Stalinist period in Eastern Europe (1948/49-1953)
Basic things that apply to all socialist states in this period: Large advancements in education, healthcare, industrialisation (but unlike OTL not absolute priority of heavy industry due to different international situation) and post-war reconstruction and realative stabilisation of economies, collectivisation of agriculture, women emancipation, institution of hardline regimes with a strong role of secret police and suppression of any opponents of the regime, show trials and purges, large influence of Soviet Union in internal politics – countries forced to act as Soviet “advisors” want, socialist realism control over culture, dominance of propagandistic and ideological motives, strong censorship
Albania

• 1949-1953: Main difference is that during this era there weren't any western attempts at overthrowing Hoxha (yet). These years see successful economic development and mass modernisation of the country. Albania is strongly pro-Soviet, however its importance compared to OTL is lesser as Greece is also socialist.
• May 1949: Show trial and execution of Koçi Xoxe. Hoxha’s power strengthened, relations with Yugoslavia fell apart.

Bulgaria

• On the 15 July 1949 death of Dimitrov, Valko Chervenkov became general secretary. Hardline Stalinists Bulgaria’s “Little Stalin” – repression (large part of BKP purged), consolidation of power, Soviet inspired culture, development of heavy industry, collectivisation. Since death of Vasil Kolarov also as the prime minister (23.1. 1950)
• 1949: Traicho Kostov with other prominent moderate members of BKP executed after a show trial.
• Failure of the First Five Year Plan as it did not met all targets (1949-1953), large scale industry build-up achieved.

Romania

• Soviet economic control trough Sov-Rom companies
• 1948 leading communist politician Lucrețiu Pătrășcanu was arrested (after Soviets demanded), accused of titoism. Persecution of opposition and anti-communist resistance active in Carpathians.
• 1949 start of construction of the Danube–Black Sea Canal, start of gradual collectivisation, start of development of heavy industry (success in development of steel, petrochem and machinery industries). 1951-1955 first five-year plan.
• Power struggle between “Muscovite” and “Prisoners” faction within Romanian Workers Party – Ana Pauker a stalinist, who multiple times defied Stalin’s policy (allowing Jews migrate to Israel, opposing collectivisation efforts) was still slowly losing favour of Stalin, in January 1952 Gheorghiu-Dej requested Stalin’s approval for purge of Muscovite faction, however unlike our reality (and this is main shift) this is initiative is opposed (due to lesser extent of Stalin’s antisemitic campaign, that would be only beginning by that time, lobbing of Molotov and Beria for them ), instead Stalin pressures Romania for show trial with Pătrășcanu, which in this timeline see Stalin as failure of Gheorghiu-Dej.
• 3.6. 1952, Petru Groza stepped down as prime minister -> instead of centralising power in Gheorghiu-Dej’s hands, soviet-aligned Iosif Chișinevschi was pushed by soviet “advisors” to this position.
• Show trial with Pătrășcanu and his suspected associates 28 April to 2 May 1953.

Hungary

• 16-24 October 1949 Process with László Rajk – as in our reality, “titoist spies” influential to other trials. Inter opposition to Rákosi purged. 15 executed, 78 imprisoned. Other purges and show trials in the military during 1951. Trial with Jews is not planned.
• Rákosi builds the most repressive regime from the socialist bloc states, a cult of personality modelled after Stalin.
• Economy: focused on expansion of heavy industry, collectivised agriculture. However, like in other states without Korean war, shifts to military sector primacy doesn’t happen, resulting in more supply of consumer goods, but Hungary still faces shortages, but the economic situation is little bit better overall.
• 14.8. 1952 Rákosi further centralised power in his hands by becoming chairman of the council of ministers.

Poland

• October 1948: Gomulka and other proponents of sovereign stance purged; 1951 Gomulka arrested. March 1948 Witold Pilecki show trial.
• 22.12. 1948 creation of Polish United Workers Party.
• High soviet control: Konstantin Rokossovsky as polish defence minister (49-56), influence of “advisor” Ivan Serov
• Catholic Church keeps influential position -> conflict after 22.7. 1952 constitution that declares Polish People’s Republic as a secular state, closing of Church schools etc. Trial with Cracow Curia (1953)
• 1950-1956 Six-Year Plan – changes as in other states from our reality, it is not focused on rapid accelerated industrialisation, instead on increase in heavy industry, while also investing in services, food, construction, and consumer goods. Result is less developed heavy industry, but better economic situation of population and less shortages (but Poland would still experience some). As the plan was more modest, it was successfully completed in 1956. As in our reality, mass increase in urbanisation and general national income (that would be bit lesser due to less heavy industry being developed)
• Warsaw that was less damaged was still largely reconstructed in socialist realism

Czechoslovakia 1948-1953

• 1948-1949: wave of exile to the American zone in Germany. Due to Czechoslovakia not being (in years 1948-1956) on the Iron Curtain, there are way less cases of illegally trying to flee across borders (since the only way is to another socialist state GDR), emigrants mostly try to get to Western Austria through Eastern Austria.
• In 1948 consolidation, start of collectivisation and final wave of nationalisations (majority of industry already nationalised during the Third republic), ČSSD merged (annexed) into KSČ. Law 231/1948 (law on the protection of the people’s democratic republic) passed, enabling persecution of political opponents (6.10.1948), “bourgeois” societal organisations (like Sokol) banned.
• 1949 the first political process with general Píka. 1950: Under Soviet pressure organisation of mass political process with “Group of Milada Horáková” (31 May-8 June 1950, non-communist intelligence). 1952 process with “Green International” – catholic intelligence.
• 1949 start of construction of Stalin’s monument in Prague.
• 1949-1953: The First Five Year Plan – centrally planned economy, focused on industrialisation of Slovakia
• Massive changes due to different international situations! – first 5year plan was focused since 1951 on militarisation due to Korean War and Cold War tensions, this period is radically different and much more calm , so this doesn’t happen, instead plan remains focused on mechanisation of agriculture, growth and development of consumer industry prioritised over the heavy industry -> this has positive effect on economy and plan is successful (this has influence down the line in 1953), economic situation is better compared to our reality, more goods to buy are available. Main target of propaganda of that era is the United Kingdom and its Imperialism, TATO, Yugoslavia and in Czechoslovakia especially Western Austria and Habsburgs, not American Imperialism. Also the infamous campaign against “the American beetle” doesn’t exist, campaign against the potato beetle yes, but it is not presented as a CIA operation to destroy Czechoslovak potatoes.
• Process with a conspiracy centre of Otto Šling and Jan Šverma – 20. January 1953
  • Slánský process without Slánský. This is another major shift, the Slánský process had major antisemitic undertones and Slánský being Jew was a major factor in choosing him. This antisemitism is missing as 1952 is the year where first antisemitic campaigns only started in the USSR, instead it is focused solely on “titoists”, while other people are grouped with them. Everything was organised by Soviet “advisors''.
  • Jan Šverma, who survived during the Slovak National Uprising, served as the Deputy Prime Minister (1948-1951) and Deputy General Secretary of KSČ (1945-1951), together with Otto Šling (leader of KSČ in Brno) were accused of being heads of made-up conspiracy led by Yugoslavia and the United Kingdom. They were executed. Other people persecuted (some are different): Karel Šváb, Vladimír Clementis, Osvald Závodský, Bedřich Reicin, André Simone and Josef Frank (executions), Marie Švermová, Arthur London, Vavro Hajdů, Mikuláš Landa, Jarmila Taussigová (life sentences) and others. People who were persecuted due to them being Jewish or having ties with Israel are not affected in this timeline.
• Process with bourgeois nationalists – June 1954, it was a follow-up to the process with Šverma, delayed to the period after Stalin’s death as Husák refused to confess. He was given “only” life sentence, others 20-10 years in prison. Oher follow-up “Process with regional secretaries” doesn’t take place; these people are already convicted in the main process.
• In 1953 Stalin had died, so did Klement Gottwald (14.3.1953)

Denmark 1949-1953

• Anti-communist political leader arrested in 1949: Hans Hedtoft, H. C. Hansen and others October 1949 process with members of anti-communist MI6 affiliated group “Firmaet”, however political leaders weren’t put on trial due to Larsen’s opposition to such mass trial.
• 1949: approved the first five-year plan: focus mainly on modernisation of agriculture, shipbuilding, light industry and only in minority in heavy industry and started voluntary and gradual collectivisation, all against wishes of soviet “advisors”, continuous diplomatic relations with Nordic countries (+large immigration wave to Sweden, established tough border security) -> as we establish Stalin loses trust in Larsen already in 1947 and his further opposition to Stalin’s plans and Tito-Stalin split (even if Larsen officially denounced Tito, he himself wanted to develop “Danish Way to Socialism” as campaigned before power consolidation) leads eventually to his downfall, despite pleasing Stalin with established of several Soviet military bases in Denmark and obeying all Informbyro directives.
• 15 February 1951 Central Committee of DFSP announced resignation of Larsen from all positions “due to health and personal reasons” he was replaced by Knud Jespersen as the general secretary and by Alfred Jensen as the prime minister. Several days later, Larsen was purged from the party and secretly arrested. On 12 March statement of the CC of DFSP on “Errors and Rightist Deviations under leadership of Aksel Larsen” was released, denouncing Larsen for Titoism, working also as party’s “self-critique” and devoting its leadership to upheld Marxism-Leninism. Party was purged of “Titotists”, many of them arrested. On 4 May also president Mogens Fog was forced to resign and put under house arrest, the presidency was abolished and replaced by a collective organ.
• New directives were issued regarding collectivisation, the process was “speeded up” and peasants were forced to join collective farms by economic pressure (high quotas), but still a more moderate agricultural policy based on Germany and Austria was promoted. Those in opposition were arrested. The Five Year Plan was reworked with help of Soviet experts giving primacy to construction of new metallurgy.
• Stalin wished to stage a large show trial with Larsen, as message to other leaders in socialist bloc, so between 20 to 26 April 1952 “Trial of the Anti-Party Conspiracy Revisionist Centre headed by Aksel Larsen” was held, it became shock worldwide (and paranoia to all socialist leaders) and only time past communist leader was executed, next to Larsen another 10 people were executed and 15 sentenced to long time in prison.
• By 1953 collectivisation rates increased from 15% in 1951 to 50%, targets of the 5 year plan were not met, Danish economy was however still in a relatively good shape.

Yugoslavia - Informbiro period 1948-1953

• Worse isolation and economic hardships compared to our reality, as the non-interventionist United States don’t really want to help Yugoslavia and Britain has few resources to spare.
• 1949: Andrija Hebrang, Sreten Žujović and other pro-soviet leader purged, executed, arrested or forced to flee.1948-1950 attempted coup, insurrection of anti-Titoists in several places
• Immediately after the split, Yugoslav economy suffered problems due to the Soviet embargo, and Tito moved the country towards self-sufficiency. Investments in the military. Special measures introduced in 1948 (third shifts, mobilisation of workforce and ratios) to combat problems.
• In 1948 trade between Yugoslavia and the West was restored, soon socialist bloc imports were replaced by Western ones, but at unfavourable prices. In 1949 IMF and World Bank approved loans to Yugoslavia, however due to Americans not lobbying for Tito, interest rates were unfavourable and got Yugoslavia to huge debt. Unlike OTL, desperate Tito abandoned claims on Trieste and managed to obtain British aid in 1951.
• Economic hardship forced Yugoslav leadership to seek economic reform and thus the beginning of Yugoslav socialist self-management (market socialism) was born. Introduced by Tito, Milovan Đilas and Edvard Kardelj in 1950. It led to partial stabilisation of the dire economic situation.
• Threat of possible Soviet invasion increased in 1951 with communist victory in Greece. However, unlike in our reality Yugoslavia did not turned to United States, Greece and Turkey, but to TATO as an alliance, Yugoslavia entered negotiations with TATO that resulted into singing of the Turkish-Yugoslav Agreement on 28.12.1952, in which countries pledged to defend each other against Soviet or Greek invasion and opened possibility of Yugoslav membership, it is connected with increase of relations with USA after American “New Foreign Policy Doctrine” of 1951.
• 2.-7.11. 1952 VI. Congress of Communist Party of Yugoslavia: Party renamed to League of Communists of Yugoslavia, peak of political liberalisation, decentralisation state and of party structure, separation of party and government functions, socialist self-management officially approved as economic policy, economic and political discussion promoted, emphasis of creation of socialist democracy, “democratic centralism” abolished. Changes resulted in 13.1.1953 Yugoslavia passed constitutional reforms – Yugoslavia declared “socialist, democratic, federal state of sovereign and equal nations”, a new legislative Federal People's Assembly was established, giving more power to republics. Liberalisation also brough artistic freedom.
  GREECE
  

Hellenic People’s Republic (1951-1953)

• 1951: communist consolidation of Greece, beginning of anti-communist insurgencies (active to mid-1960s). Sweeping radical socialist reforms: nationalisation of all industries, beginning of collectivisation. Repression of suspected royalist sympathisers (Campaign Against Reactionary Saboteurs), creation of soviet-modelled powerful Ministry of Public Security (November 1951) that led these repressions. Autumn 1951 mass arrests and purges in various fields. Large wave of emigration. Paranoia and fear of British invasion, start of military build-up reorganisation of DSA into the Greek People’s Army, Airforce and Navy.
• In November 1951 Zachariadis consolidated his grip over the military by purging war hero and prominent commander Markos Vafeiadis after accusations of him being Yugoslav spy and royalist, this move was unpopular for people and regular party members. Stalinism, creation of personality cult around Zachariadis. Purge of Vafeiadis’s allies.
• 6 December 1951 “Bloody Day of Saint Nicholas” execution of many prominent “bourgeois intellectuals and politicians” that supported royalists during the civil war after a show trial.
• 1952: IX. Congress of KKE (11.3.) – position of Zachariadis confirmed, toning down of repressions, election (2.6.) – only one-party ticket and “Democratic Front for National Reunification”. Campaign for international recognition (socialist states did already before 1951), Zachariadis retreats from the position of prime minister, Nikos Ploumpidis takes this position. Creation of the People's Assembly that passes the new constitution (August). Greece joins CMEA.
• Relationship with church: As majority of Greek people are religious, approach like in Poland, trying to make agreement, however persecution of many priests, who are connected with anti-communist groups.
• The most militarised (maybe after USSR…) in socialist bloc at the time, had very tense relations with TATO.
• 1953 (later about it, since it belongs more to the 1953-1956 period): Despite the death of Stalin Greek Stalinism itself continues…

Kingdom of Greece (1951-1953)

• Rump British puppet state, wikibox accurate for now only everything is moved by a year
• September 1951 to March 1952 “Rhodos government period” – state is ruled basically by military, very unstable state, uprisings and rebellions mainly in Crete. White terror and repressions start against populations many suspected communists executed, massacres.
• March 1952 Papagos comes to power (officially), gains extraordinary powers (basically becomes a dictator) – in next month intensification of repression and eventual defeat of all insurgencies and opposition against exile Kingdom, stabilisation and formation of working authoritarian state apparatus. Seat of government moved to Crete.
• In December 1952 a fraudulent election was held, victory of Papagos’es Greek Rally against the Liberal Party -> it marks transition to façade democracy and limited liberalisation.
• Papagos' government continues to represent Greece in the UN.

GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
Austrian Democratic Republic (1950-1953)

• After its formation, several left-wing reforms were passed: nationalisation of industry, creation of a centrally planned economy (1st five-year plan 1951), moderate collectivisation of agriculture. Similar to (real and TTL) Germany, East Austria suffers problems with Republikflucht towards the Western part. In 1952 federal states were abolished and East Austria became a unitary state. General secretary and president Koplening, prime minister Franz Honner (wikibox here accurate), elected in 1951 with “National Unity Front” list.
• Fight with Catholic Church, prominent institution in Austria, seen as representation of old reactionary Empire and sympathisers with the Western part (especially after the proclamation of Archduchy). Promotion of a new Austrian identity based on the labour movement, the first Austrian republic (which DRÖ claims to be a continuation) and strongly opposed to pan-Germanism and the old Austrian Habsburg empire. East Austria presents itself as the only sole legitimate Austrian state.
• Compared to other states, political climate is lighter, there are no show trials, however in 1952 part of VSAPÖ (Vereinigte Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei Österreichs – United Socialist Workers Party of Austria – aforementioned union of SPÖ with KPÖ) is purged and catholic leaders often face persecution with many of them imprisoned

Austrian Republic and Archduchy (1950-1953)

• Head of the first West Austrian government was Julius Raab, while Leopold Figl served as State-President.
• Why the hell is Austria Archduchy again you may ask? Since 1919 Habsburgs were banished from Austria, however here Winston Churchill comes to change situation, as West Austria was created under large British influence, Churchill went to propose to Raab to restore Habsburgs in order to boost public support and to continue historical line from the Habsburg Austria and to have greater legitimacy as the true successor. As the National Council was dominated by ÖVP, Raab agreed to the proposition. From August to November (1950) discussions were held between Otto and Raab on restoration of monarchy. Newly proposed changes to the constitution were discussed in the National Council. Eventually supporters of restoration prevailed and on 11 January 1951 the Habsburg Law was revoked.
• Otto von Habsburg returned to the country already in January 1950, was greeted by cheering crowds, but also with demonstrations. Monarchy is going to remain a polarising question amongst West Austrians. In the East this was greatly condemned.
• The March 1951 election resulted in another majority of ÖVP, the new National Council drafted and approved a new constitution making the country a constitutional monarchy, 26 June 1951. 3rd December 1951 Otto’s coronation ceremony, reining name as Otto II.
• Economically and politically West Austria is close with Italy and the United Kingdom, it also took an American loan in 1952.
• In 1951 Western Austria also introduced Gruber Doctrine (after foreign minister Karl Gruber), emphasising its position as the only sole legitimate Austria state, stating that Salzburg cuts relations with any country that has diplomatic relations with East-Vienna.

German Democratic Republic (1950-1952)

• Last time we left, the German Democratic Republic was proclaimed in May 1950 and occupational troops started to leave the country, that wouldn’t be finished until late September. Until that time DDR could not fully project its authority outside the Soviet zone. As Germany was disarmed it had to rely on its Volkspolizei.
• Some reforms were already started by the German Economic Commission and Occupation Authority, like nationalisation of nazi and pro-nazi owned industries and expropriation of various assets. In May 1950 a major nationalisation decree (that affected all parts of Germany, excluding the UN zone) was issued by the Reiman government, together with promised land reforms and voluntary formations of collectives.
• In September Länderat was dispersed by German authorities. During October CSU was forced to join Democratic Bloc, while Bavarian Party was banned for promoting separatism, many right-wing parties for its real or imaginary connection with Nazism. By the end of the year control over the American zone was achieved, however the governments of Baden and Wurttemberg still opposed the government. In March 1951 administrative reform was passed by SED, weakening the power of opposition by merging Baden with Wurttemberg and changing the borders of Franconia. New election was declared for October 1951, both state and federal (justified by “need to take into account political and legislative changes”), despite vocal protests of many deputies Democratic Bloc, now renamed Democratic Front for National Unity (DFE) put only one united candidate with possibility of a blank ballot. Democracy ended (29 October 1951). As elections were also held in the UN zone, here the blank ballots actually won 76% of the votes as part of a large protest initiative. Before the election on 5th of May 1951 III. SED congress was held, Walter Ulbricht was elected general secretary, major reorganisation on the lines of socialist bloc mass parties.
• 1952: The First Five Year Plan was launched focused on reconstruction, collectivisation of agriculture – everything like in real life East Germany (thus also similar to East Austria). Plan set high targets, resulting in high quotas for workers. (Germany economy was still in very bad state), persecution of opposition (connected with Nazism and declared saboteurs), Stasi created and eventually by end of the year thanks to facing large exodus (similar to East Germany) inner-German border (with UN) was closed (December 1952).
• Germany internationally still appeared as a neutral state and also had relations with Yugoslavia, however, they took pro-Soviet positions all the time: recognition of PRC and Greece.
• Nazi resistance existed in very limited numbers, some soldiers hiding in the woods and fighting long-lost war, no mass nazi underground. But as German propaganda pushed that idea and it also entered popular discourse.

United Nations Mandate in Germany (1950-53)
What was happening in the UN zone and what changed with the creation of Germany? It becomes more complicated. Next to the Allied Control Commission (ACC) under control of the UN Trusteeship Council and local state governments, a new position was established by the 1950 Peace Treaty – Authority of High Representative of the German Democratic Republic – so a representative sent by Berlin government, see UNMG was officially part of Germany. You will not see it on any maps. This High Representative had some powers, and he oversaw relations and implementation of common policies, elections, but the vast majority of German laws did not apply here, if these laws weren’t approved by UNMG, which they weren’t as this organisation was dysfunctional. UNMG became hub for German dissent and target of emigration, however, unlike GDR x FRG living conditions (in terms of economics, income, workers’ rights etc.) in UN zone sucked even more than in Germany proper, as it exited purely to exploit German labour, resources and industry in profit of Western companies. UNMG was the main point of German propaganda, criticised, as well what it was, Western exploitation of Germany, and strikes were organised against, it was the worst presentation capitalism can give. The 1951 election was met with protests as we mentioned above, it led to increasing opposition to the GDR government. Before 1953 it was common to travel between zones, but as the border was closed UNMG and GDR divided even more (so yes, it was part of Germany, but majority Germans cannot enter it and it is not ruled by the German government). If it is not complicated enough, it will get later in 1953.
FRANCE
Important in France is that CIA involvement in the country ended in 1949 (important is that CGT-FO despite being formed doesn’t gain any support and remains very marginal, while CGT itself is pro-communist). As the Marshall Plan aid is cut, economic situation worsens and living conditions fall and as government prioritises financing of Indochina War, post-war reconstruction drags on, rations continue, people are increasingly unhappy and PCF gains more and more support, right-wing turns towards Gaullists. This period is marked with numerous strikes, protests, unrest and general chaos. Also like in Italy, France takes many IMF loans and gets into debt.
Political chaos: 26 August 1948, Ramadier replaced as prime minister by André Marie, Marie forced to resign in 11 October 1948, replaced by Henri Queuille, who was replaced by Georges Bidault who served until 20 July 1950, replaced by Henri Queuille (again) just for a month, 23 August 1950 René Pleven became prime minister, government collapsed after formation of PSIF (and effectively lost parliamentary majority) 28 June 1951, new government head by Robert Schuman that and stayed in this position to the election in 1952, but was not able to pass anything including electoral reform that helped Third Force in our reality.
Since 1950 PCF has used a “popular front strategy” and attempted to sway the left-wing faction of SFIO to support them, instead of Third Force. There are changes, instead of the pro-government group headed by Mollet being splinter, instead the splinter group is forced by anti-government sections of SFIO and Parti Radical, French Socialist Independent Party (Parti Socialiste Indépendant Français PSIF) 26 June 1951, formation of PSIF which first leader become by popular Pierre Mendès France, who vocally opposed continuation of the war in Indochina. PSIF formed the “Popular Front” with PCF.
Before 17 January 1952 election, large political polarisation. Massive “New Year Strike” in 1952 – General Strike organised by PCF, mostly as part of political campaign. There is also increasing radicalisation of anti-communist right. Government attempts a massive anti-communist campaign that ends up being unsuccessful, while Gaullists are mainly attacking the government and PCF second. Wikibox needs overhaul (actually even those before it, there are too many seats for election), election results into majority of the Popular Front, Gaullists became the second strongest party and Third Force parties ended up decimated. Maurice Thorez became French Prime Minister; communists took key ministries (21 January 1952).
Maurice Thorez government (1952-1953)
First acts are several major left-wing reforms: shortening of workday, workers’ rights, approval of massive social programs and public works to reduce unemployment. During spring and summer several major nationalisations are drafted and approved by the government. End of financing of the colonial war. Early policies of the government are popular amongst people and somehow improve the economic situation. France petitions the USSR for aid in April 1952.
Franco-Vietnamese talks February – April 1952, ceasefire is declared, delegates including Ho Chi Minh and representatives of Laos and Cambodia, but not Bao Dai, are invited to Paris (Paris Conference 5 March – 6 April). France withdraws from Vietnam and recognises Democratic Republic of Vietnam as a legitimate Vietnamese government. French troops also began to transfer authority to locals in Cambodia and Laos and leave the area completely by January of 1953. This initiates debates about the future of colonies Thorez announces that in the future France would set all colonies on the way of independence. This generates large opposition from the right, but also liberals.
PCF also works on taking control over the French security apparatus and military. As we mentioned, there was conflict between “eastern” and “western” branches of Free French Forces, 1947-1951 communist sympathisers were removed from important positions, during 1952 the opposite happened. Communist aligned officers from the French Legion in the USSR take important leadership positions in the military. As communists controlled the Interior ministry before, several pro-communist officials survived there and now were empowered or re-instated, anti-communists removed. This was attacked by opposition, however communists augmented they do the same thing as the Third Force did before.
Major fight was about SDECE, which was dominated by anti-communists and closely connected with MI6 and CIA. In late January 1953 PCF publicly attacked SDECE as an organisation controlled by “imperialist spies and reactionaries, that plot subversion against the French people'' after the “Le Havre Affair”, where many weapons were found hidden by local Gaullist political leader (30 January 1953). Another major political weapon for communists was the publication of the French war crimes in Indochina in L’Humanité by Vietnamese correspondents (September to November 1952), Thorez government announced that all perpetrators would be punished, leading to large police investigation and arrests of many officers that participated in war in Indochina including many SDECE agents, serving also a purge. Back to Le Havre Affair, after this evidence war presented by ministry of interior that SDECE agents collaborating with Britian and America were responsible, leading to SDECE being dissolved (27 February 1953) and instead new communist dominated General Directorate for Internal Security (DGSI) was formed, organisation started to investigate SDECE, military and opposition parties, DGSI started to cooperate with MGB. Thorez gets reports that there were preparations for counter-revolutionary activity. Truth is that SDECE had been collaborating with CIA and MI6 since November in preparation of what would become Salan’s Coup.
Benelux - Netherlands, Luxembourg nothing to expand. Belgium Julien Lahaut survives assassination attempt unlike OTL, there is a mistake I never realised in the wikibox, bad despite Van Acker shown correctly as candidate, wrong person is shown as elected president.
Italy - Since better result De Gasperi’s DC rules alone without coalition. This results into lesser number of left-wing policies. Cutting of the Marshall Plan has serious implications for Italy, a much worse economic situation, with living conditions falling in the early 1950s. Italy thus took large IMF loans between 1951-1952, that put country into a huge debt. These both factors result into even larger popularity of PCI. DC began to massively fall at polls. To improve its standing, electoral law was changed to gain a supermajority bonus (2/3 of seats) to party or coalition, that obtains over 50% votes, communist protests.
Ireland - The 1951 election resulted in gains for Fine Gael (even though Fianna Fáil did still win), so Costello’ Labour-FG coalition continued to govern.
Nordics - integration

• First attempted customs unions from 1951 failed, but a free trade agreement (3.8.51) between Norway and Sweden was signed, this treaty also established open borders. Upon free travel was expanded in 1952 and later in 1954 with creation of Nordic Passport Union (SWE, NOR, FIN, ICE, later Faroe Islands joined too) – open borders and free movement.
• 1.7. 1951 Swedish-Norwegian Defence Treaty was signed (negotiations began already in 1949 after change of American foreign policy) – countries established a military alliance.
• 12.2.1953 Nordic Council – largest project – was created between Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland and Faroe Islands.

Sweden focused further on development of its military in light of American “retreat”, alliance with Norway. End of several social reforms by the Ohlin coalition government proved unpopular and election resulted in victory of Social Democrats, who also needed to form a coalition with Farmers Party (that also participated in the previous one). Tage Erlander returned to the post of prime minister, returning to previous social democratic policies. 1952 “Catalina Affair” did not occur, due to lesser Cold War tensions.
Norwegian 1949 election victory of Labour, Gerhardsen remains PM and doesn’t resign in 1951 as in our reality. Same policies, economic recovery and prosperity. Military strengthening.
Finald 1950 Paasikivi re-elected president. 1951 parliamentary election victory of Social Democrats, continuation of Kekkonen government. Increasing Nordic Cooperation. Everything as in our reality. July-August 1952 Helsinki Olympic games – last international event without major tensions
Iceland – American military withdrawal from Iceland, TATO seen as pointless. 23-24 Oct. 1949 parliamentary election results in victory of coalition government between Progressive and Social Democratic Party (government is supported by Socialists, who also see electoral success, while Independence suffers major defeat). Hermann Jónasson becomes the new prime minister. 1.8.1952 Ásgeir Ásgeirsson elected president. 1952 fishing disputes with UK: “Cod Wars”, this also contributes to that 30.8.1952 Iceland suspends its TATO membership. US bases continue to operate on Greenland as before.
In Turkey 14.5.1950 first free multiparty election are held, victory of the Democratic Party, Adnan Menderes becomes prime minister, Celal Bayar becomes president. Pro-Islam policy, economic growth after encouraging business, strongly pro-British policy. Turkey helps with Operation Poseidon, Kingdom of Greece becomes increasingly reliant on Turkey, while relations with mainland Greece collapse. After 1951 rise of anti-Greek sentiment in Turkish society, Red Scare and suspicion towards Greeks. Investment in military strengthening, taking US loans.

France
We mentioned France before, as it is one of key players in events of the war.
Recapitulation 1944-1945: 1944 – De Gaulle’s turn towards Stalin. 30th August Franco-Soviet Treaty (between the USSR and the Provisional Government of the French Republic)-> creation of the French Army Corps on the Eastern Front. In 1945 France was successfully included as the fourth Allied power in 1945. Already discussed political shenanigans about liberation of Paris. Due to their role in resistance, liberation, Legion in the East and the 1944 treaty, PCF gained massive political significance and became the main political force in the country.
1946 – Purge of collaborators and nazi sympathisers begins. France solidifies its gains in Germany. De Gaulle adopts the aforementioned vision of an independent French foreign political stance; he is backed by a surprising ally – PCF. On 3rd April 1946 first election to the Constitutional Constituent Assembly was held, wikibox is almost accurate, but now the previous PM is still De Gaulle and elections shall be earlier. Creation of the Fourth Republic is accepted in referendum. De Gaulle refused to give to PCF key ministerial positions that Thorez demanded, eventually compromise was reached, PCF obtained several ministries, but not key ministers (interior and defence) that Thorez demanded. After several clashes with communists (over extend of nationalisation, military leadership and organisation – eastern X western forces) De Gaulle government collapsed on 18th August 1946, he was succeeded by socialist Félix Gouin – government passed extensive nationalists and pro-worker policies, however PCF advances to control military were largely opposed.
Since the liberation debate rages about what a liberated republic should look like. De Gaulle supports the presidential system, while main political parties united in Tripartisme (PCF, MRP and SFIO) oppose it, PCF-SFIO advocated for unicameral legislative, while MRP for bicameral legislative. On 10th December 1946 referendum to approve constitution drafted by assembly was held, this constitution was proposed by PCF and SFIO, unlike OTL this referendum passes. Election to declare new assembly (according to the new constitution) were held on 10th January 1947 (wikibox results and PMs accurate, dating not) – victory of PCF (but communists were weakened compared to 1946), Thorez demanded to lead government, however other parties refused, and instead socialist Leon Blum become the prime minister, in exchange communist however finally gained the interior ministry. First president with limited power became Vincent (21st of January 1947). New government was soon plagued by disagreements: PCF refused to vote for war credits in Indochina, coalition parties harshly criticised PCF actions in the interior ministry and military, communist aligned strike actions. Government managed to push several left-wing reforms (minimum wage, further nationalisations) by May 1947. In May Blum was replaced by Paul Ramadier, under his leadership the coalition became de facto dysfunctional.
Meanwhile, the US really did not like communists present in the French government and decided to pressure French politicians to remove them in order to achieve US aid and loans (May 1947). On 5th of June 1947 Ramadier dismissed PCF on the grounds of “preparing government takeover”, large and long lasting demonstrations and strikes in response. Ramadier gladly accepted the Marshall plan (June 20). In August, Truman and Churchill attempted to get Ramadier to join TATO, but as this move would let to collapse of relations with USSR (due to 1944 treaty) and large part of French political representation (communists, Gaullists, even some parts of Socialists and Republicans) and population were strongly against it.
Since De Gaulle France pushed for creation of an all-European security system, including the USSR. On 7 May 1946, Franco-British Treaty of Cooperation of Friendship was signed, establishing a military alliance with Britain. Combining both treaties as the basis of a proposed “European Security Community” headed by France had been proposed by French politicians since 1946, but nobody was interested (except Czechoslovakia and Belgium) in such proposals. France tried to establish itself as a third power in Europe, cooperative with both blocks, but independent. France became a guarantee of Benelux neutrality; however, plans were to eventually evolve this into military alliance. When discussion about TATO started between Churchill and Truman, France was not invited (back then in spring 1947, PCF was still a major government party and France had just denounced occupation of Greenland), this also played a role in mutual distrust. Even though Third Force (in power June 1947 to 1951) were the friendliest with TATO and willing to become its members, the treaty with the USSR was a major obstacle, as majority of French politicians did not want to ruin Franco-Soviet relations. France instead chose to become a major non-TATO ally, signing the French-TATO treaty (26th March 1948), opening to membership (counted with it in 1954 after expiration of treaty with Soviets). Treaty was met with protests and strikes by communists, there were a lot of them in this period.
Also major issues, colonial war in Indochina and brutal crackdown in Madagascar, slowly increasing unrest in Algeria. Draining French resources.
Benelux additions
Despite being completely new, I again forget to consider the “Marshall plan factor” especially, when it is now connected to the Greenland crisis, and American opposition to giving aid to states with communists in government. This was a big mistake. So, changes are new political crisis in Belgium and Netherlands:
Netherlands – Similarly to France, US “suggest” to Drees that communists in government may cause troubles in getting all the American help during May 1947. Unlike France and Italy, Netherlands is much more stable, and it is difficult for Drees to find an excuse to end coalition with CPN. Eventually, this collapse comes itself as the Netherlands is invited to the Marshall Plan, CPN criticises the government's decision to accept the Marshall plan and communist ministers eventually resign in protest. Change: Drees II government 24.12.1946 to 20.6.1947, then coalition between SDAP-KVP-DVP. Netherlands still refuse to join TATO and uphold neutral position, guaranteed by powers in 1946.
Belgium – We already had the collapse of the government in 1947 in lore, but I did not comment on it. Unlike in Netherlands, in Belgium the coalition survives Marshall plan disagreements, collapse of the government in November is now connected to this American pressure, but also disagreements about practical policies, however the coalition is for some time recreated after the 1948 election, before its collapse after events in Czechoslovakia. So, no changes, just further context. Belgium also signed a treaty similar to France with TATO on 27 September 1948.
Italy
This period of Italian history is almost the same. Germans were finally pushed out of Italy in late June 1945. Italy is governed by several national unity governments (Bonomi, Parri, De Gasperi). 2nd June 1946 – Republican referendum and general election, PCI performs little better, gaining second place instead of PSI. Enrico De Nicola was elected as the first president. De Gasperi gains strong support from Americans, who wish to have a key ally in Italy and curtail strong PCI, as mentioned several times by the great victory of De Gasperi that Italy keeps all of Trieste. In May 1947 crisis erupted after the Portella della Ginestra massacre, where 11 leftists were murdered by the Mafia in Sicily. Connected to pressure by Americans, PCI was expelled from the government on 31st May 1947. Italy joined TATO in August 1947. In 1947 Italy also signed an agreement about South Tyrol with the West Austria government (de-facto officially recognising it as legitimate) CIA became very active in Italy (even more so than in France) and intervenes in Italian politics since. The 18 April 1948 election was accompanied with a massive anti-communist campaign and large American interference, results are almost the same as in reality, however DC gains more, 52% of the votes. Policies of the De Gasperi government are the same as in reality and a number of social reforms are done.
Ireland – So far as in reality: 1948 results in victory of Fine Gael, John A. Costello becomes new Taoiseach. Due to fear of communism, the coalition government establishes close relations with TATO (this is a little bit different). In 1949 the Irish Republic was declared.
Sweden – Despite urges from the West to participate in the war during 1945, Sweden stayed out of the war, however supported the Allies during the liberation of Norway. Relations between Sweden and the USSR were tense since the Soviet presence in Denmark. These tense relations led to Sweden getting close to TATO. After large media campaign and also thanks to more tense international situation utilised by conservatives, social democratic prime minister Tage Erlander lost majority in Riksdag, new government led by Bertil Ohlin (coalition between People’s Party, Farmer’s League and Right) was formed (19th September 1948) – this new coalition took more staunch pro-western stance than social democrats. The TATO-Swedish Treaty (3rd December 1948) was signed, opening up to possible membership). Right-wing government also reduces and rolls back some of the social reforms of social democrats. Close cooperation with Norway, popularity of Scandinavian integration (without Denmark, more against it).
Norway – 20th July 1945 liberation of Norway. Prime minister Einar Gerhardsen (25 September 1945, election 8 November) – as OTL many successful social democratic reforms, base of its successful development. There is another correction to make, I counted Norway as one of the first TATO members, but that would not be the case. There was actually much more hesitation to join NATO in real life, than I expected. Considering France and Benelux continue to follow the neutrality model (also Sweden), it makes sense for Norway to have more careful diplomacy. During this era Norway only signed treaty like France and Sweden (let it be together with France 26th March 1948).
Finland – Everything as in our reality. 19.9.44 Moscow Armistice. Paasikivi–Kekkonen doctrine. Finland becomes neutral, and doesn't join the Marshall plan under Soviet pressure. 6.4. 1948 Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance is signed between USSR and Finland, Finland secured remaining independent and democratic, Soviets political influence and Finish neutrality.
Iceland, Faroe Islands – 30.8.1947 anti-TATO riots in Iceland, Thorstein Petersen becomes the first president of Republic of Faroe Islands (People’s Party) 10.3.47.
Greece – leadership of royalists remains the same as in reality (too chaotic to list it), Greece does sign a treaty with TATO in May 1948. Portugal – joins TATO 11.8.1947. Spain, United Kingdom – nothing to say and expand
Turkey – Like in real life. 25.2. 1945 Turkey joins the war. Turkish Strait Crisis, unlike OTL Stalin doesn’t push territorial claims, just control over straits. Escalation 7 August 1946. Turkey backed the USA, military presence, and loans in 1947. 21 July 1946 unfree multiparty election, victory of kemalists. Major change is that already in May 1948 Turkey joins TATO.
Soviet internal politics (to 1953)
War brought enormous devastation and losses, now with war lasting even longer, the situation is even more terrible. Between 1946-1947 western part of the USSR was hit by a famine (half million to one million deaths). By early 1948 the situation stabilised, the Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature was started to prevent any possible future famines.
Stalin at the height of his power, enormous cult of personality. 24 February 1946 Great Victory Parade in Moscow, title generalissimus was given to Stalin. Early post-war period brough relatively more freedom compared to pre-1941 years – for example toleration of orthodox church. As OTL large anti-Soviet resistance in Baltics and western Ukraine. Political rise of Beria, Malenkov and Khruschev, sidelining of popular generals (like Zhukov) and Molotov. USSR strives to gain the atomic bomb (under leadership of Beria) as Soviets sees its destructive potential during American war against Japan, on 29th August 1949 the first Soviet atomic bomb RDS-1 is tested. In 1952 on XIX. congress of VKP(b) party was renamed to CPSU, the last public speech of Stalin.
In 1949 the first large postwar political process – Leningrad Affair – started, spearheaded by Malenkov and Beria. Leningrad leadership executed, over two hundred officials arrested and sent to GULAGs. Socialist realist Zhdanovshchina pushed both in the USSR and abroad. Between 1951-1952 Mirengial affair against Beria’s allies was launched by Stalin.
This all was the same as in real life; however major change comes with Jews. Major shift came already in 1944, when Stalin decided to support the establishment of Jewish Autonomous Republic in Crimea. There is really not any specific reason for it, it is a somehow possible and interesting idea. Stalin also does not, at least yet, turn against the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee. Instead in 1945 the Jewish Autonomous Republic in Crimea was officially proclaimed, Jews were encouraged to settle in Crimea to replace deported Tatars, reaching a population over 250,000 by 1952. However, Stalin does change his mind as relations with Israel worsen. Already in 1951 Stalin started making moves against JAC, its leader Solomon Mikhoels was killed “in an accident” in January 1951, later on during the same year majority of prominent Soviet Jewish figures were arrested, continuing to 1952 and 1953. In May 1952 Jewish Autonomy in Crimea was abolished by Stalin, further Jewish immigration here banned and together with it a media campaign against “rootless cosmopolitans” was launched. Stalin did not have time to finish his antisemitic campaign and eventually deport Jews from Crimea as he died in March 1953. No one from major arrested figures was executed yet (executed in our reality in 1952, arrested already in 1949, here arrested in 1952) and after March 1953 they were quickly rehabilitated. Jewish Autonomy is not re-established, but Crimea continues to have a significant Jewish population, Yiddish is re-established as the official language.
Palestine and Israel– In mid-1946 “mandatory” states gained independence. 22.3.1946 (a year later compared to OTL) – Arab league formed. Discussion about Palestine starts in the UN with delay compared to reality – 15.7.1947, UN vote 29th January 1948. Since then, fighting erupts. 14 May 1948 (as expiration of mandate remains the same) Israel is proclaimed, Arab league intervenes. Israel is backed by the USSR via Czechoslovakia. 20 July 1949 armistice, victory of Israel, Nakba and annexation of more land than allocated to Israel by UN, rest annexed by Transjordan and Egypt. We need to establish development in Israel to understand what will happen in socialist bloc during the late Stalinist era.
State of Israel (1949-1952)
What however changed is the result of the election held 1st March 1949 in which Mapam managed to secure a much better result 24% of the vote, only closely behind Mapai. David Ben-Gurion became prime minister but had to in many ways rely on Mapam to rule. Thanks to Mapam influence, as one few zionist parties that were against expulsion of Palestinians, government was forced to stop further expulsion of Palestinians (however it was too late, as majority of Nakhba already happened), Mapam wanted to allow Palestians to return and end military rule over them, but this was unacceptable for Mapai and eventually let to government collapse (9.10.1950). The Mapai-Mapam government also passed several important social reforms. Under this government Israel pursued friendly relations with socialist bloc, Stalin was satisfied. Subsequent second and third Ben-Gurion (without Mapai) governments returned to hardline policies against Palestinians and were unstable. Relations with USSR also started to worsen, one reason was Stalin’s negative attitude towards possible migration of Jews from USSR to Israel, and after 30 July 1951, when Mapam dropped by 10%, relations become much more similar to our reality around 1949 through 1951-1952 with this also Soviet internal policy changed. Israel started to become isolated as in 1952 the United States weren’t much concerned about them (edit: Since 1950 Taft administration would surprisingly become key ally of Israel, as Taft was vocal supporter of Israel, despite being anti intervention), Britain was still largely aligned with Arab monarchies and the French got a new communist government.

This guide will cover how to DIY a mattress from online components.
However! Be aware that DIY is not for everyone and if you're looking for a cheap or relatively simple mattress, then it might not be the best choice. There are typically no returns on DIY components, and while you can save money with DIY, it's also possible that it might be more expensive than you expect. I typically only recommend this to people that enjoy building things or have had problems with other mattresses and want to make something that is customizable and modifiable.
If this doesn't sound like you, then I'd advise you to look elsewhere.
This guide will also list where to purchase online components. At this time, I have zero affiliation with these companies. If this changes in the future (and I would potentially be open to some limited design or DIY consulting), then I will update this guide to let people know. Okay now on to the guide!
First, we should talk about mattress construction and mattress layers.
DIY MATTRESS LAYERS AND BASICS
1) Mattress Covers
Every mattress needs a cover. In most modern constructions this cover is usually quilted (this is the traditional, wavy-appearing cover that typically has some amount of foam stitched inside) or some kind of stretch knit fabric. You'll typically see quilted covers on various kinds of innersprings and stretch knit covers on memory foam mattresses.
Quilted covers tend to be less flexible and can stiffen an overall build (this is the drum effect), whereas stretch knit covers tend to be more flexible and allow you to feel more of the underlying foam.
Additionally, mattress covers are often contain some kind of fire barrier. This is important. I do NOT RECOMMEND building a mattress without a fire barrier. Foam is very flammable and this could be extremely dangerous.
2) Comfort Layers
Comfort layers are typically soft foams or soft fibers designed to relieve pressure and create a comfortable sleeping surface. Sometimes there are multiple comfort layers (ie, a mattress might have three 1-inch slices of soft foam) or just single a layer (ie, a single 2" slab of foam). Most comfort layers are rather soft with an ILD (a measure of foam firmness) in a range of about 8-20.
Very soft coils can also be used in comfort layers. These are commonly called microcoils. Microcoils range in height from a 1/2" to up 3" and typically feel slightly different than foam layers.
3) Transition Layers
Transition layers are layers of foam or other materials that are typically firmer than the overlying comfort layers and are intended to "transition" or "blend" the sense of initial softness with the firmer underlying support system. This is typically a layer of medium to slightly firm foam with an ILD of around 18-30. Microcoils can also be used as transition layers.
However, this layer plays another role that is not always appreciated or communicated by mattress companies. When used with pocket coils, the transition layer helps determine how firmly these coils are linked together. Put another way, if you put firm foam on a pocket coil, then the firm foam will link these pocket coils together rather firmly and impart a firm feel to the entire mattress. Similarly, if you have very soft foam over a pocket coil, this will allow for more conformance and create a much softer overall mattress. Thus, the interaction of the transition layer and pocket coil is one of the biggest determinants of overall firmness in a pocket coil design.
I call this the pseudohelical effect, as this foam is functioning similarly to the helical coils in a connected coil mattress.
4) Support Systems
There are two major kinds of support systems in DIY mattresses: foam cores and pocket coils. These function somewhat differently, but both are designed to provide solid support to a sleeper. I wouldn't say that either is superior to the other, but I will say that most mattresses sold on the market today use some kind of pocket coil. Foam support systems aren't bad (and many people prefer them), but they tend to allow less conformance and have more a "hard stop" in my experience.
Foam used as a support system tends to about six inches in height and ranges from 28-50 ILD. However, most builds on the market use a much smaller range of 32-36 ILD. Further, foam density matters here. I don't typically recommend foam support systems that are less than 1.8lb/pcf, unless these are intended for a guest room or for occasional use. And if you're a heavier person, you might want an even denser foam than that - something in the 2lb range (or latex) is likely to be better.
It's a bit more difficult to estimate firmness with pocket coils as this varies with coil count, gauge, coil height, etc and can be further modified with the overlying transition foam as discussed above. That said, a higher coil count (and higher coil gauge) is likely to be softer and allow for more conformance.
I also recommend using some kind of base foam under a pocket coil unit. This is usually a thin layer of foam (around 1" to 1.5") that provides a consistent surface for the pocket coils to push against. It also forms a "bridge" on foundations and prevents pocket coils from "floating" in the spaces between slats.
DIFFERENT KINDS OF FOAM
There are a lot of different foams on the market. Some of these are trademarked (like Energex and Serene foam) and relatively consistent from seller to seller. However, other foams will vary widely from one seller to another. The memory foam you buy on Amazon is likely to be totally different from the memory foam you'd buy from a different seller.
1) Poly foam. Or polyurethane foam. This has the classic "soft catch" that most people associate with foam. Density matters here. I'll talk about this more in a different guide, but I generally recommend high density (1.8lbs or greater) poly foams. Poly foam is also commonly available in a convoluted form, which will soften the foam considerably.
Recommended use: all layers depending on firmness.
2) Memory foam. Or viscoelastic foam. There's a huge variety of memory foams on the market. Memory foam can be made to feel quite hard and have a very slow response (almost like wet sand), or can be made to feel very soft and somewhat lively (almost like cotton batting). If you're purchasing sight unseen, it's nearly impossible to know what you're buying. I also think density is somewhat less important here, as there are now a lot of (reportedly) highly performing memory foams in the 3lb range. Still, very low density foams are probably best avoided.
Recommended use: comfort layers. I generally don't recommend this for a transition layer.
3) Serene foam. Serene is a trademarked foam from Carpenter that typically comes in two formulations: soft and firm. I think this feels somewhat like memory foam, but it has the tiniest bit of resilience which creates more of an overall floating sensation. It also tends to sleep much cooler than memory foam with a durability that's reportedly comparable to much denser foams. Be aware that the "firm" 22ILD Serene can feel quite firm.
Recommended use: comfort layers, maybe even transition layers on soft builds.
4) Energex. Energex is a trademarked "latex-like" foam from ECS with properties similar to both latex and memory foam. It typically comes in two firmness: soft and firm. It's also reported to be one of the most durable materials on the market. I think the soft formulation feels somewhat like memory foam, but without the slow-response that is characteristic of memory foam. The firm formulation is typically reported as an ILD of around 18 (this is usually considered a medium ILD), but I think it usually feels a bit firmer than that.
Recommended use: comfort layers, transition layers.
5) Latex. Latex is a high quality and durable material with a very unique feel. Most people articulate this sensation as "push back." This means that the latex has a sense of actively pushing back on you as you sleep - some people like this and some don't. That said, even if you dislike it, there may be a place for latex deeper in a build where the "push back" can be muted by overlying comfort layers. Latex is commonly available in many firmnesses and two formulations: Dunlop and Talalay.
Recommended use: all layers depending on firmness.
6) Other foams. And there are still more foams on the market. Things like HyPURgel, Allay, Tranquility, Qualux, and Lattice foam are available, and I expect to see even more in the coming months to years. If you're interested in one of these, feel free to give me a shout and I'll try to investigate. And as a quick rule of thumb, most of these can probably separated into two large categories: fast response "latex-like" foams and slow response "memory foam-like" foams. I'll try to cover more of these at a later date.
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Okay so it's as easy as getting a few layers and putting them together right? Well... kinda.
It isn't difficult to put foam layers together. It IS difficult to predict how these will work together and get it right on the first try. As an example, let's walk through a few sample builds. However, please keep in mind that none of these are necessarily recommended builds. These are just examples.
Foam Example #1:
Cover: Stretch knit
Comfort Layer: 2" of 4b memory foam
Transition Layer: 2" of 18ILD Energex
Support System: 6" of 36ILD 1.8lb poly foam
Discussion: This is a basic foam mattress with a 2" comfort layer and a 2" transition layer. The memory foam on top will impart some softness, while the more resilient and energetic Energex below will provide some bounce and recovery whilst softening the hard foam underneath. I'd predict that this would perform well for a lot of people and come in at around a medium-firm to firm. It'll probably be too firm for a lot of strict side sleepers, who might prefer a 3" + 2" configuration.
Foam Example #2:
Cover: Stretch knit
Comfort Layer: 3" 20ILD Latex
Transition Layer: 3" 30ILD Latex
Support System: 3" 40ILD Latex
Discussion: This is a pretty simple 9" latex mattress that uses progressive firmness to provide softness up top and firm support underneath. This is typical for latex builds. A larger person might want a little bit more of a support layer (possibly 6") so they don't "bottom out" and contact the unyielding mattress foundation. Similarly, a smaller person might want more softness and could add another 2" layer of latex or 2" of memory foam or other soft foam up top.
Pocket Coil Example #1
Cover: Stretch knit
Comfort Layer: 3" 20ILD Latex
Transition Layer: None
Support System: Quantum Edge 789
Base Foam: 1" 36ILD 1.8lb poly foam
Discussion: This is almost every latex hybrid on the market. It's simple, effective, and if you like latex, this could work very well for you. Note - the 20ILD latex layer acts as both a comfort layer and a transition layer in this build. This is something that you sometimes see with simplified pocket coil OR foam builds. Not every mattress has a distinct comfort layer and transition layer. I'd expect this to be around a medium-firm with a LOT of bounce. You should also expect some "push-back" from the latex.
Pocket Coil Example #2
Cover: Stretch knit
Comfort Layer: 2" Serene Foam
Transition Layer: 1" 24ILD Latex
Support System: TPS 15.5 Gauge 1008
Base Foam: 1" 36ILD 1.8lb poly foam
Discussion: This would be closer to a medium build with a lot of pressure relief. This uses a soft comfort layer, a "medium" ILD in the transition layer, and a high coil count and relatively high gauge coil unit. This would be something that is likely best suited to petite or average-sized sleepers. It's also close to some of the modern Serta iComfortEco hybrids, though it isn't zoned as awkwardly as those.
Pocket Coil Example #3
Cover: Stretch knit
Comfort Layer: 1" 4lb memory foam
Transition Layer: 2" 36ILD 1.8lb poly foam
Support System: TPS 14.5 Gauge 1008
Base Foam: 1" 36ILD 1.8lb poly foam
Discussion: This build is usually a mistake. Two inches of firm foam over a firm-ish coil unit is going to create a VERY firm overall feel, and the 1" of memory foam above is unlikely to provide much or any pressure relief. This is a build that happens when people prioritize foam density over comfort. And while there are a few professional builds similar to this on the market, most of these use a much lower density foam that can feel softer than it's stated ILD.
WHERE TO SOURCE COMPONENTS
Here's a shortlist of component sellers. And again, I don't have any affiliation with these companies.
Coil Units
1) Texas Pocket Springs: Texas Pocket Springs is actually a pocket coil manufacturer. They provide coils to some of the largest mattress companies in the US and have recently expanded into the DIY market. Their coils are also somewhat unique when compared to the average pocket coil and can be manufactured without an overlying scrim sheet to allow for more conformance.
You can see San Diego Mattress Makers talk about this here.
2) AZ Premium Mattress: Arizona Premium Mattress is a long-time DIY seller and, as far I know, offered some of the first DIY latex hybrids on the market. They typically sell pocket coils made by Leggett and Platt in both zoned and non-zoned versions.
You can see Leggett and Platt's different coil units on their website here.
3) DIYMattress dot com: This is a website that's only recently popped up on my radar. I initially thought they were related to AZ Premium Mattress, but that doesn't appear to be the case. They currently offer one coil unit, though it's not totally clear to me who makes this. Their website says it's made by Leggett and Platt, but the coil count suggests it's maybe made by Brooklyn Bedding.
Update: This appears to be affiliated with SleepEZ.
Foam Layers
FoamByMail: FoamByMail has historically been the most popular online foam seller on Reddit. Their memory foam tends to get good reviews, while their poly foam tends to gets more mixed ones. They offer three formulations of memory foam. I'd put the 3lb memory foam at a medium-firm, the 4lb at a medium-soft, and the 5lb at a soft. Most people tend to prefer the 4lb.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), latex (Dunlop), memory foam (3lb, 4lb, 5lb)
FoamForYou: This is a smaller seller I found while looking for someone that can make a 1" memory foam topper. Their memory foam is a gel-infused 4lb foam that I'd put at a medium to medium-soft. Larger people will probably feel this as somewhat softer.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), memory foam (4lb)
FoamOrder: This is a somewhat boutique seller that offers a 5lb memory foam, though the prices are kind of outrageous. Still, this could be a good option if someone is pursuing a "Tempur-like" build.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), memory foam (5lb)
FoamOnline: Another online foam seller. They offer high quality poly foam, HR foam, and various kinds of memory foam. They're one of the only online sellers that has a soft/medium HD poly foam.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), memory foam (2.5lb, 3.25lb)
Foamite: This is a Canadian brand with a huge variety of foams. I've never ordered anything from them, but they appear to also make a 1" memory foam topper, so I might explore this in the future.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), memory foam (various), HR foams (various)
Comfort Option: Comfort Option is a mattress manufacturer that I've talked to for years. I think they make high quality products with high density foams. They also have a wide selection of specialty foams available as toppers.
Foams offered: poly foam (various), Energex, Serene foam, memory foam (3lb), HR foam
MattressTopper dot com: This is a mattress topper website owned by Brooklyn Bedding. To be perfectly honest, I haven't been impressed with Brooklyn's foams in the past, but I've been told they've improved things in the last years. Previously, their Titanflex was just gel-infused Energex, but this might change in the future.
Foams offered: memory foam (2.5lb, 4lb), Titanflex, latex (Talalay)
Sleep On Latex: There are a lot of latex sellers, but Sleep On Latex tends to be my favorite. They sell simple, high-quality Dunlop Latex and have a history of excellent customer service.
Foams offered: latex (Dunlop)
DIYNaturalBedding: Really interesting array of products here focusing on natural fibers and latex. Not sure I can name another company selling wool sheets, tufting needles, and kapok fiber for DIY pillows.
Foams offered: natural fibers (wool, kapok), latex (Dunlop)
AZ Premium Mattress: Putting AZ Premium Mattress down again here as they are one of the only sellers I've seen that offers HyPURgel. They also have a variety of latex options.
Foams offered: HyPURgel, latex (Talalay, Dunlop)
Department Stores: As I'm sure you're aware, department stores also sell toppers. I usually don't recommend these, but I should point out that Target sells a lowish-density (though comfortable) 1.5" memory foam topper AND a 3" Serene foam topper. The 1.5" topper is probably best utilized over a cover as a topper, but the 3" Serene foam topper could be a good comfort layer in a build.
Foams offered: various, but most tend to be pretty low quality.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
What about mattress covers?
I hear you. And yeah, I'm working on that. However, I want to do some more investigation on which of these have inherent fire barriers before I make any kind of list. Similarly, if you're looking for a cover, I would advise you to ask the seller about this. Fire barriers are very important.
Are you going to create some recommended builds?
I'm not sure on this. There are two reasons. First, I don't want to suggest that a particular DIY build will work for someone and then hear that it didn't work out and they lost money. Second, I think I would need to do a lot of testing before I am confident on recommended builds. If a company wanted to sponsor this that might be interesting, but I would need to disclose this.
How can I DIY a Tempur-Pedic?
I'm not sure there's a great way to do this right now. Tempur uses some very unique foams and has a style of construction that'd be hard to replicate at home. You might be better off talking to a few of the companies above about their own 5lb memory foam mattresses.
Should I cut open my old mattress and DIY?
This question always makes me nervous. Many mattresses use fire barriers with an internal fiberglass core. This can be exposed when you cut open your mattress and contaminate your home. I typically do not recommend opening an old mattress, but you might be okay if it's an older pocketed coil mattress with a quilted cover. These tend to use non-fiberglass fire barriers. Still, I generally don't recommend this.
What's all this about fiberglass?
Okay, this is a big topic, but... some manufacturers have taken to using fire socks with an internal fiberglass core as a fire barrier on their mattresses. This has led to situations where people discover that fiberglass fragments have escaped the fire sock and contaminated their home. I'll talk more about this in a different guide, but for DIY fiberglass is not generally an issue unless you're cutting open an old mattress. If you're just buying foam layers these should not have fiberglass.
You can read my guide to recognizing fiberglass here.
What's all this about scrim sheets?
Good question. A scrim sheet (or fly sheet) is a thin layer of material overlying a pocketed coil unit. This links these coils together to add stability and make adding/gluing foam layers easier. However, this layer does typically limit the conformance of the pocket coils. Most Leggett and Platt systems come with a scrim sheet and are designed to be used with one. Some TPS coil units, on the other hand, do not use scrim sheets. This is a relatively unique feature to the TPS Quad Coil and should allow for more flexibility and conformance.
What's all this about Foam ILD?
ILD (or Indentation Load Deflection) is a rough measure of foam firmness. Foams with lower ILD's will generally be softer and foams with higher ILD's will be firmer. However, different foam types can feel pretty different despite similarly stated ILD's, so be aware that something like Energex might feel a bit firm despite a low-ish ILD. And generally speaking, soft foams have an ILD in the teens, medium foams have an ILD in the 20's, firm foams have an ILD in the 30's, and very firm foams can go up to the 40's and 50's. See FoamOnline's breakdown here.
What's this I read in an old post on Insulation Layers?
Good eye. Insulation layers are mattress components most relevant to "traditional" connected-coil mattresses. These have less conformance than a pocketed coil and more of a "hard stop" when you contact the coils, so some kind of material is usually necessary to insulate the hard feel of the coils themselves. This can be dense foam, cotton-stitched pads, or even a type of plastic mesh. With pocketed coils the transition layer usually insulates and protects the sleeper from the hard feel of the coils themselves, though this isn't universally true.
Okay what if I kinda want to try DIY but I'm also kinda nervous?
If that's the case, you might look at a modular mattress with an unzippable cover and a removable comfort layer. You could also look at a relatively simple construction and put a topper on it, or look at mattresses that are designed to be used with external toppers.
What's the most common mistake people make here?
I usually see people go way too firm. They get on FoamByMail, order a few HD layers, and then are shocked that a 36 ILD HD foam on pocketed coils is too firm. This is due to the pseudohelical effect that I discussed above, where a firm foam effectively "links" these coils together and creates a very firm overall feel. This can also happen when people prioritize density over comfort. An HD foam is generally long lasting and durable, but that doesn't mean it'll be the most comfortable option for you. Sometimes lower density foams work well and can be replaced if they start to wear out (particularly so with comfort layers).
And for reference, most "medium" builds use a transition layer that's actually around 20 ILD.
Addendum: I see a lot of people purchasing FoamByMail's 50ILD Lux foam. I generally don't recommend this. A 50ILD foam as a transition layer is likely to feel like a wooden plank and create an Ultra Firm overall build.
Do I need to glue layers together?
If you're using latex - probably not. Latex is inherently tacky, and this effectively binds different layers together. If you're using other kinds of foam, I'd advise you to first make sure the build is correct and the mattress is working, and then use some poly foam adhesive to gently glue the layers together. Glue will make sure the layers are working as a unit and aren't sliding or pulling on each other and creating uncomfortable sheer forces.
Wait what happened to mattress ?
You can read more on this here and here. It's not a great situation.
Okay! That's about it for now. But I will keep updating this. Let me know what you'd like to see!

Dear ProtonVPN Team,
After learning from successful experiences with self-hosted proxy servers and other VPN providers, I would like to share some technical ideas with you about how ProtonVPN can improve its services for use in China.
There are a few things to pay attention to in your current services:
1.Use DNS over HTTPS to resolve API domain and server domain, and include at least 4 public DNS over HTTPS services built into the app for alternative routes.
Reason: DNS pollution is quite common in China. If you get wrong DNS results, ProtonVPN won't work correctly. Additionally, famous DOH services are not stable in China, which is why alternative routes are necessary.
2.For the app API endpoint, include at least 4 alternative routes and ensure they can be switched reliably.
Reason: The Chinese government takes many actions to block unknown and "harmful" websites.
3.For auto-selecting VPN protocols, once Proton's main API is detected as blocked, the app should try to connect using the stealth protocol first.
Reason: In network-restrictive environments, standard VPN protocols usually don't work properly. Users can't wait for a long time to connect, so a more user-friendly approach is needed.
4.Improve the stealth protocol to make it look like normal TLS traffic (without SNI).
Reason: The Chinese government usually doesn't block normal TLS traffic to unknown websites unless they are known to be harmful. Cisco AnyConnect works very well in China.
5.Encrypt the app's self-config file.
Reason: This is an important step for Windows client users. In China, software from Tencent and Qihoo usually scans users' disks without their permission. If they get hold of the application's config file, they can do some malicious activities.
I really hope the ProtonVPN team sees this and takes the appropriate steps to improve their services. Thank you for potentially saving countless netizens from the darkness.

Hello, internet.
For some context....
We currently have a pair of Firepower 2140s in HA that are currently running 7.2.5.1 managed by a single FMCv, also on 7.2.5.1.
There is a single 10Gbps connection on the FTD, our outside interface, which then feeds into a pair of Fatpipe Load Balancers. On said Fatpipes is where we have our ISPs connected to do our load-balancing for us. We have two ISPs that are just 1Gbps each, and we just acquired a 10Gbps circuit that will eventually replace our secondary 1Gbps. The FTD is assigned an IP that's within the IP space that was given from ISP #1. The LAN interface on the Fatpipes is 10Gbps.
In terms of traffic flow to the internet, you have: core switches -- ftd --- fatpipe lan ---- isp1/isp2 via fatpipe wan interfaces
The kicker is whenever we acquired ISP #1, it was setup as a /30 so the Fatpipe interface would get .1 and ISP would get .2. Fatpipe LAN interface is part of a /25, assigned by ISP1, so in that the LAN is .10 for example and the FTD has .100 in a range of .1 - .126 for usable addresses. If we have traffic that comes in via ISP2, and we do since have A records created on both ISP1 and ISP2, then that traffic gets NAT'd so an ISP1 address and then the FTD NATs that to it's real address behind the firewall.
If your head didn't just explode reading that, then I'll be very surprised. Wasn't exactly my idea at the time as this was 6-7 years ago and I was very fresh in network, but no reason to point fingers here but figured this piece of information was important.
Now to the juicy stuff.
So now, we have this new fancy 10Gbps circuit and we've been using it for a few things and would like our FTDs to use it as well. I've been reading up on Equal Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) Routing and Policy Based Routing that is evidently supported within the FTD starting on version 7.2. Flex config no longer required in this case, so that's a plus.
Also, we've looked into getting 10Gbps licensing on our fatpipe. My jaw about hit the floor when I saw the quote, so this is huge cost savings for us. The end goal here would be to rid of the fatpipes, and let the firewalls do the load balancing for us. They would also continue to terminate our site-to-site VPNs as well as Remote Access VPN.
So NOW the caveats kick into play and there are a couple things in particular that stand out as I'm reading through Cisco's documentation.
Link: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/secure-firewall/management-centedevice-config/720/management-center-device-config-72/routing-ecmp.html

• Following interfaces cannot be associated with an ECMP Zone
  • Interfaces in RA VPN configuration with SSL enabled

So here is my first concern. I had about 150+ users that work from home daily with AnyConnect and I have them currently using IPsec. IPsec works fine. My concern is where I need to actually disable SSL should I proceed with this. Even with my using IPsec solely, SSL it still utilized regardless in the initial connection with the FTD from AnyConnect.
Here is another guideline that I noticed that could potentially impact us.

• Threat defense does not support ECMP with NAT in IPsec sessions—a standard IPsec virtual private network (VPN) tunnel does not work with NAT points in the delivery path of IPsec packets.

Not entirely sure on this one, however I do have an active case with TAC so hopefully they can go into more details and provide some clarify.
If anyone has had any experiences with this and would like to share, I'd be happy to listen. I'm also open for other comments and suggestions as well. I'm fully aware that this isn't the best setup or design and may go against many best practices.
Thank you for your time.

A friend of mine, frustrated with his printer, recently handed me his fully enclosed (none of that chimney crap) 5 S1 with a Sonic pad. This wasn't his first instance of frustration, as he also gave up on his CR-10 last year. Now, both printers are under my care. 😂
So far, the S1 has been performing adequately. However, I'm not a fan of the spider nozzles. More importantly, the flow rate struggles to keep up with the prints I do using nozzles larger than 0.6mm. Initially, I planned to swap in the K1 heater block, which would allow me to use the same volcano nozzles that I've been using in my Rapido on the CR-10. But this seemingly simple modification is turning out to be more labor-intensive than anticipated. I need to extend both the CRTouch and the fan cowling. Luckily someone has made a mod for this.
The issue I've encountered is the need for increased cooling due to the higher flow rate. Considering one of the primary upgrades for the S1 is the dual 5015 cooling upgrade, it seems necessary to implement it alongside the increased flow. However, I haven't found anyone who has developed a dual 5015 PCF upgrade that accommodates the longer K1 hotend. Or better yet, just a better cowl that isn't so turbulent.
This is starting to feel like I might as well go for a full tool head replacement, but I really don't want to get into rewiring the harness for a different PCB.

May 12th, 1958

Palais de l'Élysée

The air was thick with a heavy energy. Since the initial release on Tuesday by Le Figaro, the government has been basically at halt. The revelations were an absolute blow to trust in the government, not to mention creating a crisis of faith in the system as a whole.
How did the government manage to do this? Why would they violate numerous treaties and agreements with partners? And more importantly, why?
The speech given by President Soustelle failed to allay concerns. Rather than cooling tensions and countering the narrative, the following few days only broke confidence further. The idea that France would hold firm to the policy, rather than take a drastic shift, failed as a strategy. Bringing up the absolute mess in Algeria further caused problems, as much of the public was already having issues with some of the conduct in the southern departments. Taking the stance that France was "not at fault" for the policy, despite agreeing to it was, to many, an asinine way to argue fault. However, there was a noticeable...void in the whole affair

Where is President de Gaulle?

The entire week, the President has simply disappeared from the public eye. While having met with President Eisenhower May 8th and 9th, pictures of him have been limited and his office would not respond to any comments. The normally massive force of personality was just...gone.
This was concerning to much of society. The populace, who view de Gaulle with much love, had concerns about his placement in the scandal or if something happened to him. The government, in turn, was scared to have potentially lost the support of the general. There were even some rumors that the military was preparing a coup to institute military governance in France, or that the PCF was planning a massive strike for their own coup.
"My fellow Citizens of France, this is your loyal President"
At 11:01 on May 12th, a voice echoed throughout the radios of France. Across the nation, de Gaulle would a statement that would become known as "La Réplique". At the Élysée Palace, a small amount of hand picked friendly journalists had been invited, both from France but also American, German, Italian, and other states (notably excluding any British journalists). He spoke into a mic in front of them all, cameras flashing and many writing notes as he spoke. He was alone, and yet...
France would soon be with him.

For the past week, many of you have been told many things. You have been told all the things that you believe could see the France fall once more. The information coming from all has brought fear to you, that we are on the brink of a civil war, that the rights of all will be removed.
I will guarantee to you, right now, I will not let this happen
Since the rebirth of our Republic, I have served at the behest of you, the people of France. You, the lifeblood of our great nation. You, the ones who have bled for our very survival against those who would see us destroyed. My fight is your fight. And the unfortunate reality is that our fight is against not those who would see harm towards our government from abroad, but from within.
The reality of the situation is that the government has failed you, and then made the attempt to hide what they did. I talk especially about those who spoke on May 8th, who told you that the French Government was not to blame for this crisis. They have lied to you, as they have lied to me.
This system of governance, it has allowed your leaders to hide things. It is a system built on the ability to hide as much as necessary, to act with malice and shadowy secrets. Whether this be against France or those abroad, the governing system is that rewards these actions; there is little to keep them from acting without regard. And using this, they even hide information from those parts of the government who are against their policy, as they did to myself.
Our government does not need to be based on lies, on deceit. France can and should be a strong nation that pursues an honorable course. It is the nation that I have fought for, our Homeland. In years past, I have given myself to the Republic, to defend and support it. I have only ever given myself to the Republic.
And I will do so once more, if you should let me.
I am fully prepared, if given the right, to pursue a policy to fix that which is broken. I will assume the powers of the Republic itself to end this chaos. I am ready to rejuvenate that which has rotted. I will not let this nation fall once more, there will never be a repeat of 1940.
You have my reply and my word

And with that, he would end the speech. In following interviews, the President would be questioned on numerous portions of the speech.
There was a question if President Soustelle was being directly attacked by President de Gaulle. While not specifically named, the inferences gained shown that Soustelle had zero faith from de Gaulle. Other questions called in to question if de Gaulle was interested in a policy that would attack civil liberties in his goals, a concern he laughed off by saying "Have I ever done that? On the contrary, I have re-established them when they had disappeared. Who honestly believes that, at age 67, I would start a career as a dictator?"
Needless to say, unlike the speech of May 8th, "La Réplique" galvanized the French populace. This was not for or against the government in particular, but specifically for de Gaulle. The shift was monumental, to say the least. The air was no longer heavy with hatred and confusion, but with hope and optimism.
And it was now aimed at the 4th Republic itself

July 4th, 1957

The last major elections in France were held five years ago. Five years. A government had lasted for five years. That, in all honesty, was an achievement of monumental proportions. No government in the history of the Fourth Republic has been able to achieve this, with the longest only surviving for two years before collapse. How the RPF has managed this, many are unsure of.
Especially considering the policies they’ve pursued in Africa.
Despite the best efforts of the RPF, the Africa Policy pursued by the RPF has been…contentious, to say the least. Reform has been on the mind of the party their entire existence, and while it has proved successful in Senegal, paving the way to its usage in other parts of the Union, it hasn’t been without criticism. The money invested into West Africa especially has been argued that it could have supported France. It is seen by some as a waste.
Then, on some diplomatic policies, there have been notable shifts. The recognition of the PRC, the work done to restore relations with the PRV, and general attitude of cordial relations with the east have proved to be critical for some on the right. While praised by the left, the right in society has started to coalesce itself once more, finally.
Even within the RPF, rifts are splitting between right and left gaullists, with the right enraged by the increasing influence by the left wing. Much of this has been targeted directly at Rene Capitant, the Overseas Minister, who has proven to be more on the side of the colonial populations than was even expected. His constant push for reform has angered portions of the party.
The RGR, generally much more on the right, has been attempting to pull the coalition back into something they deemed “sane”, but by this point, they’ve become exhausted by the endeavor. As a result, they announced that they would likely not pursue coalition with the RPF once more following the elections. This has left the RPF and MRP with a hole that could collapse their projects if the elections were to go the wrong way.
Surprisingly, the SFIO has been having a steady resurgence. While originally having their reputation ruined in the wake of 1950 and the later failures of 1952, the SFIO has been slowly regaining the faith of the population. Part of this is by siphoning seats in Africa, but part of it is their actions during policy making, both supporting and opposing the government in various actions. There has been a reformist mindset to the handling of the SFIO. Much of this has been attributed to the rising influence of Francois Mitterand, with rumors being that there are even talks between the SFIO and PSU for a reunification of the party. Mitterand has been vocally opposed to the objectives of the RPF and de Gaulle while arguing some of the policies themselves were of importance to the future of France. Guy Mollet has apparently adopted the strategies from this new rising star.
Finally, there is the Algerian problem. While all parties have various opinions on the war, Algerian politicians have become vocally opposed to government policy, arguing a much harsher policy is necessitated to quell the uprising. Many of the politicians, exiting from parties, have shifted to the CNIP or even UFF, who have joined in that call for harsher measures.
And so comes the elections, with the results as following

Party	1953	1957	Seat Change
Parti Communiste Français	173	165	-8
Parti Socialiste Unitaire	22	17	-5
Section Française de l'Internationale Ouvrière	60	81	+21
Mouvement Républicain Populaire	100	70	-30
Rassemblement des Gauches Républicaines	28	22	-6
Rassemblement du Peuple Français	166	137	-29
Centre National des Indépendants et Paysans	21	59	+38
Union et Fraternité Française	6	11	+5
Total Seats	576	562	-14

There are a few pieces of information to note about this election
First, the “Bloc de Droite” (Right-Bloc; an informal name) between the CNIP and UFF had massive successes, leading to a resurgence in conservative political power. Algerian politicians exiting parties to join the CNIP and UFF, combined with general angst about the policies of the current coalition have led to this turn. The BD has proven itself to be against all policies, and been a stalwart antagonist to the government, giving themselves a boost in their numbers.
The PCF and PSU, meanwhile, gained little. This can both be accounted for by losses in the Territorial Seats from the freeing of states in the Union, but also from a slow siphoning from the SFIO.
The SFIO is the other major winner of the election, as a result. While not to their old extent, they have now risen to the 3rd largest party in the Assembly, an achievement to be sure.
The MRP and RPF both, meanwhile, took their hits mainly from losses in Africa and defections towards the CNIP and UFF.
The RGR continues to be insignificant.
Following the election, coalition negotiations started immediately. The RPF and MRP, given their good relations, pursued a coalition together. The problem lay in who their partner would be, leading to two major options in the SFIO or CNIP. There were notable issues with both.
The SFIO still holds the baggage of the old years, with leadership only just starting to shift. This, combined with various demands from the faction becoming known as the “Mitteranders”, would prove a hard fight to bring into coalition. However, on the flipside, the CNIP would require harsher measures in Algeria and made it clear they would join no coalition without the UFF. While likely a bluff to be promised policy for their joining…it ended their chances.
By the end of July, a new coalition would be formed between the RPF, MRP, and SFIO, with the RGR entering the opposition. The SFIO, promised both policy and importantly, cabinet positions, held the various cards to bring about their vision. Mitterand himself was given the Interior Minister post, to sate his faction. With this said, the President of the Council would continue to be now-veteran Jacques Soustelle, given the RPF still holds the largest seat majority of the coalition.
So France goes into the next half decade, with a hope of continual stability in these trying times.

VIVE LA FRANCE

Let's discuss the changes you would suggest for the PDC calendar - regarding tournaments as such, their structure/format, dates etc.
I'll start with my bit.
*Premier League
- Back to the old league format. Hate the current format, it is totally 'ordinary'. It has the structure of a classic tournament, we see the same matches week after week. It used to be Premier LEAGUE because it was an actual league, this is something like a Premier Tournament. It wouldn't have to be a complete copy of the previous format with 10 players, for instance I can easily imagine a league with 12 players. Another flaw of the current format - 8 players is too few. Then there are problems like this year when a player like Humphries was left out.
​
*Grand Slam and Player Championship rescheduling
- The main component of qualifying for the Grand Slam consists of winning a major tournament (or being a runner-up) in the previous season. For example, for the 2023 Grand Slam, the winners of all 2023 major tournaments + the winner of the 2022 Player Championship qualified, since this tournament is the only one after the Grand Slam. This is illogical and with this format of qualification the Grand Slam should take place after the Player Championship.
​
*New format tournament
- Currently, Grand Prix is the only tournament with a differing playing format. I would love to see another tournament like this. My suggestion would be 701 DO (or even 1001) and it could be applied to the Masters.
​
*Terms and dates
- Less than a 3-weeks break between the last tournament (currently the Player Championship Finals) and the World Championship is not enough. I would add one week to emphasize the importance and specialness of the WC and also allow for more build up of tension and atmosphere before this tournament.
Taking into account my previous suggestion of swapping PCF and GS, the 2023 calendar would look like this:
15 Dec 23 - 3 Jan 24: World Championship
11-19 Nov: Grand Slam
3-5 Nov: Player Championship Finals
12-15 Oct: European Championship
15-17 Sep: WSoDF
August: World Series
15-23 Jul: World Matchplay
15-18 Jun: World Cup
April/May: Grand Prix (too many tournaments at the end of the year, this would balance the calendar)
3-5 Mar: UK Open
2 Feb - 1 Jun: Premier League (probably at least 1 week extension would be necessary to accomodate Grand Prix in ApMay)
27-29 Jan: Masters

We are in the process of trying to migrate from Cisco AnyConnect to ZPA for remote access. The problem we are running into centers around a single application, unfortunately it's the most important application that we have.
The problem we have is that the application utilizes the source IP address of the device connecting when it is locking out users. This become a problem when all of our connection are originating from one of our two app connectors. If someone gets locked out over ZPA, it effectively locks out an entire app connector and if another lockout occurs on the remaining app connector service is essentially shut off.
Is there any way to have our client devices present some type of meaningless IP as the source address through ZPA?

December, 1953
Vincent Auriol was tired. His tenure as President of France was nothing short of a nightmare. He had watched as the entire political system had been turned into a farce. Election after election, cabinet after cabinet, it was too much for him. He was tired. As he said, "The work is killing me; they called me out of bed at all hours of the night to receive resignations of prime ministers." It was, as a result of this fact, decided that the elder statesman from the SFIO would not pursue another term as President of the Republic. The playing field was opened up as a result for a new president.
The French Presidential Election system is an indirect election. What this means is that the president is elected through a majority vote of deputies and senators in both chambers. Should someone attempting to run for the President role get a majority of the votes in a single round of voting, that person would be named the new President of the French Republic.
This role is, of course, mostly ceremonial. Compared to the powers of the President of the Council of Ministers (colloquially the Prime Minister), it is still an important role, with influence on French Politics and holding various roles.
With the combination of the 576 Assembly Deputies and 320 Senate Senators, the total available votes for the president was 896. This means that, with every parliamentarian voting, the necessary votes that a candidate needs is 449. This number does decrease if not every person votes in a given round, but it still requires a strong showing from a candidate.
The field was, inevitably, extremely messy. Multiple candidates from all parties were campaigning to be elected (with the notable exception of the UFF, who had not one person run, and the PCF-PSU bloc, which coalesced its power around Marcel Cachin). Given the potentially fractious nature of the election and the cabinet, the host of candidates was large and the election would go beyond a first, second, third, fourth, and many more rounds.
The main candidates up for debate who consistently got larger sets of the votes came from the MRP, SFIO, and RPF, who held much sway throughout the parliament. The SFIO was somewhat surprising, given that they did not hold much power in the Assembly. However, the Senate was a place they still held decent amounts of power, and they were consistently breaking off votes from other parties. The other two main contenders of the MRP and RPF were unexpected though.
Unsurprisingly, the CNIP were expected to fail massively, given their track record in recent years. It did not help that the UFF as a political group would not vote for any candidate, arguing vitriolically against the whole process. Still, considering their lack of power in the Assembly, that was not an issue.
The biggest piece of interest from the press was the handling of the election from the RPF. While ascendant back in March, 1952, and using their momentum to push vast changes to society, there are major splits in the party. Namely, there are two general factions of the “Left Gaullists” and “Right Gaullists.” While all are supporters and followers of General de Gaulle, there were genuine differences in policy. Notably, there had been arguments with regards to welfare in the chamber, which has slowed such policy changes. The Africa reform plans were also a potential point of contention (though it was overall ameliorated). With other potential concerns coming up, two candidates rose to the stage, splitting the RPF vote. With other candidates also further splitting the votes, it was impossible to get anything done. It was due to this chaos that a proposal was laid out following the failure of the 9th round of voting, coming from a group of Right and Left RPF members, as well as gaullist aligned politicians of the MRP led by Pierre Pfimlin.
Charles de Gaulle.
Despite his resignation from politics back in 1946, the Hero of France had still played an outsized role in the French political scene. His influence was undoubtedly strong, and he was still extraordinarily popular. While he hated the current system (and he would only be in a ceremonial position given the 4th Republic’s Constitution), if he could be convinced to run, him being at the reins of the Presidency would cement the power of Gaullist opinions in France. His popularity and influence could even be used to shift France into a new system, one that closer aligns with his wishes.
After various meetings and working to convince him to join the running, he would. While failing to secure the necessary votes to win the Presidency in the 10th round, it was a sweep compared to other candidates, barely not reaching the goal. It was such a quick shift in support that other parliamentarians across the political spectrum would move to vote for him. By the end of the 11th round, it was clear.

Candidate	Party	1st Round	2nd Round	3rd Round	4th Round	5th Round	6th Round	7th Round	8th Round	9th Round	10th Round	11th Round
Marcel-Edmond Naegelen	SFIO	97	111	116	117	201	226	255	243	252	231	194
Marcel Cachin	PCF	186	181	179	177	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Paul-Jacques Kalb	RPF	112	113	119	121	122	119	129	132	119	52	-
Louis Vallon	RPF	127	131	126	123	153	155	156	148	138	-	-
Charles de Gaulle	RPF	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	359	477
Georges Bidault	MRP	151	149	172	171	165	172	173	167	144	81	49
André Colin	MRP	59	37	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Jean Medecin	RGR	36	-	-	-	-	82	99	121	92	76	61
Yvon Delbos	RGR	69	112	106	103	49	-	-	-	-	-	-
André Cornu	RGR	-	-	-	-	81	43	-	-	-	-
Joseph Laniel	CNIP	37	34	31	32	33	31	29	28	16	19	22
Others		16	21	27	43	61	41	44	42	93	68	53
Total		890	889	876	887	865	869	885	881	854	886	856

By the end of the election, de Gaulle had won 55.7% of the votes cast in the 11th Round, cementing him as the newly elected President of France.
In his victory speech, de Gaulle would talk about his beliefs that France was on a new course, one that would leave behind the chaos of the last seven years. He would lead France into a bright new future, much as he did when he led France to victory in the Second World War. The Republic would be shaped under his watch into a more stable, strong nation. While there was some criticism of the speech, given the powers (or lack thereof) of the President, it did set a precedent. The political headwinds for France have been brought full force for the Gaullist cause. France was to be a strong, independent minded nation. France, for Europe, for the Union, and for itself. Analysts expect that there will be major changes to the Constitution of France within the next few years, which may entirely change how France itself operates politically.

Vive la France

July 16th, 1952
In front of the Hotel de Montmorin, Minister of Overseas France René Capitant would make a major announcement to a crowd of employees, reporters, and a few politicians from the National Assembly. There was a hushed whisper for many. “What is he going to announce?” “What is this about?” “Why would the Overseas Ministry need such a massive stage?”
Approaching the mic, Capitant would begin.
“Brothers, Sisters, Comrades. Thank you for coming to hear me speak. I know many of you are confused why you are gathered here today. I know there is, for some, an expectation that I wouldn’t even be standing here in front of all of you given our nation’s tumultuous history with the government in the past few years. Still, we are here, but why?
Our nation, France, is great. It is one of the greatest nations on this planet. Even as we are in the middle of a new conflict between the United States and Soviet Union, we have shown ourselves as being a nation which will go its own way. We know what is best for France, we who live here, who work here, who grew up and who die here. France would be nothing without our people.
But, there is more to France than just the Metropole. Beyond the borders, across the seas, there sit millions upon millions more men, women, and children who are citizens of the greater French Union. Just like you, they work for the Union, they work for the greater idea of France. Many have fought, just like you, for the Union. Many others died for this nation. Whether on the fields of France and Germany, the Mountains of Italy, the deserts of North Africa, or in the jungles of Asia, they have shown themselves to be as willing to fight for France.
And yet, they are considered different to us. They are simply different due to being outside our Metropole. Each and every one of you, born in the Metropole, is considered French. They, out there in Africa or in one of our territories throughout the Caribbean and Pacific, are “French” for being in the Union, but by our rules, are not truly “French”.
We have fought for Liberté, Egalité, and Fraternité, those defining principles of France, which we all hold dear. Liberté, to have the rights of man and to have our government to protect your rights from those who wish to see you harm. Egalité, to have you be treated the same under our laws, no matter class or creed. Fraternité, working hand in hand with your comrades to continue and expand the greatness of our nation.
I’d like to ask, then, are these principles given in the same way to our compatriots in the territories? I would say no. And why, because they are different? This Union is meant to bring all members together, bound by that vision of France. Why do we do this, treating all as different?
An example of this would be the rights to political representation for the populace across the Union. Those outside the Metropole hold very few seats in our great Assembly. Of those that do, those who can actually vote for those seats are limited. The right to the vote is simply not widespread across the Union, yet they expect us to represent them. How could you, a citizen of Paris, understand the struggle of the man in Abijan? The woman in Cayenne? The child in Noumea? Could you even point on a map the cities I just said?
The problem lies in the status of those citizens. That status which I would like to see revoked, but is not possible for the time being. However, what we can do is give them political representation and voting rights.
Today, I am submitting a bill on the subject, calling for the right to vote to be handed fully to those across the Union. Further, the complex multi-electoral college system used by those throughout the territories will be abolished for a proportional representation system, much as we already see in the Metropole.
This plan will bring the Union closer together, at a time when we must all unite in our cause, to show our strength across the world. France is one of the greatest nations in the world, but let us go farther: we are the greatest nation. Let us show the world what we can do together.”
In the following weeks from the announcement of the Loi-Cadre (Reform Act), there would be a vigorous debate in the Assembly as to the necessity of the plan. Quite a few members of the opposition would complain, saying the plan was not needed or that it simply didn’t go far enough. There were many wondering what in the world the RPF were doing with this action, what their goals were.
The Right Bloc of the CNIP and UFF especially would generate some anger, arguing that this was just one step in the direction of France losing the Union entirely, that it would do nothing but aggravate independence movements, rather than keep the Union together. The PCF-PSU Left Bloc would argue that the plan was just another way for the government to hold onto colonial possessions without doing anything for the peoples of the Union.
Still, the government continued on their path. The MRP and RGR were both supportive of the proposal, being brought over to the opinion of their RPF compatriots. The SFIO, too, was convinced of the importance of them, with SFIO Deputy Gaston Defferre taking credit for the plan because “he used to run the Overseas Ministry”. With that alliance of parties, there was little stopping the plan being brought into force, as a vote of 331-213 on August 13th allowed it to pass through quickly into law.
The following regional entities would be formed, represented by currently elected and newly elected members of the Assembly:

Regional Grouping	Seats
West Africa	35
Equatorial Africa	12
Indian Ocean	9

The following is a list of overseas territories that fall into each group:
West Africa: Mauritania, Sudan, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Upper Volta, Dahomey, and Niger
Equatorial Africa: Chad, Ubangi-Shari, Gabon, and Congo
Indian Ocean: Madagascar, Somiland, and Comoros
The law also had provisions for new elections to take place in April 1953, with the newly seated parliamentarians taking those seats for the remainder of the electoral term until 1957. The rather late start to the term makes sense, given the necessary time it will take to set up voting stations throughout the territories and organize an election of this size. This will also give candidates time to run campaigns and prepare for the elections, to try and win. For these elections, all citizens age 21 and over to will be able to participate in the vote.
Tunisia, Togoland, and Cameroon all will not be participating in this system unless they wish to fully integrate into the Union. Due to the protectorate status of Tunisia as well as Togoland and Cameroon being UN trust territories, it makes little sense to try to integrate any of the three against international law.
Further, it is notable that Senegal is not on the list of new electoral regions. That said, French authorities have made assurances that Senegal will not be left out of the waves of reforms across French Africa.
Along with the passage of the new law, the French Government has announced that Félix Houphouët-Boigny, a politician from the Ivory Coast and leader of the African Democratic Rally (RDA; an ally of the RPF), would be given a position in the cabinet as a Minister of State, the first African given such a high ministerial position. His jobs will likely include continual reforms in Africa and bridging the gap as the Union grows closer.
The Loi-Cadre, dubbed as the “Loi-Cadre Capitant” after its proponent and writer, has been hailed as a new era in the Union. Further reforms, investments, and organization throughout the regions is expected over the next few years, to complement the new act. France’s goal of an assimilated and united Greatest France across the world continues on its way.

Vive la France!

Hello /networking!
I recently joined a new company that outsourced most of their networking architecture and management to a 3P vendor. There has been very little documentation, and what I do have is outdated, so I'm mostly flying blind until we pay them to update our network topology map (WIP)
I was tasked to look into potential upgrades for our older gear. The existing equipment we have currently are a mix of EOS/L Cisco (FP/ASA firewalls, Catalyst switches), and Meraki APs that were purchased and installed earlier this year.
I come from a Meraki background, so initially I wanted to just move everything over to Meraki, however, I keep hearing/reading that Meraki MXs are just not that good, and just to get a Fortigate Firewall.
I really want to upgrade to Meraki Switches (most likely MS250s) to make life a bit easier to manage and stick with what I'm used to, but I wanted to know if moving to Fortinet Firewalls will cause issues down the line, either with setup or future configuration changes. Most importantly, does it make sense for up to move to Fortinet?
To provide some context -

• This will be an upgrade to our larger offices of 200+ employees.
  
• We recently renewed our AnyConnect VPN, and have tunnels that connect to each site, although most these may be removed in the near future, as we are moving most of our physical servers to the cloud, but we still need a few VPNs setup to connect to a few sites, so we don't want to change VPNs.
  
• The current network vlan setup is relatively simple, basically an internal subnet that lets devices all talk to each other, and an internet only subnet that is pretty much exclusively used for guest wifi. I plan on expanding our vlans and locking them down via ACLs, setting them on the switches.
  
• We don't have many onsite physical servers, and there is movement to try and move them to the cloud as much as possible.
  
• Smaller offices (~20 employees) will most likely be moved to MX75s, and will not have any tunnels to our main offices.
  
• We did have MPLS, but this has been removed from my understanding. We do not have any SD-WAN configurations.
  
• I don't have much experience outside of Meraki, I am a relatively newer network admin and currently the only network admin that isn't a 3P vendor, but I am willing to learn how to use them if they make sense for our environment.
  

I'd appreciate any and all thoughts and advice around this!

January 2nd, 1952
The last coalition, built on the basis of the three party alliance as well as the CNIP, broke down over the Iraq oil deal. While the parties of the current coalition all were supportive of the oil deal, the situation as a caretaker government makes the deal potential poison to their electoral chances for March. As a result, the deal will have to be looked at.
As the year has turned from old to new, the National Assembly has announced that an inquiry into the CPGF Corporation will be completed with a cross party panel of Deputies from the political spectrum, to look at and understand the Iraq oil deal, as well as to create recommendations on how to handle the problem in the future.
It total, 15 members will serve on the inquiry panel, with the seats distributed as follows:
-4 SFIO Members
-4 MRP Members
-3 RGR Members
-2 CNIP Members
-1 RPF Member
-1 PSU Member
Notably, the PCF and the new UFF were snubbed from this supposed "cross political spectrum" committee, but considering the party is by vast majority just members from the coalition as well as the former CNIP partner, the votes of minority membership is not of major import. Still, there is likely communist influence in the committee through the PCF partner of the PSU.
Most believe that the deal is going to end with the deal being collapsed, but considering the committee serves at the discretion of the National Assembly, it could very well be that the March Elections will change the membership and views of the inquiry, or even the end of the inquiry prematurely before they can make recommendations. As a result, the rush to get through the inquiry has already begun.
Maybe Iraq will lose their deal? Maybe they keep it? Other options are open, only time will tell

I'm trying to import a pcf component to embed a html iframe tag into my canvas powerapp from the pcf.gallery website.
However, when i try to import the files, the file type doesn't match the powerapp type in file explorer? I can't import the pcf component as the downloaded folder doesn't show any compatible files.
I've tried to look into tutorials but a lot of them don't seem to cover that issue.
Can anyone guide on how to import pcf components into PowerApps canvas screens?

Hey everyone, with election season just around the corner I thought id write down my political beliefs to see which political party most aligns with my values. I then began to really consider the problems we face in this country and what laws and policies we could implement to address them. Here are the laws I came up with, I’d love to hear what you think and I’d love to hear any laws you think we, as a country, should implement.

Fit to Lead Act

All leaders in government, the public sector, civil society organisations, and the state-owned companies must meet the following conditions:
· To be eligible for a leadership position covered under the Fit to Lead Act, candidates must be South African citizens.
· Leaders must be between 30-65 years of age
· Leaders may serve a maximum of two terms (10 years) in their respective positions and hold no other position thereafter
· Leadership candidates must possess an undergraduate university-level qualification relevant to the field in which they seek to lead (e.g., Minister of finance must have accredited university degree in finance/economics)
· Candidates must have a political science certificate from an accredited south African institution
· Candidates shall have a minimum of five years of relevant work experience in their field (e.g., minister of finance must have 5+ years of working experience in finance outside of politics)
· All leaders and their immediate family members covered under this Act shall undergo yearly financial auditing conducted by independent auditors to ensure transparency and accountability in their financial affairs. The audit reports shall be made available to relevant oversight bodies and the public, ensuring transparency in the financial management of leadership positions.
· Leaders shall be required to undergo yearly physical and mental health screenings conducted by certified medical professionals.
· Leadership candidates shall have a minimum of two years of documented community service or involvement in social development activities to demonstrate their commitment to the welfare of the community they serve. Incumbent leaders shall be encouraged to engage in community service initiatives during their tenure.
· All leaders shall be required to adhere to a code of ethics, and with any allegations of corruption shall step down while being thoroughly investigated by third party authorities.
· No politician with a criminal record may hold any position
· No politician who fails a corruption screening may hold any position
· Leaders shall undergo annual competency audits, evaluating their performance and adherence to the prescribed criteria.
· Formation of a 3rd party auditing company for government spending whose auditors are anonymous and constantly rotating
· Decline in relevant metrics to the politicians duties (e.g. drop in matric rates for minister of education) makes them ineligible for re-election
· Organizations and government agencies employing leaders shall be required to report annually on the compliance of their leadership personnel with the Fit to Lead Act.
· Failure to comply with the requirements of this legislation may result in removal from the leadership position.
· Background checks and vetting: Introduce thorough background checks and vetting processes for political candidates to ensure they have no history of corruption, criminal activity, or unethical behaviour.
· Establish a competitive selection process for political candidates, involving rigorous examinations, interviews, and assessments to identify the most qualified individuals.
· Transparent campaign financing: Enforce strict rules and transparency in political campaign financing to prevent corruption and undue influence by wealthy individuals or organizations.
· Require politicians to disclose their assets and interests, as well as their family members' financial information, to identify potential conflicts of interest and prevent corrupt practices.
· Politicians may not trade on the stock market or hold onto real estate for the purpose of renting
· Independent anti-corruption commission: Create an independent and well-resourced anti-corruption commission with investigative and prosecutorial powers to investigate allegations of corruption and misconduct among politicians.
· Establish performance-based evaluations for politicians to assess their effectiveness and track their accomplishments while in office.
· Strengthen whistleblower protection laws to safeguard those who expose corruption or unethical practices in politics.
· Mandatory ethics training for elected officials, public servants
· Code of conduct and ethics training: Mandate politicians to undergo regular training on ethical conduct, conflict resolution, and anti-corruption measures.
· Establish recall mechanisms that allow citizens to initiate the removal of politicians who fail to meet their responsibilities or engage in corrupt practices.

Voting Reform act

· It is mandatory for all eligible citizens to vote. Voting day is a public holiday to ensure everyone can vote
· Implement a Single transferrable voting system
· Promote civic education programs to raise awareness among citizens about the importance of informed voting and encouraging them to choose qualified candidates.

Anti-corruption act

· Make the judiciary independent
· All state-owned companies must be subject to bi-annual internal audits
· All state-owned companies must be subject to annual, comprehensive 3rd party audits
· All government departments must be subject to annual, comprehensive 3rd party audits
· Every person hired to state owned companies must be subject to a 3rd party audit before getting the job and subject to regular audits whilst holding office
· Establishment of a Public Campaign Fund (PCF) to provide funds to eligible candidates for electoral campaigns.
· All information on political donations and the donors are publicly available
· Imposition of strict limits on individual and corporate campaign contributions.
· Ban of corporate and PAC donations to political candidates or parties.
· Ban on Super PACs or similar entities.
· Mandatory real-time reporting of all political spending, including contributions and expenditures.
· Creation of a centralized online platform for public access to political spending data.
· Lifetime ban on elected officials engaging in lobbying activities.
· Prohibition of foreign entities and governments from engaging in lobbying activities within South Africa.
· Enhanced reporting requirements for interactions with foreign entities.
· Disclosure of all financial/material gains of politicians (e.g. gifts, vacations)
· Establishment of an independent Ethics Oversight Commission to investigate and address corruption allegations.
· Clear procedures for reporting violations, investigations, and penalties for violations.
· Implement a system of public funding for political campaigns, ensuring that candidates receive sufficient resources for a fair and competitive campaign without relying on private donations.
· Establish strict limits on individual and corporate campaign contributions to prevent any single entity from wielding undue influence over politicians.
· Prohibit corporations, Political Action Committees (PACs), and other non-individual entities from making political donations to candidates or parties.

Tender Reform act

· Anyone seeking government tenders will be held personally liable for the fulfilment of the tenders’ obligations (regardless if they operate through a private company). all owners/shareholders/ executives of private companies recieving tenders are personally liable for malpractice, fraud or theft.
· Anyone seeking government tenders must hold the acquired funds in a south African bank account
· Government tender funds are given in increments, along incremental completion of tasks (e.g., 2-year project gets tender fund split quarterly) with reviews of the progress of the task
· Information of tenders, their stipulations and their recipients must be publicly disclosed
· No bee/BBBEE/demographic considerations may be made for the choosing of tender recipient. The tender goes to whoever can prove they are the most capable of fulfilling the tenders’ obligations
· Independent 3rd party board for approving tenders

Education Reform act

· Obtaining a matric certificate (or equivalent) is mandatory
· Increased Vocational high schools
· Schools must teach in the mother tongue of the students with English as a second additional language (e.g., Xhosa equivalent of Hoerskool for Xhosa kids). English students will be taught Afrikaans or Zulu as a second additional language
· German education/training system with emphasis on vocational and trade schools
· Free tuition for anyone studying a teaching degree
· Teach learning techniques for the first week of every school year for every grade
· At least 1 TVET college in every township

local business reform act

· locally owned businesses get priority in the market
· Create South African alternatives for all goods and services we import (within reason)
· 70% of all goods and services consumed by South Africans should be South African goods and services (e.g., Nandos) or produced in south Africa (e.g., Toyotas from south Africa’s Toyota factory)
· Net exporter of manufacturing
· Turn townships into factory towns
· 2-year tax free window for all new businesses. To qualify for the tax-free window, the businesses must be new legal entities registered within South Africa after the enactment of this Act. Franchise extensions or subsidiaries of existing businesses shall not be eligible.
· Township-based business registration centres shall be set up to provide in-person assistance and support for entrepreneurs in townships who may face barriers accessing online resources.
· A Township Business Support and Development Fund shall be established to provide financial assistance, grants, and low-interest loans to eligible startups and small businesses operating in townships.

Immigration reform act

· All illegal immigrants already in south Africa must register for asylum with home affairs to receive a visa
· On sight deportation of unregistered illegal immigrants
· Stricter border control with Zimbabwe and Mozambique
· Ease of access for qualified labourers with needed skills
· no hiring of unregistered illegal immigrants- subject to fines and jail time

Crime reform

· increased bail prices
· No bail for violent crimes
· Increased prison sentences
· Weighted fines: fines increase relative to income

Police reform

· Police must report all incidents that are brought to their attention
· Police must undergo 1 year of rigorous training
· Auditing into police officers

Misc laws

· Full legalisation of the commercial sale and distribution of marijuana and marijuana related products through registered growers and vendors. Increased research into marijuana. Marijuana sales are subject to sin tax
· Amendments to BBBEE to address its shortcomings that facilitate corruption, government overreach and cronyism
· Southern African union between south Africa, Lesotho, Eswatini, Namibia and Botswana. Similar policies to the EU with a shared currency (Southern African Rand)
· Grant personhood to all south Africa’s wildlife and make poaching and trade tantamount to murder and kidnapping respectively with the same legal implications
· Every industry must have a respective registered and regulated trade union
· All employees must be represented by a union
So, yeah, those are the laws and policies I would like to see implemented that I think would set a good groundwork for moving the country forward. That’s just my opinion though, so it’d be nice to hear what you guys think about them and what laws/policies you would like to see implemented.
Edit: Formatting

I'm currently looking into MFA/2FA solutions for my organization, and I wanted to see what everyone's thoughts are on this. I'm relatively new to researching this type of thing, and have never had the opportunity to use one of these solutions firsthand (other than just basic MFA with a phone or email). The organization I work for has a couple hundred staff. It does work some sensitive data, although not a major amount. We do also have a lot of outside people using computers and devices in our sites (Although these systems are on separate networks, and staff usually do not use devices that outside people use, and outside people are not using the staff assigned devices. The overall security and ease of use for the end user are more important to us than the cost. We are trying to implement a solution that covers as much of our systems as possible, and offers a solution where we don't have to require that staff use their own personal devices to receive MFA. At the moment we're looking more specifically at hardware based tokens like a Yubikey or the RSA SecurID SID700 or DS100 that provide an on screen OTP. I'm finding it hard to find much info comparing the two solutions. I'm being told that might be because they're similar but fairly different products? Either way, We're looking to minimize staff needing to use their own devices to comply with MFA, so we'd rather just given them a hardware token than require them to send OTPs to their cell phone or email. We've had a brief demo of the both the RSA and Yubikey solutions, however it's still leaving us with a lot of uncertainty of which we should choose. It seems with the RSA option, you are purchasing both the hardware tokens and the online service to make the solution work, and end up with a yearly subscription. With the Yubikey they seem to be telling us that we only need to purchase the hardware tokens, then use 3rd party solutions like MS Authenticator, ADFS or SAML to connect the services we authenticate to (which could still result in more yearly fees).
We're basically looking for a fairly turnkey solution that integrates in some way with things like:

• AD/365 (Hybrid, both on premise and Azure/MS365)
• Cisco Anyconnect
• RADIUS
• RDP
• Various sites/services that currently are using LDAP to auth

There are other things, but those are some of the big things.
Really at this point, I think the biggest questions are:

• Is the level of security between the two different enough to warrant choosing one vs the other. Like, is one more susceptible to security issues or usability issues than the other?

-Are there known issues with one product vs the other where we might want to steer clear of? (For example, is plugging in the Yubikey every time you need to sign in a major annoyance for users vs using the OTP off the RSA? Or do you notice issues with having to attempt multiple OTP codes with the RSA before it'll proceed? etc)
-Anyone aware of a good resource such as videos or documentation that isn't extremely technical that might be helpful for us to better understand? I am fairly technical, but not extremely knowledgeable in some of the security technical areas.
-Are there other solutions that we should be looking at than these two? Or combinations of one of these and another solution? Such as Yubikey and one or two other products in conjunction?
-Should we be using one solution for certain types of users versus another. Like, I know it could make sense to have more security on more high risk or higher level/higher permissioned users, but should we be looking at just different levels of the same solutions for different staff or totally different solutions?
-Are there other questions we should be asking ourselves or asking the vendors?
-Even if you've only used one of these, I'm open to hearing feedback on that.
Thanks

“Will peace ever come to the land of the Hellenes?” read the headline from British Pathé at the end of this year, as more conflict ravaged the birthplace of Western Civilization.
It was more months of violence, brother killing brother, villages razed and ravaged by two armies fighting against what both perceive as their polar opposite and existential threat. For weeks, it was a stalemate. Nikos Zachariadis and the Communists were mobile, determined, and seemingly made of the very leaves that fell in the autumn and regrew in the spring. The Armies of the King, on the other hand, were slow to react, disorganized, and barely equipped.
Things changed, however, in the land of the Spartans.
What began much like conflict elsewhere in Greece quickly turned in favor of the government. A decisive victory in open combat near Ithaca left a Communist formation routed and – for the first time in the war – the government was able to give chase effectively. Smashing this initial communist group proved a great morale victory in the Peloponnese and before long more and more civilians in the region were turning out communist fighters that they had previously been hiding. What followed was nothing short of horrific, scaring both Greeks and international observers alike. What can be called “death squads” have been roaming from town to town, taking their tax – in the form of lives. Communist prisoners were executed and hung from street signs, especially in the mountains around Sparta, not by the government necessarily but several hundred defecting soldiers from the region who have seen their portion in the battle against the rebels concluded and have returned to their villages. In situations where there were no captured communists available to be executed, these Death Squads would target civilians suspected of being communists and razed Trypiti to the ground, killing several dozen men, women, and children.
The defeat near Ithaca was a major blow to the Communists in the Peloponnese but they have not been fully defeated. Where Zachariadis had earlier declared a conventional army be formed, now the Peloponnesian Communist formations have reverted to guerilla tactics in the mountains, to decent success.
Results:

• DSE conventional army abandoned in Pelopponese.
• KKE casualties 55%: 1,650. Government casualties 5%: 320, 116 deserted
• Small far-right death squads not under the control of the government carrying out provincial justice in the Peloponnese – 3-4 bands of around 25-30 fighters each.

In for a penny…

Generals in Athens had little time for celebration, however.
The front had turned against the government in key positions in Epirus. The relocation of civilians from rural villages in the North of Greece bolstered businesses in Ioannina and Athens that were suffering unemployment from war losses, but they left a trail of chaos in their wake. The plan was somewhat successful to deny Greek communists vital supplies and resources, as the internal refugees took many of their own belongings with them, however livestock and crops were left untouched. The KKE didn’t have the men to tend these fields, but the livestock was a boon and taken to DSE held land swiftly. They were also able to recover grain stores from these villages. Zachariadis, in a radio speech, announced that this grain would be redistributed to liberated land.
The violence, however, was frequent in these evacuations. The government split their forces between fighting rebels and evacuating civilians and in some areas spread themselves far too thin. A governmental caravan travelling from Grevena towards Neapoli was ambushed by DSE forces and routed while inflicting few casualties. In the course of the evacuations and the fighting, some 450 DSE fighters were killed, and 1,240 government troops were killed in the region around Western Macedonia and Epirus. Additionally, roughly 5,400 would-be refugees fled into DSE-held territory, it is unknown how many of them will be joining up with the DSE and how many have simply chosen to flee from the Government’s forces.
In a radio broadcast in December of 1946 and in person via a representative at the PCF, Markos Vafiadis announced the creation of the Provisional Democratic Government. This new government was, naturally, supported by the KKE but in an effort to establish continuity between the DSE and the ELAS of World War II, it was more modeled on the Political Committee of National Liberation from the War (the Mountain Government). This move, which some observers called the Vafiadis Gambit, and others identified as the Limnes Plan mentioned in the KKE newspaper Rizopatsis, sought to entrench legitimacy for the DSE, not as a rebel army, but as a military branch of a counter-state to that governed in Athens, with the hope that this administrative formality would lead Eastern Bloc nations to recognize the Vafiadis government. Nikos Zachariadis, the head of the KKE, was notably not a member of the government, and its composition was declared as follows:

Post
Prime Minister	Markos Vafiadis
Deputy Prime Minister	Giannis Ioannidis
Foreign Minister	Giannis Ioannidis
Defense Minister	Markos Vafiadis
Justice Minister	Petros Rousos
Health and Welfare Minister	Mitiadis Porfyrogennis
Finance Minister	Petros Kokkalis
Agriculture Minister	Vassilis Bartziotas
Minister of the National Economy	Dimitris Vlantas
Minister of Supply	Leonidas Stringos

The next major watershed of 1947 came in the small town of Konitsa near the Greek-Albanian border. Built on a slope of the Pindus mountain range it is an amphitheatrical-shaped town that has been inhabited since the Middle Bronze Age. It was a place that had once had a Muslim majority, but unlike other Albanian populated areas in Epirus, these Muslims spoke Greek as their mother tongue, and were active in the Greek War of Independence. Where it had had a population of some 7,000 at the turn of the 20th century, the population exchanges with Turkey and the subsequent Second World War left roughly 1,000 people in the town by the time the Civil War came about. Despite this, it was decidedly not a village – it was a proper town with some 600 residences (albeit most vacant). And it was here that the newly declared Provisional Democratic Government of Greece sought to stake their legitimacy.
Konitsa had been harassed by the DSE throughout 1947 and as such, the government reinforced their positions here with 2,000 soldiers from the VIII Mountain Division under the command of Colonel Ioannis Davos. These troops came with some armaments to defend the town, but also had instructions to evacuate the population if communist capture seemed imminent, in accordance with the other civilian relocations that had been carried out in the region.
On the 23rd of December the Bourazani Bridge over the Aoös River (the only real modern bride over the river into the rest of Greece) was detonated by DSE sappers, effectively cutting Konitsa off from the rest of the province and signaling to the defenders that an attack was imminent.
For most of the 23rd and into the morning of the 24th, preparations for the defense of Konitsa were carried out. Detachments of soldiers moved up the two mountain passes north of Konitsa and began to dig-in, and some arms were distributed to civilian militias which had formed to defend the town. Around noon on the 24th of December, the DSE attack started with skirmishes with Government forces in the mountain passes. Heavy fighting occurred at the Church of Prophet Ilias above Konitsa, where the DSE suffered heavy casualties but managed to capture the mountain top and force a retreat of Government forces back to the town proper. The fighting was intense, with both sides utilizing 65mm mountain guns and sorties of Spitfires launching from a makeshift airstrip west of the town inflicting damage on the DSE advance. By the end of the 24th of December, the DSE controlled the mountains directly north and east of Konitsa and resorted to defending their position and shelling government positions in the town.
On Christmas Day, Queen Frederika made a visit to Konitsa. She had been, as she had throughout the war, been visiting the front in the region, and Colonel Davos believed her presence would bolster the men to fight. He was right, and she gave an impassioned speech in the town square during a lull in the fighting. DSE intelligence was not aware of her presence at the time. Further fighting continued with neither side making gains, but with a near 3:1 DSE manpower advantage excluding the deputized civilians, losses were far more costly for Government Forces.
On the third day of fighting (26 December), after spending a night in the besieged town, Queen Frederika was evacuated – the first attempt to use a plane failed as it was struck on the makeshift airstrip and rendered it inoperable (this also forced the Government to fly sorties out of Ioannina). Shortly after noon, the Queen departed with her entourage of royal soldiers over the old Ottoman era bridge and southeast along the Aoös River. Fighting got fiercer in the city and, by dusk, Government forces had suffered 800 casualties (40%) and inflicted heavy damage on the DSE largely in pitched combat in the town’s suburbs after DSE probing attacks (1,400 casualties – 40%).
On the 27th of December the tide turned decisively for the government and casualties reached as high as 1,300 (65%). DSE bombardment with 105mm artillery kept repair of the bridge out of town an impossibility, and restless soldiers began to load civilians into trucks for evacuation. General Michael Andonopoulos in Ioannina gave the order to Colonel Davos to hold the town at all costs and reinforcements were dispatched from Ioannina.
Day 5: 28th December. The reinforcements were slow to arrive as the march to Konitsa was repeatedly harassed by DSE partisans and infrastructure damage in the region slowed what little motorization the army had. Radios from Konitsa called out and the men were ordered to march harder but dark news came in the evening. The situation was untenable, and Colonel Davos ordered a full withdrawal from Konitsa. The reinforcing battalion got as far north as Kalpaki when some 50 or so beleaguered men collapsed at their lines. They were all that were left of the Konitsa garrison of the VIII Mountain Division. Colonel Davos was not among them. They reported that after the retreat the DSE had pushed the advantage and inflicted catastrophic casualties.
Vafiadis' costly gambit had worked, and Konitsa was now in DSE hands. Of the attacking DSE force of 3,500, roughly 1,750 (50%) had been killed or wounded. Of the government forces defending the town, all but 50 (95%) had been killed or wounded. Of the civilians that had taken up arms to defend the town, 640 (64%) had either been killed in combat. The government ordered forces to move to the region to retake Konitsa, and the DSE began moving its assets to defend the town… but all of that will happen in the first days of 1948.
The DSE victory at Konitsa was a godsend for the Communists.
In the next few days, the DSE had transferred important assets to the town and fortified its defenses, expecting a governmental counterattack. Driven to cement their legitimacy, postage was issued in the town, and the bank was assumed as the Provisional National Bank of Greece. A great DSE banner hung from the Ottoman bridge over the Aoös River. Letters sent to other Eastern Bloc states bore Provisional Democratic Government (PDK) letterheads and stamps. The Provisional Government has declared the formation of a Democratic Air Force and Democratic Navy, though both are effectively hollow promises due to the simple fact that the only aircraft in the PDK’s possession is the shell of the DC-3, and the only naval vessel is a small 5 man river skiff captured in Konitsa, fitted with a machine gun, and restricted to the Aoös River.
International observers permitted into Konitsa by the PDK reported an “intense fervor” with soldiers and civilians (many refugees) working day and night on “army building and state building.” One Indian reporter noted “there is an air that any day could be their last, but that they must make every minute of that day count.” While both the PDK and the Government are unpopular nationally, the capture of Konitsa sent ripple effects to those villages in the region not yet relocated by the government, and observers report a steady stream of new recruits eager to enlist with the PDK (minor bonus to regional recruitment).

In For a Pound…

Elsewhere in Greece, the DSE and Governmental forces fought each other viciously. A mixture of guerilla tactics and conventional methods proved effective for the DSE, but chronic equipment shortages and most importantly, lack of medical facilities, slowed their advances. On the opposite side of the coin, the inexperience and disorganization of the Government forces prevented any major gains against the DSE as the unmotivated troops also struggled with equipment and morale issues.
Time would tell if Konitsa was a fluke, but across Greece, the Government continued to fail against the DSE in the mountains. Detachments of DSE soldiers would descend from the mountains, strike government positions, and then flee – or in other cases lure government forces into traps and ambushes that were far more devastating for the Government than the DSE.
In Central Greece and Attica the government saw its greatest successes (outside of the Peloponnese) inflicting heavy casualties on the DSE despite suffering heavy casualties in turn. Spitfire strafing runs were effective. The DSE lost 2,786 men and inflicted 3,000 casualties. Further, both sides lost several 65mm mountain guns, the government lost several armored cars, and four Spitfires.
In Western Macedonia, nearly anticipating the success in Konitsa, a smaller DSE force of 6,000 men managed to inflict heavy casualties on government forces in the region, as high as 20%, though they suffered losses as well. Here, 2,100 DSE soldiers were lost, and 3,000 government forces were lost. An additional 1,500 government forces suffered minor casualties in the course of an attempt to fight the DSE and relocate civilians. The proportionally worse losses for the Government here led to a weakening in governmental control. Frequent attacks on Florina were successful, though the DSE has yet to capture the town, and the army garrison there is severely weakened. Kastoria, an urban center closest to the front, has frequently been surrounded by the DSE and supply lines harassed, though the DSE has not had the numbers or material to attempt an assault. Kastoria garrison has suffered morale losses from this pseudo-siege, but holds strong.
In Central Macedonia the story is much the same, with light intermittent fighting and relocation of civilians proving to both sides that neither intends to back down.

The State of the State

By now there are some 390,000 internal refugees, including 60,000 civilians forcibly relocated by the central Government. The economy is still in shambles, but American relief efforts in Government controlled regions are turning the tide. There is a nationwide food crisis, caused by the lack of safe and effective internal connections brought about by the war, paired with the depopulation of the North by both Government relocation and violence.
Refugees flee South and North, with some taking to the seas to attempt to get to the Greek islands that have been less affected by the war.
The DSE is hurting but not nearly defeated. Reconnaissance estimates that the effects of this year have inflicted roughly 23% casualties on the DSE’s total fighting force, but these numbers are impossible to verify as the true strength of the DSE both within Greece and neighboring countries is unknown. Government losses have been offset by the massive expansion of the military that took place this year, but their losses are not insignificant. Of the total army fielded in 1947, casualties number 10.5%. Both parties are experiencing the consequences of their tactics, with the DSE’s costly but effective hybrid guerilla tactics proving superior in 1947, but they do lack the manpower to maintain such a strategy. The reorganization from disparate bands of soldiers to a conventional army has also proved effective, but this is largely due to the skill of DSE commanding officers, battle-hardened in ELAS. For the government, the numerical and material advantages are proving less effective as attempts to force pitched battles are frequently evaded by the DSE. Indeed, DSE casualties were so high in 1947 not on account of the Hellenic Army itself, but because of the effectiveness of Hellenic air force sorties and bombing runs. DSE anti-air, while extant and inflicting damage on the air-force, did not repel the Government from controlling the skies overall. Both belligerents struggle from organizational commitment with neither pressing the advantage when they have it - a policy that is far more consequential for the Government than it is for the DSE. These factors have combined for the DSE to fight far above its weight class and the Government is still reeling and reacting to DSE actions. At this phase, the war is being fought on the DSE’s terms.
Reconnaissance sorties by Spitfire pilots confirm caravans of men and equipment moving back and forth through mountain passes into Albania and Macedonia and, what appears to be a conspicuous movement of supplies, armaments, and men across the border at Konitsa in recent days (29-31 December).
Skirmishes between Greek Government Forces and Albanian/Yugoslav/Bulgarian forces along the border continued throughout 1947 with 275 skirmishes on the Greek/Albanian border alone [historical]. During these, 13 Greek soldiers were killed, 10 Albanian soldiers, 4 Yugoslav soldiers, and 8 Bulgarian soldiers.