My Second Playthrough of Victoria 2’s Cold War Enhancement Mod (Pt. II of II)

Yesterday, I felt that I had achieved so much playing the Cold War Enhancement (CWE) mod in such a short span of time. I think it has to do with how the gameplay mechanics of Victoria 2 differ from that of its contemporary in the Hearts of Iron series, Hearts of Iron 3. In the latter, in-game time advances by one hour, which means that more time is devoted to individual years. In-game time in Victoria 2 progresses by one day. Thus, I was given the impression that a lot was done in-game, even though I had started the playthrough back on Sunday. I had reached the point where I could safely deem the playthrough as finished. Although I will not be playing more of the mod anytime soon, that is not to say that I did not have fun experiencing the rest of what the mod had to offer.

The first half of the playthrough transpired over the course of the late 20th century. The other half, which is the focus of this post, is covered most of the early 21st century, and it ends at the centennial of the initial playthrough in 2046. It is sort of amazing how much the world changed in such a short span and in ways that I did not anticipate.

At the beginning of the 21st century, the world had become multipolar. The US and the Soviet Union were no longer the two major superpowers that dominated the geopolitical map. India, China, Brazil, Japan, Great Britain, Italy, France, and a resurgent German Reich had emerged as great powers. An ever-growing series of internal and external crises had forced the Liberal Capitalists to retreat from the Empire of Liberty as nations abandoned Neoliberalism in droves. Many began adopting State Capitalism, while others chose Planned/Command Economies.

In North America, the collapse of the Empire of Liberty forced the Jeffersonians to realize “Fortress America” by establishing the North American Union with Canada and Mexico. The North American Union remains heavily influential in the geopolitical affairs of Latin America, from Cuba to Argentina. It continues to compete with the other great powers on the Eurasian landmass for influence over the continent.

In Europe, the German Reich became the dominant great power in Europe, its ambitions tempered by the British, French, Spanish, and Italians. Alliances and treaties are constantly forged and broken, with the occasional skirmish and international intrigue occurring every now and then. Meanwhile, Eurasianism fully manifests itself in the Soviet Russia, whose proponents viewed the nation as a spiritual successor to the legacy of Czarist Russia. This was occurring at a time when the Soviet Union came close to disintegrating like it did historically in the 1990s. The consolidation of power in Soviet Russia enabled the Soviet Union to avoid the same fate that befell Yugoslavia, allowing it to form the “Eurasian Union.” In reality, nothing changed; as I saw it, the Eurasian Union was still the Soviet Union because the same political forces stayed in power.

Despite the loss of the CMEA/Warsaw Pact countries, the dissolution of Yugoslavia and the fall of Hoxha’s Albania, the Soviets managed to annex the northern coast of Turkey, securing their grip over the Black Sea. This allowed the Soviets to supplant the US as the most dominant great power in the Middle East. The Pan-Arabists, however, failed to unite the Arab world. Iran became a Presidential Republic rather than an Islamic Republic, while Iraq joined the Arab Federation formed by Jordan and Palestine.

In East Asia, a series of wars between China and India had resulted in the former fracturing in various countries under the latter’s sphere of influence. The Maoists continued to hold out, even succeeding in a major war with the Jeffersonians that finally evicted them from the Eurasian landmass altogether. Only Australia and New Zealand remain as holdouts for the Jeffersonians in Oceania. Asia eventually split into Indian, Chinese, Soviet, and German spheres of influence.

Finally, in Africa, Egypt tried to become a great power but failed due to dealing with a series of civil wars and independence movements in former Sudan. The rest of the continent was split into the British, French, Spanish, and Italian spheres of influence. Great Britain remained as a Liberal Capitalist holdout, although its alignments with the US was no longer by the time the playthrough had already ended. The British, French, Spanish, and Italians adopted Socialist Monarchies, following in the example of the German Reich. The German Reich has no interest expanding into Africa, preferring the maintain the balance power with the resurgent European great powers.       

There were some recurring trends that I noticed over the course of the playthrough, especially in the latter half. It became more commonplace to encounter nations undergoing civil wars and others destabilized by the great power conflicts. While some nations dissolved into several smaller ones, others tried to consolidate power by establishing supranational power blocs. What started out as a series of trade agreements eventually morphed into proposals for establishing supranational powers. With the US and the Soviet Union no longer world superpowers throughout the early 21st century and given the resurgences of other major great powers across the Eurasian landmass, creating entire nations under a supranational polity seemed like the only way to maintain a particular great power’s influence and prestige.

Overall, there were tons of interesting features and mechanics that were not available in vanilla playthroughs of Victoria 2. Most of the things that originated from the base game were recreated to suit the geopolitics of the post-1945 world and all the various political-economic, technological, financial, and socio-cultural trends that materialized because of the Industrial Revolution and the two World Wars. Although this is the last time that I will be talking about my second playthrough, there were a number of features that piqued my interest as a political scientist. I am thinking about addressing them in some future unrelated posts because they happen to have some historical basis or contemporary relevance.             



Categories: Blog Post

Tags: , , , , , , ,

4 replies

  1. Hello DAH,

    Just wanted to wish you an early Happy Thanksgiving and wanted to see how you were doing? Despite being done with political blogging for the most part I have continued to read your writings and keep up with political events. I have actually done a little bit of writing myself on the recent Israel Palestine conflict and subjects surrounding it in hopes of improving my writing. I do not know if I will publish it or not yet but if I do it will probably be sometime next year with the war hopefully being over. It will not be some grand return to me political blogging however as I’m still determine to focus on my studies, irl events and relationships. Hope all is well with you and that your having a great holiday.

    From Albino Squirrel

    Like

    • Dear Albino Squirrel,

      First of all, I am sorry if I was not able to reply back to you sooner. I was preoccupied offline throughout most of last week, so whatever free time I had left was over the past weekend.

      I am doing well so far. Things could be much better than what they are now, but I am not complaining. I do appreciate your continued dedication to read my Blog because, even though more of my time is being spent offline, I still try to post something related to one of the topics discussed in the Treatises. It is just that I felt that I had finally explored everything that I had researched throughout the 2010s and I now have a more coherent picture of where I stand as a political scientist than I did ten years ago.

      As for the latest conflict involving Israel and Palestine, my thoughts exactly. So much has already been written about that topic and it is too early to make a definitive analysis on the implications of that particular conflict. I learned that lesson almost two years when I began writing about the “Special Military Operation,” despite anticipating that it would become a stalemate.

      Right now, I am wondering whether Bogumil from the ARPLAN Blog is doing alright at this point. I have not heard from him for a while, and I do not know what will become of his research. I just hope that myself or somebody else manages to save it on the Wayback Machine just in case.

      Feel free to comment on any of my upcoming posts. I look forward to hearing from you again soon.

      Signed,
      -DAH

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dear DAH,

        It’s all good I understand the holidays is a busy time for everyone. Glad you are doing okay and I did enjoy your recent article on Michael Lind. I read Lind article about a week ago and was wondering when you would do a response to it since you are big fan of Hamilton. I was pleased by usual nuance response to these topics.

        When it comes to the conflict in Palestine/ Israel I am trying to avoid making predictions on who will win but rather seeking give analysis on the situation. I am of the personal opinion that even if Hamas is pushed out of Gaza it will not be end of conflict but rather Hamas and allies will rebase in neighboring countries like the PLO did in the past. I am also hoping to give analysis on the geo politics of the situation and divides of the Neo liberal ruling class over the conflict. I have also written some critiques of Christian Zionism and the recent trend of TikTok liberals praising Bin Laden letter.

        I do wonder what happened to Bogumil though and hope he is okay. He always had good content and was one of first places that introduced me to writings on National Bolshevism, Conservative Revolution, Strasserism, and Rudolf Jung. His translations are extremely valuable in understanding Pre World War 2 politics in Germany.

        Look forward to reading more of your articles.

        From Albino Squirrel

        Like

      • Albino Squirrel,

        Honestly, a lot of the works from Lind (not to mention American Affairs and Compact Magazine) are refreshing perspectives in contrast to what we have come to expect from US politics in general. Now, granted, I do not necessarily agree with all of Lind’s conclusions, because some of them were products of particular moments in recent history (q.v. “Radical Centrism” or his 2016 commentaries on Trump and Sanders Populism). If there is one thing that I will definitely agree with him on, it is the need for Hamiltonian institutions and a Federalist-like movement advocating alternatives to the Jeffersonian consensus that continues to define the Democratic-Republicans.

        I was thinking the same thing about Hamas. Does Israel think that they are fighting the Six-Day War or the Yom Kippur War, when it was fighting conventional warfare against Arab nations? Palestine is not a large nation nor is it a powerful one. You are definitely correct on that analysis. As for the “TikTok liberals,” are you serious? You’d think they wouldn’t stoop that low, but it seems like anything goes at this point.

        As for Bogumil, I have been trying to get a hold of him for months, and I am starting to wonder if something happened offline. My assumption is that he has decided to take a long break away from ARPLAN to either translate a new text or a take care of offline matters. I will accept either, but it would be nice to hear back soon.

        I am planning to write two new posts this week. But because my schedule this week is a literal mess, I have no idea as to when I will be able to finish them. My hope is that I complete one post today and do the other one on Friday or Saturday. We will just have to wait and see.

        Signed,
        -DAH

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment