep the Midwest and Northeast while carrying the border states and still walk out with a victory. While Truman had failed a similar feat in 1948, he also had to deal with northern progressives walking out and supporting Henry Wallace, something Humphrey was thankful not to have to repeat.

While the Republicans were still the heavy favorites due to 1958-1959 recession and foreign policy missteps, Humphrey did overwhelmingly lead with the labor and black vote (though polling suggests Republican attempts to appeal to civil rights has worked to a minor degree, many black voters still back the Democratic Party for their recent civil rights track record and economic interventionism, leading to ~2/3rds of black voters planning to back Humphrey) and believed he had a chance to prove naysayers wrong in a comeback. Other Democrats did not share such optimism, remembering Truman’s defeat despite his constant mantra of victory being around the corner, but all corners of the Democrats outside of the South still came out strongly in favor of Humphrey. The Humphrey campaign doubled down on its civil rights platform by bringing on Senator Stuart Symington as Humphrey’s running mate, making the 1960 presidential election the most Senate-heavy one in memory, with all but Gerald Ford being incumbent Senators. With the stage set, Humphrey began his acceptance speech, a crowning moment for the little known pharmacist from South Dakota.

Early-Mid 1960 - United States of America

Since announcing his candidacy in January, Richard Nixon has consistently led every poll of Republican voters. To pollsters, his opponents seemed doomed, with the Senate Majority Leader having a steady ~70% of the Republican electorate supporting him with around an even split going for Rockefeller and Goldwater. Though he had failed to convince either to drop out, his consistent support of the Republican Party and years of effort had captured the endorsement of much the Party and convinced most Republicans that 1956 was a fluke. Everyone from Alf Landon to President Dewey himself had either outright endorsed Nixon or were working to ensure he had a smooth ride to the nomination. While this did little to dissuade Goldwater, who was running to both boost his own national profile and reinvigorate the Republican Party’s right-wing, it did much pain to Rockefeller. Since announcing his campaign, he had styled himself as a liberal Republican who would go further than Dewey while attacking Eisenhower for not doing enough to support the nation’s vulnerable. While useful in some areas (and certainly not as bad as it was for Rockefeller in real life), it simply could not match the influence of Nixon nor shake the perception of Rockefeller as too liberal to unite the Republican Party.

As March rolled around and the few actual primaries of the Republican Party began, things did not improve for Rockefeller. Whatever popularity he might enjoy with the liberal intellectuals in the East Coast Establishment, the rank and file Republicans nationwide saw him as simply a worse alternative to Nixon, one that would make the conservatives stay at home in November while trying to out-promise New Deal Democrats on domestic policy. With Nixon they found a true party man who was an internationalist with moderate credentials, but with connections and friendships to keep the conservative wing in order. Seeing the writing on the wall after being handed a couple major defeats, Rockefeller bowed out of the race and instead started courting party insiders in order to gain influence at the convention. Nixon even reached out via intermediaries to discuss the possibility of Rockefeller getting on the ticket, but a man as ambitious as Rockefeller would not play second fiddle to the likes of Nixon. He would support Nixon when he became the nominee, but was more concerned about lining himself up for his next chance at the presidency.

With the only real threat from his left defeated, Nixon now had the task of taking down a serious threat from the right. While Goldwater had virtually no chance of getting the nomination, both he and Nixon knew he could throw a spanner into the works at the convention. Nixon himself had no love lost for Goldwater, his ideas would see the Republican Party doomed to obscurity for all time in a country that has clearly shifted its opinion towards a more moderate path. Still, the man whose name is on The Conscience of a Conservative and has spent the better part of a year rebuilding the grassroots conservative movement was not someone to simply be forgotten. Meeting with Goldwater privately with a few other party insiders before the convention, Nixon managed to convince Goldwater to drop out and endorse him to make the presidential nomination unanimous at the convention. This concession would cost Nixon, however, with Goldwater getting a prime speaking time at the convention and token concessions on some parts of the platform. This suited Goldwater nicely, as he would be able to boost his national platform and tout to the right-wing of the Republicans that he had moderated the overall platform, while for Nixon it ensured a much smoother convention.

the 1960 Republican National Convention

As Nixon rode to overwhelming victories in the primary and came into the convention the pre-selected choice of both the rank-and-file Republicans as well as senior party insiders, much of the speculation about the Republicans would be how they try to court members of the New Deal Coalition without losing the conservative vote and who Nixon would choose as his vice president. The first was quickly answered when the Republican platform adopted measures calling for a national health insurance system, comprehensive expansion of rural development measures, federal funding for education, overhauls of national defense, and the strongest civil rights plank in the Republican Party’s history. These measures are all differentiated from the Democratic Party’s proposals by both their scale and focus, with Republican messaging focusing on enhancing people’s choice and building communities, while disparaging their opponents for wanting to rule from Washington.

However, above all else the two strongest messages the Republicans are sending to voters are their ideas on civil rights and national defense. Decrying a “missile gap” with the Soviets evidenced by their victories in the Space Race, Nixon and the Republican Party promised a strong stance against communism, an end to the Middle Eastern oil embargo, and a rapid expansion of the US military and nuclear deterrence. With Nixon’s existing foreign policy experience in the Senate Foreign Affair Committee and the ongoing blunders by the Eisenhower Administration, this made for a strong rebuke of the status quo and proved most popular with voters. Domestically, while giving some respect to the proposed changes to welfare (which Nixon himself thought was a waste of time, as the Democrats could always out-promise Republicans on government handouts and programs), Nixon adopted a hardline outlook on civil rights. Touting the Civil Rights Act of 1960, freshly passed and having been associated with him by the press [M] without the Vice Presidency and the expense scandal having been avoided due to Democrats not wanting to expose their own practices, Nixon has maintained a much more cordial relationship with the press [/M], Nixon promised that under a Republican Administration that poll taxes would be made illegal, the strongest civil rights in history would be passed, and that the injustices done to the black community in the Deep South would be rectified.

While the missile gap and defense planks were par for the course, Nixon and his managers had worked with delegates to hammer out the most progressive civil rights policy plank in American history, with hopes that a very strong showing here would outmaneuver Northern Democrats and either force them to confront their Southern compatriots or lose part of the black vote to the Republicans. While Dewey had peeled some of the New Deal black vote away from Harriman, Nixon was making a gamble that he could really dent the shift of black voters to the Democratic Party or at least cause a further fracture of Democratic unity. With the utter destructiveness of Eisenhower’s own push for civil rights and the walkout of Southern Democrats at the Democratic National Convention, this could be the push needed to see Republicans win across the North.

As for the second question, who Nixon would pick, he was mindful of both the national atmosphere and the need for party unity. Rockefeller would never kow-tow to Nixon and play second fiddle (even if Nixon had wanted him, which he did not), while an out and out conservative like Goldwater would be a step too far. Still, as Nixon was now firmly planted on the liberal end of the Republican Party in the eyes of conservative insiders, a candidate from outside the Northeast and who could be acceptable to both wings of the Republican Party was needed. Nixon also needed an internationalist and someone who could assist him in getting Congress to pass his planned legislative agenda. This already eliminated many of the big names who were being floated around in the press, as well as Nixon’s own personal choice of Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. Instead, Nixon convened a council of 38 Republicans to assist him in choosing a candidate broadly acceptable to the Republican Party and Nixon himself. Unlike in 1956, when Nixon was hard pressed to find anyone willing to sign on to the ticket, this election season has many figures coming out of the woodworks to canvas and attempt to influence party figures of their viability, giving this committee’s men extra power. After Nixon issued a de facto veto of any figures the public or conservatives would perceive as close members of the “Northeast establishment,” discussions quickly closed in on choosing someone from the Midwest to help carry the region this election.

After five hours of discussion between themselves and Nixon, they selected one of their own, Representative Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, to complement Nixon. Heavily supported by Michigan’s delegation and pushed for more generally by the Midwest (initially, some had wanted to nominate Everett Dirksen of Illinois, but his Senate seat was seen as vulnerable should he leave to serve as Vice President), Ford had been mentioned several times in discussions about future Republican leadership in the House and had made a name for himself as a negotiator and moderate among party colleagues. While generally considered to hail more from the moderate, Dewey-supporting side, he had not made enemies of anyone from the conservative wing nor was overly associated with liberal Republicans. Some concern was expressed about his name recognition and lack of experience, but to mention that to Nixon, who himself had been in politics only two years longer than Ford, was seen as foolhardy. After some discussion on the convention floor, no one had any strong feelings against Ford, though some conservatives were noted as unenthusiastic that their primary performance didn’t get a more thoroughly conservative candidate. Such discussion was ignored in favor of a moderate national outlook, but Ford’s floor manager did advise him to play up elements of fiscal conservatism in his acceptance speech.

With all major opposition dealt with, the platform adjusted to maximize popularity, and a non-controversial vice presidential nominee, Nixon finally felt good about his chances in November. Unlike in 1956, when the crooks and Communists had threatened to end his career and he was almost written off in the wake of Eisenhower’s success, he now had an upper hand. In 1956, he had tried to thread the needle on the boiling issue of civil rights, didn’t connect with voters how he wanted, and didn’t pay nearly enough attention to the media, all of which cost him dearly against the titan of the Eisenhower campaign. Not in 1960. He would expose the cracks in the Democrat’s coalition, decisively come out in favor of civil rights to rub salt in the wound of the Democratic split, and campaign heavily on the ever more apparent failings of the Eisenhower Administration’s foreign and defense failures. Never again would he suffer the sting of defeat like in 1956, he would make sure of that. As he looked into the adoring crowd of Republicans before he started his acceptance he knew one thing for certain. Everything’s coming up Milhouse.

[M] Massive credit to the book 1960: LBJ Vs. JFK Vs. Nixon : the Epic Campaign that Forged Three Presidencies by David Pietrusza for giving me a treasure trove of information on the 1960 Republican National Convention and giving me plenty of pointers on how the Republicans of the 1950s were operating! Also, I’ll be writing a (hopefully) short summary of the Democratic Primary next. [/M]

After the second-longest season in recent memory, the mod team has decided to end Season XVIII. ColdWarPowers is now on development break, and there is currently no set plan for when development of Season XIX will resume, and when Season XIX will begin.

If you're curious about ColdWarPowers and would like to learn more, please visit our Discord server. You can also visit other XPowers communities like r/FrontierPowers, r/PostWorldPowers, and r/GlobalPowers.

In 1961, King Muhammad V, who had ruled as sultan since 1927, and king since 1950, died during a minor surgery. He had led the nation to independence and beyond. The streets were filled with mourners and foreign dignitaries, and his funeral remains a touchpoint in Moroccan cultural memory to this day.

At the age of just 31, his firstborn son, Hassan, was crowned Hassan II, King of Morocco, Commander of the Faithful. He immediately ordered new general elections, both in Morocco proper, and in the Trust Territory of the Former Spanish Sahara. The elections in Morocco ousted the left-wing coalition that had governed since 1959 and installed a right-wing, pro-Darija coalition of the Nahda and Istiqlal parties. This suited Hassan II, who, in his twelve-year reign, favored America, Europe, and the west over pan-Arabism and the Soviet Union.

The elections in the Trust Territory of the Former Spanish Sahara returned another pro-Moroccan Djema’a, albeit under dubious circumstances. In 1962, this would be confirmed with a referendum that endorsed annexation by Morocco. The UN Trust Territory Council rubber-stamped immediate Moroccan annexation. In truth, the true results of the referendum are disputed. Sahrawi nationalists alleged large-scale voter intimidation, if not all-out vote rigging. Whatever the true results were, few allege that the genuine Sahrawi population, as opposed to Moroccan settlers (termed “returnees” by the Moroccan government) actually voted for annexation. In response, Sahrawi nationalists launched the “Sahrawi Intifada” in 1962, backed by the nascent state of Algeria, which despised Morocco for its colonial annexation of Tindouf, and coveted its return. After two months of brutal street fighting, Sahrawi rebels were pushed out of the towns of the Saharan coast, and retreated to an increasingly desperate guerrilla struggle in the desert, which would persist for ten years without success. Moroccan troops used extreme tactics against them, including the forced settlement of tribes.

Government repression under Hassan II was not limited to the Sahara. The Royal Guard of Morocco established the “Musta’arif” in 1963, a computerized secret service that tracked politicians, labor unionists, journalists, intellectuals, military officers, and dissidents in a vast database held in a secure facility in Meknes. A New York Times report of this operation reportedly inspired a young novelist in California named Philip Kindred Dick.

If there is one thing Hassan II was known for, however, it was his bizarre and relentless pursuit of a policy known as “Darijization.” Inspired by the linguistic polices of Ataturk, Darijization declared colloquial Moroccan Arabic, Darija, to be a separate language, and the sole national language of Morocco. Businesses, schools, and the army were forcibly “Darijized,” which is to say brought under the auspices of the new language and its latin alphabet. Never popular, public support for Darijization collapsed over its ten year reign, with widespread public apathy turning to hostility and anger, which in turn was suppressed all the more ruthlessly by Hassan II and his Musta’arif.

This culminated on June 19th, 1972, when pan-Arabist elements of the Air Force (one of the least Darijized branches of the military) launched a daring coup against Hassan II. Mohamed Amekrane, an Air Force officer, was proclaimed President of the Arab Republic of Morocco. Hassan II was flying from Dakhla back to Meknes during the coup, when his airplane was shot at by rebel fighter jets. Remarkably, Hassan II grabbed the radio and convinced the pilots of the rebel jets that the king was dead and the plane should be allowed to land. Upon his emergency landing in Marrakech, and the revelation that the king was still alive, support for the coup collapsed, and the Royal Guard executed rebel officers.

But the Royal Guard was privately sympathetic to certain criticisms of Hassan II. When Hassan II returned to Meknes on June 26th, 1972, he was privately informed that if he did not want to be executed, he should abdicate. Reluctantly (reportedly at the barrel of a gun and in the presence of the American ambassador, for whom the Darijization project had gone from a quirky local project to a threat to the stability of America’s chief ally in North Africa), Hassan II abdicated and retired to exile in France. At the age of ten, his son, Muhammad VI, was crowned king, under the regency of Hassan II’s younger brother, Moulay Abdallah. The regency council immediately announced the end to Darijization, and the restoration of Arabic as the sole official language, with recognized minority languages for the Amazigh, as well as some political liberalization, which allowed the free election of a conservative and semi-Islamist government under former cabinet minister and general, Mohamed Oufkir.

Hassan II occupies a split memory in Moroccan public consciousness. On the one hand, his formal annexation of the Western Sahara, and his defeat of Sahrawi and Algerian forces is widely celebrated as the final step towards the creation of the promised “Greater Morocco.” He also inaugurated close relations with Mauritania, which during his rule operated almost as a vassal of Morocco, and many of Morocco’s former enemies in the Mediterranean, such as Portugal, which welcomed Morocco into the European Free Trade Agreement (EFTA), in which Morocco remains to this day (despite three failed bids for EU membership). Under Hassan II, Morocco’s economy boomed to upper-middle income status, thanks to generous American and European aid and easy access to European markets. On the other hand, few Moroccans can forget his brutal repression in pursuit of Darijization, a policy that still baffles most Moroccans. He is neither publicly celebrated, nor condemned. When he died in 1999, there was no public mourning or funeral, but a private state affair attended only by his relatives.

Despite its eccentricity, Darijization enjoys a strange half-life in Moroccan politics. After more than ten years in which even mentioning Darijization was taboo, in 1985 a small pro-Darija party, Hizb Tshari (The Regionalist Party) won representation in parliament, though it was shunned by other parties. In 2000, parliament was deadlocked between rival Islamist-Nationalist and Liberal-Socialist camps. Abderrahmane Youssoufi, who led a coalition of the secular center and the left, controversially turned to Hizb Tshari to supply him with a crucial majority in exchange for establishing the “Institute for Darija Studies.” Despite sustained criticism, the Institute for Darija Studies has survived and thrived, publishing a comprehensive Darija dictionary, several Darija grammars, and numerous apologetics for Darijization. As memories of the repression of Hassan II fade, and alienation from the Arab world during regular flare-ups with Algeria grows, a signifiant minority, especially prominent in younger Moroccans, favor a limited return to Darijzation, including its recognition as a co-equal national language. Only time will tell if they will be successful.

Some historians argue that the Estado Novo ended with the election of Humberto Delgado in 1959 as President. This is, however, false. Delgado continued to work with Caetano in all 10 years of him being President, and reportedly even sought counsel from Salazar. Him never arresting Salazar or any other agents of the Estado Novo is itself telling, but his furtherance of the colonialist policies (albeit with a liberal-reformist bent) of the Estado Novo proved that he was only ever a nominal opponent of that regime.

Whilst Delgado did manage to prevent large-scale colonial war from breaking out, and Portugal never lost colonies apart from its say-so, the social order in Portugal (and its colonies) remained fundamentally unchanged until the Revolution. When Delgado declined to run for a third term in 1973, all hell broke loose. What was expected to be a peaceful transition to power ended in a brutal civil war.

Ultimately, the Maoists won, and Portugal's neocolonial enterprise was scattered on the wind, and all of its former neo-colonies plunged themselves into a civil war. Portugal became a light of China and the People's Great Savior in Europe as the green on her flag was subsumed by red. A great cultural revolution swept the entire nation, even spreading to some of her former colonies like Angola and Mozambique. Now, both the East and West were Red. NATO was, by this point, deprived of a founding member and Portugal became an outcast in Western Europe.

As the Soviet Union fell apart, the People's Republic of Portugal remained resolute in its support for the People's Republic of China, and continued to subsist off of foreign aid from it. But Portugal would remain Europe's Hermit Kingdom.

I'm back losers!! I finally have some free time and I'm excited to get back into CWP! Bulgaria is going to navigate the aftermath of the Yugoslav crisis and my ultimate goal will be to explore cybernetics and maybe some sort of uniquely Bulgarian communism under the aegis of the Soviet Union.

I also have several posts planned about the Pomaks and minority policies inspired by the stuff going on in the USSR

And I will invade Greece.

1st November 1959

Berlin, Germany

Following extensive investigation by German security forces, the government has today announced that the KPD has been outlawed in Germany and many of its leaders arrested as a result of collusion with an outside government.

During the dawn raids to arrest the leadership 5 people where killed across Berlin however the Chancellor has hailed the arrests as a success and "the first step towards restoration of true democracy in Germany".

No further statements have been made at this time.

Buenos Aires, Novemeber 3rd 1959

LAS MALVINAS SON ARGENTINA!

Screamed a protester in front of the national congress or rather a banner of support he carried with him. The rebirth of Argentine nationalism that initially came with Peron before his disgrace had not left and many wished assurances of the nationalist pretenstions which came with it.

With the recent British occupation of the Suez, many more left-wing leaders within Argentine politics had likewise adopted the position with the British seemingly distracted and intending to hold their terriories by force or even still expand them the beast had to be put down.

Then there was Frondizi watching this madness march forward which would place his own ambitions at risk. For once there would be no leaving his offices besides watching the results of the Congress's resolution come up.

A vote pushed forward by nationalists across bipartisan lines, an issue Frondizi could not accept nor could he challenge the gutteral roar of nationalism which had enflamed the nation. The Islands are Argentine.

As he listened to the radio powerless and the speeches of with some random individuals: Developmentalists, Peaceniks, disinterested nationalists etc. God knows where they got a Argentinan with a pro-British position for that peace. He couldn't stop it and the threat of a assertive Britain was definetly against Argentine interests.

Frondizi had to preempt it, the Argentine republic would file an appeal to the ICJ on the matter of the territory of the Falklands.

There was at least an upside Argentina has acted respectfully unlike the UK aligned with the goals of the international community and the decline of the wool trade had affected the Islands negatively alongside the declining British empire meanwhile Argentina's economy had seemingly begun roaring to life which if it came to a referendum could secure Argentine sovereignty of the archipelago.

(OOC) IF the mods want to rp it can it be NPC'D as I do not want to sit through a multiple day trial (/OOC)

The Republic of Costa Rica is a nation with great agricultural, and perhaps industrial potential, however it suffers from a lack of connectivity. Without adequate road, rail and shipping links, Costa Rican products cannot hope to compete on the global market, let alone serve the broader population. This needs to change, and President Mario Echandi Jiménez has a plan to do just that.

The Plan Nacional de Conectividad

The Plan Nacional de Conectividad envisions the Costa Rica of 1970 as a modern, interconnected and prosperous nation. This vision, however, will not be achieved through wishes and good ideas alone. It will require blood, sweat, money and labor drawn from across Costa Rican society in order to manifest successfully. While much money will be spent on roads, given their flexible nature, significant investment will also be made in railway lines for industrial applications.

The first of these lines will connect the Atlantic side-city of Guacimo through to the capital, San Jose, via the path cut through the mountains by the Chirripó River. This line, featuring two parallel tracks, will connect the Atlantic and Pacific lines allowing cargo to be transhippied from the Caribbean Coasta to the Pacific. While not initially electrified, space will be left to facilitate future upgrades, should the money become available. In total, the track is estimated to cost around $3.6mn USD dollars to construct, with work to be completed by 1965.

The second will connect and upgrade the two southern railroads, originally built for Banana transportation, to enable other kinds of cargo services. While the actual new line being constructed is minimal, around 20 kilometers, upgrades to the remainder will cost almost as much as a new line. In total the dual tracked line will cost $3 million USD, with work to be completed in 1963.

In terms of roads, four main highways will be built, crisscrossing the country and meeting in San Jose. This process shall take time, however, and is more of a vision than a concrete plan. In the short-to-medium term, $15 million will be allocated towards upgrading various primary and secondary roads, mainly through the addition of asphalt to major ones, and grating to minor ones.

The plan also calls for the consolidation of the major ports on both coasts to enable greater efficiency and economies of scale when importing and exporting products. This process shall be a gradual one, with money invested in upgrading the Ports of Limón and Caldera on the Pacific and Caribbean coasts respectively. This work will focus on improving connectivity within the ports, increasing the number of modern vehicles operated,and expanding facilities specifically designed to handle containerised, rather than loose, cargo. More than $5 million will be invested in each port with initial work to be completed in 1966.

1 OCTOBER 1959

This presidential election has, to put it mildly, been a crisis of sorts for the Estado Novo.

In the first place, it will be an actual election. There appears to be a legitimate possibility that Salazar will lose, as he seems to be unpopular amongst not only the youth but also pretty much every segment of society which is not ardent hardliners. His opponent, Humberto Delgado, has managed to marshal an impressive coalition of reformists, moderates, communists, liberals and military men. Salazar, on the other hand, has suffered from what some call a lack of charisma. His seeming inability (or perhaps unwillingness) to connect with the population on any significant level does him no favors in this regard.

It seems entirely possible also that Mr. Caetano has struck some sort of agreement with Delgado, as Mr. Delgado has pointed all of his criticism at Salazar, even though Salazar is technically out of office right now. Mr. Delgado also claims to have the support of the armed forces moreso than Salazar, which could very well be true. After all, memory of the Nuno Affair is still fresh in the high command's minds. Some are claiming that Caetano went as far as to promise that the PIDE and the Internal Ministry will not interfere in the election, much like the previous Presidential elections. Caetano denies this and promises that all elections can be expected to be conducted no differently than they have in the past.

Meanwhile, the Portuguese Communist Party (Suslovist) has withdrawn from the ballot in tacit support of Mr. Delgado. General Secretary Ruy Gomes announced that a popular front must be built against fascism, even if not all non-fascists are willing to work together formally.

The mainline (read: Maoist) Portuguese Communist Party remains resolute in its advocacy for armed struggle and in its opposition to participation in "bourgeois politics".

With just a few weeks until election day, it remains to be seen whether the New State is in any actual danger of collapse.

Sometime in 1958 during the civil war

Sukarno, the man who controls Indonesia alone could be seen cracking, he had given the PKI control over certain ministries for example the ministry of the economy, however The glorious and brilliant chairmen of the communist party Dipa N Aidit could tell this was just a temporary measure of Sukarno who would likely oust the communist the minute he re-consolidated rule. Sukarno was pragmatic like that, it's what made him a good leader and a difficult man to get rid of. However, at this time Sumatra, Sulawesi and even Java itself was undergoing rebellion and this would be a perfect time to strike the PKI was the party of the people with it being the largest party in all if Indonesia. Although it would not go into this alone

Dipa N Aidit would secretly organize meetings with leaders from the two small Murba and Acoma parties, two national communist parties which whilst split off form the PKI were still fellow left-wing revolutionaries who could be instrumental in this national struggle, While not all members of the PKI would want a violent struggle the smaller and more extreme Murba and Acoma parties were perfect to help fill those numbers, this needs to be a struggle with leftwing unity not just the PKI seeking out a power grab. And with that PSI leaders in Java would be sought out and talked with, many of them understand that Sukarno has purposefully pushed them out of government even though they are one of the larger parties in Indonesia. And this has likely made many of them dissatisfied with the regime. And so a with that a Secret United Front would be made between the PKI-PSI-Acoma-Murba parties with the PKI as the primary party the PSI as the secondary and the Acoma and Murba as two attached members. Leaders in the party were promised ministry positions once leftist rule can be established and true free and fair elections held.

Now as for the military, the policies of Sukarno with the rapid expansion of the airforce, army, and navy as well as the training by Soviets and assistance by the PRC has not only caused a bloated and gigantic army, this has also caused a situation where many of the senior officers in the army may be from the time of the Japanese but many of the new soldiers have communist sympathies and the airforce is even more communist with all the pilots having been trained by soviet flight instructors to utilize MIGs. Should it come to it we will likely see a situation where the vast majority of young soldiers side the communists. However we cannot expect that to be enough, this needs to be a revolution lead by the people for the people and whilst the Military we have turn for us may be the core of our new army we will need to see to it that a proper revolution upon rising up is given support by the common people and will have to be supported by large people’s militias. Efforts will be put in to begin gathering the basis of these peoples militias and stockpiling excess rifles in warehouses along Java, Sumatra, borneo, Various islands and Sulawesi.

In late 1958, the elections of the Bet Haam would take place. Unlike previously, Israel was currently at war during these elections, but because of the overwhelming victories, the war had not really effected the active daily life of most of the citizens. Many of the men and some of the women were not at home though, however, the IDF made sure to collect the vote of the soldiers who were on the frontline.

The 120 seats would need to be elected, which means a new Prime Minister could potentially be selected. However, despite the controversy of Ben-Gurion's Hula Valley War, Sharett's actions as Prime Minister has seen significant economic growth, and a largely successful war that could end with great success for Israel. From this, it was expected that the UWF would have a resounding victory, especially with the re-alignment of the IPRP, which saw the split of the Communist Party of Israel, and several of the members joining with the UWF.

Bet Haam Elections, 1958

As predicted, the UWF is able to securely take the Bet Haam, with 62.5% of the total seats under the coalition's control. The ZLF took thee second highest coalition votes, while LUC received the third most number of votes.

Hesnat Hafderli Elections, 1958

In the Hesnat Hafderli, there is almost half the number of seats with only 54. With there being 2 representatives from each of the 27 districts resulted in strong battles in each district for these seats. However, the UWF was able to achieve 36 seats split across several districts with some of the districts being a UWF sweep. 18 seats went to the opposition, but with 66.66% of the seats in favor of UWF they would have full control of the Knesset.

After discussion among the UWF there were several questions regarding if Sharett would retain Prime Minister or would Ben-Gurion who despite having retired, remained fairly active in the political landscape. It was then decided that Sharett would retain Prime Minister and form the 2nd Sharett Cabinet, and the 6th Cabinet of Israel.

2nd Sharett Cabinet, 6th Cabinet of Israel

President of Israel, 1959

Finally, a new President of Israel was elected to a 5-year term. Yitzhak Ben-Zvi became the 2nd President of Israel after replacing Yosef Sprinzak who had served from 1954-1959. Unfortunately, Sprinzak died in January of 1959, preventing him from running for his second term. Ben-Zvi would take office beginning his term as President of Israel.

Gentlemen, I have returned.

Anyhow yeah I'm basically just back to handle military stuff, mainly Algeria and the occasional warcrime for export. I'll be around so ping me.

Anyhow, I need to fill out the next hundred words for the bot to not neutralize me... so here is de Gaulle's speech on Algeria, Oct. 1958.

Last Sunday, three and a half million men and women of Algeria, without distinction of community, in complete equality, gave France and myself their vote of confidence. They did this quite simply without any constraint and in spite of the threats that certain fanatics brought to bear against them, their families and their property. This is a fact, as clear as the bright light of clay. And this fact is fundamental not only because it mutually and forever pledges, one to the other, Algeria and France, but also because it ties in with what happened that same day in Metropolitan France, in the Overseas Departments, in the Territories of the Community.

The least that can be said of this great demonstration is that the French people proved to themselves and to the entire world their determination for renovation, and that, at the same time, a hundred million men decided to build their future together in Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.

With regard to Algeria, what is the future to which France is calling her? Women and men of Algeria, I have come here to tell you what it is.

What must be achieved is the basic transformation of this country, so brave, so alive, but also so full of difficulties and suffering. This means that it is necessary for the living conditions of each man and woman to improve from day to day. This means that, for the benefit of the inhabitants, the resources of the earth and the ability of the elites must be brought to light and developed. This means that children must be taught. This means that all Algeria must have her share in what modern civilization can and must bring to men in terms of well-being and dignity.

But the loftiest plans call for practical measures. Here are the measures that my Government intends to take in the near future covering the next five years by virtue of the full powers that the new Constitution has just conferred upon it.

During these five years, of the young people in Metropolitan France - yes, I say in Metropolitan France-that enter the service of the State, in the Administration, in the Army, in education and in the public services, at least a tenth of these young people must be recruited from the Arab, the Kabyle and Mozabite communities, and that without prejudice to an increased proportion of Algerians serving in Algeria.

In the course of these five years, salaries and wages in Algeria will be raised to a level comparable to what they are in Metropolitan France.

Before the end of these five years, 250,000 hectares [617,500 acres] of new land will be allotted to Moslem farmers.

Before the end of these five years, the first phase of the plan for the agricultural and industrial development of Algeria will be brought to its conclusion. This phase includes, in particular, the delivery and the distribution of the oil and gas of the Sahara, the setting up, on this soil, of great metallurgical and chemical complexes, the construction of housing for a million people, the corresponding development of health services, of roads, ports, means of communication-in short, the regular employment of 400,000 new workers.

Gradually in the course of these five years, two-thirds of the girls and boys will be enrolled in school and, during the three years after that, complete school enrollment of all Algerian youth will be achieved.

During these five years, the human contact that has been made especially by the French Army-by its career officers, its reserve officers, its fighting men, its young conscripts-will be continued and developed and, in Metropolitan France, the same must be true, in Paris and n our provinces.

What will be the political Consequences of this evolution which calls for very extensive and prolonged efforts? I believe it is quite useless to freeze in advance, in words, that which, in any event, is going to take shape, little by little, as it is undertaken. But, in any case, two things arc certain as of now: the first concerns the present.

In two months, Algeria will elect her representatives under the same conditions as will Metropolitan France. But at least two thirds of her representatives will have to be Moslem citizens.

The other refers to the future. The future of Algeria will in any event - because that is the nature of things-be built on a double foundation: her personality and her close solidarity with Metropolitan France.

In any case, it is absolutely essential that this fruitful transformation be accomplished. This is necessary for the good of the men of Algeria, for the good of the women, for the good of the children who live here; but it is also necessary for the honor of mankind. It is necessary for the peace of the world. For no one has any interest in the stagnation of a people, except the kind of people, who, to serve their ambitions, gamble on the spirit of revolt and the poverty of others.

This transformation, this immense political, economic, social and cultural task-who could effect this transformation, if not France?

Now it happens that France has the will and the means to do so. It also happens that the vote of the Algerians has just proved that they desire this transformation and that it should be carried out with France.

Therefore, turning toward those who are prolonging a fratricidal conflict, who are organizing lamentable attacks in Metropolitan France, or who are spreading through the chancelleries, through underground dens, by means of the radios and the newspapers of certain foreign capitals-vilifications of France, to those I say: Why kill? We must enable people to live. Why destroy? Our duty is to build. Why hate? We must cooperate.

Stop this absurd fighting and you will at once see a new blossoming of hope over all the land of Algeria. You will see the prisons emptying; you will see the opening up of a future big enough for everybody, and for you yourselves in particular. And then, speaking to those States which are throwing oil on the fire here while their unhappy peoples writhe under dictatorships, I say: Could you do what France is in a position to do here, what only France is capable of doing? Could you people do it? No. Then let France carry on, unless you deliberately decide to envenom the conflict in order to distract attention from your own difficulties. But in the present state of the world, where can these bitter incitements lead if not to a universal cataclysm? Only two paths lie open to the human race today: war or brotherhood. In Algeria as everywhere, France, for her part, has chosen brotherhood.

#Long live the Republic! Long live Algeria and long live France!

"Of course it wouldn't be this easy. Democracy's restoration would have allowed them to return and we waited too long. It was all neccessary.", all of these thoughts rocked Frondizi's head as he opened a newspaper and found that calls for impeachment had entered the National Congress.

Calls of Frondizi being a socialist, irony in those calling him a plutocrat, the worst was one calling him the second coming of Peron.

Meanwhile in congress according to the paper several members of his own party had rallied against him, likely bribed and by no means a signifigant portion. Their seats will likely be made void by this effort. The Paper Machievlli would set out to work ever more revitalized, as what could these oligarchs hope to do?

The army was defanged and hell more likely to side with him over them. The Neo-Peronists backed him and assumedly so did the people. Meanwhile these oligarchs were still weak despite their renewed strength compared to prior and many of these reforms had already been carried out in the USA with only more cushioning done by Frondizi. Their arguments would dissolve in mere days with only the corrupt exposed, at least Frondizi hoped.

Frondizi would not go, only the oligarchs and the "unproductive" members of the assembly.

The 1954 Plan was a resounding success, part of that success being due to Molotov’s proposal to begin a transition of collective farms (kolkhoz) into state farms (sovkhoz), proletarianizing the peasantry, following the path of Stalin. With Molotov now Chairman of the Council of Ministers, he has a much clearer directive to work on agricultural policy. The eventual goal of the CPSU in the field of agricultural is the eventual abolition of all collective agriculture and the abolition of the peasantry as a class. To ensure the survival of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the proletariat must be strengthened.

Transformation of kolkhoz into sovkhoz brings many benefits, such as actual stable wages, pensions, and other other social benefits of proletarian employment. Smaller and less economically viable kolkhoz will also be abolished, combined, and transformed into sovkhoz. These larger state farms will allow the Soviet government to better plan its agricultural produce, specifically when it comes to specialized farms that require more know-how than general crop farming. Due to the sheer massive size of Soviet heavy industries, the utilization of sovkhoz will make it easier to ensure that state farms are more properly equipped, something which was a challenge under collectivized farming. As previously stated, farms deemed ineffective will be shut down, with their labor redistributed and their equipment and tractors provided to more proven sovkhoz.

Hey so Canada is a little boring and I’m struggling of ideas, I saw Indonesia is in a civil war and I’d like to have a chance to fight in a civil war. I saw that the previous player allied with the communists? Which is okay I had some other ideas though and would like to be incharge of Indonesia as I navigate it through this crisis. I was reading the Posts from the precious player and saw I’ve got a large military and talk with the Soviets and Chinese sometimes also so maybe they’ll help me.

October 15th, 1959 - Washington, D.C., United States of America

While many are fretting over who will be the next Republican nominee, the Republican National Committee and various Republican advocacy groups have started plotting a comeback in the federal legislature. Currently, the Republican Party is at a 22 seat disadvantage in the Senate and a 23 seat deficit in the House, both of which can be significantly improved upon for the Party. With the numbers in the House, it might even be possible for the Republicans to take back control of the House for the first time since 1948. For this to be possible, however, a solid strategy and plan on what seats to target and how to go about a national campaign must take place. While President Eisenhower and the Democrats continue to fumble the ball on Suez and languish without solutions domestically, the Republican Party can show itself off as a party that got domestic results and one that can recover the international situation the United States finds itself in.

National Campaign Focuses

For the starting parts of a national campaign, the Republican Party is targeting getting a fundraising advantage early on and keeping it, as well as working hard to get competitive candidates to announce for target seats. In this role, President Dewey, Senator Nixon, and a myriad of other GOP heavyweights have ramped up fundraising events in earnest, while the RNC is hitting the rolodex in a myriad of states to begin recruiting good men for the Class II Senate elections, House elections, and gubernatorial elections coming up. In addition to this fundraising effort, the RNC has bankrolled a partnership with the advertising firm Ted Bates, Incorporated to craft a full spectrum media campaign, from the television to the paper to the campaign poster. Several other companies, from Walt Disney to local advertising firms, have been tapped for future content creation and assistance for specific campaigns.

The RNC has also begun building up campaigning infrastructure across the country in target seats, with the following Senate seats being especially targeted:

With such a number of first term Senators up for reelection in competitive states, the Republican Party has a chance to slim down the Senate Democrats from 61 seats to 54 if it doesn’t lose a seat itself, a good start to flipping the Senate in the future. It will also make it much easier to pass legislation if a Republican takes the White House, especially since every seat targeted is inhabited by New Deal progressives. While good candidates will still need to be found, the RNC has already begun injecting cash into the state parties of each targeted seat to begin building up 1960’s campaign apparatus.

In terms of topics of discussion, the Republican Party will be targeting fears of Soviet nuclear superiority, lackluster economic growth, the Eisenhower Administration’s diplomatic blunders, and exploiting the Northern-Southern split in the Democratic Party. Already, Richard Nixon has begun talking about a “missile gap” between the United States and Soviet Union, pointing to the USSR’s fast-paced and rapidly expanding space program, as well as the recent confrontation in the Mediterranean.

For domestic issues, the Republican Party has started coordinating on blaming Democratic deficits and an over-reliance on the state to solve problems, comparing the Eisenhower Administration’s relatively unsuccessful efforts to the market-based approaches of Dewey. Defense spending is also a target, with the Republicans gathering comments from senior military officials about the President’s policies regarding defense spending. With Republican oversight, the space race can be won, America can ensure the Soviet Union’s advantages in missile development don’t spiral out of control, and the economy can be reinvigorated to bring prosperity to all.

On civil rights, the Republican Party has a two-pronged approach. Congressional Republicans and the Party overall agree with the push of civil rights and will most likely vote for any civil rights legislation, but the Party can still exploit divisions in the Democratic Party to hamper the Democrats in the border states and potentially make some Southern states competitive for the presidential election. With rumors that the Eisenhower Administration is looking to get another civil rights act passed in 1960, and with the Southern Democrats already chafing under the Civil Rights Act of 1957, a wedge can be had in the Democratic Party. While the Republicans can’t directly cause a split in the Party, it would seemingly be inevitable that the South would walk out of the convention if the Democrats passed two civil rights acts and nominated anyone but a Southerner as their nominee. What the Republicans can do, however, is run serious house campaigns in states like Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, and Kentucky, where House Democrats may be hampered by having to defend their record on civil rights to unreceptive audiences.

An Update on the Nixon Campaign

While Richard Nixon has yet to formally announce, he has started to prepare heavily for the campaign. In addition to gathering support from Republicans across the Party, the Senator has made use of the RNC’s partnership with Ted Bates, with the media group sending Rooster Reeves personally to counsel the Senate Majority Leader on improving his speech and public image. As Nixon is a man reviled by the DC press corps and a somewhat oddball speaker, much of 1959 has been spent improving his speech to produce good, brief sound bites for advertising, and refining it to work for a larger audience.

In addition, Nixon tried his best to clear the field of major candidates, to very mixed success. An attempt to stave off Barry Goldwater from running an insurgent conservative campaign fell flat, with the Senator seemingly dead-set on at least showing the conservative wing of the Party still has some life in it. Still, Goldwater didn’t seem opposed to Nixon as the nominee should he win. A talk with Governor Rockefeller went similarly, with the Governor seemingly convinced he can be an effective challenge to Nixon. As they’re both relatively moderate Republicans, such a campaign could prove damaging if Nixon is unable to make decisive wins in the actual primaries. Nixon’s conversation with Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. went much better in comparison, with the Secretary of State saying he stands with Senator Nixon and will work with Nixon in earnest to get the GOP back into the White House. An odd visit to Pennsylvania also yielded results, with Nixon convincing the Governor that his campaign ultimately hurt his chances of being re-elected as Governor of Pennsylvania. As such, Stassen quietly stopped campaigning and eventually terminated his campaign.

Thus, the stage was set for a showdown between Richard Nixon and Nelson Rockefeller, with Barry Goldwater as a third party who could potentially wreak havoc if unchecked. Nixon, of course, starts with a significant amount of political capital, fundraising, and campaign infrastructure, but Rocky’s popularity could see him overcome these obstacles. Nixon has also seemingly once again gained the favor of President Dewey once again, as the President has seen Nixon’s earnest campaigning in 1958 and his fundraising efforts for 1960 as proof that he’s a true party man, especially compared to a radical like Goldwater or the political acolyte that is Rockefeller. This support is mostly limited to the occasional appearance at a fundraiser or putting in a good word with Republican figures in the Eastern Establishment, thus dulling Rockefeller’s advantage with the liberal Republicans.