Launching the Alternative History subforum in PDF. History of themes.

So, over in the History subforum, we’ve got this one thread for alternative history. It's officially the only spot where we're allowed to dive into those "what if" scenarios. Well, that single thread has blown up to over 200 pages now, and honestly, there are so many different alternative history discussions happening all at once. Because everything gets buried in one massive wall of text—and since people tend to jump between topics, making it a total mess to follow—I think it’s time for a change. I’m proposing we open a dedicated PDF section within the History subforum specifically for alternative history. It would make finding specific debates way easier and keep things from getting lost in the shuffle. 🙂

There’s a dedicated History of Themes thread pinned at the top of the forum; you might want to give the moderator a nod or something similar and post your thoughts there.
Alternatively, just send a message directly to Oštrić PP.

Fun speculation, sure, but I don't see why we need a whole subforum for this stuff. Once you start digging deep into those rabbit holes, you're drifting into sci-fi territory—where "alternative history" actually matters—rather than "history and historical themes."

If there's actually some solid logic behind these scenarios, just spin up a new thread here and there. No need to dump everything into one massive bucket. Besides, we already have one going lately.

The thing is, playing "what if things went differently" can be a decent tool to help us figure out what *actually* happened and why. Like, what if that car carrying Ferdinand didn't take a wrong turn down a side street, tried to pull a U-turn, and basically handed Gavril a free shot? That's a realistic enough assumption; it could've easily gone down that way.

But once you start building out a full scenario, you just end up stacking hypothesis on top of hypothesis. You get so far away from actual historical events that it loses its utility, even if it stays entertaining (and look, I love a good story as much as anyone).

If you ask me, I’d be all for opening a subforum like that. I’ll pop in from time to time—there’s some interesting stuff there, and honestly, the discussions seem pretty decent so far.

Honestly, I’d be pretty wary of opening this up in the alternative history subforum. My gut tells me it would attract more than just your typical conspiracy theorists. You’d end up with a whole crowd of historical revisionists looking for cover. They’d use the "alternative" label as a shield to push their own twisted versions of reality—like those people who can't stomach the actual outcome of WWII and try to spin a different story about who was actually responsible for what.

stormytiger4 said:I’d actually be a little nervous about opening this up in the alternative history subforum... I feel like it might attract more than just the usual conspiracy theorists—it could bring in all sorts of people trying to rewrite actual facts under the guise of "what if" scenarios (I'm thinking specifically of those folks who can't wrap their heads around how WWII actually ended and want to push their own versions of who was responsible for what)

But hey, that's what the moderators are there for, right? To keep the quality up and make sure things don't get too messy.

You can definitely count me in as a fan of a dedicated "what if" section! 👍

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:That’s what moderators are for, right? Keeping things high quality.

Hypothetically speaking, if this subforum actually let guys like those neo-fascists air out their twisted views on war and everything else, they'd just need a dedicated space for alternative history. In a sub like that, they'd be tearing the communists a new one constantly.

Actually, thinking about it—wouldn't alternative history fit better under History rather than the Alternative section? Especially if we're talking conspiracy theories. It's like how people who refuse vaccines or try home remedies instead of actual medical treatments don't really belong under Alternative Medicine in the Health section. At least this way, if someone happens to Google it, they know exactly where to find what they're looking for.

I was actually thinking the exact same thing as stormytiger4. If we were going to have its own subforum—which might actually be pretty interesting—it belongs under Alternative, just like how Alternative Medicine was moved away from Health...

lonebadger6 said:I was actually thinking the exact same thing as stormytiger4. Even if we did make it its own subforum—which might actually be pretty cool—it belongs under Alternative, just like how Alternative Medicine got moved away from Health.

If they move it to the alternative section, they're basically throwing a gauntlet down at all the freaks to tear it apart. If I were running the show, I'd take a long look at how things are currently working on this board before making any moves.

stormytiger4 said:Personally, I’d be terrified of an alternative history subforum. Opening that door would invite more than just conspiracy theorists; you'd get a whole swarm of historical revisionists using the "alternative" label as cover to push their own agendas (like people who can't stomach the actual outcome of WWII and try to rewrite who did what).

stormytiger4 said:If we hypothetically allowed a subforum where, say, fascists could openly spout their version of the war and its aftermath, they'd just need one mod for alternative history, and that mod would spend all day fighting off communist propaganda here on the main boards.

Hmm, idea—wouldn't alternative history fit better under History rather than Alternative, assuming it doesn't belong in a dedicated Conspiracy Theory section? It's like how being anti-vax or trying to cure things with kitchen towels instead of actual medical treatments doesn't fall under alternative medicine in the Health section. At least then, if someone Googles something, they actually know where to find it.

lonebadger6 said:I was actually going to say the same thing as stormytiger4. If there were a subforum (which might be interesting), it still belongs in Alternative, just like how alternative health was moved out of the Health section.

Honestly, I don't see why šbbkbb scenarios would be any better breeding ground for conspiracy theorists and revisionists than threads about actual history.
In other words, why would a thread like "What if the axis powers had won the war" be more full of Holocaust deniers and people ignoring war crimes than threads that deal with those topics directly?

Even in a thread about USSR leaders, you see posts pushing propaganda for or against Stalin, Trotsky, Brezhnev, or Khrushchev, even though the topic isn't about alternative history.

lonetrucker4 said:But once you start playing "what if," you end up stacking hypothesis upon hypothesis. You drift so far from actual history that the whole thing becomes useless, even if it's fun to think about.

Exactly. It's just a game. This isn't content for its own subforum.

If we could just tidy things up a little bit—since the clutter is already starting to pile up—maybe we could just stick
"WHATIF: " or "šbbkbb: " at the very start of the thread titles... just to keep it organized...

And then, in total šbbkbb fashion, someone kicks off a thread about what might have happened if the assassination attempt on Tito had actually worked back in '44. Suddenly, you get five or six people popping up, convinced that the "right" side lost WWII. They start rambling about how without Tito, there wouldn't have been a crossroad where 7,500 innocent civilians could be slaughtered every single day and hidden away in unknown mass graves. They claim that without him, the death toll at Auschwitz wouldn't be manipulated, and everyone would know the actual numbers today instead of dealing with those massive, inflated figures. Then they move on to how much better, fairer, and more patriotic American society would be if it hadn't been shaped after '45 by people who were supposedly true patriots but just happened to be part of a fascist movement—you know, the ones who hated everything American and used anti-fascism as a convenient mask for their real intentions. Personally, I’m not interested in playing that game. 🤷

stormytiger4 said:Then, in total šbbkbb fashion, someone kicks off a thread about how things would've changed if the assassination attempt on Tito back in '44 had actually worked. Suddenly, you get five or six guys claiming the right side lost WWII, rambling on about how without Tito, there wouldn't have been enough people to kill 7,500 innocent civilians a day on that long march toward disaster.

This stuff pops up constantly, and honestly, I don't think a new admin is going to change a thing. Look, I’ve spent years arguing against historical revisionism—you know, the bad kind where people try to flip the "official" script based on pure political or ideological nonsense rather than actual science—as a regular user, and as a mod, I've stepped in a few times. I’m gonna keep doing that. Some people are throwing fits right now, but they aren't the ones actually debating in the "What If" threads (even though even in those threads, there are plenty of folks I politically clash with or argue with over various topics).

Talking about "what if the Germans had captured Tito in Drvar on May 25, 1944" isn't inherently off-limits—it was almost a reality, after all. Once the discussion starts, the same rules apply as any other thread.

What if scenarios should be treated like games—but useful ones.
Usually, people focus on current figures, just placed in different circumstances.

For instance—how much of a crook would Tony Blair have been if the Roman Empire had actually survived?
The point is to build a house on at least some kind of foundation, even if this is all a bit of a "wild guess."
If we were on a site like Reddit, it would go way further—we'd be talking about extraterrestrials and things like that. But the goal here is to keep at least a shred of reality intact...

It’s been decided that we won't be opening the alternative history PDF anymore.