If you use the CB that allows you to get rid of a communist government in a country then what kind of government replaces it?
If you use the "uninstall communist government" CB then what government comes instead
- Thread starter Hardcore_gamer
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Save game to test it. (Or not)
Use uninstall communist government.
See the result.
Have an answer.
Use uninstall communist government.
See the result.
Have an answer.
But how does that make sense if the nation that uses the CB isn't a democracy?
because historically those countries worried about communism were more often than not democracies. fascists are really the sole exception
This was only really true during the cold war.
The majority of the nations in the game's timeframe are not democracies, so it makes no sense if fascists, monarchists, radical liberals, presidental dictatorships, or ANYTHING that isn't a democracy decides to invade just to install a democracy that they don't like anymore then they like the communists.
If this is true then Paradox has really dropped the ball here and this CB is sloppy and poorly executed.
Except that the cold war USA would have been happy to install anti-communist dictators in communist countries if it was cheaper than installing a democracy.
And then there is also the fact that, like I have already mentioned, this game isn't taking place during the cold war.
If Imperial Germany had invaded a communist Russia in the early 20th century, do you think they would have replaced the communist regime with a democracy?
at this point, the most anti-communist nations were the USA (a democracy), the United Kingdom (a very democratic state), France (a democracy), and the Weimar Republic (a democracy). And by the time a country actually became communist, democracy had prevailed over the monarchies
Communists show up in the game decades before the real world communist revolution in Russia. And that's not even mentioning that almost no game ends up like the real world did anyways, so talking about how "in real life, X happend blah blah blah" is completely moot.
I am also not really sure what the big deal is to just make it so that the new government installed is of the same type as the one used by the "liberator", I mean its such a common sense design decision that I am baffled that this isn't the case already. If I am running an absolute monarchy, a reactionary dictatorship, or any kind of an autocratic government, then I don't want to replace those hostile communists with a hostile democracy. It makes no sense to force it down the player's thoat that communists can only be replaced with a democracy because somebody thought it would be more "realistic".
USA wasn't really anti-communist in the game frame, not as much as it would get. And the Weimar Republic didn't become communist because of burning of the Reichstag (which basically outlawed KDP and SDP, the two biggest parties with the NSDAP) and the center right parties believing nazism was just the flavour of the month. Of course, I'm talking about late-game scenarios here. In middle game there shouldn't really be opposition to communism except in other dictatorships.
Not true, there are still a great number of monarchies today. The majority of anti-communist countries were said monarchies and dictatorships that didn't want liberal revolutions to give the people their civil, economic and political rights. There are way more dictatorships is south america, africa and south asia than there are democracies in the west. Also, most democracies are not anti-communist, and often have socialist parties democratically elected. Anything else you've heard is American propaganda
Socialist parties tend to distance themselves from Communist parties, not the least because they don't even really have the same origins despite Marx influencing both. Communist parties in democracies tend to be a lot more marginal, but not so much in Weimar Germany which was largely created by a communist revolution that then petered out as the fervour died down and the pre-existing elites creeped back in, which I suppose is evidence that Stalinist purges are needed to maintain a revolution.
Imperial Germany was a democracy rather than an absolutist regime, we just think otherwise due to wartime propaganda and a focus that highlights how Germany's democracy was weaker than the monarchy but doesn't compare that directly to the general corruption in other contemporary democracies. The United Kingdom is also so much a republic in all but name that using it as the bench mark for Constitutional Monarchy or hybrid democracy/monarchies makes you expect the wrong things.
The UK was a monarchy, but it wasn't anti-communist. Marx lived here for a while and wrote many of his most famous books here. Many communist ideas are actually based on English peasant riots and extremist protestant groups and pre-date Marx by centuries.
The Fascists were the guys who really hated communism.
Democracy didn't prevail over monarchy because democracy and republic/Jacobinism aren't the same thing. Most monarchies in Europe were taken out during WW1 and the USSR was part of that republican revolutionary process rather than apart from it. Greece, Italy, Yugoslavia/Serbia, the nordic countries, Romania and Bulgaria remained democracies though and apart from the neutral nordics even made great gains during WW1. The Ottoman Empire was replaced by a Turkish republic but the non-Turkish areas slowly re-emerged as smaller monarchies, with most of them being overthrown in military coups later. WW2 killed a lot of monarchies but Italy was the only one that became a democracy.
Imperial Germany was a democracy rather than an absolutist regime, we just think otherwise due to wartime propaganda and a focus that highlights how Germany's democracy was weaker than the monarchy but doesn't compare that directly to the general corruption in other contemporary democracies. The United Kingdom is also so much a republic in all but name that using it as the bench mark for Constitutional Monarchy or hybrid democracy/monarchies makes you expect the wrong things.
The UK was a monarchy, but it wasn't anti-communist. Marx lived here for a while and wrote many of his most famous books here. Many communist ideas are actually based on English peasant riots and extremist protestant groups and pre-date Marx by centuries.
The Fascists were the guys who really hated communism.
Democracy didn't prevail over monarchy because democracy and republic/Jacobinism aren't the same thing. Most monarchies in Europe were taken out during WW1 and the USSR was part of that republican revolutionary process rather than apart from it. Greece, Italy, Yugoslavia/Serbia, the nordic countries, Romania and Bulgaria remained democracies though and apart from the neutral nordics even made great gains during WW1. The Ottoman Empire was replaced by a Turkish republic but the non-Turkish areas slowly re-emerged as smaller monarchies, with most of them being overthrown in military coups later. WW2 killed a lot of monarchies but Italy was the only one that became a democracy.
Last edited:
Regardless of who hated communism the most, it appears that most of the people who have comented so far at least appear to agreee (even if they haven't outright said so) that only being able to repace communist regimes with a democracy is dumb.
Has anyone actually confirmed it yet? If not, I'm just going to assume it rolls back to whatever form of democratic government it last had. (HMs Gov., Democracy, etc.)
I don't think it's been confirmed. People just lit the afterburners after someone hazarded a guess that it installs a democracy.
I bet it installs a like government. That is what "puppet nation" did in Vic 1. Monarchy installs monarchy, etc. This makes the most sense as a design decision.
America and Britain did intervene militarily into the "USSR" during the Russian Civil war. (North Russia Intervention) Most likely the ultimate intent of the expedition was to undermine the communist-bolshevik cause in the Russian civil war.
Just because this intervention petered out and failed in the end, doesn't mean that America and Britain were suddenly friendly towards Communists...
