Why the Reds WON the Russian Civil War against the Whites
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- The Russian Civil War occured after the Russian Revolution (February Revolution and the October Revolution). In this conflict the Reds fought against the Whites. Also many nationalist factions as well as armed peasants were involved. The Reds were led by Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky, the latter founded the Red Army. The White leaders acted largely independently from each other: Admiral Alexander Kolchak in the east; General Nikolay Yudenich and Colonel Pavel Bermondt-Avalov in the north-west; General Anton Denikin in the North Caucasus and the Don region; General Pyotr Wrangel in the Crimea; warlords or ‘Atamans’ like Grigory Semenov or Roman von Ungern-Sternberg in Siberia and southern Russia.
This video answer the question: Why the Reds WON the Russian Civil War against the Whites.
SUPPORT ME ON PATREON ► / historyhustler
SUPPORT ME ON PAYPAL ► www.paypal.com...
SUBSCRIBE ► / @historyhustle
INSTAGRAM ► / historyhustle
FACEBOOK ► / historyhustler
TWITTER ► / hustlehistory
SOURCES
- Russia in Flames. War, Revolution, Civil War, 1914 - 1921 (Laura Engelstein).
- A People's Tragedy. A History of the Russian Revolution (Orlando Figes).
- The Vanquished. Why the First World War Failed to End, 1917-1923 (Robert Gerwarth).
- • Why did the Bolshevik'... (19-01-2023).
IMAGES
Images from commons.wikimedia.org.
MUSIC
"Prelude and Action" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
"Crusade" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
"Crossing the Chasm" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
"Evil March" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
"Devastation and Revenge" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
"Lost Frontier" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
SOUNDS
Freesound.org.
E-MAIL
historyhustle[at]gmail.com
Check out the PLAYLIST of Revolutionary Russia:
ruclips.net/p/PL_bcNuRxKtpHU_1zyN5Mf1lluyJ1okewt
do you think that "Russian Civil " term is badly misleading and terrible outdated ?
✅ 👍
@@adamradziwill feel free to explain.
@@HistoryHustlecould you do a segment on the green armies in the future
@@armyman-ig7qs yes, one day I will.
The Reds had a coherent ideology that offered more than a return to a failed autocracy. They also could offer minorities their own republics in which they could have their own limited cultural, political and linguistic independence, something the tsarist state never had. This is why the Latvian Rifles were a thing.
von Ungern Steinberg is one of those people who you'd think was a fictional character if there wasn't good historical evidence claiming otherwise. He was kicked out of the Cossack cavalry for being too violent, spent most of WW1 doing brave-but-rash cavalry charges against the Germans, and, during the Civil War, tried to recreate the empire of Ghengis Khan. The Dalai Lama called him the incarnation of the god of war.
Zhang Zongchang is basically the ultimate Chinese meme.
That mf was too hardcore to die
Damn but I have heard he was pretty brutal and killed hundreds of his own people and was pretty hated though.
* von Ungern-Sternberg
That's why the mad Barron is one of Kaiserreich's best leaders.
There aren't many videos that actually describe the warfare of the Russian civil war! Largely only about the revolution itself, skipping from 1918 to 1922. Thanks for making it, very informative. Excited to see future episodes about this topic, it was so complex because alongside the Russian civil war there was the allied interventions, the various wars of independence, the Finnish civil war to the north, conquest of the territories like the Caucasus/Ukraine, and interstate wars like the polish-soviet war. Can't wait to see what you choose to focus on next.
I totally agree! The Russian civil war itself cost the lives of millions of civilians and contributed to major food shortages which always leads to mass starvation
I recommend you listen to the Revolutions Podcast from Mike Duncan, he just finished the Russian Revolution (among many others he did)
Gotta looking into Japanese history to find more interesting enough
@@maxsportsman2416 For people its always easier to ignore that part and say "its communism/tzars/blah blah fault" than have some common sense and think of this.
This was indeed a good topic to learn about.
Makhno's role is often understated. The Whites were supposed to get reinforcements from the French in Odessa. The Black Army cut them off from reaching the port at the battle of Peregonovka. After that battle, the seige of Moscow was lifted, and the White army's hope for victory was over.
More on that here
ruclips.net/video/UWwEnAheJsQ/видео.html
Yes but let’s not pretend that the Reds would have lost if not for Makhno. It’s a lot more complicated. They probably still would have won.
@kerryannegarnick1846 Moscow would have Been captured. This is the conclusion modern historians are coming to with all the varying sources on the internet and not being suppressed by the USSR. Bolsheviks downplayed the anarchists role to "banditry." The Reds stabbed them in the back. Makhno's treaty with Trotsky said if they helped them defeat the Whites, Ukrainian Free Territories would be autonomous. And Had the Reds not been so concerned with attacking other revolutionaries, they'd have been able to reclaim Poland.
@@j.leonardo260 but even if they were going to lose Moscow, the Bolsheviks would have just moved the capital back to Petrograd. Remember the most important city is Petrograd at this time, not Moscow. Although losing Moscow would have been huge, it wouldn't have been fatal.
@@j.leonardo260 I don't think they stabbed them in the back. They never really were going to accept anarchists because they simply had contradicting views of a revolution. So they stabbed them in the front. And frankly I'm on the side of the Bolsheviks because the Soviet Union lasted almost a century, brought the territory of the Russian Empire from a feudal backwater to a space-faring, industrial super power capable of beating the Nazis almost single-handedly, and drastically improved standards of living for the Soviet people. We are seeing now the massive consequences of the end of the Soviet Union in all of those states. Anarchists have always failed to accomplish anything of note for any length of time because their ideology doesn't acknowledge the contradictions within society and thus doesn't accept the need to suppress the enemies of the revolution.
Eagerly awaiting the story the Czech battalion ! This answered questions I have had for years ,i.e ... Effect of allied forces , Trotsky's effectiveness and popular support . Awesome vid ! Thanks for this community and your attention to my favorite avocation.
Thanks bro this topic is highlighted so people can undetstand things with facts
One reason the reds won is because they made "PM M1910" machine guns mobile by putting them on carriages. In Russian its called "Tachanka". They could be used easily by anyone. The reds would drive these carriages to battle sites and machine gunned there enemies when they made charges. Todays version are the Toyota pickups which are mounted with heavy machine guns/anti-air guns used in certain nations in war and which is said to be highly effective.
The following clip from a Russian movie shows how they did it - ruclips.net/video/rmmQP8E1dXQ/видео.html
Actually it were the rebels of southern Ukraine who invented them (Nestor Makhno)
A very good 18.49 minutes worth Stefan ! You put these facts better than some books I've read. The Reds, we promise land, bread and peace. The Whites we promise a return to how things were in 1914, that and a fragmented leadership and aims meant it was hardly surprising the Reds won. There are some strong parallels there with the modern Afghanistan tragedy too. I look forward to your next offering.
Many thanks for your reply!
Whites themselves were hardly divided ideologically, even at the level of regiments, while Whties on the South were mostly Republicans and Democrats, North-West and most of the East Whites were Monarchists, some Divisions of the Eastern Army were also Republicans and even 2 of them were Socialists (Izhevsk and Votkinsk divisions) + Whites never had any development in Political and Socio-Economical spheres in their regions. Simply it could be explained - "Way of Russia will be decided after the Defeat of Bolshevism", because plan was that The Constituent Assembly after the war had to decide whether to remain a Monarchy or switch to something new
Imo the theoretical idea and intention of the red was kinda good to break with the establishment of the super rich, but with so much money and power on the side of the whites (world burgeoise) they had to be tuff with a lethal grip on what they had conquered, any weakness would ruin everything (the same applies to current Cuba), but this resulted in a criminal and murderous regime in the URSS.
I wish for more equilibrium on the world.
Neither peace, nor bread, nor land.
Imagine if Zatistv Russia had held the Eastern front until the allied victory.
I know battle reviews are interesting to some, but a more interesting video for me would be an in depth look at what types of people supported each faction and why.
Read Pyotr Wrangel's memoir "always with honour" it's honestly amazing.
@@horrifyinggelatinousblob Thanks for the suggestion. I'll look him up. I am probably more pro-revolutionary but it is important to know what the other side was thinking.
Excellent summary Stefan - thanks for posting :)
Few people on RUclips talk about the final battle of the Russian civil war that being the fall of Ayan in the far east in June of 1923. Maybe you could cover that in a future episode. Most talk about the Russian civil war stops in 1921 or 1922 when really there was still spillover into 1923.
The civil war fighting actually stopped in 1935 when the Basmachi faction in central Asia ceased hostility
@@ernestkhalimov1007 Good point, but Wikipedia is saying the movement ended in 1934 while the last major battle was in late 1933.
@@Nebiros21 thank you for that bit of information as well 👍
It didn't totally end until 1926 and continues today thanks to the Neo Cons!
@@mikefay5698 The part of about Neo Cons makes no sense.
Your students are very lucky to be able to learn more about subjects such as the revolution and the civil war. At my school, admittedly many moons ago, history was centered on British history and somewhat sketchy.
Couldn't agree more. American history was shoved down my throat, where every other county was only viewed from our eyes. I really didn't know anything until I got to college and took Russian History, which is one of the most interesting classes I've ever taken. And that only opened the door. I feel like in highschool what I learned was barely a grain on a whole continental beach. There's such a density of information out there, and I'm still in awe.
Shit nowadays in the west all they do is flogging the white people of history as racist colonialists blah blah blah....no reality just critical _____ theory.
I too was a victim of British History. Mind you all lands lie or don't teach it at all. Even correctly taught as Stefan illustrates. Napoleon was correct when he noted, "All History is lies that everyone agrees upon"!!
British history where all nasty stuff is left out like buying massive amounts of slave labour timber from Soviet union, government at that time knew about it and just ignored it.
The thing is that schools have limited time to go through the history of a country. So is there really need to go through a thing like the Russian Civil War if you live in the former British Empire.
I'm a history teacher in Finland and as much as the Russian Revolution has a part in our history and happened right next door there still is much more important events to study than the Russian Revolution.
The biggest reason I've seen for the Reds winning - was that they had the Moscow Rail Hub and Interior Lines. Trotsky could organize a force large enough to defeat one of the White Russian Armies - then head out the rail lines that Army was traveling along to supply themselves. His force would outnumber the Whites locally and defeat them. Then - that force - could be sent through the Moscow Rail Hub to hit another White Army and defeat it.
This is a problem for any Superior Force that has surrounded a Smaller Force. They may outnumber the smaller force over all - but - they have to travel around the enemy force they are surrounding to link up with each other. The smaller force that is surrounded - merely needs to cut across their own _"Interior Lines"_ and they can achieve local superiority over part of the larger surrounding force.
.
His brilliance was in recruiting White Tsarist Officers and keeping their familys hostage in case they flipped. Earning the everlasting hatred of Voroshilov and Stalin who wanted a Militia run by NCO's. Trotsky won because he wanted a professional Red Army which was essential for victory. Some Officers did try to turn and were shot. Political Commisars checked these Officers out for treachery!
Yes, it was and remains the biggest issue - transport infrastructure hypercentralization in Moscow. The one controlling it controls whole central Russia.
Straight up from Napoleon playbook
Trotsky loved his Armored Train!
@@fungunsun1 At that time a Napoleonic Victory would have freed the Serfs from Feudalism and be progressive! And united all of Europe which the USA fears most of all!
Well researched video and there is a saying "Those who ignore / don't study history, these are comdemned to repeat it."
What’s your takeaway? Resistance to a leftist takeover of a country is futile? Or don’t let communism get a foothold anywhere in the world altogether?
@@ericwanderweg8525 My takeaway from these events are that it is prudent for increasing the winning chances that you should have and earn the support of the local population first, have some more of organized structure for your military and strategy and take off your ideological blinds.
This is especially true today, but your comments already has shown that you can not overcome your ideological programming and can not see things and events from different perspectives to gain a better understanding of events unfolded and unfolding.
to make it clear: if you are interested in history and current political events, you should listen to everyone involved in events / conflicts with open ears and eyes and don't judge them before hand.
If you do that, especially in things already unraveled and wrapped up in the past, you can avoid similiar situations in the present and at least - if you cannot influence them - predict, what will happen with some degree of probability. You see, people blinded by ideologies, faith, hate, narcissim or similar vices, are easy to predict what they will do and act.
@@shakeyourbunny sounds like the pot calling the kettle black concerning ideological programming. We get it, you’re on the left and this was a glorious chapter in history for you. My “programming” comes from various coworkers that lived under communist rule. They might have a different view than you do concerning the great worker’s paradise.
The overall denominator in this story is that the Russian military from the start, so 1914 and before, was in every aspect not up to par. They had the basics but not the finesse to be a decisive force. I think that that stems from an upper class cultural 'believe' in what leadership entails. An outdated romantic notion of nobility or something like that. The Bolsheviks were a very UNromantic practical bunch, hell bend on "Result Whatever The Costs". Their leadership system was effectuated by those pesky political commissars, who were ideological well orientated, power hungry and very hands on. Did what was needed to be done, sans merci.
So, cultural outdated believes v nihilistic (nothing can disappoint me or rob me from my believes because I lost them already) pragmatism.
Awesome video. Thank you
You're welcome!
The Russian Civil War, In my learning the theme is that it was complex due to all the factions, and in part that is why the reds won in the end, because the factions just did not get on/support each other. Then you have the greens (nationalists like at least 2 of the Ukraine factions!).
Then you have oddities like the Baltic Landwehr (at its height, a divisional sized unit made up of ethic Germans from the Baltic states and nothing to do with the German Army that armed and supplied them honest guvnor!) who seemed to have a go at everyone around them!
the conflict has strong similarities with the Syrian Civil War where the Assad regime is unified against the many rebel groups that fought each other as much as they fought Assad. the West supported the Syrian rebels just as they supported the Whites, but the fragmented pro-Western forces were no match for strong unified forces with ideological system.
Greens were anrchists and they actually fought reds, whites and UPR.
The Bolsheviks succeeded because their disciplined fascism was more effective than White diversity. Thus why Bolsheviks always try to convince their enemies that "diversity is their strength" and then try to sow social chaos to create revolutionary conditions.
My understand one too is that the whites were primarily defeated by their own corruption.
They had more experienced troops, allied support, and the support of locals terrorized by the reds. But wherever they went they alienated locals leaving hostile populations to their rear. Supplies sent to them by allies were lost to corruption and wouldn’t make it to the frontlines.
It didn’t take long before the people turned against the whites and the allies realized they were a lost cause.
@@LEFT4BASS It was exactly the opposite. The Whites were too disorganized when it came to recruiting troops, depending on the Russian patriotic spirit. The Bolsheviks did not worry about such bourgeois concerns, ruthlessly conscripting whatever manpower they could get their hands on, herding peasants into battle and forcing them forward with blocking detachments. Incompetent or unlucky officers were shot. Experienced officers had their families held hostage, who were shot if betrayal was suspected.
The White Army was not a negligible force. Most of it was made up of experienced officers, and the force depended on quality for their successes. At its peak it had a million men with about a third in reserve. The Bolshevik army peaked in 1920 at five million men, mostly peasant levies, with about half in reserve. Much of it was regularly trying to desert, save for elite formations like the Latvian riflemen, were always reluctant to engage in combat, and depended on force of numbers for whatever success they enjoyed. The Bolshevik apparatchiks were at least as corrupt as the Whites, if not more so, but the Whites were always badly outnumbered. The Whites simply were not nearly as ruthless and as vicious as the Bolsheviks, and the peasants were not nearly as afraid of them as they were of the Reds. Eventually the Whites were simply overwhelmed.
Excellent video!!!
In august 1919 Gdov county sended a plea to Estonian government to take county as a part of Estonian republic and the main reason was harsh and violent treatment from North-western army and government towards civilian population. A little bit about Estonian independence war from Red army prospective.
Red army against Estonian army
During the Estonian War of Independence, the Northern Front (later the Western Front) led military activity towards the Baltic region and Poland. Until July 1919, the Northern Front was led by former Lieutenant General of the General Staff, Dmitry Nadyozhny, and thereafter by former Colonel Vladimir Gittis. While staff officers and division and brigade commanders were former tsarist officers, regiment, battalion and company commanders were mostly non-experienced former junior officers, non-commissioned officers or even privates. For instance, former corporal of the tsarist army was the commander of the 49th rifle regiment that fought at the Viru Front. The deficient qualification of the unit commanders of the Red Army contributed to Estonia’s victory in the War of Independence.
In late autumn 1918, the Red Army prepared 12,000 men to invade Estonia. By February 1919, up to 26,000 men were fighting against Estonia. At the time, Estonia had about 15,000 soldiers at the front. At the end of the War of Independence - the end of 1919 and the beginning of 1920 - there were 40,000 Red Army troops at the Viru Front, fighting 20,000 soldiers and officers of the Estonian Army and the North-western Army. The Red Army outnumbered their enemy two-fold in the Estonian War of Independence. At first, the Red Army also had an advantage with regard to weapons and equipment, but the situation evened up by the end of the war.
Estonians in the Red Army
On 29 November 1918, the Commune of the Working People of Estonia, a puppet government of Soviet Russia was established in the areas annexed from Estonia. The Commune was led by Estonian communist Jaan Anvelt. Large enterprises, banks and other property were confiscated, and political opponents were suppressed by the red terror. The power of the Commune relied on the Red Army: it was an occupation government of Soviet Russia, tasked with imitating a legitimate government and thereby turning the war in Estonia into a civil war between the Reds and the Whites.
The Red Army also included Estonian rifle regiments which consisted of Estonian Bolsheviks and Red Guard soldiers who had fled to Russia and Estonians mobilised in Russia or in the annexed Estonian territories. In early spring 1919, six Estonian rifle regiments together with cavalry and artillery units were merged into the 1st Estonian Rifle Division. The commander of the division was former Lieutenant of the tsarist army Leonhard Ritt, and when he defected to the Estonian side, former Red Guards Battalion Commander Jakob Palvadre. The Estonian rifle regiments comprised up to 6,000 men.
The Estonian Red Army was formed in early spring 1919 and in addition to the 1st Estonian Rifle Regiment it also commanded the Latvian Red Rifle Divisions. Former Major General Nikolai Vassilyev was the commander of the Army and former Lieutenant Colonel, Estonian August Kork was the chief of staff.
In June 1919, the Soviet Russian Government decided to terminate the activities of the Commune of the Working People of Estonia, as the Estonian forces had re-captured the areas previously controlled by the Commune. The command of the Estonian Red Army was also disbanded, and the units were subordinated to other command units. The 1st Estonian Rifle Division was reorganised into a independent Estonian rifle brigade in the Red Army and transferred to Ukraine and southern Russia.
Siim Õismaa, Estonian war museum.
The reds also promised farmers to get their own land, which was quickly taken back when they have won.
Indeed.
and farmers cant believed and tought: wait, they cant Be the same bolschevicks as 1918 when they give us the land...
No
Because they had Johnny Bench, Ray Knight, Dave Concepcion, Ken Griffey, and Pete Rose. Damn, nearly anyone would win with that lineup.
?
@@HistoryHustle its a joke. Hes alluding to the Cincinnatti Reds
Tldr, cause the bankers and ceos supported them
Yes, Stefan, it is certainly complicated. You or rather I need a chart to distinguis who is who and where are they and where are they going. It is particularly confusing for me to understand the presence of White Russian forces on the territories of the newly revived nations such as Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia. I would be very interested in learning more about the interplay between theses forces. Also, I would be interested in the interplay (that might sound like an all too kind word) between the White forces and the various Ukrainian government or attempts at government that arose at the same time as the civil war. Even the word civil war sounds a bit stange as it was anything but civil, but I cannot offer a better suggestion at this time. Thanks again....Stephan
Good and entertaining video. I do believe there are a few things that are overlooked that are important (not saying there's any particular intention, it's a huge topic to cover in just one video).
While the reds agreed to cede some territories in order to end the war with Germany, they were not thinking about giving up that much. They had to due to Trotsky gambling in the negotiations instead of doing what he was mandated to do. That was just one of the many times Trotsky did whatever he wanted going out of the line and dismissing the collective decisions that were taken. Then, the red army was not founded by Trotsky. He played an important role but he wasn't the only one involved, and the decisions of this kind were not taken by one person, but collectively. That's one of the basis of the (early at least) soviet government. Then something else I think it's not stressed enough is how much foreign attacks the reds had to cope with. Just saying "the allies" doesn't get you to think how many countries actually had hostile reactions against the soviet republic.
And even if it's highly biased, I do recommend reading the Trotsky's history of the Russian revolution. In many parts of the book you will ask yourself if he's telling the truth or he's just saying something for his benefit. Besides that, it is very well written and do a good job in putting you in the middle of all the events that were happening. Really crazy, high paced times.
If you want a personal account from the last White commander get the book "Always With Honor" by Pyotr Wrangel. He wrote the book shortly after the end of the war and he gives great accounts on why they failed. Also great accounts on some battles he was in.
Interesting subject!
👍
Big-elephant-in-the-room question: Why were so many high positioned bolshevik functionaries and party members of Jewish descent? I have nothing against Jews, I have met a few jewish people and they were helpful and kind. Today, quite the contrary, we can actually see many Jews supporting right-wing nationalist parties in Israel. I do believe it’s sinful and a pity that many of the original tribes rejected Christ’s beautiful message. However, apart from any value judgements: why did many theorists and politicians connect judaism to bolshevism? How much of this is true (for the Jews at the time, not today!)? Did they maybe lack any national affiliation and not feel connected with the Russian state? Maybe it’s worth the time and effort to make a video about this difficult but definitely important subject. Thank you for all your work on your channel. Greets!
I get this comment a lot. I quote Orlando Figes (A People's Tragedy):
"It must never be forgotten that while many revolutionaries were Jews, relatively few Jews were revolutionaries. It was a myth of the anti-Semites that all the Jews were Bolsheviks."
Mainly because Jews were historically ostracized from participating in society and were barred from entering conservative and christian political parties so most Jews just joined the socialist and communists that openly accepted them and since Jews are some of the most studious people their knowledge gained them great merit in their respective parties.
In the case of Tsarist Russia the monarchy regularly sponsored anti Jewish pogroms centuries leading up to and during the Civil War so it made sense for Jews to side with the Reds that weren't trying to exterminate them like the whites were trying to do.
Because the reds were one of the few people that weren’t openly genocidal towards them
Sweet Jesus was a Jew. Jews say he was a Rabbi called Yehudi Ben Abraham. If he existed at all!
@@HistoryHustle Okey, clear enough, thank you for your reply.
I read somewhere that after the fall of the iron curtain, many jews migrated from the (post-)USSR to Israel, and this caused Israeli rightwing, nationalistic parties to surge in the ballots. Can you confirm this? If this is the case it’s obviously quite telling.
is difficult for you because you don't like what the reds represent for you.
Contemplate presenting apple pies recipes (I supose you like apple, is so german).
Figgs' description of Trotsky as The Man on the Horse, Bonapartist, just doesn't square with the 1000 books and account I've read on this event? Is Figgs your only source? You might have seen documents I have not, doubt it, and I would love to see them, primary sources please, not from Orlando Figgs, he is not a primary source. A kitchen table author at best.
See sources below the video.
But he Figes is a good Bourgeois hack Historian beloved by the hack media!
Merci de ce tres bon vidéo.
👍
W Bruce Lincoln wrote several books on Russia. WW1 and Civil War. I recommend them
👍
I like how Lenin like guy talks about civil war in Russia 😏
😅👍
It is amazing how many great historic events are decided by small armies due to poor coordination, poor support or poor political decisions. I'll mention just one from a relatively rcent history: loss of American possessions by France following a battle of Quebec, barely won by a 5 000 (?) English army.
From a Colonial perspective, 5000-man army is alot... The New World wasn't fielding armies the size of those in the Old World.
Key victory can be attributed to trotsky’s leadership and tenacity
Sure played a large part.
Russia is freaking huge
It is.
The Reds won because they had superior hitting and pitching.
Better leadership, better organization, central position, much better liars, utterly ruthless, never for one moment believed their own bullshit, sought victory over everything else. Were not afraid to force reluctant peasants into suicidal battles or exterminate their own people by the millions if it would give them an advantage. They also had "Budenyy's Luck."
@@DrCruel Whites that wanted to continue the WW1: Am I joke to you???
@@DrCruel You also forgot that Soviet communists believe their ideology so much they wonder why whilst giving their gold reserves to the Americans (in international trade with them) to avoid full pledge capitalism and made the decline of the Soviet Union inevitable and wonder why in the end why all that happened lol (even the higher ups too).
@@zidorovichburblyatya2862 Apparently!
@@zidorovichburblyatya2862 You mean the Bolsheviks looted the country and lived the high life while their own people struggle in squalor? Isn't that what socialism is all about?
Your take, like many, never explains how the Bolsheviks, isolated and hobbled by war-wrought economic collapse and facing opponents on multiple fronts, armed and supplied by the Big Powers, were able to build the Red Army from scratch and systematically win everywhere. The reason is political. The Bolsheviks' land-to-the-tiller agrarian reform won mass poor-peasant support, while the Whites' deeply reactionary nature revealed itself wherever they went, despite a frisson of left allies (Kerensky, right-SR's). War-communism requisitions provoked some anti-Bolshevik revolts, but these did not spread. With the New Economic Policy in 1921, the Bolsheviks politically neutralized even these.
You do realize they lost Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland i.e. the most economically advanced parts of pre- revolutionary Russia?
Like they stole a car without an engine.
@@johnkilmartin5101 The Bolsheviks didn't "lose" those countries. They were forced to cede them to Germany by the Brest-Litovsk treaty to get out of the war. The West then used them to stage invasions of Soviet Russia. All were beaten back.
@@nikhtose Finland declared itself independent and only received German assistance after being unable to push out Bolshevik forces on their own. Once the Bolsheviks were pushed out the Germans left. It was never occupied by the Germans. All of which occurred after Brest Litovsk.
@@johnkilmartin5101 The Finnish workers took power, were crushed and mass-slaughtered by a military coup armed by Germany. This gang “declared independence.” Your use of euphemism to excuse rightist violence while outraged at Bolshevik countermeasures is revealing.
Most wonderful & informative historical coverage about Russian white counter revolutionary defeated vas Red Russian revolutionaries... many records were talked about that historical events, but they were not identified it in such details of your respective channels... I read that Russian Massonni Secret Society's ( they had relationships to French Masson society )organized national revolution against Tsar regime..allot thanks .(History Marche) channel....my respect 🙏 for you Sir Stefan..going on
Is putin massonni?
@@daveconrad6562 No way! rather anti woke nationalist!
As russian i am interesting to hear about history of revolution in 1917. Because today officials in russia are trying to rewrite this history, and return the prerevolution "old good times" with unequality and official slavery provided by Czar goverment.
They started trying to rewrite its history as soon as the Russian Civil War was over. First the Communists rewrote it. Now its tankie historians that do it. Seriously, he is dressed as Lenin. He glosses over anything that makes the reds look bad. He focused on the monarchists on the white site (the least popular of at least a half dozen factions). He talks about the war being ideological when most soldiers on both sides were conscripts. And even though large parts of the war took place in Ukraine and there were Ukrainian independence forces involved, he doesn't even mention this at all. Not one single word. That docudrama about Trotsky that might as well have been made by Stalin was more accurate.
This is like watching the big game on TV and the broadcast crew is all wearing uniforms of one specific team.
Putin yearns for Orthodoxy and Gilt Palaces saluting toy soldiers and Nationalism and Solzhenitsyn instead of Bolshevism!
@17:26 Ding! Despite being a strong supporter of the Russian Orthodox Church, I still cannot understand why Nicholas II was made a saint. His tsarina and the royal brood were pious and compassionate (by all accounts) but Russia suffered enormously under his misguided and oppressive rule.
For Womens Magazine's!
Very interesting. Would be good to hear more about the Latvian Rifles and their role with the Red Army.
There’s still a large memorial to them in Riga I remember.
Latvians also staffed a lot of the political and police positions (Cheka, nkvd). Later fueled Stalin’s paranoia as they were seen as potentially collaborating with Germany.
Probably been torn down by the Fascists running Latvia. The Lettish rifles were Lenin's most trusted bodyguard!
@@ryangriffin5990 Well they certainly do these days with the EU which was based on Heinrich Himmlers SS. He was in charge of all the occupation Zones. During that period of occupation they gathered all the Jews in the centre of Riga and clubbed them to death. Making the SS sick!
@@ryangriffin5990 True. Their, ahem, "role" in the purges is even more fun. First they killed shitload of people. Then they were eliminated, occasionally with relatives and kiddies.
The Russian-language expression is "за что боролись, на то и напоролись". Look it up.
"Much of the West arms support disappeared
due to corruption."
Some things never change.
Though the location is the same.
The Bolsheviks had the centre as said, a clear ideology and would bend the truth to suit the needs (bread, peace, land). The opposition was fragmented with fractional governments made up of monarchist, right wing, SRs, left SRs, Kadets. The opposition failed to realise they could not put the old empire back together too late. They alienated Ukrainians, Baltic states, Poland in particular. They failed to compromise on land reform which considering how the Bolsheviks robbed the peasants was a huge mistake. There was no serious coordination with in particular Kolchak and Denikin. The maximum expanse of Kolchak was too early to meet up with the Southern Front. Early on it was all about WW1 and the Allies vs the Germans but then became about the internal issues and the spread of Bolshevism The Bolsheviks were both chaotic and ruthless but so were the Whites. Both sides murdered civilians in huge numbers in especially brutal ways. The moderates were drowned out so whatever way it went there was going to be massive retribution whoever won. The key moment to stop it was March 1917 when they should just have pulled out of the war and repaired the country. The Bolsheviks exploited this but the death they brought would end up being greater. They implemented non of the slogans peace, bread, land. They brought war, famine and collectivisation. Turned the peasants back into serfs, replaced the Okhrana with and even more ruthless Cheka and turned exile to Siberia into the Gulags. Lenin became the new Tsar.
Well at least today the USA Britain and all the EU even Japan are all mates against Russia and agree that cutting of the German Gas line and Blockading Russia will ensure peace Democracy Human rights except for Julian Assange and Bidens rule based order and no more Chinese Balloons!
Только "Кровавый Совок" способен строить сотни городов на чистом поле, ради великого жестокого бога -ГУЛАГа, где на алтарях в жертву приносились миллионы убитых лично Сталиным сторонников либертарианства)))
How? Communists murdered 6 of my Volga German (Saratov) Grandmother's uncles (cossacks) in Russia Civil War & scaled murder up to 25? million. My family came to Canada as refugees.
Nice
Wow this was a great presentation. Good flow and continuity. I have a theory about the Bolsheviks and Germany. Germany’s great influence operation or regime change was the release of Bolsheviks on Russia after their development in Germany. Germany couldn’t sustain or win a two front war. The Revolution took place and the Russian Army collapsed. They shifted their resources to the West and nearly defeated the English and French.
@@yellowwasprakija2869 yes and so did Karl Marx. I believe that the reason why Nazi Germany was so fervently opposed to the Soviet Union was because they felt they were responsible for its creation.
I believe Lenin was based in Switzerland during the first years of WW1.
The German High Command transported the Bolsheviks from Switzerland to Russia (via Germany, Baltic Sea to neutral Sweden and to Russian controlled Finland).
They hoped Lenin would remove Russia from WW1, which he did.
However after the big German spring 1918 offensive in the West failed, revolutionary activity started to spread from Russia to Germany.
This, combined with the arrival of the USA in the war forced Germany to sue for peace.
@@rjames3981 well the Germans didn’t sue for peace but realized that they couldn’t win in 1918 and it would be at least another year of war. They liked Wilson’s 14 points and wanted to negotiate. However the Americans did not take part in treaty negotiations and Wilson died campaigning for the League of Nations which wasn’t ratified by US Congress so the US wasn’t really part of it either. The Germans felt they were betrayed and saddled with war guilt and reparations when they were pragmatists. Bolshevism was starting to spread in Europe (and they felt that was their responsibility to contain)
@David - ‘The actual terms, which were largely written by Foch, included the cessation of hostilities on the Western Front, the withdrawal of German forces from west of the Rhine, Allied occupation of the Rhineland and bridgeheads further east, the preservation of infrastructure, the surrender of aircraft, warships, and military materiel, the release of Allied prisoners of war and interned civilians, eventual reparations, no release of German prisoners and no relaxation of the naval blockade of Germany. The armistice was extended three times while negotiations continued on a peace treaty. The Treaty of Versailles, which was officially signed on 28 June 1919, took effect on 10 January 1920’
@@rjames3981 small wonder why Germany embraced extreme nationalism and war with France and UK in the 1930s.
Tzar factions were not liked by peasant Russians, and Bolsheviks lies sounded really good.
Pyotr Wrangel's memoir "always with honour" is an amazing account of the barbarity and lunacy of the Reds. One of the greatest tragedies inflicted on Mankind was the germans putting Lenin on that train. Without that, there would be no Holodomor, nor Mao and his "great leap forward"
Nah the greatest barbarity against mankind was Hitler since he killed way more people in 12 years than the USSRs entire existence. Including western monarchism that killed 165 million indians in 40 years in just India alone nevermind the rest of British rule of India much less the rest of their colonies and the colonies of the French Belgian Spanish Portuguese Dutch and Italians.
Plus the west gave mankind 2 world wars.
@@ernestkhalimov1007 most killings under hitler happened in 4 years from 1941-1945, and he managed to kill more than all soviet leaders combined in the decades that the ussr existed
@@NBrioDaZueraRules indeed
Trotsky wasn't on the train! He carried out the October Revolution Lenin was in Finland!
I only watched 1 minute of the video because here is the answer: It is indeed easy to explain and the reds will always win (can apply to ANY country). Landlords or Boyars (russian aristocracy) imposed heavy taxes on peasants and those taxes were collected by some other scumbags who pocketed double of what there was due. Therefore peasants were starving in the best scenario. With the event of World War l MORE taxes were required to support the war effort. Now with Bolsheviks uprising a salvation was on the horizon for 90% of the starving population, so the Red Wave was absolutely unstoppable no matter how much military support from USA, England, Germany and others was given for the White faction. HUNGER is a very powerful incentive. Everything else trying to explain whys and wheres of White faction defeat is just technicalities and curiosities. Very simple to explain the Bolshevik revolution.
Besides Reds and Whites, there were also the Blacks. Anarchist forces in the Ukraine led by Nestor Makhno
Russian history, always compelling and mysterious, I love it.
Move to Russia, they are making history right now
@@GunslingerLv fascinating from afar rather
@@GunslingerLv BOT
@@PavelAVasilevich shill
Only kept mysterious by Western govts in order to better propagandize Russia
Reds had more support from the general masses. So many promises they would soon break. I still remember reading horror stories from the 1920s and 30s on how horrible working conditions were in the Soviet Union. One story in particular, an American college kid went there as a welder all hyped up he was going to be part of something great. He ended up working in the ass end of no where helping build a factory. Conditions were terrible, everyone lived in tents, it was the middle of winter. Workers were dying as a result. He discovered that many were even there by force, had no choice, bayonet and the gun was their motivation, when those ones died the others made jokes like "They were only a Kulak."
I doubt that is what those people fought for, an supported.
You're talking about the counter-revolution led by Stalin after Lenin's death, made possible by the devastation and isolation resulting from the Civil War. He murdered the entire Bolshevik leadership, most of its honest cadre, while keeping the name.
@@nikhtose And Lenin's policies led to a famine that made Stalin's two famines look not so bad. Lenin's war on the Kulaks lead to the destruction of entire villages, arrest and murder of untold numbers. This lead to the largest famine in known history within the former Russian Empire. In fact it's the primary reason Lenin "Liberalized" agriculture, ie gave farmers some Private Incentives, and stepped away from the ore Socialist style of agriculture Stalin would later impose. Yes Lenin pushed for a Liberal Economic style of Agricultural system to repair the damage that was done to their agriculture during civil unrest, and his handling of the peasant revolts. ie he allowed Farmers to be Capitalist.
This more "Liberal" approach was the primary divide between Stalin and Trotsky as well. I mean liberal not in the 1930s style modern liberalism, but just general liberalism ie individualism.
But to be blunt. Under Line, hundreds of thousands of Cossacks were killed, a few hundred thousand peasants were killed. We know that around 50,000 or so White Russian supporters were murdered. Between 4-8 million died through famine. All that with a shorter lived regime than Stalin or Hitler. Let alone the fact that Lenin's movement was the Counter Revolutionary movement, which by armed force Leninist crushed the Mensheviks which was the ruling Socialist party at the time in 1917. So ironically those who opposed Lenin were counter revolutionaries against an already existing counter revolution.
@@Alte.Kameraden So many lies. The famine resulted from the World War breakdown, followed by the civil war, worsened by hoarding by better-off peasants, not any Soviet policy. The Bolsheviks won majorities in the Soviets in October for taking full power for peace, bread, and land, which they delivered, to the horror of the Mensheviks. Again, no way they could have won without broad support, which historians ignore. And the Red Terror was provoked by broad sabotage, assassination by pro-White forces, which carried out gross mass murder of peasants, workers, and pogroms against Jews. No revolution is won by polite votes.
Caleb Maupin, Jackson Hinkle and US Professor Steven Kotkin give alternative views of events
Standards of living were much higher in the 30s what are you talking about
It’s been rather hard for me to find good videos on the Russian civil war, this is by far the most informative. Thank you
Great to read. Thanks!
@@HistoryHustle Relief maybe!
You'll be glad to know that there is a News Blackout of Seymour Hersh's opinion that the USA and Norway did it. Blew up the German Gas line! Who can now say Biden is senile?!
Excellent. Thanks. BZ.
Any thoughts on whether the Allied Powers Intervention Expedition was a seed for WWII and/or the Cold War?
Entire ideology from the getgo was about World revolution. The confrontation between the two (three if you count fascism) systems of modernity was set with or without sadly failed intervention
I heard him say the "Rats versus Whites". That pretty much sums it up.
Very Informative and interesting!
Thanks! GOD BLESS THE CSA!
CONSTITUTIONAL STATES OF AMERICA!
Make a vídeo about portuguese🇵🇹expeditionary forçe in ww1
At 2:11 it's sort of neat that you see signs in both the old and new orthography.
Didn't know that detail, thanks!
@@HistoryHustle I only notice that sort of thing. There might be Bozo the clown in the middle of the crowd and I could miss it. But I never miss orthography!
A war within a war within a war started by a war 👊🏻 another
Excellent episode Stefan 💙
Thanks for replying!
Civil War in the Ukraine still going on. Stefan won't report on that because of the Biden ban on news. Try Mr Ritter, Jimmy Dore or the excellent Duran Greeks and McGregor!
As far as it goes this essay is correct. But the Dutch author does not mention a vital and actually the crucial demographic, without which there would have been no civil war or " Revolution ". Bolchevics and Menchevics were led and dominated by Juse. If the author would like to read the last book written by Sozhenitzen, called 200 years together, he would understand. Solzhenitzen lays the blame for the 1917 Revolution, the Civil War and the Red Terror on Juse, not just those inside the Russian Empire. The Revolution was funded by Rothschilds through their friend and agent Jacob Schiff, a tax exile who lived in Switzerland.
only the mensheviks were, majority of bolsheviks were russians, aleksandr shlomo was not a russian, he hated russians, he loved christians, and jacob schiff literally funded anti bolshevik forces, plus anyone who thinks communism is jewish 🇳 🇪 🇪 🇩 🇸 🇹 🇴 🇧 🇪 🇸 🇱 🇴 🇼 🇱 🇾 🇪 🇦 🇹 🇪 🇳 🇦 🇱 🇮 🇻 🇪 🇧 🇾 🇨 🇦 🇳 🇳 🇮 🇧 🇦 🇱 🇸 🇫 🇷 🇴 🇲 🇳 🇪 🇼 🇬 🇺 🇮 🇳 🇪 🇦
Oh those Juice!
I am ethnic Ukrainian this was an important battle against the reds.
I understand.
How different history could have been if Fanny Kaplan had slightly better aim and had successfully assassinated Lenin in August 1918.
He took two bullets in the neck and chest!
They were getting western capitalist help
no? the red army was pretty much isolated and had no foreign allies, most of the western powers funded the whites
Of course the whites were lol.
And they sucked so bad their donors had to step in to fight the reds only to fail themselves
The saddest part about reading this conflict was that the people. The pesents only realized too late how shit the reds where only when the whites where gone
Wrong
Stephan, what is your opinion of Russian historian Steven Kotkin? Have you read any of his books? I heard that he's the one for reliable facts on the Bolsheviks, the Soviet Union, Stalin.
The families of recruited officers were kept hostages during the war.
Kolchak was famous Polar explorer.He was betrayed Czech legion and handed over to the Red army.
Another Fake Bourgeois hack Historian!
Why did the opposite happen in Finland leading to a whites victory?
Hope to cover that in the future.
Skills issue.
The red forces only held the urban south and left the regions north of them unattended allowing the whites to regroup organize and campaign effectively while Trotskys campaigned elsewhere.
Also in the taking of ukraine by the red the greeks living there were prosecutend with more that 100.000 dead and many were deported to kazakstan uzbekistan etc. There are still greeks there in uranopol sevastopol odessa mariopol etc.
See, here is where Bolshevik universalism shines.
It wasn't just the Greeks, every (besides 1, well okay also Roma but they weren't as easy to round up and give 5 minutes to grab passport and food) ethnic minority was pretty much cleansed from Ukraine. Poles, Germans, Bulgarians, 1/2 dozen different minorities from Crimea...
@@Poctyk Ukrainians should be greatful for Lenin giving them the ethnostate they always wanted as should the Poles for Stalin for giving them an ethnostate and establishing a barrier between them and Lithuanians since both claim lands from each other still oddly enough.
Greeks are everywhere even Melbourne!
It's simple enough though. When the people realise the oligarchs are the enemy, they can form the most formidable army. The rich have power as long as they can manipulate, the people have power when they unify.
The fact the colonial, fascist and imperial powers sent young men to die for the Russian oligarchs is incredibly telling.
Very much so agree, they don’t really teach about western coalition interventions during WW1 in Russia in public schooling. Least they didn’t where I went.
@@cjthebeesknees they usually brush over that and say it was just the Reds vs Whites when the whites were supported by all the major European powers and 14 other armies across the former Russian Empire
From one toxic ideology to another, sadly, one that's taken lives on a scale greater than any previous ideology by a wide margin.
@@TheMelnTeam inherently false since 40 years of British imperialism killed 165 million people in India nevermind the rest of British rule of India and much less the rest of their colonies.
@@ernestkhalimov1007 That's not what "inherently" means. Mongols are among the worst, in proportion to world pop at the time, but after that not so much. After that, it takes a lot of gymnastics to attribute more death to countries. Communist junk is a common sight in top 10 worst mass murderers in history, with the worst killing more civilian population than the Nazis (though if the Nazis lasted longer they'd likely have the highest body count, fortunately they did not).
Finally a video about the Civil War that does not become a series of political rants. Very clear explanation about the White forces in a very summarised video. Congrats.
Thanks!
Many MANY thanks for your support Jesse. Really appreciate it!
Ding Dong at 8:49. HAHA! You think you can trick me? Anyway, one thing that I have heard was that Makhno's troops took the city (Dneipro?) where much of Denikens artillery shells where located, causing a shortage on the front line. Not sure if this is true, but I'd like to know more. You did a great job of giving a concise history of an immensely interesting, but very complex, historical subject. Take it Ding Dong easy.
Curious about the analysis, I wrote a paper on this. 😅 Have memory loss though, so wondering to see what it was like, not scrutineering. 😂
👍
14:13 the Bolsheviks promised independence to Estonia. What a historical irony. The same Bolsheviks occupied Estonia 20 years later.
Yes. Pragmatism had the upper hand at first.
They were granted it but Lenin died.
Because they had the support of western finance.
no they didn't, the west funded the white army
@@NBrioDaZueraRules the white army were a mix of democrats and monarchists. Learn your history b
@@teddyjackson1902 and the west funded them
@@teddyjackson1902 west funded the whites to protect their investments and still lost despite all the money and 14 other armies fighting the red with them
Lenin won, Gorbachev lost, Putler rose to be tsar again, what a waste
This is a history with a lot of moving parts. Good job Stefan!
Thank you Jonathan!
I don't like the Bolsheviks, but people really should keep their political bias away from the comments on a historical video
Shut your eyes at the parts you don't like! Or play Bowls!
Great presentation
👍👍👍
Great work, Stefan. Your delivery is a little fast for some of us.
I did not think that your coverage of the bread riots early on,
which sparked the revolution was quite adequate.
Bread riots can do that. With great respect,
As a high school student, I excelled at partying, drinking, cutting classes, sleeping in my car and chasing girls. For those subjects that required sitting at a desk in a class and doing actual work, I was somewhat less enthusiastic.
However, I did have an interest in history and did manage some reasonably good grades. I wish we'd had instructors like this for I would have graduated with honors.
Sounds like my experience, although might I add smoking copious amounts of blunts and playing basketball. I was a B student my freshmen year but the rest of the three years I barley scrapped by with C- and D+ severely struggling to be engaged and interested whatsoever besides History/Social Studies/Government which I easily aced with A-
Math and anything above Algebra I failed nearly every test and quiz and barley passed with a 65 (anything less is failing grade) I like your style my friend, chasing 🐱 was most certainly one of if not my top priority as well lol.
All roads of your life lead back to you.
@@marcd2743 Blink momentarily and end up in the heart of Rome.
@@michimatsch5862 Oof, better get a move on then huh chief.
An awfull lot of people are sleeping in cars these days with the housing racket. Not many girls would be keen on that abode. Drinking for sure and worse!
Everytime I see Bronstein, I understand why Stalin had beef with him.
Mainly cause Trotsky was an idiot after the war.
Dude literally wanted to charge at Europe head on without industrializing and actually having a military capacity
@@ernestkhalimov1007 I think his main concern was dead people on both fronts.
To bad the Whites didn't win 😞
if they had won russians wouldn't exist anymore because the nazis would exterminate everyone
@@NBrioDaZueraRulesnot true.
@Zaptic I disagree
@Zaptic I disagree
In Ukraina the hard work was done by Nestor Makhno and his Anarchist Army...but they was crippled by the bolshevist.
They promised all, gave nothing and took everything
Pretty much..
They promised, they gave it all and took everything from the landlords, capitalists monarchs nobility and the liberals.
Thank goodness.
1917 was arguably the true start year of the Cold War with the Second World War being a brief interruption
Some historians claim this is the case.
There was greater rivalry between the US & Britain around that time.
Super!!!
👍
What about Vladivostok in the east ?
Yes, I would like to focus on that in the future. Thing is, these were pitched battles and by far not as important as the ones mentioned in the video.
Very interesting to think that if had the White moviment have a better political structure it would have won the war. Maybe if they organized in a facism like regim and centralized anti bolshevik factions they would have faced sucess. Very good vídeo, thanks for sharing and im very excited for the Chezch-slovak milítias video !!
The Whites wanted to continue WW1. Lenin wanted to end it.
That was decisive, not just in Russia, but also in ultimately encouraging rebellions in Germany which forced Germany and other Central European powers to sue for peace.
Just number: Red Army at one moment was 5 million versus 500 thousand Whites and intervention forces. More than enough to win considering a very similar motivation on both sides.
Ever wondered why Trotsky's Red Army was the most popular?
@@mikefay5698 because Bolsheviks delivered to peasants, who were an absolute majority of population, what they've promised. Unlike other political parties. Moreover, Red Army even got support from the former imperial officers (e.g. gen. Brusilov) for fighting against foreign intervention.
The story can be described in one name: Leon Davidovitch Bronstein, better known as Leon Trotsky.
Sounds Jewish.
Great General but overall bad for the survival of the communist cause at the time.
Widely discarded by the socialist world
I am fascinated by the civil war, but much of the information is clouded in propaganda and obscured by the language barrier. Thanks for this resource!
Probably this is the best analysis of the situation of several turbulent years contained in 18 minutes. How true about ideology. It was the socialist ideology of the Bolsheviks that made it possible to break the caste system, unite all nationalities and estates and create an incredible power for the first time. Of course, the number of mistakes and crimes was huge. However, now, watching the United States, you see that imperialism and oligarchies lead to the complete end of humanity. The future, if it happens, is still behind the ideology of socialism, taking into account previous mistakes. Спасибо.
It is bro , i'm Marxist Leninist myself and we have to acknowledge the bad things (and crimes that happened ) and remain critical of ourselves and policies
@@quintenbruggink1595 so do you recognise that the policies of Lenin regarding collective farming in Ukraine led to the Holomodor (8-10 million dead)
@@victorstock86 I acknowledge the material conditions of the era including the incompetence of the local command structure in accurately reporting to Moscow and the western powers trying to strangle the new socialist state by funding 15 armies against them, attempting to isolate them, and forbidding international trade by not accepting gold as payment and forbidding the diffusion of modern technologies and techniques into the agricultural and industrial fields of the USSR led to the culmination of the famine of Ukraine which btw is not a genocide simply because it was a nationwide occurrence and all the severely areas affected were Russian majority areas of the USSR with even ardent anti communist scholars that had every incentive to speculate as they had previously confirming the opposite with the famine being alleviated once Moscow fully addressed the extent of the disaster and no famines in Ukraine or the rest of the USSR after the 1940s.
The reds ultimately won because their core region of action the Leningrad-Moscow-Caspian Sea line was unified early. Everyone else was scattered with conflicting goals. That this region also included some of the most populous parts of Russia only helped.Ultimately only a few managed to break free the poles and the baltic peoples. That having been said a white victory may not have been good news either. Russia under a far right nationalist government potentially allied with a Germany under you know who its interesting to imagine WW2 in that case.
White victory would be such drastic change of history that we can´t be sure how much different would be Germany or rest of Europe.
hope you do the story of the Czech legion during their time in Russia is a tale worth to be told
You beat me to it. Great idea 💡
14:10 Strange that the Bolsheviks guaranteed (capitalist) Estonia independence but not (Socialist) Ukraine.
Ukraine was useful to them. With its grain fields and Donbas more useful than Estonia. They were pragmatic on that one.
A friend who was born in the USSR in 1926 and lived there until 1942 summed up the situation this way. "For 70 years communist Russia was insane." Not too much has changed.
Yes someone born that didn't witness the insanity serfdom and cyclical famines of the Tsarist age and growing up and enjoying the fruits of a burgeoning society departing from the dark ages and leaving before wars end to avoid seeing one of their own countrymen fly to space and ushering a 2nd 40 year peace with no major conflict in Europe which is largely unheard of in European history and giving the third world the tools to ward off the western powers trying to restore the pre WWI order saying nothing had changed is comical.
@@ernestkhalimov1007 The insanity did not go away.
@@TolKOZAK thanks for rethinking your post
@@ernestkhalimov1007 I said, "Not too much has changed." How is that rethinking? Russia is still insane.
@@TolKOZAK An ordinary bourgeois state, even somewhat puny compared to America or France.
That’s also why communism was so attractive in Russia at the time, many leaders were attracted by the idea of the “death of the deity.” By getting rid of the deity they could unite a country too diverse culturally, ethnically and religiously internally through the soviets. Tzar orthodox pan-slavic nationalism simply couldn’t bind together an empire anymore that had grown too vast and diverse.
No, it was the Jews (Bolsheviks) vs. Non Jews (everyone else).
"You must UNDERSTAND
the LEADING Bolsheviks who took over Russia
WERE NOT Russian.
They HATED Russians
They HATED Christians.
Driven by ETHNIC Hatred
They tortured and MURDERED millions of Russians
without a shred of human remorse."
-
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
=
West Clown World is ignorant of greatest human slaughter
as the West Bolshevik media owns West brains.
Yep the 'unofficial history' that no one ever learns
Lmao ok 🤣
Minority Russians losing to the Jewish majority population
it's literally the other way around, non-jews (bolsheviks) vs jews (everyone else), anyone who thinks communism is jewish 🇳 🇪 🇪 🇩 🇸 🇹 🇴 🇧 🇪 🇸 🇱 🇴 🇼 🇱 🇾 🇪 🇦 🇹 🇪 🇳 🇦 🇱 🇮 🇻 🇪 🇧 🇾 🇨 🇦 🇳 🇳 🇮 🇧 🇦 🇱 🇸 🇫 🇷 🇴 🇲 🇳 🇪 🇼 🇬 🇺 🇮 🇳 🇪 🇦
@@metanoian965 you must understand, aleksandr solzhenitsyn (shlomo) was not a russian, he hated russians, he loved christians, driven by ethnic hatred he spread lies about millions of russians without a shred of human remorse
Another video that is a love letter to the USSR.
Why?
Good
@Adrians Cehins black book of Communism and Victims of Communism Foundation only count 20 million killed by the USSR while Nazi Germany eclipsed that number in 12 years by killing over 40 million and even worse is the British who eclipsed communism completely by murdering 165 million Indians in 40 years alone, nevermind the rest of British rule of India and not even mentioning the millions killed in the rest of their colonies or those of the other western European powers
Sorry, teacher - you made an embarrassing mistake. There was no civil war in Estonia. It was purely war for independence. To remain in power and popular, bolsheviks promised whatever and Estonia used it indeed, but then bolsheviks started crushing Estonian independence right after Germany quit the eastern front, installed an unlegitime bolshevik puppet government to Narva (prototype of the Kuusinens' Terijoki government in Finland during the Winter War that was not a civil was either, ok), but it got kicked out and the Red Estonian units started to switch sides and were withdrawn from the Estonian front. I hope to see you clearing your mistake without any western European oversimplifications, sterotypes and biases in another video about the Estonian war for independence.
Good you mentioned it. For the west this civil war is completely unknown... For the west this was not relevant...
I think he means that the Russian Civil War had "spilt over the boarders, and on to Estonian territory", well that's what I think he meant, anyway.
There were a lot of communists in Estonia, it was very close to Petrograd after all. Same with Latvia, on of the greatest units of the Red army were the Latvian rifleman
@@nickyman5557 Well now that is true, but not enough of them to turn the situation into a win for Lenin and the Red Army, it would seem.
@@frenzalrhomb6919 that’s mostly cause of support from the British, they literally sent their navy to the Baltic to fight the Bolsheviks. Also troops from Finland and German Estonians
The reds also have a great general like mikhail tukachevsky idk why he got purged by stalin.
He was terrified the Army would be rid of him since Trotsky formed the Red Army. He murdered
Trotsky too and 4 of his children!!
Tukachevsky was purged for being incredibly incompetent in not securing Poland and various other humiliating defeats which was an easier reason unlike Trotskys who was a better general with more merit but discredited himself after the war by vocally proposing suicidal military action of storming Europe without even having established a proper industrial base needed to sustain that war which would effectively kill socialism in its cradle, plus he spent the rest of his career writing butthurt letters at all the part members and just being the chihuahua in the room until he was banished and later icepicked.
@@ernestkhalimov1007 The Polish versus Red Army War was lost since Stalin was insubordinate to Trotsky and refused to break off a siege of Lwov and aid Tukachevsky. He lost favour with Lenin after the defeat and Tukachevsky and Trotsky was of course Murdered by Stalin.
who at least knew he was incompetent at anything and by murdering competent Comrades he would look competent!
@@ernestkhalimov1007no trotsky. No red army. No soviet victory.