Antony Beevor Breaks Down the Russian Revolution of 1917

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 14 фев 2023
  • 'Antony Beevor Breaks Down the Russian Revolution of 1917'
    Host of History Hit podcast 'Warfare' Dr James Rogers sits down with military historian and author of 'Russia: Revolution and Civil War, 1917-1921', Antony Beevor to discuss the causes and major events of the Russian Revolution.
    Listen to the Warfare podcast here: play.acast.com/s/the-world-wars
    Speaking in the Three John's pub in Islington, allegedly where Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky met in 1903 and sowed the seeds of one of the most significant revolutions in history, the pair cover the February and October Revolution of 1917, the fall of a weak Tsar Nicholas II, the failure of Kerensky's provisional government and the role of the First World War in creating discontent, providing Vladimir Lenin the opportunity to capitalise on chaos.
    Sign up to History Hit TV now and get 14 days free: access.historyhit.com/checkout
    And remember, as RUclips subscribers, you can sign up to History Hit TV today with code RUclips and enjoy 50% off your first 3 months!
    For more history content, subscribe to our History Hit newsletters: www.historyhit.com/sign-up-to...
    #historyhit #russianrevolution #lenin

Комментарии • 823

  • @AnnaAnna-uc2ff
    @AnnaAnna-uc2ff Год назад +4

    Thank you.

  • @gregrobertson5576
    @gregrobertson5576 10 месяцев назад +31

    Beevor's book about Stalingrad is absolutely one of the best books I've ever read. Glad to know Antony Beevor is still alive.

    • @692ALBANNACH
      @692ALBANNACH 8 месяцев назад +1

      And another one is The Great Fight for Civilization.

    • @josephglatz25
      @josephglatz25 4 месяца назад +2

      I haven't read any book by Antony Beevor that I didn't like.

    • @jbriaz
      @jbriaz 3 месяца назад

      I agree. I've read four of Beevor's books, but it's pretty clear that Stalingrad stands above the rest of his. That's his magnum opus.@@josephglatz25

    • @memirandawong
      @memirandawong Месяц назад +1

      That was a great book I read it twice!

    • @amcespana2150
      @amcespana2150 Месяц назад

      just western propaganda

  • @koksallce6750
    @koksallce6750 8 месяцев назад +1

    Thank you!

  • @jordanthomas4379
    @jordanthomas4379 Год назад +61

    Sir Antony Beevor is truly one of the very few great historians still living, his books are very well worth reading

    • @thevillaaston7811
      @thevillaaston7811 11 месяцев назад

      He is a charlatan who writes for an American readership.

    • @ruslankbr5243
      @ruslankbr5243 10 месяцев назад +5

      Are you kidding he is one of the worst he is rather writer especially on WW2 themes. There are a lot of propaganda in his books and articles

    • @ossiebowman3731
      @ossiebowman3731 10 месяцев назад +2

      @@ruslankbr5243 such as?

    • @eamonwright7488
      @eamonwright7488 10 месяцев назад

      @@ruslankbr5243 I like Stephen Kotkin myself. He's the walking Library of Alexandria about Soviet Russia.

    • @ruslankbr5243
      @ruslankbr5243 10 месяцев назад +1

      @@eamonwright7488 but he has political agenda too, this became obvious during last years when he blaming only Russia in military expansion totally ignoring that USA provoked this conflict for decades beginning from lie to Gorbachev about NATO expansion. I think historian or expert should explain problem from all points of view and must not became a mainstream voice.

  • @fredjohnson9833
    @fredjohnson9833 Год назад +105

    Lenin's Revolution was 8 months after the Tsar was overthrown. Nicholas was ousted in February and Lenin didn't take power until October.

    • @lavrentivs9891
      @lavrentivs9891 Год назад +22

      Which is mentioned in the video.

    • @fredjohnson9833
      @fredjohnson9833 Год назад +5

      @@lavrentivs9891 yes, but the title is misleading

    • @christopherpetergoodman8994
      @christopherpetergoodman8994 Год назад +6

      @@fredjohnson9833 Why is the title misleading?

    • @fredjohnson9833
      @fredjohnson9833 Год назад +22

      @@christopherpetergoodman8994 it looks like an they changed the title. Originally the video was called "how Lenin overthrew the Tsar," which would have been inaccurate

    • @tombrunila2695
      @tombrunila2695 Год назад +8

      quite so, which makes Lenin's revolution a coup d'Etat ´.

  • @adam_p99
    @adam_p99 Год назад +27

    The thumbnail made me think you’d hired Robert DeNiro

  • @wa1ufo
    @wa1ufo Год назад +1

    Well done!

  • @jaydub51512
    @jaydub51512 Год назад +72

    Bravo! Antony Beevor is one of my favourite historians!

    • @DaveSCameron
      @DaveSCameron Год назад

      Let's hope he never mentions the Jews then and he's home free!

    • @gravitypronepart2201
      @gravitypronepart2201 Год назад +2

      @@DaveSCameron he does indeed mention the jews in the book. But what is your point?

    • @seanohare5488
      @seanohare5488 Год назад

      He d top notch

    • @amcespana2150
      @amcespana2150 Год назад

      He is a falsifier of history, in spacial of Russia and Spain., British Empire goal has been always to destroy the other civilizations of Europe like the Catholic and the Orthodox, and this guy is just one more cog in the war machine of the protestant British Empire

    • @DaveSCameron
      @DaveSCameron Год назад +1

      @@amcespana2150 That's a little strong Sir, perhaps there's been some egos that have played things up but where Beevor is concerned he's simply inconsistent and gets mixed up, he's not the world's propagandist for Perfidious Albion! 🤣 🤣

  • @robg5958
    @robg5958 Год назад +87

    I read Stalingrad and Berlin: wow! Antony Beevor is a fantastic historian!

    • @seanohare5488
      @seanohare5488 Год назад +2

      Definitely

    • @tpxchallenger
      @tpxchallenger Год назад +3

      Stalingrad is a superb history.

    • @joeyj6808
      @joeyj6808 Год назад

      Beevor is a hack.

    • @olegevstigneev5367
      @olegevstigneev5367 Год назад +4

      Примитив.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +5

      For you, Anthony Beevor is a fantastic historian, but for us he is a liar.
      Для вас Энтони Бивор - фантастический историк, а для нас - лжец.

  • @alanwitton5980
    @alanwitton5980 Год назад +34

    Antony Beevor is a great historian!

  • @robertsansone1680
    @robertsansone1680 Год назад +4

    Excellent. Very excellent. Thank You

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +1

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

    • @robertsansone1680
      @robertsansone1680 Год назад +1

      @@DmitryTihomirow Do you honestly believe that this is my first exposure to history? I have been reading history for over fifty years. Also, and more importantly, I have known people who have survived Communist Labor Camps. I have also met people who escaped E. Germany while being shot at. I need no sermon about the joys of Communism.

  • @noelhadjimichael2570
    @noelhadjimichael2570 Год назад +7

    fascinating high quality conversation

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

  • @wolfu597
    @wolfu597 10 месяцев назад +8

    My favorite history author.
    Have two of his books that were signed by Antony Beevor himself.

    • @joebrown2661
      @joebrown2661 4 месяца назад

      They’ll be worth a fortune in 50 years

    • @wolfu597
      @wolfu597 4 месяца назад +1

      @@joebrown2661 Their value will jump when sir Beevor passes away.

  • @jesshumphries3745
    @jesshumphries3745 Год назад +5

    I am literally listening to this on Audible at the moment!

    • @shornsheep3118
      @shornsheep3118 Год назад

      It will be mostly lies that you are listening to. Read Winston Churchill's 1920 article "Zionism vs Bolshevism." Have a look at the British white paper Russia No. 1 1920. Even British MPs got the censored version up until the 1990s.

    • @DaveSCameron
      @DaveSCameron Год назад

      Expensive

    • @gravitypronepart2201
      @gravitypronepart2201 Год назад

      I am too.

    • @braxxian
      @braxxian Год назад

      Yep, me too. Beevor’s books are always a must.

    • @Ukraineaissance2014
      @Ukraineaissance2014 Год назад +1

      I keep falling asleep to the audiobook of it by accident (not at all boring, it's just what I do) and having awful nightmares due to the appalling events of the civil war recounted

  • @FranFerioli
    @FranFerioli 10 месяцев назад +5

    In The leopard - a literature masterpiece about revolution in the south of Italy - there is a great quote: "If we want everything to stay as it is, everything has to change."
    And where are we now? War, conscription, revolts. and a Tzar...
    Nothing brings the great themes of tragedy to life as the history of Russia.

  • @Glyn23
    @Glyn23 10 месяцев назад +1

    Great story teller.

  • @Futureshucks
    @Futureshucks 10 месяцев назад +6

    Excellent, and no Dan Snow in sight. Perfection. Well excellent that trail at the end. Perfect until that point.

  • @patrickstjean7646
    @patrickstjean7646 Год назад +62

    Lenins 3 great lies at 13:37
    1. Promised the factories to the workers
    2. Promised the land to the peasants
    3. Promised peace to the Soldiers

    • @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917
      @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917 Год назад

      Actually, he gave them all of the above. They were not lies as Beevor contends. That's why the Russian workers fought so vigorously in defense of their revolution against the "democratic" White Movement and their British/Western sponsors.

    • @patrickstjean7646
      @patrickstjean7646 Год назад +4

      @@BolshevikCarpetbagger1917 these are the first claims I've heard about Lenin's acts or policies following the revolution. No one talks about that here, they skip directly to Stalin.

    • @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917
      @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917 Год назад +8

      @patrickstjean7646 "skip directly to Stalin"
      Another piece of evidence that things are not always as simplistic as scholars like Beevor make them out to be when history is not on their side. Two books I can recommend that give the most transparent version of the Russian ruling are The Days That Shook the World by John Reed and The Bolsheviks Come to Power by Alexander Rabinowitch. Christopher Hill, who wrote an outstanding book on the English Revolution, may have written something too.

    • @HooDatDonDar
      @HooDatDonDar Год назад

      @@BolshevikCarpetbagger1917 Reed was a propagandist, who is buried in the Kremlin. Rabinowitch all but says anyone who opposed Lenin deserved to be shot. His section on the suppression of the democratic Constituent Assembly is specially bad.
      Could you get a less repulsive avatar?

    • @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917
      @BolshevikCarpetbagger1917 Год назад

      @HooDatDonDar Reed was a witness to the Revolution from A to Z. He was proven right on WWI prior. Rabinowitch was right on the Constituent Assembly. It was no longer a legitimate institution that served the masses. All the parties save for the Bolsheviks were going to continue the war and opposed Soviet power to the working class. If the German Communists had done the same with the Reichstag, we wouldn't have gotten Hitler.

  • @wildcolonialman
    @wildcolonialman Год назад +1

    Fabulous.

  • @SSArcher11
    @SSArcher11 Месяц назад +1

    concise and correct

  • @simonlawrencesings
    @simonlawrencesings Год назад +12

    Brilliant video thank you. That Prof was great. More of him please!

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

  • @markmatousek9427
    @markmatousek9427 Год назад +64

    "The total destruction of the past", interesting observation.

  • @carsten9168
    @carsten9168 9 месяцев назад +3

    The first thing you hear about Anthony Beevor was his fantastic and detailed book on Stalingrad and the invasion of Berlin by the Red Army !

  • @thatcanadian6698
    @thatcanadian6698 2 месяца назад +1

    Fascinating gentleman.

  • @schweinhund7966
    @schweinhund7966 Год назад +1

    A very sage video

  • @adielstephenson2929
    @adielstephenson2929 Год назад +4

    That was great! Thanks! Have you got any more like this? Btw, your questions were perfect as well.

  • @charlottehardy822
    @charlottehardy822 Год назад +41

    As he says, Lenin’s revolution came after the revolution that toppled the Tsar. Talk about wrong title.

  • @kevinfright8195
    @kevinfright8195 10 месяцев назад +23

    I love the little facts of history. Politicians never change throughout history. People of today should be aware of this

  • @zakimtshali8105
    @zakimtshali8105 Год назад +4

    I love Antony Beevor!!

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +1

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

  • @ThePierre58
    @ThePierre58 Год назад +4

    Beevors books are outstanding.

  • @alexdieudonne1924
    @alexdieudonne1924 Год назад +5

    History hit has great interviewers.

  • @peterhoughton3770
    @peterhoughton3770 Месяц назад +2

    An excellent and balanced historian. His note about class genocide is worth remembering … socialists always slip under the radar when it comes to crime. Saw Beevor live in Melbourne launching his book on Operation Market Garden. And his book on Stalingrad is superb.

  • @ilyaXshuffler
    @ilyaXshuffler Год назад +35

    I like how he speedrun the whole history in one question lol

  • @richardsimms251
    @richardsimms251 Год назад +16

    What an interesting and smart history professor

    • @RobCummings
      @RobCummings Год назад

      Beevor is great. This interviewer is a bit of a dolt.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +1

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

    • @wiwlarue4097
      @wiwlarue4097 10 месяцев назад

      He may be a splendid person who has read a great deal but what he says isn't necessarily true. Deliberately avoiding the subject? The communist takeover attempt failed at about 1918 in various countries so we should automatically think of an international attempt. In several of those countries they didn't even have a despot ruling but an elected government yet the same tribal soviets committed the same acts in many states across europe. Germany, hungary etc. The 1848 "libreral democratic" revolutions in europe started a month after Marx released his manifesto so the roots of this international conspiracy go back further. The international bankers sponsored Marx, the russo japanese war, and the revolutions. Anyone have any idea why did they do that? What were theyy aiming at? Trocky and Lenin both brought vast amounts of money from wall street and switzerland. Old and new "testaments", communism, socialism, liberal deocracy, islam, cultural marxism etc.... what do they have in common? Try to put the puzzle together.

  • @mikewingert5521
    @mikewingert5521 10 месяцев назад +2

    Beevor…first class. I served in his former regiment.

  • @DCMamvcivmEvony
    @DCMamvcivmEvony Год назад +1

    Robert De Niro with my mornings history lesson.

    • @savidge08
      @savidge08 Год назад

      De Niro scum sucking enemy of America, Beevor not so much

  • @casperdog777
    @casperdog777 Год назад +29

    Antony is a super historian - favourite author for me too !

  • @butcher568
    @butcher568 10 месяцев назад

    i love his books.

  • @UNUSUALUSERNAME220
    @UNUSUALUSERNAME220 10 месяцев назад +1

    Antony, has a lovely singing voice.

  • @McIntyreBible
    @McIntyreBible Год назад +5

    16:08, that’s right Beevor, Lenin is guilty of genocide-class genocide!

    • @DanielGarcia-kw4ep
      @DanielGarcia-kw4ep Год назад

      You can choose to be a landlord, you cannot choose to be a slav or a jew... I don't see where's the genocide

  • @TheDavidlloydjones
    @TheDavidlloydjones Год назад +41

    Data point for 1905: Nicholas, or at least his administration, was not quite as inept at Anthony Beevor seems to think. The largest building in the world in 1905 was the Singer Sewing Machine factory in Siberia -- so perhaps that 1905 "revolution" was a revolution of rising expectations, the unrest that comes with a society moving up from rock bottom.

    • @peterfmodel
      @peterfmodel Год назад +12

      I agree. Nicholas was probably not the most competent leader, but his administration was another story. The Czar was eventually pushed to one side and replaced by the Kerensky government, a structure which the Czar put in place. Lenin overthrew a pseudo parliamentary government under Kerensky, not the Czar. Perhaps the biggest issue with Kerensky was he wanted to continue the war, if Kerensky made peace with the Central powers and Lenin would have had little chance of succeeded in his revolution.

    • @lox000zavr
      @lox000zavr Год назад +17

      As Leon Trotsky said: "The revolution is not made by hungry people, but by well-fed people who have not been fed for one day".

    • @peterfmodel
      @peterfmodel Год назад +2

      @@lox000zavr Это верно и мудро - True and Wise words.

    • @partygrove5321
      @partygrove5321 Год назад +2

      The Tsar completely messed up WW 1

    • @Salman-sc8gr
      @Salman-sc8gr Год назад

      No it was a revulsion funded by Wall Street crooks.

  • @celestialteapot309
    @celestialteapot309 23 дня назад +1

    I recommend the book on Lenin by Alan Woods and Rob Sewell for a non bourgeoise view of history

  • @scotsbillhicks
    @scotsbillhicks Год назад +5

    Can we find A.J.P. Taylor’s televised lectures? I remember a clip where he walked on stage, faced the camera and bluntly stated that the Russian Revolution was due to the Russian army being too dependent on horses.
    Horses need fodder. The transport system was organised to get the fodder to the front, leaving inadequate transport for wheat to the cities.

    • @daisuke6072
      @daisuke6072 Год назад +2

      A.J.P. Taylor seems to have been too fond of catch-phrases, no doubt on the crucial need in TV programs to catch the attention of the audience asap. It reduces history to a "reductio ad absurdum".

    • @robertlevine2827
      @robertlevine2827 10 месяцев назад +1

      Well, their overreliance on horses also made them a Mickey Mouse army.

    • @markhughes7927
      @markhughes7927 10 месяцев назад +1

      @@robertlevine2827
      I thought that horses were a main if not the main source of transports well into the period of WW2…no? …though I wouldn’t have thought by the end once all the factories were whirring….

    • @robertlevine2827
      @robertlevine2827 10 месяцев назад +1

      @@markhughes7927 Not into WW2, but actually they were somewhat important in WW1--I was exaggerating for comic effect.

  • @jacobembry6709
    @jacobembry6709 10 месяцев назад +3

    I still blame Yoko.

  • @tedpikul1
    @tedpikul1 Год назад +6

    There’s a great scene in the novel The Master and Margarita, involving a talking cat and a theater full of people…always summed it up for me.

    • @tedpikul1
      @tedpikul1 Год назад

      @SHUTEYECINEMA
      So, Nat'ralists observe, a Flea
      Hath smaller Fleas that on him prey
      And these have smaller yet to bite 'em
      And so proceed ad infinitum

    • @DerDop
      @DerDop Год назад +2

      @SHUTEYECINEMA bulgakov despised Communism.

    • @DerDop
      @DerDop Год назад

      @SHUTEYECINEMA i guess that his books were banned because he loved communism so much :))) tankies are so stupid.

    • @DerDop
      @DerDop Год назад

      @SHUTEYECINEMA I was born in the USSR. It was a shithole.

  • @brianbozo2447
    @brianbozo2447 Год назад +4

    Beaver is an amazing wester and historian the best there is!

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

    • @cezarstefanseghjucan
      @cezarstefanseghjucan 2 месяца назад

      @@DmitryTihomirowThe Communists smuggled Socialism and continued Feudalist dictatorship only replacing aristocracy with party members.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow 2 месяца назад +1

      @@cezarstefanseghjucan, first, where did the Communists smuggle socialism into?
      Secondly, feudalism is a social system based on the feudal lords' ownership of land and other means of production. The peasants working on this land are in serfdom from the feudal lord.
      Under feudalism, there is a strict division into estates, and a person cannot move from one estate to another. A feudal lord will never become a peasant, and a serf peasant will never be able to become a feudal lord. The peasant's children will also remain peasants.
      There are no social elevators.
      But under socialism, there are no classes and estates, social elevators work and anyone can make any career.
      For example, in the 20-50 years of the 20th century, the profession of a pilot was considered elite. Therefore, during the Second World War, almost all pilots of the Luftwaffe and allied countries (except the USSR) were either representatives of noble families or sons of rich bourgeois.
      But the Soviet aces are almost 100% the children of workers and peasants.
      For example, fighter pilot Hero of the Soviet Union, Ukrainian Ivan Kozhedub, is the son of a poor landless and horseless peasant. From the age of 7, he worked as a farmhand for his rich neighbor, kulak. The Soviet government gave Ivan's father land and a horse, and Ivan was able to stop working for a rich man, went to school, and then graduated from flight school and became a fighter pilot, a hero, the elite of the state.
      The first cosmonaut of the Earth
      Yuri Gagarin is the son of a peasant, graduated from a vocational school with a degree in milling and worked at a factory.
      The first female cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova is also from a peasant family, she worked as a weaver in a factory.
      Stalin is the son of a shoemaker, Khrushchev, Gorbachev are the children of peasants, Brezhnev, Yeltsin, Putin are the children of workers.
      You don't understand the topic.
      Why are you writing nonsense? First, study the issue more deeply before expressing your opinion.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow 2 месяца назад

      @@cezarstefanseghjucan, во-первых, куда коммунисты протащили социализм контрабандой?
      Во-вторых, феодализм - это социальная система, основанная на собственности феодалов на землю и другие средства производства. Крестьяне, работающие на этой земле, находятся в крепостной зависимости от феодала.
      При феодализме существует жёсткое разделение на сословия, и человек не может перейти из одного сословия в другое. Феодал никогда не станет крестьянином, а крепостной крестьянин никогда не сможет стать феодалом. Дети крестьянина также останутся крестьянами.
      Социальных лифтов нет.
      А при социализме нет классов и сословий, работают социальные лифты и любой может сделать любую карьеру.
      Например, в 20-50 годы 20 века профессия лётчика считалась элитарной. Поэтому во время Второй мировой войны почти все пилоты люфтваффе и стран-союзников (кроме СССР) были либо представителями знатных семей, либо сыновьями богатых буржуа.
      А советские асы - это почти 100% дети рабочих и крестьян.
      Например летчик-истребитель Герой Советского Союза украинец Иван Кожедуб - сын бедного безземельного и безлошадного крестьянина. С 7 лет он работал батраком на своего богатого соседа-кулака. Советская власть дала отцу Ивана землю и лошадь, а Иван смог перестать работать на богача, пошёл учиться в школу, а потом окончил лётное училище и стал лётчиком-истребителем, героем, элитой государства.
      Первый космонавт Земли
      Юрий Гагарин - сын крестьянина, окончил профессиональное училище по специальности фрезеровщик и работал на заводе.
      Первая женщина-космонавт Валентина Терешкова тоже из крестьянской семьи, она работала ткачихой на фабрике.
      Сталин - сын сапожника, Хрущев, Горбачев - дети крестьян, Брежнев, Ельцин, Путин - дети рабочих.
      Вы не разбираетесь в теме. Зачем вы пишете чепуху? Сначала поглубже изучите вопрос, прежде, чем высказывать своё мнение.

    • @cezarstefanseghjucan
      @cezarstefanseghjucan 2 месяца назад

      @@DmitryTihomirow The commoner had it worse in Communist Russia than under Capitalist USA. All those people complied with party politics are were some of the few people given the chance while the rest waited for food and gas in queues since early morning.
      Communism wasn’t for everyone, it toppled because it failed to offer comfort to the many and downtrodden. It was a party-first policy that exploited the working class. Communism was never actual Socialism.
      You nonsense is objectively wrong.

  • @geoffreybslater1146
    @geoffreybslater1146 Год назад +2

    Well as far as the parading troops, it seems that they still follow that modus operendi

  • @frederikriemaeker6927
    @frederikriemaeker6927 Год назад +2

    Who else kinda thought at first that it was Robert De Niro on the thumbnail of this video

  • @kynismos
    @kynismos 10 месяцев назад +2

    Lenin was obviously a very clever, ruthless politician.

  • @anheuserbusch65
    @anheuserbusch65 Год назад

    Is there a good book about this that anyone would recommend? I've been looking for a book on the Russian Revolution for a while

    • @patbrown911
      @patbrown911 Год назад +2

      Beevor´s book about it is probably really good, didn´t read it though. I recommend Stalin´s biography by Stephen Kotkin, it´s a really good book.

    • @anheuserbusch65
      @anheuserbusch65 Год назад +1

      @@patbrown911 thank you!

    • @audreylee1699
      @audreylee1699 Год назад +3

      Revolutionary Russia by Orlando Figes

    • @jonbon8598
      @jonbon8598 Год назад

      Watch Juri Lina's doc, The synagogue of Satan, he,LL put you right, 👹💰💸🤮

    • @pietervonck3264
      @pietervonck3264 10 месяцев назад +2

      Trotski's history of the revolution

  • @daisuke6072
    @daisuke6072 Год назад +14

    As the Bolshevik revolution succeeded he's now hailed as a significant historical political figure [setting aside partisan prejudices]. In any other other field, or if his revolution had failed, he would be considered a rogue.

    • @louise_rose
      @louise_rose Год назад +14

      Well, Lenin was born in a society that had only just abolished serfdom and where maybe 80% of common people in the countryside were pretty much illiterate. The differences tied to class were huge and modern industrailization was only just arriving when he was a kid. As someone put it, he's not a boyscout or a democrat, but (I would add) he had a fairly good ability to realistically analyze the challenges facing Russia at the time and in the future.
      Definitely one of the leading tacticians and strategists of the socialist left of Russia in the early 20th century. I don't admire a lot of his methods, but he did manage to bring the resources of Russia into play for ordinary people in a way that none of the tsars in his lifetime would have been able to achieve. Many western historians and pundits just take it for granted that there was an open road towards a stable,. peaceful "British-style democracy" in Russia around 1917, and then blame Lenin for wrecking that path, but that's really not a safe assumption to make at all.

    • @bayerischman
      @bayerischman Год назад +7

      Lenin was still a rogue, and a despicable one at that!

    • @louise_rose
      @louise_rose Год назад +7

      @@bayerischman Yeah, he wasn't picky about political methods, but the same can be said (to a degree) about many famous "great men" in history, even some of the founding fathers of America or Rome.

    • @philiprufus4427
      @philiprufus4427 10 месяцев назад

      @@louise_rose If it had not been for German Imperial Intelligence and The High Command he would have been nowhere.The Kaiser distrusted him,and was against the plan fearing the future.
      He was right,Ludendorf was one of the plans chief architects(a lunatic prone to fits) Germany still lost the war,and the plan plunged Europe into chaos !

    • @farzanamughal5933
      @farzanamughal5933 10 месяцев назад +1

      That is how all of history works

  • @ray.shoesmith
    @ray.shoesmith 10 месяцев назад +14

    2 Australians won the Victoria Cross in Russia in 1919. Would love to learn more about their stories but there's very little written.

    • @hiramhackenbacker9096
      @hiramhackenbacker9096 10 месяцев назад +1

      I didn't even know there were any Australians in Russia then. Who were they fighting with?

    • @ray.shoesmith
      @ray.shoesmith 10 месяцев назад +4

      @@hiramhackenbacker9096 Cpl Arthur Sullivan VC and Sgt Samuel Pearse VC. They were part of ~150 Australians who remained in England after the Armistice and signed up for the North Russia Relief Force, fighting against the Bolsheviks. They served in the 45th Battalion Royal Fusiliers, wearing Australian uniform, and were awarded the VC in separate actions in Russia in 1919. That's all I know, like I said there is very little written.

    • @hiramhackenbacker9096
      @hiramhackenbacker9096 10 месяцев назад

      @@ray.shoesmith thanks. That's very interesting and worth some research you would think.

  • @briankristiansen821
    @briankristiansen821 Год назад +6

    At 9:13 he claims that the women of Russia achieve the right to vote, as the first women in Europe. That is incorrect. Danish women achieved this in 1905.

  • @kingerikthegreatest.ofall.7860
    @kingerikthegreatest.ofall.7860 Год назад +146

    Let us not forget that Germany helped finance Lenin and his revolution. Germany wanted Russia out of world war 1.

    • @urbaniv
      @urbaniv Год назад +28

      They didn't financed him but the Emperor allowed and supported the transport of Lenin via train through Germany. Without that Lenin might never could have left his exile in Switzerland.

    • @robertsansone1680
      @robertsansone1680 Год назад +38

      The U.S. practically founded & trained Al Qaeda to fight the Russkis in Afghanistan. All actions have reactions. Many have undesired consequences.

    • @jackprecip5389
      @jackprecip5389 Год назад +1

      New York City and London Jewish financiers (Schiff, Warburg, Rothschild, etc) heavily funded Lev Bronstein (Leon Trotsky, who was originally a Menshevik) and the Bolsheviks. Lenin was more of a figurehead, and while the Germans facilitated Lenin back into Russia, the German state was pretty much destitute by 1916, and it was German Jews living abroad like Schiff and Warburg that bankrolled the operations. Why do you think a supposed "Russian peasant revolutionary" was in New York City for 3 months in 1917 riding around in expensive carriages and eating at the finest restaurants? Think about that for a moment. People seem to forget that there was a SERIOUS rivalry and hatred between Orthodox Christian Russia and Talmudic Judaism that not only goes back to the 1600's (I could even reference Gabriel Of Bialystok here from 1690), but can actually be traced back 2,000 years (Orthodox Christianity didn't officially exist until the schisms with the Roman Catholic's in the 11th century). It's no accident that one of Marxism's and every communist movement's main platform is the abolishment of religion (especially Christianity) and replace it with state atheism, not to mention replacing God and family with the state and its subjects. Whether or not the fact that Karl Marx himself is the descendant of many generations of Talmudic Rabbi's (starting with his grandfather Mordecai and quite possibly linking all the way to Rashi himself) is significant or just coincidence is up to the individual to decide. The ambitions of the Rothschilds and Great Britain to form a united European federation (with the Rothschilds as the central bank of course) was quite prevalent in the 1800's, with Tsar Alexander II (and later Alexander III) heavily resisting the idea (and others like Von Bismark as well), and some say that Great Britain's wars against Russia, including the 1850's Crimean War and even their involvement in the 1905 Russo/Japan war and the internal revolutions there, were linked to this. Russia was primarily simple rural family owned farms and farmers who were avid Orthodox Christians, and they had little connection to the Tsar or Russian government (other than paying the collectors when they came around). When the Bolsheviks took over the cities, most of rural Russia didn't even know about it for months, and when the Civil War hit, and then the Cheka and NKVD started coming around, it was an absolute nightmare and a disaster for them and the country.

    • @gim12345
      @gim12345 Год назад

      ​@@robertsansone1680 the us also funded the soviets Trotsky was in New York,Ford was the most read author in the ussr even Stalin loved and said wonderful things about It

    • @gerryhouska2859
      @gerryhouska2859 Год назад +18

      Germany didn't want the war in the first place, only started mobilising in response to Russian mobilisation. The whole thing was a terrible mistake and the world is still suffering from its aftermath.

  • @revolver_84
    @revolver_84 Год назад +1

    Lad knows his subject matter

  • @GaryJohnWalker1
    @GaryJohnWalker1 10 месяцев назад

    A boast that I have Beevor's Russia 1917 work lined up in its audio book form, just need to work up the stamina to listen to it ...

    • @GaryJohnWalker1
      @GaryJohnWalker1 10 месяцев назад

      And the Three Johns, Islington. On the 'must visit' list

  • @daskalman
    @daskalman 9 месяцев назад +3

    "The total destruction of the past" that Lenin and Marxism in general propagates, ensures history's inevitable repitition. One would think that +100 million corpses throughout the globe would be a lesson humanity NEVER forgets, but after bearing witness to what modern (or post-modern) colleges, universities and institutions of higher indoctrination have devolved into, one would be wrong to think any such lesson was learned.

  • @paulceglinski7172
    @paulceglinski7172 10 месяцев назад

    It's about time.

  • @user-zx4cp6kz4b
    @user-zx4cp6kz4b Год назад +2

    at 11.12 Rodziánko* M.V.

    • @b1646717
      @b1646717 Год назад +1

      It is amazing that you know enough to catch that small mistake. Well done!

  • @cybercheese3
    @cybercheese3 9 месяцев назад

    5:51 That guy looks really tall!

  • @Ukraineaissance2014
    @Ukraineaissance2014 Год назад +8

    His new book is good. Finally somebody addressing the massive elephant in the room of the 20th century that is the russian civil war instead of churning out yet another D day/stalingrad book.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +1

      If you knew Russian and had access to different points of view, then you would not admire Beevor so much. You would doubt a lot of what he says. He puts noodles on the ears of people who do not have the opportunity to know the opposite opinion.
      Если бы вы владели русским языком и имели доступ к разным точкам зрения, то вы бы так не восхищались Бивором. Вы бы усомнились во многом, что он говорит. Он вешает лапшу на уши людям, которые не имеют возможности знать противоположное мнение.

    • @monkeytennis8861
      @monkeytennis8861 Год назад

      @@DmitryTihomirow yeah ok

  • @Decrepit_biker
    @Decrepit_biker 10 месяцев назад +13

    "Only 3 lies? Those are rookie numbers, you gotta pump those numbers up" Boris Johnson - at any point in his entire life. Probably.

  • @robertmiller2173
    @robertmiller2173 Год назад

    Excellent, thank you!

  • @christophercox9150
    @christophercox9150 10 месяцев назад +1

    All you people arguing over the finer historical details, whilst i'm just pleased to know the significance of the Finland Station. I assumed the Pet Shop Boys, in their song 'West End Girls', had just made it up as a convenient rhyme. You learn something every day eh?

  • @CalidrisJZ
    @CalidrisJZ Год назад +1

    You should remember that shoes or boots made out of bark is what they normally wore, so it's not like it was some horrible change for the worse.

  • @victornewman9904
    @victornewman9904 Год назад +4

    So basically, nothing has changed.

    • @apuuvah
      @apuuvah Год назад

      Normalny.

    • @richardgrant418
      @richardgrant418 10 месяцев назад

      That’s the craziest comment I’ve read in months

  • @halsinden
    @halsinden 10 месяцев назад

    comrades, this is vital & keen but would it offend the proletariat to have some better angles, lighting & focus to support such weighty subjects?

  • @bobapbob5812
    @bobapbob5812 Год назад

    Is Beevor a Welsh language name?

  • @gerrytyrrell1507
    @gerrytyrrell1507 Месяц назад +1

    Thank you..Mr Beevor...The battle for Spain ..magnificent...Dublin

  • @pjl8119
    @pjl8119 3 месяца назад +4

    Czarism never ended in Russia. It just changed it's clothing.
    Bolshevism was an ultra brutal, oppressive and industrialised form of Czarism.

  • @lievenvanlint7717
    @lievenvanlint7717 Год назад +5

    The picture (2.57) used to show conditions of squalor in tsarist period industry is from about 1960.
    Not from the time of the revolution.
    Easy to date because of arc welding on the left of the picture. This was most uncommon before WW2 and portable sets (as used here) are certainly post WW2.

  • @nigellawson8610
    @nigellawson8610 10 месяцев назад +5

    Nicholas II was incompetent. He existed in a world that was totally divorced from reality. He would have made a somewhat decent squire. If he had any sense he would not have antagonised the Germans. If Nicholas had brains he would have concentrated on the modernisation of his country like the Japanese had done after 1878 instead. Of course, along with extending the franchise, he would have had to completely overhaul the decrepit administrative structure of the state, with special emphasis on the armed forces. It would have taken a much stronger personality than Nicholas II to accomplish this Herculean task. He would have also had to share power with the rising middle classes, which would have gone against his desire to perpetuate autocracy in the guise of his own person.

  • @krato890
    @krato890 9 месяцев назад

    I thought that was wedge antillies

  • @tomrainboro3728
    @tomrainboro3728 Год назад

    Remember Kronstadt

  • @BatMan-oe2gh
    @BatMan-oe2gh 10 месяцев назад

    Never ceases to amaze me how people can be riled up by lies and propaganda. Still works today.

  • @xe2594
    @xe2594 Год назад +1

    1. I have hair
    2. People find me desirable
    3. I think Stalin should take over

    • @rickglorie
      @rickglorie Год назад +1

      1. In Soviet Russia hair has you! 2. In Soviet Russia housewives near you! 3. In Soviet Russia, revolution takes over you!

  • @frederickbowdler8169
    @frederickbowdler8169 6 месяцев назад

    France and Russia were close was their influence from French Revolution?

  • @chriscline8901
    @chriscline8901 Год назад +1

    "The Orthodox Church refused to educate them [the Russian peasants]."
    This needs unpacking because there was no ban on education in Tsarist Russia - certainly by the Orthodox Church.

    • @austinlittke5580
      @austinlittke5580 10 месяцев назад

      i believe the major educational institutions in russia were via the church, which only accepted the elite aristocracy to be educated.

  • @Salman-sc8gr
    @Salman-sc8gr Год назад +1

    The peasants were held ransom by the lovely ones that ran the distilleries.

  • @h2energynow
    @h2energynow 10 месяцев назад

    What about the vodka banning by Monarcy, Which resulted in a loss of income for czar.

  • @mango2005
    @mango2005 Год назад +2

    A missed opportunity for a democratic Russia. Also on the peasant debt, this was because they were required to pay for their freedom that the government bought for them with government bonds for their former owners. These repayments were scrapped in 1907. Also the land the ex-serfs got after Emancipation tended to be worse than the land their ex-feudal lords got, and so didnt generate enough income to pay the debt without the people starving.

  • @domenicozagari2443
    @domenicozagari2443 Год назад +1

    Read Baruch Levy letter to Carl Marx .

  • @davidbridge5652
    @davidbridge5652 10 месяцев назад

    I love all the youtube historians commenting on here

  • @TheWhitehiker
    @TheWhitehiker Год назад +1

    They dont laugh at his wit--but otherwise incisive.
    Excellent photos as well.

  • @alexandervladimirov3939
    @alexandervladimirov3939 10 месяцев назад

    First of all, not Lenin, but Ulyanov

  • @martha3225
    @martha3225 Год назад +4

    Each individual is unique and needs to follow the path the path that best suits him... We all should treasure our uniqueness and respect others uniqueness as well.. If people want to live communally that's great. Those whom by nature are more individualistic , that i great too. Lenin once said when discussing freedom" "Freedom,? The freedom to what?" Which is very arrogant ,, authoritarian attitude that's reveals a profound ignorance of what freedom is about.. A form of government that is against human nature has to be enforce d by the bayonet.

    • @OneLine122
      @OneLine122 Год назад +1

      I am not sure it's ignorant or arrogant, it's a good question to ask and one people should ask more often. There is another reason why a government would enforce things, and it's if they are working for human nature and people aren't, and that was of course his view. It's certainly the Marxist view that communism is according to human nature while capitalism is not, or only for a few. Also "human nature" in and of itself is about commonness. So strictly speaking a government that would promote that would in fact stamp out uniqueness when it goes against that nature and that's what all governments will do. It's why they are there. So it's a good question to ask, about that nature, freedom for what? is more challenging than it looks.
      Basically your answer is already made, which is the individual, but that's because you believe it is human nature to be individualistic, which is contradictory. But let's say it would be possible, then it means no government could exist, or would exist, because it's the only way to be free of everything as an individual. The only free individual is the lone individual ultimately, as soon as he is in society, he is not free, only free to accept that society at best. I don't know anybody that actually promotes this, except one historical person, everybody wants to be protected from other's freedom even the most staunch individualists, so I think it's a good question. At least it's necessary to actually mean anything, because just saying "freedom" is meaningless or just a sociopath type of thinking.

    • @martha3225
      @martha3225 Год назад +2

      @@OneLine122 Freedom to me means freedom from intrusive government. Ayn Rand understood this.

    • @HooDatDonDar
      @HooDatDonDar Год назад

      Freedom from your sort, Vlad.

    • @eagle1ear
      @eagle1ear Месяц назад

      @@martha3225 As if Corporate Capitalism isn't intrusive and doesn't (essentially) control governments......

  • @johnberry3824
    @johnberry3824 Год назад +1

    Fascinating analysis by Antony Beevor. But the interviewer's questions are inane.

    • @anzacman5
      @anzacman5 Год назад +1

      Well let's face it, the academic level that seems to predominate nowadays is pretty abysmal. Ok, so it wasn't aimed at the serious scholar level, more for the current crop of university graduates and internet couch surfers.

  •  Год назад +5

    We demand a new, intellectual, wise and open minded world and society filled with philosophy,advanced science,thinkers and fine arts. (The Duke of Star Sirius).

    • @DaveSCameron
      @DaveSCameron Год назад +2

      Yes please, I'm in! 😂

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад

      Do you think people like Beevor will give you all this? In my opinion, you overestimate him too much! ☝😂
      Вы думаете вам всё это дадут такие люди, как Бивор? По-моему, вы его слишком переоцениваете! ☝😂

    •  Год назад +1

      @@DmitryTihomirow We demand absolute anarchy sir, a brave new world.

    • @ardentspy
      @ardentspy Год назад +2

      @ Well, perhaps when you've finished school and entered the real world, you can have an opinion about it. Until then, maybe leave politics to the adults?

  • @SysterEuropa
    @SysterEuropa Год назад +63

    Lenin accomplished what Robespierre's guillotine could not. As such, the blood flowed for many, many decades in Russia.

    • @dirremoire
      @dirremoire Год назад +15

      The reign of the Tsars was just as bloody and brutal. As far as Russian history is concerned, Lenin was nothing new.

    • @pyatig
      @pyatig Год назад

      Soviet people who grew up in 20s and 30s were willing to lay down their lives en masse during WW2 to protect their homeland. That should tell you everything you need to know about what they thought of the regime

    • @theodorsebastian4272
      @theodorsebastian4272 Год назад

      ​​@@dirremoire You spoke bullshit. Lenin kill more people in one day than the infamous interior minister Stolypin did his entire career.

    • @tastethecock5203
      @tastethecock5203 Год назад +2

      ​@@dirremoire No, it wasnt. Russian monarchy wasn't that special compared to European monarchies , and in many cases was even softer. Dissidents speaking against government were exiled to Siberia...where they were free to do almost anything almost without any control or oppression.what happened to dissidents in England? France? Spain? Austria? It's intellectual laziness to project Soviet and modern Russian qualities into Russian history as a whole.

    • @DmitryTihomirow
      @DmitryTihomirow Год назад +7

      Has blood flowed in Russia for many, many decades?! What decades? Are you crazy? What are you raving about?
      Кровь лилась в России много-много десятилетий?! Каких десятилетий? Вы сошли с ума? О чём вы бредите?

  • @woodybear8298
    @woodybear8298 9 месяцев назад

    Anthony Beever could be Jimmy Page's dad.

  • @mgoldman60
    @mgoldman60 Год назад

    That looks like the Cavern Club. I think the host might be talking about the other Lennon.

  • @2710daisy
    @2710daisy 2 месяца назад

    Where did Trotsky come from ?
    He had a lot of gold when he arrived to Russia from
    guess what America 😂 the recipe never changed

  • @helenscoffield
    @helenscoffield Год назад

    Wallstreet and the Bolsheviks by Antony Sutton.

  • @Libertyjack1
    @Libertyjack1 Год назад +7

    If Lenin hadn't died within a few years of the Russian Revolution, we would've had a clearer view of where he stood on some never-ending, international civil war. As it stands, his Country was boycotted from all the great trading nations in the World. This was something that only thawed with the growing unrest of the Great Depression and the rise of fascism, after his death and under Stalin.

    • @hughmungus1767
      @hughmungus1767 Год назад +3

      It was very clear to (most of) the Bolsheviks that the expected World Revolution had failed well before Lenin died. The failure of the Communists in Germany and Hungary to keep their revolutions going, the failure to overcome Poland, and other events made it plain that the world - or at least the industrialized Western countries - were not about to go Marxist. In fact, Stalin championed the concept of "Socialism in One Country" which essentially recognized that it was going to be a somewhat longer struggle to bring the "gift" of Communism to the whole world so that the Soviet Union needed to proceed accordingly.

    • @condelevante4
      @condelevante4 10 месяцев назад +2

      Boycotted by countries because he was trying to export revolution to them. He was also an advocate of class genocide and countless people died under his watch.

  • @Magdoeds
    @Magdoeds 11 месяцев назад +2

    Wrong. Russian women were not the first to be able to vote in Europe. In neighboring Finland they had had that right for more than a decade. In Norway and Denmark too, they had that right.

  • @alanseymour1252
    @alanseymour1252 Год назад +3

    I wonder if this history is going to repeat itself in Russia again very soon.
    How long can Putin survive?

    • @edackley8595
      @edackley8595 Год назад +1

      Putin's popularity is much higher rating than Joe Biden's in the US.

    • @richardgrant418
      @richardgrant418 10 месяцев назад

      That’s an absurd comparison

    • @austinlittke5580
      @austinlittke5580 10 месяцев назад

      well the question is what happens after he dies

  • @ghw7192
    @ghw7192 10 месяцев назад

    Was it Lenin who said "Let me teach the children and the seed I have sown shall never be uprooted"?

    • @eagle1ear
      @eagle1ear Месяц назад

      The Jesuits make a quite similar claim....

  • @dalelerette206
    @dalelerette206 10 месяцев назад

    In his book Apocalypses: Prophecies, Cults, and Millennial Beliefs through the Ages (2000), historian Eugene Webber chronicled apocalyptic visions and prophecies from Zarathustra up to the modern day. And it was very interesting to note how the literature had influenced society over the millenniums. More specifically, it was fascinating how certain psychological patterns had repeated themselves. During times of social change the literature would become more pronounced, either reinforcing or denouncing the change. Eugene stressed how the End of an Age may not necessarily indicate the End of the World, more the End of an Age. More importantly, Webber noted how some of exceptional intelligence worked alongside others in their devotion to the prophetic discipline.
    In his posthumously-published Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John (1733), Isaac Newton expressed his belief that Bible prophecy would not be understood "until the time of the end", and that even then "none of the wicked shall understand".
    Yes, this is the same Isaac Newton who published Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (1687). And maybe he has a point. This doesn’t mean his theology was perfect. Many Christians would consider him a heretic in his general rejection of the divinity of Christ. But it does indicate an interest where one wouldn’t expect to find one.
    And it also indicates that one shouldn’t just assume that because someone studies the topic means they are uneducated. It’s always been the kindness of the simple-minded that has changed the world for the better.
    Some believe it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. It is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love.
    J.R.R. Tolkien
    Although large swathes of the Christian Community had twisted their faith into conflicted interests of various socio-political issues - falsely believing their world-views excused them from loving one another -- there were still many from all denominations that maintained a genuine and sincere hold of their faith.
    And even though the largest group of authentic believers belonged to the Catholic Church, it still had to be painfully brought to mind the madness of just how beautiful the Early Church was under the Democracy of the Holy Spirit.
    To prosecute is to bring legal action against for redress or punishment of a crime or violation of law.
    To persecute is to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically: to cause to suffer because of belief.
    It is true that life can be unfair. But when someone uses the Bible to justify the perpetual unfairness of life, they are completely missing the point. The Bible constantly demands us bring about fairness for all people.
    Ecclesiastes 9:11-16 certainly describes a very strong example of how things can be unfair. But Ecclesiastes 9:11-16 should never be use as a justification for the inevitability of an unfair life. Ecclesiastes 9:11-16 points out how unfair life can be so we may examine OURSELVES and make life fair for people.
    What's the difference between democracy and rule by mob?
    Plato regarded democracy as little more than mob rule by another name-perhaps without the violence, at least at first. The distributism model of G.K. Chesterton that awakens reciprocal financial benefits along ALL PEOPLE is the only authentic democracy: African, American Indian, Asian, Australian, European, Indian, Melanesian, Micronesian & Polynesian.
    Unlike socialism, which advocates state ownership of property and the means of production, distributism seeks to devolve or widely distribute that control to individuals within society, rejecting what it saw as the twin evils of plutocracy and bureaucracy.
    Conservatives voluntarily give more money to charitable enterprises than liberals do. END OF ARGUMENT
    I think a magnanimous approach to G.K. Chesterton's 'Distributism' straddles agape 'compassionate justice' aligned along economic channels that naturally feed each other. Distributism is an economic theory asserting that the world's productive assets should be widely owned rather than concentrated. In short, no one is considered superior to another, especially NOT for cosmetic reasons such as physical beauty. James 1:27 says, "Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you."
    G. K. Chesterton considered one's home and family the centrepiece of society. He recognized the family unit and home as centrepieces of living and believed that every man should have their property and home to enable him to raise and support his family. Distributists recognize that strengthening and protecting the family requires that society be nurturing.
    Proverbs 19:17-20 says, “If you help the poor, you are lending to the LORD- and he will repay you! Discipline your children while there is hope. Otherwise you will ruin their lives.”
    This part never changed.
    Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.
    The Scriptures illuminated the message ever further:
    If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind. For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.
    Saint John loved to repeat his motto. “Love one another.”
    Saint Jerome (AD 374 - 419) told of the frail apostle John, in extreme old age, being carried into his congregation mumbling only, “Love one another.” When asked why he talked of nothing else, Saint John would only reply, “Because it is the Lord’s command, and if this only is done, it is enough.”

  • @kevingooley6189
    @kevingooley6189 10 месяцев назад

    It has been said that: “The error’s of Russia will spread around the world”. I am interested in what those errors area.

  • @NullStaticVoid
    @NullStaticVoid 10 месяцев назад +7

    The Soviet revolution always fascinated me because of the artwork it produced. The music, writing, film and constructivist art. Vivid graphic arts that are still emulated in pop culture.
    But the more I learn of the revolution itself, the worse my perception is.
    The pogroms and genocides. Allies like the Ukrainian Anarchists being declared counter revolutionary and attacked. And the endless intrigues between factions of the Soviets led by Lenin, Trotsky and others.
    Guess you really don't want to know how sausage is made.

    • @DrCruel
      @DrCruel 10 месяцев назад

      The revolution happened in February of 1917. The Bolsheviks were just socialist gangsters who launched a coup, seized the reins of power and murdered anyone who might resist them. Also, Lenin had destroyed the democratic soviets by 1921. Calling it a "soviet revolution" is like claiming the National Socialists led a pro-Jewish uprising.

    • @woodybear8298
      @woodybear8298 9 месяцев назад

      Not to mention the number of dead people it produced.

    • @F1Hopeful
      @F1Hopeful 9 месяцев назад

      I presume the genocide in this case was just a footnote. Communist and Nazi artwork is monstrous in their stylized depictions of the imaginary and propagandized struggle between “classes”. I find it all anathema to good taste and abhorrent to the most valuable qualities of the human soul. They are soulless, mechanistic and of poor esthetic quality. Balance the art against the 100 million cadavers that communism is categorically responsible for.

    • @eagle1ear
      @eagle1ear Месяц назад

      As for "the artwork it produced," do you mean the art produced in the early years (Constructivism, etc.) or that beginning around 1928/30 (Social Realism)?