Frenchy Reacts to the Russian Revolution Pt 2
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 апр 2024
- A Frenchy reacts to the Russian Revolution Pt 2 !
Let's review the second pt of the Russian Revolution by oversimplified. A frenchy reacts!
Original video:
• The Russian Revolution...
#oversimplified #russianrevolution #lenin #stalin
Don't hesitate to share your thoughts with me!
“Even if Lenin himself tended to live the life of a Bourgeois”
For all that he claimed to “represent the working class”, Lenin was an aristocrat who never spent a single day of his life on a farm or factory.
In my opinion Lenin had no one to blame but himself for the Russian economy plummeting even further after he took power.
He forced fixed prices on farms and agricultural businesses, and when the farmers tried to speak out against it, saying they could not sustain their businesses (paying for maintenance, supplies and workers’ wages), Lenin ordered them shot and hanged.
Then when the farms collapsed and the already-existing food shortages became even worse, he blamed it on “foreign agents.”
Regarding the Russian Civil War:
A Russian told me that there was never any civil war at all, that instead it was a “western invasion by the USA, France and Britain.”
I suspect that he himself didn’t believe what he was saying.
Post-Truth; not actually trying to convince the other person, but to frustrate, tire and make them feel weary and hopeless and to not want to care anymore.
Lenin actually proposed a capitalist economy something like the social democracy today until Russia properly industrialized but he died before he could implement it,
and then Stalin rejected that in favor of a command economy model thinking it would be way faster and he wanted to be prepared for the next war which he thought was going to be soon.
Yes, thank you for this comemnt and sorry for the late answer
@@ToonStory-fh4gn np, keep up the good work
This certainly made a Monday a bit more bearable. Thank you for the sampling of your novel, was good. I'm a long time oversimplified fan but somehow don't think I've seen this, it was fascinating. I wonder if Rasputin was totally working alone? I guess it seems he had so much influence and power I suppose it's possible there was an agitator in the background? I suppose that's an urban legend like years ago the stories of Anastasia surviving and sent into hiding, I remember wishing that one was true but practically it wasn't likely. Thank you as always for the video and thoughtful commentary, this is a very smart, diverse, fun community I love reading and liking the comments.
Having followed Rasputin's life, I can't think of a single moment when he could have been used by an outside force. He was a free electron, totally unpredictable and out of control. Thank you very much and good luck for this Monday, which for me is coming to an end... Phew!
cyanide was neutralized by cakes or alcohol, so it did not work on Rasputin.
I'd also heard that the poison had been badly dosed, especially given the size of the lad. Well, thanks for that!
Fantastic video as usual my friend I've a few questions,I keep hearing in videos that when the Russians were fighting on three fronts,when they smashed the Austrian front,the Germans had to strengthen that front,is this the reason germany lost the war.
Why did they mummify Lenon,they didn't mummify other leaders.
What happened to Rasputins body.
Thank you, I don't think the Brusilov offensive where they destroyed the Austrian army is a reason why Germany lost the war. Sure it made them divert troops from other fronts but eventually the Russian front collapsed 1 year later.
I truly don't know about Lenin's body and Rasputin... For Lenin probably the next leaders were not so much reverred than he was.
Cheers mate!
Cheers pal
Nicholas’ wife Alexandra was Queen Victoria’s granddaughter.
Yes, and I think hemophilia was a genetic thing in her branch of the family... Thanks!
32:59 General Secretary of communist party wasn't "important" position but after Stalin came to power through it, it basically became most important position in every communist party, in every country that had communist regime at some point in their history. They basically followed by his example. That's why leaders of communist party are General Secretaries, not presidents, chairmans etc. Mao, Kim Il Sung, Castro etc. All Gen. Secs.
Yes, a very, very good point. Thank you very much!
there was not officially in Communist (bolshevik) party such position as the "General secretary" since mid of 1920s till 1966. Stalin was only just a Secretary (without predicate "general") of the Cent.Commitie of Communist party of the USSR (equal among other 5-6 secretaries). Stalin also had not any state positions till the 1941, when he was appointed the Chairman of the Concuil of People Commissars (instead Molotov)
I wonder how you feel about more recent historical analysis that lays a good bit of responsibility of the fast Russisn mobilization at the hands of the French? These scholars claim the French foreign ministry and their very well connected diplomtic embassy in St. Petersberg made a great show of how the Austrians and Germans were mobilizing for war. In fact that was not yet the case. Austria was mobilizing but only against Serbia. A general mobilization by Austria when it did happen was a clumsy disaster. Their war against weak Serbia was a humiliating near debacle. Germany had given Austria a blank check against Serbia (a good candidate for cause of the war) even though Germany had no cause in the Balkans and their treaty with Austria did not obligate them to participate at all. However the first reports of Russia mobilizing is all the German military needed to fire off the Schlieffen plan and begin the WW1. Also enjoyed your novel excerpt very much
Thanks mate, I did not hear about this analysis could you share me the source? It sounds really interesting and might do a potential nice topic for a video :)
Now everybody’s paycheck is the same
Almost!
Can you react to the oversimplified Punic wars next ?
Already done, enjoy 😃
5:15 - Are your novel going to be in English!?
It will be written in French, but if it's ever available in English that means it will have been a big success, so I hope so!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn noooo
Why Empress Alexandra Feodorovna is German? She was half British... Queen Victoria (all British monarchs before Elisabeth2) was more German - she hadnt no drop of English blood. Btw european nations was formed much later than their ruling dynastic nobility. So no one dynasty - even german- havent nationalities of their peoples
Technically, Alexandra was born in Hesse to the Hesse-Darmstadt family. The English royal family came from Hannover, but the Hohenzollern dynasty came 100% from Germany, the Habsburgs from Austria. What other royal families do you have in mind?
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Hessen dynastic house (to which Alexandra Feodorovna belonged in patrimonial line) emerged in 13 century as branch of Brabant house, Brabant house emerged from Reginar (Luven) house and was relative to Carolings (Charlemagne). Well known fact that German dynastic houses never mixed with lower status families (they during centuries had marriages with equal noble houses)/ so German princes hadnt any German in their genetics.
Thank you for 'tempering' that 'Oversimplified'. It feels like 'Oversimplified' is more interested in drama, cartoonish action or punchlines, than structure, clarity and clear communication. So, I appreciated your commentary. 👍👍
It is somewhat impressive that Trotsky and the Bolsheviks(the popular 'Beat Combo' 😀) defeated the amassed opposing forces. Is that because the opposing forces were fighting each other, or very disorganised, and/or had incompetent leadership, or something else?
Best Wishes. ☮
My only 'playlist' thought is something you've very likely seen. This is very popular with reactors:
_Every Country England Has Invaded: Visualized_ ruclips.net/video/snukwrLhu8Y/видео.html (12m:26s)
However, this attempts to examine the likely source, a book called "All the countries we've ever invaded and the few we never got round to", released in 2012 by Stuart Laycock, and triage, differentiating 'invaded' from 'landed trying to help':
_Have the British really invaded 90% of the countries in the world?_ ruclips.net/video/t86J_zZjjq4/видео.html (15m:33s)
I can't see either of them in your videos, so an analysis _might_ be interesting?
Because the opposing forces were against the Bolsheviks, but not together, they had huge contradictions. The Bolsheviks managed to at least partially restore the economy and launch factories, but the Whites failed. Advantage in the organization is the main condition for victory.
Thank you! Yes, I think that the lack of cohesion, internal rivalries and the absence of a common strategy have doomed the Whites here. Thanks for the recommendations and for the nice comment, as always!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn
In addition, there were many people who did not want any state control and war with the rebel national minorities. The Bolsheviks, flirting with them, gave them autonomy, the Whites fought for a single and indivisible Russian empire.
@@mishamixailov Thank you for replying.
Best Wishes. ☮
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Thank you for replying. I do enjoy 'Oversimplfied' with your commentary, and learn more from the combination.
Best Wishes. ☮
not following your logic on the treaties. That one treaty is very harsh doesn't make the other one better.
And that's just (painful) numbers. The treaty of Versaille had other parts. It felt like (or could be made to look like) a intentional humiliation of Germany. It was stupid! Many a book has been written about the psychological and political consequences of the treaty of Versaille. Who knows what would have happened without it. or not.
Thinking of it, the different approaches after the 2 world wars and their consequences kind of prove it. Another world war vs. 80 years of peace (in that region...)
Btw Bismarck fought hard, up to threatening to resign, to avoid a harsh peace treaty with Austria after their defeat. He knew that humilating your enemy and direct neighbour) has the potential to come back and bite you in the backside. He lost that fight (or didin't fight it) after the Franco Prussian war and history proved him completely right.
What do you find so hard about the Treaty of Versailles so that I can answer you?
It's hard to compare the two wars, but by the end of WW2 Germany had been totally destroyed, reduced to 4 occupation zones and then cut into two hermetic blocs. The Marshall Plan was effectively put in place to prevent the spread of communism in Western Europe.
Yeah but the treaty of Versailles basically declared Germany to be solely responsible for ww1 wich it clearly all involving parties had pretty much moved towards conflict for decades by this. Europe was a powder keg and all it was needed was one political crisis to push it over the edge. Also by placing so heavy War Reparations on Germany the Entente effectively tried to castrate the German Economy wich fueled both left and right wing Radicalism. In regards to the remaining parts of the treaty mainly the territorial loses however I don't think that they were all that unjustified most of the lost Land wasn't even really populated by Germans except alsace-lorraine but this Region wasn't really pro German.
The illegal French and Belgian occupation of the Ruhr was however definitely unjustified.
Stalin was in tremendous scale much more bright person and deep intellectual than Trotsky, the latter was ordinary demagog plus too Jewish for leader of (even Soviet) Russia. Trotsky lost his 80% of his power already in 1917, as main organizer of October coup 1917 he chosen Lenin ( "schoolar monkey") as the 2nd person after him/ but treacherous Lenin seized all the power and deposed Trotsky on the 2d role)
Thank you for your time. I'm curious: are you Russian? If so, how do you see this transition from the old regime to the USSR? Peace
First 🥇
😃
@@ToonStory-fh4gn 😀