Could the US have a strong Communist Party as the opposition?

[TerranGames]

This question was inspired by the PCI in Italy where it was constantly the second-largest party in the country and all the other parties would sometimes enter grand coalitions solely to prevent the PCI from taking power. What I was wondering was, with a POD that still results in a Cold War of some kind, could a similar situation arise in the US, with a powerful Communist/Socialist party forming a "permanent opposition" of sorts? I'd imagine it'd be more difficult, since the US would be the centerpoint of whatever anti-socialist alliance exists in any TL.

Thanks!

 

[Lalli]

Unlikely even if you butterfly USSR completely. At best you would get some moderate socialist party but hardly much more. But even then it would require avoiding of red scare.

 

[Cudymcar]

Not with Red Scare running amok.
In 1939 CP USA numbered 100.000 members.
In 1949 it numbered 3.000 members, 1.500 of them being FBI informers.

 

[muskeg13]

Current politics/history. But, yes. It's happening now. The Commies are here now, in strength, with decades of red educational indoctrination. It's everywhere.

 

[Sam R.]

The difficulty for me is not just an increase in left politics, (coherent IWW organisational reproduction into the 1920s?); but, is to get a situation where a left is impotent enough to not be destroyed, but potent enough to be the largest party of non-government?

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

Current politics/history. But, yes. It's happening now. The Commies are here now, in strength, with decades of red educational indoctrination. It's everywhere.

You’ve been warned about introducing political flamebait to on-topic conversations, and now you’re adding conspiracy theories to this mix?

Kicked for a week.

 

[HexWargamer]

This question was inspired by the PCI in Italy where it was constantly the second-largest party in the country and all the other parties would sometimes enter grand coalitions solely to prevent the PCI from taking power. What I was wondering was, with a POD that still results in a Cold War of some kind, could a similar situation arise in the US, with a powerful Communist/Socialist party forming a "permanent opposition" of sorts? I'd imagine it'd be more difficult, since the US would be the centerpoint of whatever anti-socialist alliance exists in any TL.

Thanks!

At the very least you need to prevent the McCarthy 'purges' ... which essentially 'cleansed' communiststs from all areas of influence in American institutions, especially Universities and (famously, or should I say infamously) Hollywood and the media. This removed the main methods of delivering the communist 'message' (aka propaganda) to the general public, especially the impressionable (eg students).

Without lots of support from the general public any political party has problems. Lacking membership fees means they can't even finance the election campaigns of candidates (sure, Moscow can provide funds but you can bet the opposition would be very quick to condem that ...)

The other 'problem' is you don't have enough 'downtrodded masses' (such as peasent farmers) in the USA who can be convinced that by siezing the wealth of others ( banks, factory owners, landowners, Kulaks etc) they will some-how end up better off .... yes, USA has it's poor, but these are very much in the minority.

Finally, I would suggest that it's only the oppression of a Facist dictatorship that pushes people into a lasting opposition = i.e. IMHO experiencing Mussollini is what entrenched the Italian communist party.

 

[EasternRomanEmpire]

Finally, I would suggest that it's only the oppression of a Facist dictatorship that pushes people into a lasting opposition = i.e. IMHO experiencing Mussollini is what entrenched the Italian communist party.

The PCI grew during the Cold War, it reached its peak in 1976; Mussolini and Partisan resistance were far from being the only factors for the popularity of the PCI.

 

[Cudymcar]

At the very least you need to prevent the McCarthy 'purges'

McCarthy was Johnny-come-lately. When he started his campaign (1950) the Communist party was already destroyed. By J. Edgar, mostly.

 

[Lalli]

McCarthy was Johnny-come-lately. When he started his campaign (1950) the Communist party was already destroyed. By J. Edgar, mostly.

McCarthy just saw everybody who were more left-wing than he as communist. And probably it was mostly his own ego-boost campaign.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

Communist? Probably not. Socialist? That depends on your definition of socialism, and if you want a viable party to call itself socialist, the Cold War opponent would need be someone other than the USSR.

 

[Fries]

A viable socialist party? Probably not. Definitely not after 1920. I could see a very powerful social-democratic party that may identify itself as "democratic socialist"---maybe an evolution of Farmer-Labor; a stronger progressive wing?---as a strong third party but not a permanent contender. By the time the 60s roll around it's almost entirely subsumed by the New Deal coalition, but the events of the late 60s to early 70s and maybe the Rodney King riots (if they still happen) could make it prove to be powerful. Maybe an early and public anti-war stance in Vietnam?

Finally, I would suggest that it's only the oppression of a Facist dictatorship that pushes people into a lasting opposition = i.e. IMHO experiencing Mussollini is what entrenched the Italian communist party.

It actually tends to be the opposite, I think: fascism tends to grow in countries with strong labor movements. Or, if you'll excuse my Marxism, as a petite and upper bourgeois reaction to powerful labor movements by an invigorated proletariat in moments of economic crisis. The Horthyite movement entrenched itself in Hungary after the exile of Otto and the destruction at the hands of the coalition against the MSk; Germany's Nazi party began as a domestic anti-communist party, ballooning into popularity throughout Bavaria as a reaction to the November Revolution and in East Prussia from a fear of Soviet influence; the PNF grew in the aftermath of the Red Biennium---the Blackshirts were formed as an anti-leftist force during the Biennium, and an alliance between the Blackshirts (and by inclusion the PNF) with local landowners and anti-communist activists were what helped sweep Mussolini into power. Pinochet came to power in Chile after a US-backed coup against Allende, and the TYS in Japan had its roots in anti-leftist violence against liberal prime ministers and both anarchist and communist groups.

 

[LeX]

Maybe not full-on communist, but a socialist movement is probably viable if something like the New Deal is not implemented and crony capitalism gets worse during and after the 1930s. A widening gap between rich and poor and scandals involving blatant corruption of the monied elite could cause the OTL 1950s/1960s drive for things like the Civil Rights movement to be merged with calls for stronger economic regulations.

Basically, rather than Marxist-Leninist revolution, this American Socialism (maybe American Social Democrats?) would strive to level the playing field for Americans of all backgrounds. In the likely event that there is American involvement in TTL's World War II, the war effort would probably give this movement more opportunities to expand its societal influence.

I think the emphasis of the party would have to be on the democratic aspect of things, because it would necessarily have to unite all kinds of disparate interests and groups to gather enough support. However, with enough popular discontent at Wall Street corruption and whatnot, it should be possible to add the economic package to the mix, which seems to have been largely left out IOTL.

EDIT: There would also be a lot of radicals, such as bona fide Marxist-Leninists who want a violent overthrow of the American government and a totalitarian vanguard party like in Russia and China. But absent a terrible civil war and poverty and national humiliation, which America is not likely to experience in the 20th century, I think these fanatical Lenin/Stalin/Mao wannabes will not get anywhere near power. In fact they will only provide ammunition for anti-leftist propaganda among the American right wing and probably the "ASD" would have to strongly disavow/shut down these people to be successful.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

This would require a pre-1900 POD, looking at the labor unrest after the crash of 1873 as a catalyst that drives American political history more like France. In this case the Socialist Party (based on Labor and Populists) would divide between the mainstream, like the SFIO, and the supporters of the Bolshevik International. In France the PCF remains a major player until they were subsumed by Mitterrand in the ill-fated, for the PCF, Union of the Left. But the POD has to be pre-1900.

 

[htgriffin]

This question was inspired by the PCI in Italy where it was constantly the second-largest party in the country and all the other parties would sometimes enter grand coalitions solely to prevent the PCI from taking power. What I was wondering was, with a POD that still results in a Cold War of some kind, could a similar situation arise in the US, with a powerful Communist/Socialist party forming a "permanent opposition" of sorts? I'd imagine it'd be more difficult, since the US would be the centerpoint of whatever anti-socialist alliance exists in any TL.

Thanks!

U. S. Communists openly and loudly breaking with Moscow Central early on would help. Enough, that is another question but a United Front with FDR as his administrations implemented an even more comprehensive New Deal might manage to get them wedged into political discourse among the general populace as Loyal Opposition rather than Stalinist Puppets.

 

[Fries]

U. S. Communists openly and loudly breaking with Moscow Central early on would help. Enough, that is another question but a United Front with FDR as his administrations implemented an even more comprehensive New Deal might manage to get them wedged into political discourse among the general populace as Loyal Opposition rather than Stalinist Puppets.

Earl Browder tried that and failed miserably. He was even voted out of the party's leadership for a time; after 1950 he became irrelevant precisely because he advocated for working with the Democrats. A thing to remember is that at the time you're describing---the 30s to the 50s---"Stalinism" was widely seen as the only form of socialism actively being proven to be able to sustain itself. A lot of people in the party, like William Foster, were genuine Marxist-Leninists and hated the idea of cooperating with liberals. Anti-Stalinism as a widespread and generally accepted political trend didn't emerge among the global left-wing until the 1956 Secret Speech and the beginning of de-Stalinization: other trends like Trotskyism, anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism, De Leonism, guild socialism, just anti-Leninist Marxism, &c. didn't really have major centers or widespread political movements (with a few notable exceptions, such as early modern Japan and especially Spain and Italy).

 

[Viking25]

Germany's Nazi party began as a domestic anti-communist party, ballooning into popularity throughout Bavaria as a reaction to the November Revolution and in East Prussia from a fear of Soviet influence; the PNF grew in the aftermath of the

Not denying the Nazis anti communism but calling them a petit bourgeois movement is a bit of an exaggeration. Sure they got a lot of their support was from the middle class but it was also from across German society. Ian Kernshaw even argues they were probably the only real national party( as in there support wasn’t restricted to one group/ geographical voting block) by the 1930s.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

As for htgriffin, for the U. S. Communists to openly break with the Stalinist International turns them back into regular Socialists, and as I argued earlier the existence of a strong Socialist part in the pre-war International is probably required to create a viable Communist Party after the breakup of the old International.

 

[the Imperium of Canada]

This question was inspired by the PCI in Italy where it was constantly the second-largest party in the country and all the other parties would sometimes enter grand coalitions solely to prevent the PCI from taking power. What I was wondering was, with a POD that still results in a Cold War of some kind, could a similar situation arise in the US, with a powerful Communist/Socialist party forming a "permanent opposition" of sorts? I'd imagine it'd be more difficult, since the US would be the centerpoint of whatever anti-socialist alliance exists in any TL.

Thanks!

Maybe have the United States enter World War II under a much more isolationist leaning government (idk President Huey Long or something). It's main focus is Japan and it's involvement with Europe is a lot more limited and fraught with tension with the United Kingdom.

By the end of things the UK and France are the head of the NATO equivalent while the US largely retreats back into its own affairs.

Then contrived some circumstances where a strong leftist current can develop in the United States.

 

[Fries]

Not denying the Nazis communism but calling them a petit bourgeois movement is a bit of an exaggeration. Sure they got a lot of their support was from the middle class but it was also from across German society. Ian Kernshaw even argues they were probably the only real national party( as in there support wasn’t restricted to one group/ geographical voting block) by the 1930s.

Note I also included the haute bourgeoisie in that statement. The Nazi party found its firm rooting in former soldiers, the former aristocracy, more well-off workers, bankers, and industrial conglomerates. Fascism arises as a reaction from the bourgeoisie, who are terrified of class consciousness and proletarian revolution, and the petite-bourgeoisie, who are terrified of becoming poor (or are already poor but either are not or cannot become radicalized; largely in part due to reaction from socialist uprisings---in Nazi Germany this manifested itself as fear from the Spartacist revolution, the Russian revolution, the Hungarian revolution, and the Red Biennium in Italy) and losing their jobs but not radicalized: it helps if they're unfamiliar with or at least not particularly well-versed in Marxism and/or politics as a whole. Fascism feeds on the fear of the petite bourgeoisie, whereas it comes from the fear of the haute bourgeoisie; the petite-bourgeoisie and lumpenproletariat in pre-Nazi but post-Depression Germany were scared of losing their jobs, rocked by hyperinflation and economic mismanagement dating back to the Versailles treaty, hated the West due to the Americans pulling out economic aid and the French occupation of the Ruhr (as well as what would eventually become the Allies being most of the Entente; the United States, France, the United Kingdom, and eventually the Soviet Union as a successor of the Russian Empire), were anti-communist or at least feared Soviet expansion to the West, were filled with former soldiers and Freikorps members, and had convenient scapegoats; ethnic minorities (particularly Jews), political minorities (particularly communists), and foreign adversaries (particularly France and the USSR).

Fascism as a distinct ideology is a set of beliefs, funded and spread by the haute bourgeoisie. Think how Krupp, IG Farben, BMW, Ford, AEG, AP [Associated Press], Audi, Dresdner, and Hugo Boss among many other companies collaborated with the Nazis and supported their efforts against victims of genocide and the Nazi political system; Krupp produced Zyklon B and directly spread and benefit from slave labor, IG Farben produced Zyklon B and produced rubber using Auschwitz prisoners (killing roughly 23,000 of their 35,000 slaves), BMW benefitted from slave labor and used slaves in vehicle production, AEG used slaves, AP censored anti-Nazi sentiment and promoted pro-German articles in the States, Audi exploited slave labor (particularly at Leitmeritz; over 4,500 people were killed as a direct result of Audi using slave labor from that camp), Dresdner was the main stakeholder in Auschwitz and was the main financier and banking group for the SS in occupied Poland, and Hugo Boss was a fervent Nazi who made Nazi uniforms, and many other examples. I'd go all day listing them here.