Nikita Krushnev to Zhou Enlai: "It's true that I come from the poor/working class, while you come from the elite/rich class.". *Zhou Enlai to Nikita Krushnev: "Yes, but it's also true that we have both betrayed our respective classes.".* 👊
The split was of huge importance to China. Learn from the mistakes of the Soviet Union. The future of China is bright, as long as we do not forget the past.
@@komarovosevastopol Deng understood that in other to achieve socialism, one must build productive forces. So, they open their country to let investment in order to develop their economy.
@@komarovosevastopol Deng came along and made China even far stronger than the USSR. He was the perfect example on how China learned from Soviet mistakes.
2:00 that explanation is not true. Soviet Union became revisionist and was moving towards social imperialism. China's struggle wasn't principally based on peasant resistance (it was a dictatorship of the proletariat). China was socialist and was advancing towards communism. But China too became revisionist after Mao's death.
Every socialist regime / state has to be revisionist or at least adapt to the material conditions and necessities of the working class. Now, if the public administration doesn't change / evolve into something more than just state capitalism (because that's what communism has objectively been) is doomed to corrupt and extinct (all in its battle or competion against liberal / bourgeois / imperalist / capitalist democracy).
Why no one talking about the context of this video production? I believe it is more relevant to know why the Chinese students were asked to tell about Soviet Union in Englishon camera for (...whom)? The point is that these children were taught how to approach the Soviet Union ar school. Their thoughts are right. But the most interesting part who was the audience this file was made for??
The Sino-Soviet split was the most unnecessary and tragic break up in history. Imagine how history could have turned out differently had the Socialist bloc remained unified. Instead, the Sino-Soviet split created an opening which allowed the REAL imperialists - led by the US - to turn the tide and eventually strangle the world. Did the USSR and China have differences? Of course. They started off at different levels of economic development and different histories, so found themselves with different foundations; one based on rural peasants, the other based on nascent industrial production. You don't have to agree 100% of the time with another side. You merely have to recognise you have 80% in common with them, and that should be good enough reason to team up against the real threat to the working classes of the world.
The Khrushchevite Social-Imperialist bureaucratic Revisionists were a threat to Socialism as much as the Yankee Imperialists. It was right for the Marxist-Leninist Anti-Revisionists, led by Chairman Mao and Enver Hoxha, to break ranks with the Revisionists, hell-bent on destroying their countries.
The Soviets didn't help us with anything. They took our land and resources, and for what? Equipment that they let us "borrow"? Faulty agricultural science that led to famine? Nixon and Kissinger were infinitely more helpful to the Chinese.
The narrator doesn't know what he's talking about. The difference lies in that what he calls "Russian Communism", that is the rule of the New Bourgeoisie represented by Khrushchev and Brezhnev, is not communism at all but capitalism. In the USSR the usurpation of power by the New Bourgeoisie represented the destruction of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Khrushchev immediately went on an offensive against socialism in both the superstructure and the base. He thoroughly purged the Communist Party and the state of communists and replaced them by his goons. He removed such respected figures like Molotov and Kaganovich that had been serving the people of the USSR and had occupied central roles on the development of socialism in the USSR for decades and defamed Stalin. Under the guise of attacking the "cult of personality" he attacked socialist culture and art. In industry and agriculture he facilitated the free development of the forces of capitalism. He sold equipment stocks to the collective farms, central planning was sabotaged and effectively abolished and he gave much more authority to bureaucrats and managers in decision-making barring the working masses from participation. This would eventually lead to the formalisation of profit as the primary marker of efficiency in 1968 through the Kosygin reforms. Meanwhile communists were repressed and locked in mental hospitals and declared insane ruining many lives. This is capitalist restoration through and through. These reforms would of course eventually destroy the grounds the soviet state stood on to the point of collapse in 1991, though at that point it had been irreversibly changed its colour. In China this was recognised. After the Khrushchev clique had completely defamed the USSR and split the International Communist Movement it didn't take long for a mass movement against this stratum of privileged bureaucrats and "small kings" to emerge gaining the full support of the Communist Party with Mao Zedong at its head. This was the Cultural Revolution. Through its ebs and flows production was advanced, social relations transformed and proletarian art and culture flourished. Only after the death Mao Zedong and the treason of the Hua-Deng clique did socialism come to an end in China. What followed was a campaign of terror against the working class and peasantry of China as the People's Communes were smashed and socialism forcefully dismantled. The relative greater turbulence of capitalist restoration in China is the result of the high degree of political consciousness and readiness to fight developed through 10 years of Cultural Revolution. The modern Chinese state is of the same character as how Mao described the USSR of the 60's and beyond: A fascist dictatorship of the Hitlerite variety. The rule of the Chinese revisionists will not last much longer than that of the Soviet revisionists before it falls apart. It is a question of when the rapid economic growth that the modern Chinese bourgeoisie enjoy so much today stagnates and comes to a halt at which point it won't be many years until fascism in China will become opposed not only by the labouring masses who have to deal with daily frustrations and uncertainty, but also by the petit-bourgeoisie and even some sections of the bourgeoisie itself. The masses make history and they will always win in the end.
Interesting indeed. What, in your opinion, makes revisionist states so brittle? Imperialist countries have had no issues proclaiming themselves as champions of freedom and democracy for decades, even for centuries.
I agree, very intriguing. I support your belief that the modern Chinese state is of the same character as how Mao described the USSR of the 60's and beyond: And it is until fascism in China will become opposed not only by the laboring masses. The masses make history and they will always win in the end. dBut, please answer this question, if the masses do rise up against the PRC, do you believe they will be pro-socialist (following Mao Zedong Thought) or do you believe among these masses are pro-Hong Kong "democracy" protesters, pro "Free Tibet", and some pro-Taiwan people; who after this rising up is over, could rule all of china once more? Do you really believe that for decades under revisionism, with China is still calling itself socialist, that those who oppose China will view socialism as the best thing to replace the PRC?
@pro fukai Because China's capitalist development began in the late 70's while the Soviet Union's started in the late 50's. On top of that restoration in China has been more ruthless towards its own people and the socialist relations in the economy were forcefully dismantled quicker than in the Soviet Union. It took until 1968 for all socialist aspects of the economy to be dismantled in the Soviet Union. In China it took a few years. China has also not developed a military-industrial complex that has monopolised R&D and sucks up a large chunk of the resources available to it. Military spending is unproductive and gives no returns. If China were to try to match US military spending and global power projection China would probably face similar economic difficulties.
@@MrOldMajor Revisionist states are bourgeois states and ruled in a fascist manner. Fascist rule is inherently unstable as it makes itself the enemy of the vast majority of the population, even liberal factions of its own ruling class. If fascism was stable all bourgeois states would immediately disband or disempower their elected assemblies and reorganise the state and society as a corporation. No fascist country lasts for long. In Hitlers Germany there were several attempts on his life, even from the armed forces themselves. Fascist regimes in the third world also seldom survive for many decades. Marcos in the Philippines and Fujimori in Peru respectively didn't last long and then there are the countless other short-lived juntas in Latin America or Africa.
@@vegitoblue5000 It depends on the communists in China. A liberal overthrow of fascism might be a prelude to revolution in the future as any faux "democracy" in China would quickly reveal itself as an enemy of the Chinese people. The expanded formal legal protections in a bourgeois-democratic state also provides more favourable conditions for communist organising in its earlier stages. Building a communist party under the conditions of fascism presents a uniquely difficult obstacle though it is far from impossible.
No one can tell how a socialist state claiming "everybody must works in field" became a state with one of the highest Ginis. 77年还在讲任何人都要接受社会主义劳动教育才能不出现精英主义的社会分层，仅过了二十年高干子弟已经纷纷走马上任，仅过了四十年基尼系数已经全球前列。是77年的理论过于理想化太浮夸，还是失去了毛主义指导的中央层连简单的社会主义目标都要抛弃了呢？
The students in the video are absolutely right that the USSR had degenerated into a hypocritical back-stabbing self-serving power, BUT, I would add that this had happened LONG before Brezhnev came to power. In the closing days of WW2, Stalin (himself an opportunist & self-serving sociopath) declared war on Japan so that the USSR could take & occupy Japanese-occupied Chinese land. The Chinese Civil War was still brewing in 1945, and Stalin claimed that he'd release those Chinese lands back to China ONLY if the Commnist-Chinese side won the civil war. Guess what, the Chinese communist DID win the civil war, but did stalin give the land back? NOPE. Neither did any soviet leader since stalin. Brezhnev himself was EXTREMELY corrupt, and he was selected to be the leader of the USSR because he reliably represented the concerns of the elite/ruling class (which was ALSO extremely corrupt). This is widely known to everyone. Oh, I forgot to mention that during the Civil war, Soviet assistance to the Communist-Chinese side was spotty & unreliable. When Mao came to power in 1949, he visited the USSR, stalin treated Mao like a stupid tourist. He assigned mao a railroad car to see the USSR & a Russian tour guide. Ne never met with Mao. Never shared any ideas with mao. No less insulting than that, when the Chinese delegates met with the soviets in 1949, the soviets treated them to a banquet, AND THEN CHARGED THEM FOR THE COST OF THE FOOD, as though it was a capitalist restaurant!!! How stupid is THAT?
If Vladimir Lenin lives longer, Sino-Soviet Split would never happened. The reason why Soviet Union De-Stalinized is because the Soviets wants to restore it's image. If Soviet Union still goes on Stalin's route, the Soviet Union's image would be in jeopardy by the whole world who are not ruled by a Communist Party. Which means, Non-Communist Countries.
Stalin was praised by communista and revolutionaries around the world even after his death, like che guevara. This has nothing to do with his image being painted as bad by the outside, kruschev made the idea of hating him "reasonable" by fabricating evidence, even tho many people knew about stalin not being what their governments claimed, they believed the lies of the people from that country, who wanted to destroy it.
*Because a bureaucratic Revisionist Clique led by Nikita Khrushchev seized power in a military coup and proceeded to discredit the image of Stalin and his allies such as Andrei Zhdanov who sought the further democratization of the USSR and bringing the Union closer to Communism, which would ultimately destroy the power of Nikita Khrushchev and his bureaucratic clique.
China's poor economy is the result of what you see, but do you understand the reason? At that time, China faced the blockade of the two camps of the United States and the Soviet Union, and also faced the military threat of a comprehensive siege by the Soviet Union from Afghanistan, which was controlled by the Soviet Union in the north and west, and India and Vietnam supported by the Soviet Union in the south. Also aid other countries in the struggle for communism. The Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979 was to humiliate the Soviet Union, the Sino-Soviet reconciliation in 1985, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, China can devote its energy to economic construction.
Nikita Krushnev to Zhou Enlai: "It's true that I come from the poor/working class, while you come from the elite/rich class.".
*Zhou Enlai to Nikita Krushnev: "Yes, but it's also true that we have both betrayed our respective classes.".* 👊
I like the proud and slightly smug smile of the "Their services are intolerable" guy
As I Chinese I really appreciate your videos, a look into the revolutionary time. Warm greetings!
top 10 anime betrayals of all time
Teacher Looks like Zhou Enlai
With American Accent: "They all look the same to me."
No, he doesn’t.
@@grandoldgamer2842 his accent is British isn't it?
When I first saw him I thought that he was Zhou Enlai.
A very cool video! where did you found the footage?
The split was of huge importance to China. Learn from the mistakes of the Soviet Union. The future of China is bright, as long as we do not forget the past.
And than Deng came along
@@komarovosevastopol Correct.
@@komarovosevastopol Deng understood that in other to achieve socialism, one must build productive forces. So, they open their country to let investment in order to develop their economy.
@@komarovosevastopol Deng came along and made China even far stronger than the USSR. He was the perfect example on how China learned from Soviet mistakes.
@@justanormalguyonyoutube1098 the country was already built up enough, this is literally the excuse right opportunists used during bukarin
In 1:20 she predicted that what will happen to USSR 14 year's later after 💀
What a super unbelievable coincidence 👏
*spoke about what happened already at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in February 1956
77届的大学生都是牛人，李克强，李源潮，李东生，章忆谋，顾长卫，陈凯歌等等，向他们致敬！
邪恶共产
2:00 that explanation is not true. Soviet Union became revisionist and was moving towards social imperialism. China's struggle wasn't principally based on peasant resistance (it was a dictatorship of the proletariat). China was socialist and was advancing towards communism. But China too became revisionist after Mao's death.
Every socialist regime / state has to be revisionist or at least adapt to the material conditions and necessities of the working class.
Now, if the public administration doesn't change / evolve into something more than just state capitalism (because that's what communism has objectively been) is doomed to corrupt and extinct (all in its battle or competion against liberal / bourgeois / imperalist / capitalist democracy).
China is socialist. The old type of thinking about building socialism is in the dustbin of history.
Mr Old Major, May I please give Spanish Captions to this video and the one of the PRC getting admitted to the UN?
Just turned on community contributions for both videos. You are very appreciated! Thanks for your support!
MrOldMajor No problem!
@@texxon3355 Much appreciated, I shall turn on community contributions on all my future videos.
MrOldMajor and I shall continue translating.
and where is this video?
Why no one talking about the context of this video production? I believe it is more relevant to know why the Chinese students were asked to tell about Soviet Union in Englishon camera for (...whom)?
The point is that these children were taught how to approach the Soviet Union ar school. Their thoughts are right. But the most interesting part who was the audience this file was made for??
made for the world in general. since it's in English, I can translate it into Spanish. In turn, a compatriot of mine can translate it into Quechua.
Excelente! Difícil de encontrar videos con subtítulos en Español.
It is good to see cold war era propaganda about sino soviet split. Very interesting as how govt twist narrative to their advantage.
Thanks. Great that this interview is in English. From the BBC?
Not the BBC, it is shot by freelance journalists, presumably sold to filmmakers and broadcasters.
@@MrOldMajor This is the only footage from them? The voice sounds very very familiar.
Like 4 decades later, leftist on the internet still debate about this subject
Revisionism and it's consequences for the international Communist movement.
Thanks for the video MrOldMajor. May I have the title of this documentary please?
Unfortunately there is no documentary. This is footage taken by freelance journalists.
@@MrOldMajor But what is the where is it from? Who took it? How'd you find it?
好像是意大利导演安东尼奥尼拍摄的< 中国>?
The Sino-Soviet split was the most unnecessary and tragic break up in history. Imagine how history could have turned out differently had the Socialist bloc remained unified. Instead, the Sino-Soviet split created an opening which allowed the REAL imperialists - led by the US - to turn the tide and eventually strangle the world. Did the USSR and China have differences? Of course. They started off at different levels of economic development and different histories, so found themselves with different foundations; one based on rural peasants, the other based on nascent industrial production. You don't have to agree 100% of the time with another side. You merely have to recognise you have 80% in common with them, and that should be good enough reason to team up against the real threat to the working classes of the world.
Where was the CPSU when French and Japanese workers and students fought alone？They are busy stealing the fruits of the workers' labor！
The Khrushchevite Social-Imperialist bureaucratic Revisionists were a threat to Socialism as much as the Yankee Imperialists. It was right for the Marxist-Leninist Anti-Revisionists, led by Chairman Mao and Enver Hoxha, to break ranks with the Revisionists, hell-bent on destroying their countries.
The Soviets didn't help us with anything. They took our land and resources, and for what? Equipment that they let us "borrow"? Faulty agricultural science that led to famine? Nixon and Kissinger were infinitely more helpful to the Chinese.
Gem of a clip. rare footage
The narrator doesn't know what he's talking about. The difference lies in that what he calls "Russian Communism", that is the rule of the New Bourgeoisie represented by Khrushchev and Brezhnev, is not communism at all but capitalism. In the USSR the usurpation of power by the New Bourgeoisie represented the destruction of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Khrushchev immediately went on an offensive against socialism in both the superstructure and the base. He thoroughly purged the Communist Party and the state of communists and replaced them by his goons. He removed such respected figures like Molotov and Kaganovich that had been serving the people of the USSR and had occupied central roles on the development of socialism in the USSR for decades and defamed Stalin. Under the guise of attacking the "cult of personality" he attacked socialist culture and art. In industry and agriculture he facilitated the free development of the forces of capitalism. He sold equipment stocks to the collective farms, central planning was sabotaged and effectively abolished and he gave much more authority to bureaucrats and managers in decision-making barring the working masses from participation. This would eventually lead to the formalisation of profit as the primary marker of efficiency in 1968 through the Kosygin reforms. Meanwhile communists were repressed and locked in mental hospitals and declared insane ruining many lives. This is capitalist restoration through and through. These reforms would of course eventually destroy the grounds the soviet state stood on to the point of collapse in 1991, though at that point it had been irreversibly changed its colour.
In China this was recognised. After the Khrushchev clique had completely defamed the USSR and split the International Communist Movement it didn't take long for a mass movement against this stratum of privileged bureaucrats and "small kings" to emerge gaining the full support of the Communist Party with Mao Zedong at its head. This was the Cultural Revolution. Through its ebs and flows production was advanced, social relations transformed and proletarian art and culture flourished. Only after the death Mao Zedong and the treason of the Hua-Deng clique did socialism come to an end in China. What followed was a campaign of terror against the working class and peasantry of China as the People's Communes were smashed and socialism forcefully dismantled. The relative greater turbulence of capitalist restoration in China is the result of the high degree of political consciousness and readiness to fight developed through 10 years of Cultural Revolution.
The modern Chinese state is of the same character as how Mao described the USSR of the 60's and beyond: A fascist dictatorship of the Hitlerite variety. The rule of the Chinese revisionists will not last much longer than that of the Soviet revisionists before it falls apart. It is a question of when the rapid economic growth that the modern Chinese bourgeoisie enjoy so much today stagnates and comes to a halt at which point it won't be many years until fascism in China will become opposed not only by the labouring masses who have to deal with daily frustrations and uncertainty, but also by the petit-bourgeoisie and even some sections of the bourgeoisie itself. The masses make history and they will always win in the end.
Interesting indeed. What, in your opinion, makes revisionist states so brittle? Imperialist countries have had no issues proclaiming themselves as champions of freedom and democracy for decades, even for centuries.
I agree, very intriguing. I support your belief that the modern Chinese state is of the same character as how Mao described the USSR of the 60's and beyond: And it is until fascism in China will become opposed not only by the laboring masses. The masses make history and they will always win in the end.
dBut, please answer this question, if the masses do rise up against the PRC, do you believe they will be pro-socialist (following Mao Zedong Thought) or do you believe among these masses are pro-Hong Kong "democracy" protesters, pro "Free Tibet", and some pro-Taiwan people; who after this rising up is over, could rule all of china once more?
Do you really believe that for decades under revisionism, with China is still calling itself socialist, that those who oppose China will view socialism as the best thing to replace the PRC?
@pro fukai Because China's capitalist development began in the late 70's while the Soviet Union's started in the late 50's. On top of that restoration in China has been more ruthless towards its own people and the socialist relations in the economy were forcefully dismantled quicker than in the Soviet Union. It took until 1968 for all socialist aspects of the economy to be dismantled in the Soviet Union. In China it took a few years. China has also not developed a military-industrial complex that has monopolised R&D and sucks up a large chunk of the resources available to it. Military spending is unproductive and gives no returns. If China were to try to match US military spending and global power projection China would probably face similar economic difficulties.
@@MrOldMajor Revisionist states are bourgeois states and ruled in a fascist manner. Fascist rule is inherently unstable as it makes itself the enemy of the vast majority of the population, even liberal factions of its own ruling class. If fascism was stable all bourgeois states would immediately disband or disempower their elected assemblies and reorganise the state and society as a corporation. No fascist country lasts for long. In Hitlers Germany there were several attempts on his life, even from the armed forces themselves. Fascist regimes in the third world also seldom survive for many decades. Marcos in the Philippines and Fujimori in Peru respectively didn't last long and then there are the countless other short-lived juntas in Latin America or Africa.
@@vegitoblue5000 It depends on the communists in China. A liberal overthrow of fascism might be a prelude to revolution in the future as any faux "democracy" in China would quickly reveal itself as an enemy of the Chinese people. The expanded formal legal protections in a bourgeois-democratic state also provides more favourable conditions for communist organising in its earlier stages. Building a communist party under the conditions of fascism presents a uniquely difficult obstacle though it is far from impossible.
一眼望去那個老師以為是周總理
他们这里洋文好的人多的很呐！
Of course
No one can tell how a socialist state claiming "everybody must works in field" became a state with one of the highest Ginis.
77年还在讲任何人都要接受社会主义劳动教育才能不出现精英主义的社会分层，仅过了二十年高干子弟已经纷纷走马上任，仅过了四十年基尼系数已经全球前列。是77年的理论过于理想化太浮夸，还是失去了毛主义指导的中央层连简单的社会主义目标都要抛弃了呢？
因为76年的时候他们就抛弃了社会主义
As much as I dislike Khrushchev, I personally believe the Sino-Soviet split was a mistake.
yeah maos 3 worlds theory was his biggest mistake.
@@kozara8202 how?
why would a socialist country ally with a capitalist one?
@@stalinikos 3rd-Worldism I agree with, 3 worlds theory I do not.
@@lepmuhangpa Elaborate.
miss this way of english learning, full of purpose, the way chinese have lost and must return.
看到那時的中國才能體會到現在的中國進步有多大
打个不恰当的比喻，当时我们是小树苗，但是长得很直，现在我们是大树，但是长歪了
@@くるみ-w1s 当时特权腐败问题也不小了
@@くるみ-w1s 我们是为了快点长，才长歪了，直着长长得慢，说不定一阵风挂倒了呢。
@@williamyao5317 呵呵，文革时期你像今天这样的体制搞腐败？去看戚本禹回忆录，看看当年的亲身经历者是怎么评价当时的社会运动的。
Hello comrades, do you have access to the fully documentary? What's its name? It would be nice to watch it entirely.
I wonder what the world would look like today had Stalinism not been debased by Khrushchev.
Where I can watch the full video? Can you give a credit?
Могу дать по длинным ушам.
China still remembers Comrade Stalin.
What documentary is this from?
这些都是我父母时代的影像了。
英语口音都特别好
Do you have the source of that documentary ?
The life, it's like North Korea.
Say why is this in English?
The students in the video are absolutely right that the USSR had degenerated into a hypocritical back-stabbing self-serving power, BUT, I would add that this had happened LONG before Brezhnev came to power. In the closing days of WW2, Stalin (himself an opportunist & self-serving sociopath) declared war on Japan so that the USSR could take & occupy Japanese-occupied Chinese land. The Chinese Civil War was still brewing in 1945, and Stalin claimed that he'd release those Chinese lands back to China ONLY if the Commnist-Chinese side won the civil war. Guess what, the Chinese communist DID win the civil war, but did stalin give the land back? NOPE. Neither did any soviet leader since stalin.
Brezhnev himself was EXTREMELY corrupt, and he was selected to be the leader of the USSR because he reliably represented the concerns of the elite/ruling class (which was ALSO extremely corrupt). This is widely known to everyone.
Oh, I forgot to mention that during the Civil war, Soviet assistance to the Communist-Chinese side was spotty & unreliable. When Mao came to power in 1949, he visited the USSR, stalin treated Mao like a stupid tourist. He assigned mao a railroad car to see the USSR & a Russian tour guide. Ne never met with Mao. Never shared any ideas with mao.
No less insulting than that, when the Chinese delegates met with the soviets in 1949, the soviets treated them to a banquet, AND THEN CHARGED THEM FOR THE COST OF THE FOOD, as though it was a capitalist restaurant!!! How stupid is THAT?
说苏联商品质量差，搞得好像那时候我们多好似的
那时候品种有限 但质量真的过关
@@zikunjin9874 高山下的花环小北京怎么死的?
@@williamyao5317 说的不是一码事，电影是电影，导演想表达一件事，想写死一个人，爱怎么写就怎么写。。。你想说产品质量不行，也至少举几个”生活中的例子“。。。我觉得产品质量问题这就是很正常的嘛，主要就是一个生产环节的质量监管，集体经济生产模式之下你监管偷工减料是没办法得利的，没有意义，自然也就严格监管了；市场环境主要是竞争利润，我少一寸材料多挣几块钱，一批货质量差一点多挣一千块，绝对会有人试图绕开监管的。。。苏联质量差不差我不知道，我看史料得到的结论是，苏联基层和中层大部分官僚腐败严重，所以在集体生产中也就有利可图，质量差就是逻辑通顺的；但是从没听说过文革那会中国有什么官僚腐败的问题。。。
Kids are cute!
咱都一样修嘛，甚至青出于蓝而胜于蓝🤣
一边倒则学俄语，尼克松以后学英语。zms只能说意识形态是为国家利益服务的，所以身段柔软可塑的得是意识形态，而不是相反吧，哈哈。
😂尼克松之后才学习英文的么？ 要不再了解了解？
那个时候的人脸上洋镒着自信的笑容
不自信的能拍出来给你看到？
可爱的工农兵大学生！
Ye dude that student totally saying that the soviet union is bad next to that friendly army guy because why not thats her opinion guys!
嗯
Damn, China turned revisionist one year later 😂😂😂
呵呵，如果以当时的眼光看确实如此，而且走得更远。
And then Deng Xiaoping made it state Capitalism
没有永远的朋友，只有永远的利益。Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests
"Their goods are so bad" thats why they copied soviet jets and the ak47 lmfao
If Vladimir Lenin lives longer, Sino-Soviet Split would never happened. The reason why Soviet Union De-Stalinized is because the Soviets wants to restore it's image. If Soviet Union still goes on Stalin's route, the Soviet Union's image would be in jeopardy by the whole world who are not ruled by a Communist Party. Which means, Non-Communist Countries.
Stalin was praised by communista and revolutionaries around the world even after his death, like che guevara. This has nothing to do with his image being painted as bad by the outside, kruschev made the idea of hating him "reasonable" by fabricating evidence, even tho many people knew about stalin not being what their governments claimed, they believed the lies of the people from that country, who wanted to destroy it.
Shut up revisionist
shut up revisionist
Soviet under Lenin is a trash. Pay some respect to Stalin and history never have "If".
*Because a bureaucratic Revisionist Clique led by Nikita Khrushchev seized power in a military coup and proceeded to discredit the image of Stalin and his allies such as Andrei Zhdanov who sought the further democratization of the USSR and bringing the Union closer to Communism, which would ultimately destroy the power of Nikita Khrushchev and his bureaucratic clique.
Bigger revisionist
문혁 후라 고학력자들 갈려나갔는데 저 교사가 영어를 잘 가르칠까
傻逼，中华民国万岁你他妈说什么韩语，恶心。
恶心
just like today's north korea.
LOL No.
on9
港屎
Scripted. Poorly. Incomprehensible.
look how dogmatic.
I laughed on this video.
Knowing that in this era China had their worst Economy while Soviet made reforms after Stalin's death.
Look at today's Soviet Union and China?
@@jacksun6897 All thanks to Deng Xiaoping. If China maintains their Maoist Orthodoxy they might be worst as 3rd World.
Iol im sure their reforms went well
China's poor economy is the result of what you see, but do you understand the reason? At that time, China faced the blockade of the two camps of the United States and the Soviet Union, and also faced the military threat of a comprehensive siege by the Soviet Union from Afghanistan, which was controlled by the Soviet Union in the north and west, and India and Vietnam supported by the Soviet Union in the south. Also aid other countries in the struggle for communism. The Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979 was to humiliate the Soviet Union, the Sino-Soviet reconciliation in 1985, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, China can devote its energy to economic construction.
How'd that go? lmao
一派胡言