The TL is weird, and I think I embraced it a while ago (April-June, 1924).

Covenant of Nations ]

April 2 of 1924, the Covenant of Nations holds an important meeting, with the way of successes of the Russian economic reconstruction and the beginnings of the high-speed rail making their inroads into the Russian Empire (and also the beginnings of bilateral projects with other countries of the Russosphere), new discussions for bilateral projects began between the members of the Covenant.

This is perhaps one of the reasons for the second industrial revolution of the Russian Empire, the mechanization of Russian agriculture and the demographic growth of the Empire, added to the great expansion of the Russosphere, gave rise to a good breeding ground.

But this starting point was also supported by the Covenant of Nations, since the bilateral relations between the countries of the Russosphere gave rise to a 'production and distribution chain' that supported the beginnings of globalization, as the ruble zone expanded and the forms of manufacturing-export changed.

Essentially, the central bank of the Covenant (directed de-facto by Moscow) raised the financing and investment in numerous infrastructure projects that would include (mainly):

Airports (which were progressively becoming more viable commercial enterprises).

Bridges.

Public transport terminals.

Canals.

Railways.

Roads.

Ports.

Communication centers.

Among some other things, but that was the main thing in these mentioned projects.

Essentially thanks to this, the Russian economy continued to make its way into the economy of its allies, but giving rise to an important trade in goods and services that continued to intertwine Eurasia through a New Silk Road.

As we know the nature of the original Silk Road and the Russian Silk Road allowed for the exchange of materials and ideas, but for the Russian Empire it was also an important platform for Russian economic-cultural influence and changes throughout history. Russosphere.

On May 1, 1924, the Covenant of Nations under Tsar Nicholas II, decided after the approval of these new infrastructure projects, to carry out a campaign against poverty and the improvement of life in rural regions of the Covenant. .

In a sense this campaign (a "Strategy Against Poverty in a Prosperous Society") was an important step towards the first globalization, great agricultural modernization around Eurasia and lifting millions of people out of poverty (in modern terms).

At a time when the population of the Covenant of Nations was in the process of growth beyond 300 million people, so the needs of the Covenant also grew and naturally more resources, food and services were needed.

And the Covenant weren't about to rely entirely on foreigners, so they needed to develop their own productive forces.

In the campaign of a "Strategy Against Poverty in a Prosperous Society", on the one hand the aforementioned infrastructure projects of the Covenant were carried out and on the other hand we saw a kind of minor 'agricultural revolution' (a great agricultural mechanization and improvement of the primary sector within the nations of the Covenant, with similar consequences to an agricultural revolution such as improvement in techniques, product diversification and major productivity).

In the sense that agriculture and sustainability of the human organization, saw a continuous and important increase in productivity and technological improvements (fertilizers, tractors and the like - obviously not as advanced as the modern times of genetic manipulation of food products, but it was quite modern for the time).

Which also translated into increased quality of life and 'common prosperity' within the Covenant of Nations, which began to push back the poverty and food problems that existed at the time (and still exist today).

In the 20th century through the effects of climatic events, government policies, war and crop failures, millions of people died of famine in some of the most prosperous times of Humanity.

And we already know that in societies of millions of people this can be very dangerous (see the history of China or the artificial famines in India), both because of the cost of lives and because of the socio-political consequences that economic-food insecurity can have.

So in summary, the reforms that took place within the Covenant served several purposes (mass development in the economy of the member countries due to the growth in complexity of the bloc, sustainability of Russian influence in the Covenant, and maintaining the influence of political order in the member countries) and had various consequences (increased quality of life, support for the socio-economic and political developments of the Covenant at the time, and possibly the beginnings of globalization).

As a result of the Eurasian explosion (led by Russia), the Covenant of Nations grew to over 400 million citizens in 1930 and its future growth was supported by the success of important projects initiated in the 1920s.

(OOC: We're getting close to the 1926 container and globalization update, that's basically what this part of the update means if you ask me - and also a little clue about Russian population for the next decade)

*******

[Orthodoxy: A 'Popular' Church for the new Common Man]

Despite the fact that the division between state and church is reaffirmed in the constitution of the Russian Empire (due to the multi-religious nature of the Russian Empire and the evolution of its rule of law), it is difficult to say that the Russian Empire is completely secular, or that the state and the Russian Orthodox Church (or even other national religions) are totally separated.

Partly due to the laws of the Russian Empire (the Tsar/Tsarina must be a believer in the Russian Orthodox Church and his/her position has important links to religious dogma), for pragmatic propaganda/political reasons (the importance of religion in Russian society or some events since the Empire is a multi-cultural state, a nature that includes certain religious aspects) and for various historical reasons of the first half of the XX century.

Especially due to these mentioned historical reasons there was a 'resurgence' in the relationship between the Orthodox church and the state, and the creation of new currents of thought within the Orthodox world.

This historic reasons include:

*Independence of the Orthodox Balkan nations from Ottoman rule.

*The dissolution of the Ottoman Empire at the hands of Russia, culminating in the liberation of the city of Tsargrad (Constantinople).

*The formation of the title/role of 'Tsar Agustus' under Alexander III.

* The rise of Stalinism, whose ideological vision was linked to an understanding between the interests of the popular classes (workers and peasants) with a certain religious thought (mostly Orthodox, since Stalin did have experience with the Orthodox Church).

*Other religious situations throughout the world, such as the socialist revolutions in Christian countries (mostly belonging to the Catholic denomination -such as Iberia, Italy or France- although there were also other denominations such as Protestants in Red Germany and even other Abrahamic religions like the Jewish populations of Western Europe ) and the success of the Emirate of Ha'il in its Pan-Arabist politics (which ultimately resulted in the occupation of the entire Holy Land under an Arab Muslim power).

**Note: Socialist countries around the 20s-40s practiced extreme levels of secularism or even the doctrine known as 'State Atheism' (in general we can say at the end that Protestantism suffered a lot, but Catholicism was in a more acceptable situation). In subsequent decades (50s-60s to modern times), socialist countries have made various changes or reforms regarding the relationship between the socialist state and religion/spiritual thought, which may vary from country to country.

And so under these conditions, the Russian state and the Russian Orthodox Church began to deal with new movements of religious thought that began to gain a foothold in Russian society and politics. Coupled with an obvious political link between the Tsarist government and Russian religions (be it Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism or Buddhism... but Orthodoxy had a 'special position' for obvious reasons).

The reason why these new movements and the relationship between church and state did not get out of hand was mainly because of important reforms that took place within the Russian state under Nicholas II.

Establishing a certain order within the Russian Orthodox Church and its 'new' Patriarchate to consolidate a favorable political situation for the state, mainly thanks to the 'Patriarchal' factions (originally called Tikhonovists, after their leader, Patriarch Tikhon). The main figures of this early Tikhonovism were Alexandr Ivanovich Vvedensky, Vladimir Dmitrievich Krasnitsky, the priest Evgeny Khristoforovich Belkov, Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) of Vladimir, Archbishop Evdokim (Meshchersky) of Nizhny Novgorod, Bishop Macarius (Znamensky) of Krasnoslobodsk, and Archbishop Seraphim (Meshcheryakov) of Kostroma.

Tsar Nicholas II, Patriarch Tikhon and these allies essentially maintained a state-friendly position within Russian society, accepting important reforms and engaging in socio-political and propaganda activities, through the creation of an important new edict on May 29 of 1924, where Patriarch Tikhon of Moscow and All of Russia and Tsar-Augustus Nicholas II confirmed a brief reorganization and help to reconstruction of the institution of the church after the Russian civil war ( 'fixing' the problems caused by it and putting in new useful allies or changes).

And along the way rationalizing the situation of these new 'popular' Orthodox movements that would subordinate themselves in one way or another to the state and the Russian Orthodox Church.

In the process, creating a 'consensus' between Church and State, where the Tikhonovists or Patriarchals would hold a certain relevant position (and benefits for them) within Russia, but still keep the Tsar and the secular government at the helm of the ship. And also giving rise to the aforementioned subordination of the Orthodox Partisan Wave to the central authorities in Moscow.

A pragmatic and advantageous relationship, which marked an important part of the new religious thought of the early twentieth century in Russia and to a certain extent in the second half of the twentieth century (although by then these changes had been diluted).

If we look at these new orthodox movements, we will currently find relatively useful or harmless movements.

During the Russian civil war and the reconstruction period, these new religious movements or thoughts within the Russian Orthodox Church would born and consolidate due to the elimination of several ultra-right wing members of the institution (mainly due to relations between these elements of the church with the Directorate during the Russian civil war and purges of troublesome elements of the military clergy and nobility) and the certain blows received by the leadership and center groups of the institution during the war.

These movements are mainly divided into five groups:

*The Living Church or Zhivotserkovniki/Zhivtsy, the 'radicals' of these movements, who called for certain reforms within the church organization such as the formation of a larger secular clergy and reforms within the 'monastic-religious orders'.

*'Renovationists', a group that believed in the need for a church-community of a democratic nature on principles of "equality, fraternity and liberty."

*Communalists, who as their name suggests, supported the creation of a strong collective (community, not in the sense of collectivization) and 'new' labor morality within Russian society.

*Ideological/Orthodox Modernists, a group that sought a renewal within Russia and its religious order, following doctrines similar to the New Russia of Tsar Nicholas II or the thought of Premier Stalin.

*'Bonapartists', a name used for various ideologues and leaders of these movements that emerged in the social-political waves that existed within the Russian Empire, characterized by an identity strongly associated with 'Popular Classes' (workers and peasants, which sometimes made them win the term 'populist').

And six, if you count the "Grey Priests" or also "Repairers", who are actually the HUGE bunch of Okhrana agents who served within all these movements to control the situation of said groupings towards pro-State and pro-Patriarchate doctrines and/or purging the most problematic elements (a lot of pseudo-cults/sects were essentially destroyed by the Okhrana and various opposition leaders/ideologues found themselves investigated or captured, or suffered a similar fate).

A lot of the groups mentioned above were actually led by these Gray or Repair Priests, but we can say that they took advantage of the wave that existed in post-civil war Russia and were not really the instigators of the movements themselves (although due to their interference, they would be a vital part of their development).

*[Note]: These new Orthodox movements cannot be compared to the 'New Age' movements that existed within the United States or the changes in religious politics within Socialist Europe.

This is rather an Orthodox-world phenomenon.

They obviously didn't win everything they asked for, but they were useful during this time for a number of reasons and saw the rise of this new 'Common-Man' or working class identity among the religious movements in Russia, and thus the Russian Orthodox Church.

Which in some sense mimics the secular movements in Russia and the Vatican laborist government that existed at the time, a church that while maintaining a consensus for certain religious doctrine, was also tied to a secular (and centralized) state and progressive citizen movements.

In the rest of the Russosphere, these events within the Russian Empire also had their relevance, especially within Serbia where the 'Partisan/Red Priests' began to emerge.

These Partisan Priests were the leaders of Russian-inspired movements (of religious and political nature) that arose within Serbia, creating a Serbian Orthodox movement with 'populist'-progressive characteristics and Russophiles (basically following the popular-religious movements that existed in Russia) which attracted the attention of Serbian workers and peasants.

Between the 30s-40s (a period of formation and consolidation, especially for the role of the Partisan Priests in fighting during World War III) to even the 80s, these Partisan Priests played a considerable role in developments within Serbia, either through their relations with the Serbian state or an active role within the government.

The most famous of these Serbian Partisan Priests are Vladimir "Vlada" Zečević (who even briefly became Minister of the Interior of Serbia, Minister of Construction, Transportation and Infrastructure and played an important parliamentary role) and German, Patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church from 1958 to 1990.

In short, nothing too bad came out of the rise of these new thought movements within the Orthodox world, in fact to some extent they were helpful in forming labor movements during the 20th century (a certain unity within Orthodoxy in the Russosphere, not just based on in the influence of Tsargrad and Moscow) and resistance during the Third World War (helping in the fight against reactionary groups in Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania and parts of Russia).

*To this day: Today the Russian Orthodox Church obviously does not have as much power as it used to, but it is still a part of Russian society and political-national events since it is 'integrated' in what is the whole of the Russian Empire (like the other religions of the various groups of the empire, which follows a doctrine of unity and civic nationalism).

A curious example is the 'blessing' from members of the Church towards the rockets or other devices of the Russian Space Program, and weapons or vehicles of the armed forces (including submarines, missiles and more).

ea98bbcb133d23a68027c034f5c2eace8cfbd8c9.jpg

"Pennies from the peasantry made churches' wealth - So why do you stand like a fortress? Give everything to the peasants!" - Certain behaviors and elements of the church (in addition to the social advances in the Russian Empire as a result of economic and educational reform) during the Russian Civil War showed the obvious differences between the men of the church and the Russian peasantry-proletariat, so it mobilized the population towards new, more popular Orthodox movements (aligned with Russia's massive population).

stalin.jpg

5de7ac8685600a3ea8288e0c.jpg

Relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and secular government of the Russian Empire after the success of the reform of 1924 by Patriarch Tikhon of Moscow.

czar1.jpg

2_8358799c.jpg

Nicholas II, Tsar Augustus and Autocrat of All-Russia, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church after his death. For obvious reasons, Nicholas II is very famous among Orthodox believers (and also non-Orthodox citicenz of the Empire, but non-Orthodox don't have him oficially as a Saint).​

*******

[Central Asia: After Alexander III]

Turkestan or also known as Central Asia is a vast region in many ways, with enormous diversity in geographical, economic, ethno-cultural and historical issues.

As a result, the changes that occurred in Central Asia under Russian rule also had considerable results and consequences in such a varied land, due to the importance that Central Asia plays in numerous projects.

Mainly in the expansion of the Green Wall of Central Asia, resource extraction, the Russian New Silk Road, infrastructure development and bilateral projects with the Covenant of Nations and other strategic allies of the Russian Empire.

All this meant the increase in human development and economic development in Central Asia.

Historically the region was a key part of various trade routes and was conquered numerous times by different nearby empires, but the advancement in technology and the influence of new thoughts led to certain changes in Turkestan.

Mainly we saw an increased role and centralization of the state in the life of the region, which was now able to carry out various projects in the impoverished and isolated parts of the region (in the process ending most of the old criminality and greatly limiting inter-ethnic/ inter-cultural conflict), leading in the process to the increase of infrastructure in communications, transportation and basic needs.

For obvious reasons the region increased its socio-economic importance.

And also due to this socio-economic increase, we saw changes in the way of life in the region and its culture, mainly as nomadism began to 'die' giving way to favoring a sedentary lifestyle.

After all, there was an increase in the population's abilities to obtain stable work, food and water (the increase in non-native populations such as Russians and Ukrainians in Central Asia also helped).

With greater sustainability came almost constant population growth which led to larger population centers (where nomadism did not become as sustainable as before).

Although this is positive for the increase in the development and complexity of the region, it also gave rise to other particular situations.

Mainly the fact that different ethno-cultural groups settled in the huge region, with almost no 'consideration'. Numerous Uzbeks, Tajiks, Turkmens, Kazakhs and other peoples of the Russian Empire could be seen living in a relatively small space (several communities or towns and cities thus had considerable diversity).

The State led by Moscow maintained the law and therefore peace, but there was no official demarcation of where Kazakh lands or Uzbek lands began, most delimitations were therefore geographical or historical, giving rise to a rather confusing map of political, social and cultural relations in Russian Turkestan.

A Turkestan that remained united for various reasons, including the political-ideological and social progress of the region under Moscow, the New Russia of Tsar Nicholas II, the civic nationalism promoted within Russia, advances in the administrative organization of the region and the generation of the 'Baby Boomers' from Central Asia.

Essentially, the 1920s under Tsar Nicholas II were a major period of change in Central Asia, due to the influence of the Alexandrian government and Tsar Nicholas II's New Russia idea in Turkestan.

On the one hand, allies of Tsar Nicholas II such as Alibi Togzhanovich Dzhangildin began to influence the popular movements of Central Asia in favor of Moscow, bringing important reforms in the ideological thought of Central Asia.

And on the other hand, the tsarist-Alexandrian policies had begun to bear fruit. Essentially the 1920s saw in 1926 the completion of the first and some of the most complicated parts of the Green Wall of Central Asia, although its results were already beginning to show.

The growth of arable land and the fight against the desert, the growth in healthcare, infrastructure and economic interconnection gave rise to a considerable population boom among the populations of Central Asia (comprising Turkic peoples, Persians, Slavic migrants and more). Which for these reasons was known as the 'baby boomer' generation of Central Asia.

The baby boomers of Central Asia (not to confuse other generations under a similar category that emerged after World War III), although they may have had their rebellious facets, grew up strongly influenced by the doctrines of Moscow, which was reflected in their behavior more late.

Tsar Alexander III, due to the Green Wall of Central Asia and other policies, is a very popular figure among the peoples of Central Asia and Tsar Nicholas II's thinking of a New Russia, guided this in a right direction.

Although obviously the different groups and individuals of the Baby Boomer generation had their particular characteristics (ideology, culture-ethnicity and religion), they were strongly mobilized in favor of belonging to the Russian Empire and currents that existed in the rest of Russia.

Like the aforementioned Dzhangildin, whose influence led to the expansion of the Central Asian left and related movements (the relationship between 'progressivism' and Islam, some pan-Turkish ideas, etc.) that damaged possible extremism or separatism in the region.

ux0zb6Z-K9Og3KgtOhPIOYAMlCdzTbiXpEoDFl6T7pY.jpg

"A New Road!" - Russian-Uzbek poster from 1926, influenced by the New Russsia of Tsar Nicholas II and the thought of Dzhangildin for Central Asia, similar posters inspired important movements in Central Asia and its future generations (theyoung Baby Boomers) towards a bright future.​

*******

[Fourth (IV) Duma - Deputy Premier L. V. Kamenev vs Premier I. V. Stalin]

While within Russian politics there is of course an "official protocol" for numerous political procedures, as in all countries, a lot of the internal politics of the Russian Empire actually occurs 'behind the scenes'.

Tsar Nicholas II is a clear example of this, for a considerable time Nicholas II had managed to build a circle of trust behind the official policies of the Russian Empire. Forming allies that would essentially rule the Russian Empire alongside the Tsar as helmsman for a long period of time (the long rule of Tsar Nicholas II, with whom only two emperors have managed to compete - one being Alexander III).

Among this circle of trust was obviously the Premier I.V. Stalin, who like Tsar Nicholas II, is one of the historical 'political juggernauts' of the Russian Empire, with feats that other similar figures have not been able to reproduce with such success.

Between January 29 and January 31 of 1924, at a meeting of various RSLDP figures (who held positions in its central organs) is where this behind-the-scenes politics began to spin again rapidly, as the Russian Empire recovered of its civil war.

In this case we are talking about the beginning of a major struggle between factions of the RSLDP, on the one hand the Stalinist faction of the party (which naturally gets its name from IV Stalin) and the 'moderate' or 'social democratic' wing of the party (led by L.B. Kamenev).

This showdown might seem sudden, but it makes considerable sense from a number of practical standpoints. Originally the RSLDP leadership in the early years of the Russian Empire's democratic reforms was led by a Troika/Triumvirate consisting of Zinoviev, Stalin and Kamenev.

With Stalin and Kamenev forming an alliance and defeating Zinoviev (who at first led an 'orthodox' wing of the party and later the small Petrograd Zinovievist circle), it was natural that their interests progressively began to clash for several reasons.

Mainly due to conflicts in the new constitutional government of the Russian Empire, the promotion of members aligned with their own positions, the lack of a common enemy and other personal-dogmatic conflicts.

In short, different factions that were originally against a common enemy began to fight to take a definitive position in the leadership of the party.

Yesterday's opponents may be today's allies, and today's allies may be tomorrow's opponents, it is a simple truth of the political fabric.

Stalin was supported by men like Kalinin, Kirov, Rykov, Bukharin, Molotov, Kaganovich and Dzerzhinsky (and more), people who formed the 'center' of the Stalinist wing (and several new young politicians who would later form other factions or groups within Russian politics).

* If we talk about external allies, Stalin had the leader of the Trudoviks, Alexander Kerensky (and in case of need, he could even ask Tsar Nicholas II for support).

Kamenev on the other hand had the support of men like Yevgeni Alekseyevich Preobrazhensky, Timofei Vladimirovich Sapronov, Vladimir Mikhailovich Smirnov, Alexander Konstantinovich Voronsky, Valerian Valerianovich Obolensky, Vladimir Nikolaevich Maksimovsky, Andrey Sergeevich Bubnov, Vladislav Vikentyevich Kosior and Yakov Naumovich Drobnis, among some others.

*If we talk about external allies, Kamenev had the support of the International Workers Party of Russia of Lev Trotksy (and therefore with the support of old SRs, with Maria Alexandrovna Spiridonova and Viktor Mikhailovich Chernov at the head).

In essence, Kamenev's group believed in the need for various reforms within the Russian Empire to increase the 'personal freedoms' and 'political freedoms' of the Russian state, supporting the construction of the welfare state but attacking the centralization of power and various administrative reforms by the government of Nicholas II and Premier Stalin.

This group however was also not free from its own divisions, for example Preobrazhensky was strongly tied to Trotsky (between the late 20s and early 30s, Preobrazhensky jumped between allying with Stalin and allying with Trotsky) and Sapronov and Smirnov lead a 'radical faction' inside Kamenev's wing.

And in this also came other divisions on various issues such as the future of the party, with the majority of Kamenev's group supporting the need for 'reform' (possibly a purge like the one made against Zinoviev allies years ago) within the RSDLP, while others like Sapronov supported the need to found a new party to avoid the 'petty-bourgeois corruption' of the group.

While Stalin's group supported the direction presented several years ago in numerous Congresses and elections of the RSDLP, following the direction that existed in the Russian Empire at that time.

On May 31 official action finally occurred within the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, where the Stalinist faction began to overwhelmingly fill the party's bodies, which began to 'smother' supporters of the Kamenev faction.

Through these actions, Kamenev's position as Deputy Premier of the Russian Empire during 1924-1925 became almost entirely ceremonial and his reputation/leadership was heavily damaged.

In their place other new allies of Stalin or old allies began to exercise the functions of real power within the state, effectively leading the Fourth (IV) Duma.

With this, Premier Stalin and his allies began to pull strings to plan what to do with Kamenev and his allies, it was obvious that Kamenev could not return to occupy the position of Deputy Premier.

Instead Kamenev could be moved to a lower position within the Duma, the central bodies of the RSDLP or other Russian bodies like the National Congress f Russian Citizens. Or even an 'early retirement' from politics, so to speak.

But in 1924, it was still too early to speak about the future of Kamenev...

In mid-late 1925 on the other hand, with the elections approaching, the future of the leadership of the Kamenev-led faction was finally decided.

*Trivia: In general a young Seryozha (Grand Duke Sergei, youngest son of Tsar Nicholas II) had a limited participation in these events -he ended up participating more in future factional conflicts tho- but obviously he aligned with his mentor, Sergei Kirov (member of the Stalinist wing) during this particular factionalist conflict.

In general, talking about factionalism within the RSDLP and other parts of Russian politics is a very complicated issue for various reasons, whether due to difficulties in freedom of information-related documents, the various constant changes in policies and socio-historical narratives, or ideological-personal divisions, complicate the matter a lot.

So these different factions could be divided into different groups or lists, according to ideological issues, historical eras, regions or other issues:

The factions of the 'periphery' against the regions of the 'centre' (factions of poor regions against regions of rich factions).

The autonomist factions against federalists (national question of autonomy vs. federalization).

More 'elitist' factions versus more 'populist' factions.

'Urban' factions versus 'rural' factions.

'Hardline' factions against 'reformist' factions.

Regional factions of all kinds like various ethnic groups or geographic regions like the Caucasus, Russian Kurdistan, Central Asia, the Far East, etc.

And the list goes on (the fact that the population of the Russian Empire continued to increase for decades did not soften the situation either, administration and politics in such a huge land and population is simply a complicated matter)...

In its time of greatest division (the period of 1953-1960 and/or 1962-1970), Russian politics came to have 8 main Parties and/or Platforms in its national politics (which was a lot considering the long period of stability that was the reign of Tsar Nicholas II, but this has its various explanations), with the situation finally stabilizing after 1962/1965-1970 for various reasons.

*All this perios mentioned may vary according to the historian or historigraphy, from ideology to ideology or country to country, etc.

[OOC: Nicholas isn't getting younger to deal with political things in the mid of the XX century :p ]

*******

[Great Game: Red Shambhala]

The Great Game: The Great Game is a term used for the struggle over geo-political interests that occurred between the Russian Empire and the British Empire/Imperial Federation in Asia.

Originally this Great Game originated in Central Asia (when at the time of Tsar Alexander III the Russian Empire began to expand to the south of Turkestan and to make diplomatic moves in Afghanistan), but over time due to the Little/First Cold War, it moved beyond Central Asia.

The Great Game never really ended, but it did change direction for various reasons (the conquest of almost all of Central Asia under the Russian state and its integration under the Russian state, and the British occupation of Afghanistan in the third Anglo-Afghan war).

Fundamentally we can say that the Great Game had moved to almost 'all' of the region of Asia, with Russia having expanded into the northern Middle East, Persia, Northern China and parts of the Asia-Pacific region.

Instead, the Imperial Federation included southern portions of the Middle East (south of the Emirate of Ha'il and the aforementioned Russosphere), the Indian subcontinent, most of Afghanistan, and parts of the Asia-Pacific region (with the help of allies such as the Philippines and the Australian-New Zealand portions of the Imperial Federation).

And one of the notable pieces of this new direction of the Great Game was the Tibetan Plateau, from which came many of the rivers of Asia and was one of the hearts of Buddhism.

Tibet was technically under British occupation in every way, but the independence of the Indian subcontinent was only a matter of time and Russia's moves pointed to its growth in the region.

The tension in the Tibet region during the next phase of the Great Game increased for many reasons, in particular the unification of the Mongol lands under the Russian flag, where the Russian state began to mobilize to secure its geopolitical interests.

In these actions, Buddhism also played a curious role, helping the components of the Russian state and Russian society in their efforts against the Imperial Federation.

Surely the person who most alerted the British was Agvan Lobsan Dorzhiev, a monk born in Imperial Russia with ties to the Tsarist government who was an influential part of the government of the 13th Dalai Lama (Thubten Gyatso).

While Dorzhiev may have had his own little personal agenda, his interests actually aligned well with Moscow's and thus he was a vital asset to Russian's understanding of Tibet.

As a consequence, the Mongol and/or Buddhist portions of the Russian Empire, along with secular bodies of course (the Okhrana, politicians-administrators, military officers and so on) played an important role in future Russian movements in Tibet (especially after 1933 with the death of the 13th Dalai Lama, the Third World War was approaching and the clash between the British and Russians was getting closer).

In short, the different regions of Asia, including Tibet, became one of the impending points of coalition between the Covenant of Nations (the Russosphere) and the British Empire (the Imperial Federation).

Russia aimed to be the great Eurasian power, while of course the British were struggling to maintain their previous influence and world hegemony, as well as contain the growing Russian influence.

All this is looking at the Russian moves from a pragmatic and rational point of view…but there were also some strange characters who somehow or another played a role in the Russo-British competition in Tibet.

Like for example:

* Alexander Vasilyevich Barchenko, biologist and 'researcher of anomalous phenomena', whose secret-esoteric society wanted to discover Shambhala, according to Barchenko, a kind of center of ancient culture and science that existed in the mountains of Tibet. Barchenko aimed to master the legacy of this "secret science" and strengthen the position of the Russian Empire in Asia...

* Gleb Ivanovich Bokii, member of the Okhrana at first associated with Barchenko and interested in Tibet, who according to rumors (in addition to participating in decryption teams for the Russian government) ran a 'paranormal phenomenon investigation' unit of the Russian intelligence services .

* Nicholas Roerich, artist, mystic and philosopher who in the 20s began to have the idea of a fusion between the Buddhist 'Community' and the Russian 'Community' (the word used by Roerich which is actually a replacement for different forms of organization, he also referred to a concept of spiritualization of Russia under Buddhist principles and the implementation of various 'immediate' reforms in the Russian state), also with an interest in India and the Himalayas.

As a curious fact when Nicholas Roerich was alive, the Roerich family obtained the supposed 'letter of the Mahatmas' for various officials of the Russian government ('Mathatma Stalin') and a chest with Himalayan soil for the tombs of the Moscow Kremlin and some Russian Tsars.

*All the pseudo-scientific archaeologists of the Imperial Federation and their allies who believed in the superiority of a Nordic-Germanic Aryan race, which obviously at some point was in Tibet and India...because of reasons (and pseudo-historic racism).

During the 1920s and 1930s, the British and Russians promoted certain scientific (and other kinds of) expeditions into Tibet, which is another way of saying promoting their geo-political interests and to a lesser extent the advancement of scientific studies or in the case of "scientific racism", pseudo-scientific doctrines of the time.

(OOC: Think in the weird Nazi expedition to Tibet in the British case, and also some weird but more acceptable things in the case of some Russians).

And in the middle of these pragmatists and the oddballs was Roman von Ungern-Sternberg.

Tsar Nicholas II's ally was made a high-ranking official after the civil war, and was sent to Russian Mongolia, where he oversaw the development of tsarist policies in the region.

True, Ungern-Sternberg was not always consistent, but he was loyal and popular, with various connections to several important Mongol leaders and movements. As long as he was kept on a tight leash, Ungern-Sternberg was relatively useful and competent.

And because of this, Ungern-Sternberg also became a relatively important figure in the Great Game in Tibet, with its fascination and relationship with Asia (especially Mongolia and Buddhism), the Baron began to use his connections to further the interests of Russia in the region.

Ungern-Sternberg essentially created the 'doctrine' later called "Red Shambhala" (which for some reason quite fascinated some Russians as we can see).

Through currents of Buddhist thought and the Eastern allies of Russia, this doctrine sought to facilitate the creation of groups in favor of the Russian Empire in the region influenced by the political doctrines of Moscow.

The Tibetan serfs would later become an important part of this Red Shambhala, as they were one of the largest and most vital groups in the expansion of Russian influence into the Tibetan Plateau.

One can march across the plateau with a modern army, but one will not be able to truly occupy the hearts and minds of Tibet without support.

The reason for the Russian strategy with the Tibetan serfs was simple, being a serf in Tibet in modern times was a miserable life, and Russia was currently promising major changes (unlike the British).

Russia's success lay in being able to understand the Tibetan situation and take advantage of its material conditions to guide changes in directions favorable to Moscow (thanks to several groups and important assets), in addition to promoting a development model very different from that of the British Empire.

b2d10532c6cb008cf0bd32057e845ddcd83200ba.jpg

The figure of the Baron Roman von Ungern-Sternberg, at 10 Fabricnaya Street in Novosibirsk.

(OOC: This is a photo of the place in Russia were they shot the dude).​

*******

[Romanov Dynasty]

June 20, 1924, the first child of Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna Romanova and Crown Prince Nicholas of Romania is born.

The baby turns out to be a boy, who is named Konstantin.

Konstantin Nikolaevich turns out to be in good health, which is quite positive for the House of Romanov, which for obvious reasons has not been in a good position in its last years (the death of two Tsesarevichs and the empress).

Status at 1924.

Nicholas Alexandrovich Romanov (Nicholas II, 1868 - ????) + Jelena Petrović Njegoš (Elena of Montenegro) †

Nicholas Nikolaevich Romanov †

Mikhail Nikolaevich Romanov †

Maria Nikolaevna Romanova (1901 - ????) + Nicholas of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen (Principele Nicolae al României/Prince Nicholas of Romania)

Konstantin Nikolaevich Romanov (1924- ????)

Cyril Nikolaevich Romanov (1903 - ????)

Sergei Nikolaevich Romanov (1906 - ????)

*******

[International]

April 2, ultra-right demonstrations in Berlin (promoted by the new East German government) become the first scenes of violence against enemies of the regime of Manfred von Richthofen and the Strasser brothers.

The 'success' of these demonstrations is the basis for future persecutions of Jews and enemies of the East German government, such as the famous Kristallnacht.

Among these manifestations were several monarchists, who were for quite some time allies of the regime, although later the aristocrat Richthofen would grow somewhat disappointed in the German monarchists over time.

April 4, an extravagant funeral is held in Chicago for the mobster Salvatore "Frank" Capone (brother of Alphonse Gabriel Capone or Al Capone, who in 1925 would become one of the most influential personalities in Chicago).

'School Radio', a division of the Imperial Broadcasting Corporation of the Imperial Federation intended for primary schools, is founded and airs for the first time.

April 8, the monetary reserves of Socialist Switzerland receive thirteen tons of gold ingots from France, as economic reconstruction takes place after the recent conflicts in France.

April 10, the royal families of Romania and Russia make state visits between the two countries as a result of improved relations between the two houses and greater bilateral ties between their countries (in addition to the upcoming birth of the baby of the Grand Duchess Maria de Russia and Prince Nicholas of Romania).

April 11, elections in the Folketing (Danish Parliament) lead Thorvald Stauning's Social Democratic Party to win a plurality of seats, forming its first government.

Stauning becomes the first social democratPrime Minister of Denmark, however not everything is so simple.

Stauning leads a minority cabinet that basically wants to build a modern welfare state (made up entirely of social democrats - Interestingly with one of the world's first female ministers, Minister of Education, Nina Henriette Wendeline Bang), now facing the Danish plight.

Denmark is in the midst of the various European factions of the interwar period, whose movements obviously have influence or interest in Denmark.

*From Scandinavia, the British Isles and East Germany inspire ultra-right movements (the Nordicists and Danish social aristocrats).

*The European Socialist Union (which at least at this time still believes in a world socialist revolution), is an inspiration for the Danish communist movements.

*From across the Baltic, Danish-Russian ties inspire a third position that wants to see Denmark align with Eastern Europe/the Covenant of Nations.

April 15, in the Empire of Japan several of organizations from the native ethnic minorities (the Ainu and Ryukyu) and immigrants (mainly Korean and Chinese) begin to call for a boycott against the civic-military dictatorship led by the Imperial Japanese Navy for its repressive practices.

The aforementioned boycott ends up being repressed (of course) and naturally guides these groups towards greater unity with the opposition of the dictatorship. The regime of tje IJN for the moment in 1924 was still standing.

However, the late 1920s and early 1930s already show the signs of its eventual fall, which is achieved around 1937.

April 17, despite the fact that the attempt to boycott various minority groups fails, the Japanese economy continues to decline, with the zaibatsu system and important business beginning to show significant cracks.

April 19, radio and television continue to grow in popularity around the more developed parts of the world, continuing the evolution of the medium (becoming more common before major breakthroughs).

April 22, the recently elected Prime Minister of Denmark, Thorvald Stauning, proposes a new international disarmament conference in the midst of the small cold war of the Interwar Period.

These conference attempts are supported by President Henry Ford of the United States, but they will not give much results (either because of the lack of international cooperation or international organizations to direct said proposal).

April 27, the East German government begins to 'warn' about possible collaborators with foreign enemies (communists and Russians) in the society of the Prussian Republic of Germany.

April 29, elections in the United Boer States lead to the victory of pro-British parties, which leads to increased chances of the Boers joining South Africa (a state of the Imperial Federation that is made up of South Africa proper, Southern Rhodesia and Bechuanaland Protectorate).

April 30, an outbreak of tornadoes results in the deaths of more than 110 people in the southern portions of the United States of America.

*Possibly, there are also deaths from hippos.

May 1, in East Germany the armed forces of the Red-Black Front begin to interfere in the celebrations of May 1 (international workers' day).

According to the Strasser brothers, May 1 is celebrated normally again, but with certain 'reforms', so to speak. Essentially, the Front tries to turn this celebration originated by the labor movements into something closer to its ideology.

According to some this marks the true beginning of the Red-Black Front as an ideological framework, with 'nationalist-patriotic' characteristics (similar to the British Social Aristocracy, including supremacist ideas and a certain nostalgia for the 'good old days') with worker-oriented aesthetics.

This gave rise to 'Prussianism' and Strasserism, East German ideological, social and political movements that would become very important during the 20s and 30s (turning East Germany into the monstrosity it was during World War 3).

May 3, relations between Eastern Europe and the Prussian Republic of Germany are already beginning to deteriorate, when German police raid a Russian trade delegation in Berlin.

Eastern Europe actually marked a dividing point between the Red-Black Front.

*Chancellor Manfred von Richthofen sought an expansionist policy to regain the glory of the old Germany, which would require the 'expulsion' (and/or genocide) of various groups from Eastern Europe to favor Germany (which would colonize the aforementioned territories).

*Gregor Strasser (Minister of the Interior) would favor a neutral policy or was indifferent to Eastern Europe.

*Otto Strasser (Economy Minister) favored a policy of greater friendship between Russia and Germany. For a simple reason, Otto saw both countries as 'similar' and basically Germany couldn't fight the Communists of Western Europe and the Nations of Eastern Europe all at the same time.

Also according to Otto Strasser, this would also have helped Germany to be truly independent, escaping from British influence (while ignoring the influence that the growing Russia would have in Germany).

Although there were diplomatic apologies, part of the regime never hid their true feelings towards Russia, especially due to East Germany's relations with the Imperial Federation.

Churchill (and his successors) and Richthofen agree on certain points, mainly on the need for a division of Russia, before the Eurasian economy becomes dominant in most of Europe.

"What are the Russians doing in Königsberg, which they now call Korol'grad?

The Russians should never have taken Königsberg in the first place. That is why I support the deportation of Russians from German soil, even beyond.

The Russians and their allies should be deported from Poland, the Baltics, the Ukraine and Finland. Ultimately, the Russia Empire must be broken up into new nation-states, and Russia proper must be broken up into smaller historic states.

Muscovy, Suzdal, Novgorod and so on. Until 'Russia' is simply a geographical concept of history.

Never again, we can allow the formation of a Eastern state so populous and big, that it can threaten all of Europe.

The process of domination created by Russia began between the 1600s-1700s with Peter I 'the Great', and it is clear that his successors are aiming for its apex, world domination. We must counter-attack the Russian plans, for the sake of peace and freedom of a civilized world."

-Manfred von Richthofen.

(OOC: Remember the supposed plans for world domination of Peter I that I did comment on the TL XD)

"I think we shall have to take the barbaric nations in hand and regulate them. I believe that as civilized nations become more powerful they will get more ruthless, and the time will come when the world will impatiently bear the existence of great barbaric nations who may at any time arm themselves and menace civilized nations.

I believe in the ultimate partition of Russia, China and India — I mean ultimate.

I hope we shall not have to do it in our day.

The Aryan stock is bound to triumph."

-Winston Churchill

May 6, among leftists in Northern Greece, the 'May Manifesto' begins to circulate, which call and begins the process of consolidation and centralization of leftist groups in the southern Balkans.

At first simply against the Peloponnesian dictatorship, but later groups like the KKE (Communist Party of Greece) and Greek anarchists became very relevant in World War III and later in the Great Cold War.

May 10, the episodes of violent disturbances in Japan begin to increase progressively.

Armenian poetry finds a certain revival in the Russian Empire.

May 11, with the beginning of the Red-Black Front ideology, a certain cult is re-initiated to important figures of the German Reich (First Reich being the Holy Roman Empire and the Second being the great German Empire), not only monarchs but also generals and other political figures such as Otto von Bismarck.

In the process, virtually some Germans gain the status of 'martyrs' or 'heroes' for their fight against Germany's enemies (such as Wilhelm III, executed by communists along with part of the old royal family).

May 12, the Prussian Republic of Germany officially apologizes and pays minor reparations to Russia for the trouble caused by the Berlin police.

May 15, the 'Bonus Bill' fails, a proposal to speed up the bonus process for American veterans of the Second Great War.

The situation of economic bonuses and military veterans is more important than it seems, it is one of the reasons for problems and civil movements that led to great problems in the United States of America.

Just take the example of the Redneck Justice Army led by Smedley Butler, which received support from many veterans of the armed forces for fighting to facilitate economic bonuses for war veterans and their families.

Which in theory would almost lead to a coup in America (the growing fear of a 'March on Washington' or march on Capitol Hill).

May 21, George Herman "Babe" Ruth Jr joins the New York Guard (NYG, the state defense force of New York State).

May 22, premiere of the Concerto for Piano and Wind Instruments, composed by Igor Stravinsky, at the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow.

May 24, under the Ford administration, a reform of the United States Foreign Service (merger of the old consular service and diplomatic services) takes place, where once again the position of traditional institutions in foreign policy is weakening.

Power is increasingly concentrated in fewer people or groups, while the influence of pressure groups (the predecessors of modern think tanks or those already existing at the time, such as the Council on Foreign Relations/CFR) increases.

May 28, British services briefly take into custody Harry Grindell Matthews, English inventor who claimed to have built a death ray (and if true, the British wanted the secret from him).

Finally in later years the atomic weapons projects, for obvious reasons, won the 'arms race' against death ray weapons (oddly enough there were many inventors who claimed to have built a death ray, Tesla being probably the most famous).

June 7, Giacomo Matteotti (Filippo Turati's protégé) is imprisoned for his opposition to the hard-line communist doctrine of the government of Palmiro Togliatti.

June 10, in the United States of America, the National Convention of the National Republican Party takes place, which elects the party's candidates for the next presidential elections.

*Henry Ford is elected as the presidential candidate for an unexpected third term, and his running mate is Herman Preston Faris (a businessman and activist who supports Ford's pro-prohibition stances, he is more of a 'compromise candidate' between the wings of the National Republican Party).

The Democratic Party on the other hand elects:

*William Gibbs McAdoo Jr (KKK-supported presidential candidate and son-in-law of attorney Woodrow Wilson) and Charles Wayland Bryan (senior Nebraska figure and younger brother of former President William Jennings Bryan).

The Socialist-Communist Party of the United States of America found themselves in an important division, for the first time in five elections they had a chance of winning but Eugene V. Debs had withdrawn from the presidential elections, giving a severe blow to the organization of the Party.

The moderates and associated wings (a coalition of 'Reformists', Social Democrats, Agrarian Socialists, Christian Socialists, and the like) were able to favor their candidate in 1924, but as a result caused resentment among the more radical (Militants and Communist, among others) wings.

*Morris Hillquit (Chairman) and Seymour Stedman (Vice Chairman).

**Due to resentment, the leaders of the radical-militant wing of the party are better reorganizing for the next election, with the favorites being William Z. Foster, Smedley Butler, Earl Russell Browder, and surprisingly Norman Thomas, among the like.

June 12, 48 people die in the Mississippi Delta due to the Hippo Wars.

Birth of George Herbert Walker Bush, son of the National Republican politician and businessman Prescott Sheldon Bush (Henry Ford's protégé, who did not participate in the 1924 elections due to his age and partly due to the birth of the young George Bush).

June 17, Large demonstrations are held in the United Boer States for a unification between the Boers and Greater British South Africa.

This as a result of the notable influence of the British in the economy and politics of the United Boer States, and the interests of the privileged classes (which align quite well).

Plans for a referendum are definitely on the agenda for both countries (United Boer States and Imperial Federation), to determine if the Boers will finally (and peacefully) join the British Empire.

June 18, the Kingdom of Denmark officially recognizes the European Socialist Union (rather, recognizes its constituent countries).

June 21, in the Socialist Republic of Turkey, the Surname Law is approved, according to which all Turkish citizens must have surnames (since in the Ottoman Empire there were no 'surnames' as understood in the West).

While many of these are of course Turks, the citizens of socialist Turkey also adopted particular names or pseudo-patronymics of figures from the socialist world (Marx and Lenin or Liebknecht are relatively popular nicknames).

(OOC: I based this on how some Indian persons actually have similar 'names' to foreign figures, like there is this person called Muthuvel Karunanidhi Stalin).

June 28, the Lorain-Sandusky tornado killed at least 85 people in Ohio.

June 30, Jacob Israel de Haan visits the Emirate of Ha'il, this poet from the Netherlands of Jewish descent (which puts him in a precarious situation since his country is under British influence) tries to start talks with the Arabs to allow greater freedoms to the Jews in the region of Palestine.

Actually the Arab leaders kinda liked him, mostly because the more conservative positions of Jacob Israel de Haan put him in conflict with the Zionists... but in any case the Arabs did not give up their position regarding the limitations for the Jews in Palestine.

*******

[Sick Man of the World: Democracy]

(OOC: This is mostly just a section to experiment, creative writing for worldbuilding).

"It's getting harder and harder to counter-argue the fact that Russia's model of economic development is superior to Washington's"

-Quote from a economist in 1962 to the William Henry Bloomberg Center (in the last years of William Henry Bloomberg, who after the 1930s became one important member of the American economic elite thanks to his work as bookkeeper for several companies in post-Fordist America), later the Bloomberg Corporation (led by the son of William Henry, Michael Rubens Bloomberg).

The first half of the 20th century is quite complicated, we have for example the American-German war in the Caribbean, the great Latin American wars and the Second Great War (aftermath of the Fashoda war at the end of the 19th century), several bloody revolutions or civil wars, famines and other disasters, severe economic problems (the Great Depression from 1903 to 1918) and of course great political changes.

One of the great changes of this period occurs in the 'civilized world' (North America and Europe), we mainly refer to the United States and of course to several other governments (mainly European) such as that of the Imperial Federation, the first projects Socialists from Western Europe and the Russian Empire.

The United States for its part was in a time of decline, where the socio-economic and political problems of the country deepened, which would eventually be the breeding ground for political extremism, populism (the most famous example, Ford and his National Republican Party) and polarization of the population.

On the other hand, in most of Europe the so-called 'consolidation of Totalitarianisms' or 'authoritarian' regimes took place, such as:

* The Imperial Federation finally consolidating under a civic-military dictatorship led by the State Council and the All British Party, with King Edward VIII and a number of notable Prime Ministers at the head of unelected governments.

* Following the Imperial Federation, the governments of several of its allies such as the Prussian Republic of Germany under the Red-Black Front or Hitler's Sweden.

* The First Stalinism in Imperial Russia.

* The 'proletarian dictatorships' of Italy, France and Germany (the European Socialist Union in general).

* Mustafa Kemal's Turkish Socialism taking root in the Socialist Republic of Turkey.

* Growth of extreme left or right groups in numerous regions.

What do certain historiographies refer to by 'Totalitarianism' or 'Authoritarianism'? The truth is that the terms are somewhat controversial or misused in various contexts, but they have a common root.

Simply during this time, we saw the rejection of the so-called Classical Liberalism (arisen by the first liberal revolutions, mainly the American Revolution and the French Revolution) and therefore, the emergence of several Iliberal governments of the left or right (the socialist countries and various far-right governments, with Russia as always being a particular case).

A question shook the monarchical and / or republican order that existed in various parts of the world: "Is Democracy or Autocracy, better for stability, growth and innovation?"

A controversial take from the time and to this day, to which some say yes and other say no.

In theory, liberal democracy should uphold the rights and freedoms of man (rights such as private property, freedom of expression, freedom of business, etc.), but democracy was eroding and there were no saviors or saviors.

There are two explanations for this phenomenon, from a 'loss of faith' in democracy (the success of revolutionary groups or militants on the political scene), continuations of the great man theory (personalities who led democracy to the grave) or the 'passivity' of the masses (according to this explanation, the masses after the erosion of their rights or the deepening of socio-political dogmas, were unable to react adequately at the end of democracy).

In theory, democracy would work because when making decisions due to problems, people would react to solve them ... And for various reasons, it did not happen.

And so, in their place came people, groups and governments-regimes that simply rejected the fundamental concepts of liberalism.

Even Iosif V. Stalin's Premiership, while democratically elected, did not follow the concepts of a 'liberal government', simply because Liberalism had never really taken power in Russia (or Russian liberalism was a concept almost completely alien to Western liberalism).

And of course, many of the aforementioned governments did not follow liberal practices, or directly rejected many of the liberal concepts.

An example is that Marxists in the European Socialist Union and Turkey widely criticized 'liberal morality' and 'human rights', considering that their system was a scientific-historical model (so, 'independent of (bourgeois) morality') and that 'human rights' were actually concepts that depended more on material conditions than anything else (in short, not necessarily 'inalienable').

And the ideology of the Imperial Federation along with its followers, was naturally a considerably regressive movement, based on a practically feudal thought.

* Also the Social Aristocracy supported ideas and thoughts such as scientific racism, which was certainly something more accepted at the time, but is still actually pseudo-science to justify geopolitical, economic and socio-political interests.

Liberal democracy was the sick man of ideologies at that time, the sick man of the world, who was considered 'old-fashioned' or incapable of solving the social problems that affected various countries.

For the most part, liberal democracy was replaced by other governments or socio-economic and political thoughts, such as the various Latin American dictatorships, the Social Aristocracy and its derivatives, or other forms of governments that although they were to a certain extent democratic, were illiberal (such as the Russosphere or later the Emirate of Ha'il).

The coffin of classical Liberalism would arrive around the 30s, in the so-called Crack of 1933 (the failure of the American project), but soon being cultivated during the Third World War -specially after the 40s- between the 50s and 60s, Neo-Liberalism would arrive ... which is a similar and different beast that we are going to explore further in the future.

In part this Neo-Liberalism / New Liberalism, was an ideological and economic thought that worked as a response to a changing world (similar to how Classical Liberalism died from being unable to adapt to a world that changed in an incredibly fast way).

The historical-traditional centers of power had completely moved from Western Europe and China to North America (USA) and Russia (the Eurasian giant from Eastern Europe and North Asia), giving rise to the Great Cold War.

[* As a curious fact is that despite the fact that naturally the United States and the Russian Empire face each other in a political, economic, military and cultural competition, a part of the American right is slightly inclined towards more favorable relations with Russia (since in theory share similar opinions: favoritism by strong-man leaders, certain social conservatism on issues such as LGTB rights, and things like that) and at the same time there are some Russian groups that are more pro-American than others.

Of course, all of this group are fringe groups inside their countries political spectrum. Political speeches and actions are generally anti-American in Russia and anti-Russian in America.]

"In England, America, France, Germany, the malicious nature of the government is disguised so masterfully, that the people of these nations, pointing at Russia, are naively convinced that all the events taking place in Russia are unique to it, wherefore they are enjoying the ultimate freedom and their conditions don't need improvement. That makes them the most hopeless sort of slaves - the slaves who don't realize that they are slaves and are proud of their slavery"

-Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy, also better known as Leo Tolstoy (Об общественном движении в России/On public movement in Russia, 1905).