"The Soviet government has congratulated Belgium on not becoming western Germany, but has issued a reminder to its own neighbours that such independence isn't guaranteed." Tell me what you want, but the newspaper texts are the best part of these videos. He just puts so much effort into something that is on screen for like a half a second.
"When asked their thoughts about the new [Indian Communist] political party, British authorities hit our reporter until he told them where the communists were meeting."
One little thing led to Trotsky downfall that’s not talked about much is Poland. The Soviet’s disastrous war in the early ‘20s contributed greatly to dashing Trotsky’s political career.
@@19MAD95 I like how he siad the Soviets war while Poland attacked them in a middle of a famin and a raging civil war ...... Trotsky did the best of what could be done at the time
Which is ironic considering that Stalin was the reason behind Poland's victory since he disobeyed Trotsky's orders to assist Tukhachevsky in the battle of Warsaw and instead sieged the city of Lviv.
This does make me wonder how Trotsky's rule of the USSR would have realistically turned out. I say realistically because all I've seen of exploring this hypothetical route is the world somehow turning into a magical communist paradise. But realistically, how would Trotsky have handled the USSR considering it was still recovering from the Russian Civil War, was isolated from the global economy, and the German Communist Revolution that Lenin was counting on to set off a wave of European Communist revolutions did not pan out.
Considering how narrow minded trotsky was and how bad the soviet army and economy was at that point he would probably invade a country like poland/finland/romania and get clapped again and this would shake the prestige of the USSR, the soviet union would be far less brutal but also far weaker than stalin's since he had all that "build up before we expand" policy
I don't know about Soviet internal politics (less purging, presumably), but Trotsky definitely wouldn't have made a pact with Hitler. And even if he'd somehow ended up making a pact, he definitely wouldn't have trusted Hitler the way Stalin apparently did. So WWII would have played out very differently for a start.
Trotsky would have gone all out exporting communism through military means. That was one of his main objectives. Even if not, Hitler's anti-Communist, anti-Jewish rhetoric would have found willing supporters across the entirety of Europe in the face of an actual Jewish Communist in control of the USSR. I'd rather not see how that one actually turns out.
Trotsky supported the economic policies Stalin ended up enforcing. The main difference would be foreign policy. Trotsky wanted to export the revolution wherever he could, while Stalin wanted to consolidate power within the country.
The main problem with communists is that they were and are idealists. They knew a handfull of good people, and assumed everyone could become friends with everyone. Trotski realized his mistake only when he saw a good friend with a hammer in hand. Others died without noticing they were betrayed.
It literally says in the video Trotskys stubbornness lost him his friends then he was exiled and eventually killed. So good job on the same conclusion I think?
@@Fallout3131 The video assumes political differences are just personality issues and alliances because that is about all they amount to in American bourgeois two party culture.
@@Fallout3131I just rewatched, at no point does it “literally” say that, it can just be inferred, which is what I did, and made a half joking comment about it.
Moral of the story: if you don't like a guy and you think he should not be your successor you should not put him into a key position where he is able to gain more and more power while silently killing his rivals, expecially if that guy is famous for being power hungry, extremely brutal and with basically no morals to stop him.
I'm not sure Stalin was all that famous for that before he gained power - at least, not by Soviet standards. Morals? Oh, you mean bourgeoisie scruples! Another moral (or bourgeoisie scruple?) is also, don't necessarily trust the cheerful compromiser over the difficult guy insisting that he's always right.
he wasnt famous for being power hungry before getting into power, and he didnt have "no morals", everyone has them, whether his morals are good or bad is something else, and yeah i agree thats quite the fuck up of lenin but stalin back then was well respected and pretty important to fund the bolsheviks prior to revolution, even if lenin eventually wanted him ousted
By the time Lenin realized that he gave Stalin too much power and that it was a mistake, it was already too late. You know Trotsky had no chances when even Lenin was too weak to remove Stalin.
@@Cerylion it happened much later when Stalin got absolute power. After Lenin's death Stalin was a relatively unknown person compared to Trotsky, Bukharin and Kamenev.
Fun fact: Stalin (or one of his mates) gave Trotsky the wrong date for Lenin's state funeral, making it seem like he opposed Lenin to the general public as he did not turn up while most other Bolsheviks members did. Also, the politburo did not publicly disclose Lenin's Testament to the public that praised Trotsky and heavily critisized Stalin (asking for the removal of his powerful General Secretary position), which probably would have stopped Stalins rise to power.
It's doubtful if it would have stopped Stalin's rise to power; Lenin's Testament criticised Trotsky but just said that he was preferable to Stalin, and it also said he preferred that Stalin and Trotsky worked together but just didn't see how that could happen because of their clash of personalities. He called Stalin and Trotsky the two most capable would-be leaders of the Party going forward, but felt Stalin had a "meanness of spirit" that made him unsuitable (said meanness was something Lenin had defended many times in the past, mind). The public didn't have much say in who ran the Politburo; the Politburo themselves also kind of resented Lenin for interfering (again) when he was supposed to be retired and didn't have any right to tell them what to do in the first place, which was one reason it was semi-suppressed.
@@jonathancampbell5231 It still seems widely believed that "Lenin's Testament" was actually written by Lenin. In fact it was probably concocted by Krupskaya, who was finding Stalin increasingly annoying.
@@modmaker7617 How do they feel about the whole Ukraine was business, and the fact that Putin isn't exactly brimming with nostalgia for the Soviet Union outside of wanting to own what was inside its borders?
That's Nikolai Yezhov, head of the NKVD. Stalin was relying on Yezhov's brutality and unwavering loyalty during the Great Purge, but after the purge was complete he had Yezhov arrested and killed and literally erased from history. Published photographs where Yezhov stood next to Stalin were altered, you guessed it, by removing Yezhov completely. It's pretty funny, google the "before and after" photos. I find it hilarious to think that somewhere in Russia someone looked at the photo in a newspaper and thought to themselves: "Wait, I've seen this photo before. Wasn't Yezhov just there, next to Stalin? I must be imagining things." Also, there's a sad part to this story, kind of. Yezhov never stopped venerating Stalin. He upheld his loyalty to the very end, and after he was sentenced he said he will die with Stalin's name on his lips. He was shot in a small room in the basement of a provincial NKVD office. The kind of room that is easy to clean after each execution, ironically, built according to Yezhov's own design.
@@B3RyL Ya just like American liberals Stalin wanted to rewrite history. Democratic Party liberals were allied the racist southerners and the KKK. Today they claim to be the ones who ended racism rather than part of the problem. Liberal like Biden lie though their teeth about their alliance with racists Democrats in both the North and the South.
Still waiting for you to do the following videos! 1. Why did the Revolutions of 1848 fail in Germany and Spain? 2. Why do people drive on different sides of the road in different countries?
I can think of a few more good topics: 1. What were relations like between Italy and Japan during WWII? 2. Did the Aztecs and Incas know about one another's existence? 3. Why did it take so long for anyone to build anything taller than the pyramids? 4. How close were the political ties between the "axis of evil" countries?
I have already answered the second question in a comment in an earlier video. I'm not sure if you were the one asking, but I suppose you were. And that can be answered in 15 seconds or so, so not worth an entire video.
@Laurence Winch 1. depends on when 2. no idea 3. because it just wasn‘t practical and there was space enough to build new buildings on instead 4. depends on when again xD
@@gilbert8162 “Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events . . in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky” “What a swine this Trotsky is - Left phrases and a bloc with the Right . . ! He ought to be exposed” “Trotsky has never yet held a firm opinion on any important question of Marxism. He always contrives to worm his way into the cracks of any given difference of opinion" - V. I. Lenin
@@P0PG03S Stalin was the murder of Lenin's Party. Trotsky's works are still published by Pathfinder Press. Stalin death in 1953 marked the beginning of the decline of the Stalinist movement and the rise of a new communist movement in Cuba lead by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
@@bluegold1026Brits are good at that, generally speaking. They know how to crack that kind of joke. Just look up Philomena Cunk for example. Or any English banter
Yuan Shikai used to control the main army around Beijing during the Imperial era. When China became a republic, he assassinated the elected President- *China's only elected President*, then tried to declare himself Emperor. He failed, he died, everyone hates him, the end.
Except he literally wasn’t. Most of the people being purged weren’t even guilty of anything. The purges were so disastrous that after the Nazis invaded many of the generals and scientists that were purged were forgiven by Stalin because they weren’t actual threats and he needed people to fight.
That's ironic, but it's actually the Stalin Constitution which gave amnesty to kulaks, became one of the sources of unrest and increased numbers of purge.
Also worth mentioning is that Lenin never endorsed any successor and never ruled out Stalin. He had issues with Stalin and the way he opperated certain things in his later years, but he never said ‘’anyone but Stalin’’. Stalin was also closer to Lenin and hanged out with him more often. There’s a famous photo of Lenin and Stalin sitting together which is claimed to be one of Stalin’s fabrications but has actually been proven to be real. The idea of Lenin hating Stalin comes Trotsky who felt Stalin betrayed the revolution and this line of thinking was later adopted by anti-Stalinists when the darker sides of his rule was revealed.
Kind of what cheesed me off about this video. Lenin was quite positive about Stalin, and in fact, preferred Stalin to Trotsky. Lenin despised Trotsky, as Trotsky would always try and prove he was an equal or better than him. The central committee voted against him in any case, they thought his theory of permanent revolution was a load of malarky.
@@Literally-hw6jv These are just lies told by Stalinist who need to defend Stalin who became a criminal in the workers movement. Once the outbreak of problems in the Soviet Union occurred with Gorbachev. Fidel Castro would explain that Cuba would never adopt capitalist methods and the Soviet party had never come to terms with the injustice of the Stalin era.Cuba entered a process of rectification of errors while in the Soviet Union the bureaucracy would adopt the neo liberalism of Milton Friedman as a way back to capitalism. As so the Stalinist carried out the final betrayal of the Soviet Union in 1989.
Stalin, the OG of photoshoping undesirables out of history. Also nice touch at 2:41, the bunker looks like it was made by professional and very experienced people.
One thing not brought up here that my professor noted in my history of the Soviet Union class is the importance of Stalin's position as general secretary. At the time, it was an unprestigious job within the politburo, but it allowed Stalin to simultaneously gather dirt to blackmail others and place his friends and loyalists in important positions, allowing for his eventual seizure of power. It was Stalin who made the position of General Secretary become the de facto position of leadership within the Soviet Union.
From what I remember, General Secretary was known to be a very powerful position with a lot of trust behind it. You could argue that this trust was misplaced but thats another argument
@@FivePotter This was only the second time in history that a workers had taken state power after the Paris Commune. The Commune lasted 70 days. Lenon declared a victory when they lasted 71 days. They all looked for aid from the German Proletariat that never came. Lenin then vowed to tear Imperialism limb from limb and in 1920 the Congress of Peoples of the East was held. This was the internationalist perspective of the revolution that Stalin and the bureaucracy would give up for the so called building of Socialism in one country. This was when Trotsky would write the "The Draft Program of the Communist International: A Criticism of Fundamentals" for the sixth Congress of the Communist International.
Btw, I appreciate your humor. I really think its important to have a good sense of humor when discussing history which can often be a pretty dry subject when explained poorly.
@@sloeginandsleep1170 Trotsky would end up in Mexico and help create the nucleus of another Leninist Party in the United States the Socialist Workers Party which still publishes "The Militant." since 1928. While the CPUSA had long ago abandoned the class struggle for class collaboration with bourgeois liberalism.
I have been considering subscribing to this channel for a while because I watch every video and am always excited whenever he uploads. This video was definitely the final push I needed. The newspaper in this video was just the peak of historical comedy. When I read the newspaper this episode I burst out laughing twice, I just couldn't hold the laughter in, the jokes on there were not gold, but priceless. I would advice anyone who is in a similar position as me to not hesitate as I did, but just click the subscribe button; I can assure you that you won't regret it. Thank you History Matters for the time and effort you put into your content. You have gained a new subscriber.
This is a question I've been digging into recently, what a coincidence! I've found that one of the damning parts of Trotsky's downfall was that he isolated himself, and never presented the final Testament of Lenin to the Politburo and the party when he died. This would've denounced Stalin, while empowering Trotsky. There was one issue with this, and that was Lenin's high opinion of Bukharin in his testament, which ultimately would've forced Trotsky to keep the Bukharinists on his side indefinitely
The so-called "Lenin Testament" was presented to the Politburo with Stalin and Trotsky in the room as well. Everybody knew about the letter and knew it only existed because Stalin was rude to Lenin's wife, Krupskaya, for giving political information to a debilitated man which was against medical recommendation. So much so that, in the letter, Lenin says that he would prefer to be in charge someone "as good as Stalin, *but more polite".* That was the whole reason. Also, the letter also criticized Trotsky a lot, pretty much calling Trotsky an narcissistic elitist b*tch who don't know how to work with people that don't 100% agree with him. Neither was Bukharin exempt of scrutiny. Stalin, after the Politburo had read the letter, offer his position in the hands of the party, saying that if they thing he's doing a bad job, it's the party's right to remove him. Nobody was interested in removing Stalin, not even Trotsky at the time.
@@davidedeus12 Very interesting, but at the end of the day, does that mean the Politburo ultimately held more belief in Stalin's ability rather than Lenin's word? I suppose it would make sense considering Stalin's job and his exploitation of his position. I don't recall seeing that much criticism of Trotsky, although he absolutely was a lone wolf. Do you know if the letter presented to the Politburo expressly stated Lenin wished/recommended for Stalin's removal, or was the Politburo convinced that keeping Stalin was right?
@@NorShii In the letter, Lenin stated explicitly that Stalin wasn't cut for the job, but I don't remember if he said, word by word, that the Party should get rid of Stalin. Now here the thing I don't think most people understand: The leader of a communist party isn't the one with the final word. Those parties work with something call "democratic centralism", which it means that everyone in the party has the right to debate a topic, being positive or negative, but as soon as the party made an official voting and everyone has voted (in the SCP, this number would it go to almost a million members), that should be no disagreement and they'd need to act in the same line. I'm saying all of this to explain that neither Lenin nor Stalin held complete control over the party. For instance, Lenin was outvoted about how to deal with WWI Germany because the Party choose the Trotsky's line. So even if Lenin had said that Stalin should no only be removed from his position, but removed from the party and exiled to Siberia, the ultimate decision was on the hands of the Party. During Stalin's administration, this was also a very true story.
Saying Lenin solely opposed Stalin becoming leader of the USSR is mildly disingenuous. Lenin opposed all kinds of "succession" because he wasn't a monarch and didn't act like one. Lenin was a first among equals and had to rely on alliances and compromise to stay at the top. His last testament was deeply critical of all his colleagues including Trotsky. He stressed the importance of maintaining Democratic Centralism and knew the gigantic personalities of Stalin and Trotsky would distort it
I like your videos but usually you have to simplify for the sake of time but this once you have out done yourself you managed to touch every important point in the story!
@@Petriefied0246 We are still Trotsky's publisher Pathfinder Press. This a very poor explanation of what the political disputes between Trotsky and Stalin were. It assumes that that actual communists are just simpletons like the petti bourgeois far leftist Greens and Greta Thornberg.
Many of the Soviet higher-ups believed Trotsky was too much of an idealist to be in power. They saw Stalin as a more practical leader. An example of this was Trotsky’s insistence that communism in Russia would not remain unless it took root in Western Europe first. Stalin’s view was that communism must first be firmly established in Russia before focusing on exporting it elsewhere.
1:45 Not only was Stalin willing to concede points, he also adopted views purely as tools for politicking. He took opposing view of Trotsky just to be in a block opposing him. Once he got all the power, he didn't continue holding those views (i.e. allowing some private business in this case).
@@kimobrien. Who, Stalin? I wouldn't say they admire him, but they definitely try very hard to falsely equate Stalinism with Communism by making it seem like communism will always be repressive and murderous
It's cant be stated enough how much Trotsky was what we would call "a dick". He failed to make political alliances because he was the sort of person who is extremely talented (even a genius you could say) and knew it, expecting people to bend to him as a result - the problem is, politics doesn't reward talent, it rewards people skills. During party meetings, he would never listen to opposing arguments, instead choosing to read a novel when it was his opponent's turn to speak. When he first met Stalin, Stalin made a dirty joke he didn't like - his response was to lecture Stalin and basically humiliate him in front of other party members. It was all fine so long as Lenin was alive to protect him, but I think his downfall was inevitable after that.
@@jeffreygao3956 Trotsky's works and his writings will stand the test of history as the class struggle rises once again and while Stalin fades as more discredited than ever.. .
@@jeffreygao3956 For the bourgeois and those who believe capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread we are all the same anyway. The world wars of the twentieth century were the result of capitalist nations inability to arbitrate disputes in the world markets and capitalism long term tendency for profit rates to decline. The capitalist ruling classes have once again entered a crisis from which the capitalist ruling classes have no simple exit strategy. The long retreat by labor in the Imperialist nations is coming to an end. The lessons of the October revolution and the Cuban victory over American Imperialism stand as examples that can be repeated by those who are the leaders of the next and coming Socialist Revolutions.
I really appreciate you history matters , for pumping our so many videos for our entertainment and Education. Wish I could release videos in half your time lol
Another reason being that Trotsky came from a wealthy family and was highly educated, whereas other members of the party were mostly from proletariat backgrounds. He especially failed to see the threat Stalin posed since he considered him to be nothing but a brainless brute. And that was exactly where he was wrong. Stalin was a very shrewd and intelligent politician. All of his actions and alliances which he made with other party members and decisively sidelined Trostsky are it's ultimate proof.
@@shevek2954 Stalin's actions were unprincipled involved secret intrigue like the creation of the secret voting troka. His kind of politics may be fine and even expected for a bourgeois politician but not for a member of a Leninist Party. Political skills like creating "enemies of the people", shouting down others instead of debate, rewriting history and manufacturing evidence for frame up trials are to be expected from the defenders of a dying capitalism NOT revolutionaries.
Lenin: "tell whoever is in charge of giving people jobs to not let that jerk Stalin take over, btw who in charge of giving people jobs" Officer: "that'd be Stalin, sir" Lenin: *dies*
It's actually doubtful that's what happened. This story comes from a single account from Lenin's spouse who wasn't keen on Stalin But it sounds like a cool story, also doesn't make Stalin look good, so many people like it
Holy moly, if I ever find myself in a situation where I'm sharing power with someone like Stalin, I'm super duper "Hey man, you're doing great work. I'm retiring from politics. Think I'm going to head out, maybe to X, as I've always had an interest in minding my own friggin' business on a farm, avoiding politics until the heat death of the universe. If ya ever desire a good recommendation or reference, let me know!" Then go do exactly that. Yeah, not the bravest move ever but I'd rather be alive than a speedbump.
Nice shadow-ban reference at the credits! Living under Stalin was like being in a Forum and waking up one day with your account deleted without warning or explanation, your IP blocked, and all your posts removed from the board.
Actually there's no record of Lenin not wanting Stalin to succeed him. His so called testament is just a series of reflections on the attributes and flaws both of Stalin and Trotsky, and you can't draw any conclusion whatsoever on Lenin's preference. Besides that, let's remember he was practically rambling on his deathbed, being angry at Stalin for talking harshly to his wife. It's not a political reflection on his successors whatsoever.
Lenin on his deathbed: Iosef I doubt you are the best candidate to success me. Only half the people will follow you. Stalin: don't worry, it does not matter, the other half will follow you.
The vaguely fuzzy hair on all the characters is another tiny comical detail I'm really noticing tonight lol. Thank you for another funny and informative episode! God be with you out there everybody! ✝️ :)
this is my favorite part of the video 3:07 As many of you will know, Stalin really liked to erase the presence of his victims/ex-allies from the photos next to him after he purged them.
Great video! I was always under the impression Trotsky was more of a moderate but this sounds like he was more of a hardliner than Stalin (ignoring the whole being a paranoid, purge-happy megalomaniac thing).
Trotsky would have been worse. He might not have consolidated as much power, but he wasn't against people dying or purges. Chances are he would just start ww2.
Trotsky? A moderate? He was such an fanatical zealot of the Church of Marx that even other die-hard *communists* thought he was a bit of an unrealistic loon whose ideas would never work in practice.
Need to mention, Stalin was a head of HR in Bolshevik party. Basically, he hired people on key position based on loyalty to him only. Even before Lenin's death, Lenin complained that some people in the party disobeying him, because they were loyal to Stalin. Later in 1935, Stalin in his speech said a quote, that "HR is everything" or full quote "The most valuable resource are people. HR is everything". So yeah, Negan is a Stalinist.
Stalin was granted the seat of general secretary by Lenin. Purely viewed as a administrative role but which held way more power. It was Stalin who vetted and put forward candidates for party positions and thereby who ruled what. It made him able to pick only those that would in the future ally with him. Further he had oversight and control of communication and transcripts during party meetings. Making him free to edit who said what as he pleased while also knowing full well each members stance on him and others. During Lenin's time the nr 1 spot in the Soviet government was the chairman followed by the premier. As Lenin's time ended both posts were superseded by the general secretary which was Stalin, a title and post he kept throughout his reign.
Super simplified. But in a wrap-up quite correct, except - they all had different views on the socialism and development of the USSR. There were many personal issues (including women), and even after this triumph Stalin faced multiple struggles within the party and with the army.
Fun fact: Trotsky's killer was the brother-in-law of Vittorio De Sica, the film director. By the way, Vittorio De Sica also called himself a "communist" as well, although I don't know his specific faction.
Dude really just went full hunger games Stalin: let's form an alliance Everyone else: okay, sounds like a good plan. Safety forever Stalin: oh yeah, sure sure. "Forever" -however long that might be-
Trostky: the most popular figure, all over the place, but held little REAL executive power Stalin: dark figure, only in Moscow, right in the middle of the government, with HUGE REAL executive power. Lesson: Real power beats popularity
Was hoping the fact that Stalinorganized a fancy funeral for Lenin would have been mentioned as well because that was a huge deal as well that won Stalin a lot of support.
Saying Lenin was not a fan of Stalin is a bit silly. Even though I'm a Bukharinist and don't agree with Stalin's policies, Stalin was an extremely reliable Bolshevik, and played a crucial role in solidifying Bolshevik power in Russia both through military means as well as going out of his way to secure funds for the party while leading members like Lenin and Trotsky were in exile. Stalin would arrange bank robberies to acquire funds to funnel Bolshevik activities. Additionally Stalin wrote books that Lenin was praiseworthy of, namely "Marxism and the National Question" even though, it's widely believed that he had a lot of help from Lenin and Bukharin in writing this book. Stalin become the General Secretary while Lenin was still alive. He expressed no reservations about Stalin becoming General Secretary until Stalin was rude to his wife Krupskaya on the phone. Supposedly, Lenin wrote in his last testament that he would rather see a man with better social skills to replace Stalin as he was understandably quite pissed off with Stalin's behaviour, he didn't however name Trotsky. Historians debate as to the validity of Lenin's testament, many believe that this was written by Lenin himself, some like Stephen Kotkin believe that this was forged by Krupskaya. I think we need to move past the cold war narratives about the Soviet Union and look at things objectively, even if it means sometimes giving people we don't like the benefit of the doubt. It's better to do history the right way, rather than live in ideology.
You know another thing Stalin did to increase the Soviet people's support for him was not only organizing Lenin's funeral but personally leading the precession And he also purposely gave Trotsky the wrong date for the funeral
Because it generates a big chunk of its GDP from U.N spaceships being launched i there, they launch them there because it's the closest European land near the equator
“The Soviet government has congratulated Belgium on not becoming Western Germany, but would remind its own neighbors that such independence is not guaranteed.”
Trotsky did initially support the New Economic Policy and in fact proposed something of the sort one year before its implementation, finding no support for his proposals at that time. However, Trotsky and the Left Opposition opposed the New Economic Policy later on because circumstances changed that warranted a new policy. So Trotksy and the Left Opposition advocated more state industrialisation and gradual land collectivization (not the forced land collectivization as Stalin would do later on).
Also, Stalin always kept silent when internal disagreements occurred because he never want to burn bridges with whatever other side won. While others fought for their beliefs, Stalin fought for his position.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"The Soviet government has congratulated Belgium on not becoming western Germany, but has issued a reminder to its own neighbours that such independence isn't guaranteed." Tell me what you want, but the newspaper texts are the best part of these videos. He just puts so much effort into something that is on screen for like a half a second.
1:26
"When asked their thoughts about the new [Indian Communist] political party, British authorities hit our reporter until he told them where the communists were meeting."
There's a typo in the first article "of out glorious leaders"
Also, Trotsky tried to eat all the babies in Siberia
"PRAVDA: printed in English, for some reason"
"Not cool, Trot. Not cool."
One little thing led to Trotsky downfall that’s not talked about much is Poland. The Soviet’s disastrous war in the early ‘20s contributed greatly to dashing Trotsky’s political career.
That was mentioned in the short military reputation section.
@@19MAD95 I like how he siad the Soviets war while Poland attacked them in a middle of a famin and a raging civil war ...... Trotsky did the best of what could be done at the time
Not to mention Trotsky recruiting former Tsarist officers into the Red Army hurt him in the long run
Which is ironic considering that Stalin was the reason behind Poland's victory since he disobeyed Trotsky's orders to assist Tukhachevsky in the battle of Warsaw and instead sieged the city of Lviv.
Wait, there is another war the Russians lost in the last 100 years?
Time to bully some Russian trolls again.
This does make me wonder how Trotsky's rule of the USSR would have realistically turned out. I say realistically because all I've seen of exploring this hypothetical route is the world somehow turning into a magical communist paradise. But realistically, how would Trotsky have handled the USSR considering it was still recovering from the Russian Civil War, was isolated from the global economy, and the German Communist Revolution that Lenin was counting on to set off a wave of European Communist revolutions did not pan out.
Considering how narrow minded trotsky was and how bad the soviet army and economy was at that point he would probably invade a country like poland/finland/romania and get clapped again and this would shake the prestige of the USSR, the soviet union would be far less brutal but also far weaker than stalin's since he had all that "build up before we expand" policy
I don't know about Soviet internal politics (less purging, presumably), but Trotsky definitely wouldn't have made a pact with Hitler. And even if he'd somehow ended up making a pact, he definitely wouldn't have trusted Hitler the way Stalin apparently did. So WWII would have played out very differently for a start.
Trotsky would have gone all out exporting communism through military means. That was one of his main objectives. Even if not, Hitler's anti-Communist, anti-Jewish rhetoric would have found willing supporters across the entirety of Europe in the face of an actual Jewish Communist in control of the USSR.
I'd rather not see how that one actually turns out.
Trotsky supported the economic policies Stalin ended up enforcing. The main difference would be foreign policy. Trotsky wanted to export the revolution wherever he could, while Stalin wanted to consolidate power within the country.
@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs Hm, Stalin didn't exactly trust Hitler, I believe he just wanted to buy more time for the Soviet Union.
Stalins tactic of “agree now, purge later” is just so damn simple that it could be said Trotsky’s stubbornness killed him.
The main problem with communists is that they were and are idealists. They knew a handfull of good people, and assumed everyone could become friends with everyone. Trotski realized his mistake only when he saw a good friend with a hammer in hand. Others died without noticing they were betrayed.
This was NOT an accepted tactic in Lenin's party before the rise of Stalin.
It literally says in the video Trotskys stubbornness lost him his friends then he was exiled and eventually killed. So good job on the same conclusion I think?
@@Fallout3131 The video assumes political differences are just personality issues and alliances because that is about all they amount to in American bourgeois two party culture.
@@Fallout3131I just rewatched, at no point does it “literally” say that, it can just be inferred, which is what I did, and made a half joking comment about it.
Alternate Title: How Stalin Became the Leader of the USSR with the Power of Friendship
Maybe the real power is the friends we made along the way.
He was a true brony.
His mustache was inviting and friendly looking.
And then killed all his former friends to eliminate any threat to his power
My Little USSR: Friendship is Purging
Moral of the story: if you don't like a guy and you think he should not be your successor you should not put him into a key position where he is able to gain more and more power while silently killing his rivals, expecially if that guy is famous for being power hungry, extremely brutal and with basically no morals to stop him.
I'm not sure Stalin was all that famous for that before he gained power - at least, not by Soviet standards. Morals? Oh, you mean bourgeoisie scruples!
Another moral (or bourgeoisie scruple?) is also, don't necessarily trust the cheerful compromiser over the difficult guy insisting that he's always right.
Or just an overall separation of power, so dictatorships are much harder to happen.
he wasnt famous for being power hungry before getting into power, and he didnt have "no morals", everyone has them, whether his morals are good or bad is something else, and yeah i agree thats quite the fuck up of lenin but stalin back then was well respected and pretty important to fund the bolsheviks prior to revolution, even if lenin eventually wanted him ousted
By the time Lenin realized that he gave Stalin too much power and that it was a mistake, it was already too late. You know Trotsky had no chances when even Lenin was too weak to remove Stalin.
@@Cerylion it happened much later when Stalin got absolute power. After Lenin's death Stalin was a relatively unknown person compared to Trotsky, Bukharin and Kamenev.
Fun fact: Stalin (or one of his mates) gave Trotsky the wrong date for Lenin's state funeral, making it seem like he opposed Lenin to the general public as he did not turn up while most other Bolsheviks members did.
Also, the politburo did not publicly disclose Lenin's Testament to the public that praised Trotsky and heavily critisized Stalin (asking for the removal of his powerful General Secretary position), which probably would have stopped Stalins rise to power.
It's doubtful if it would have stopped Stalin's rise to power; Lenin's Testament criticised Trotsky but just said that he was preferable to Stalin, and it also said he preferred that Stalin and Trotsky worked together but just didn't see how that could happen because of their clash of personalities. He called Stalin and Trotsky the two most capable would-be leaders of the Party going forward, but felt Stalin had a "meanness of spirit" that made him unsuitable (said meanness was something Lenin had defended many times in the past, mind).
The public didn't have much say in who ran the Politburo; the Politburo themselves also kind of resented Lenin for interfering (again) when he was supposed to be retired and didn't have any right to tell them what to do in the first place, which was one reason it was semi-suppressed.
@@jonathancampbell5231
It still seems widely believed that "Lenin's Testament" was actually written by Lenin.
In fact it was probably concocted by Krupskaya, who was finding Stalin increasingly annoying.
@@alanpennie8013 Yes, I almost brought up that she wrote or co-wrote it, but wasn't sure what the historical consensus was.
@@jonathancampbell5231
Stephen Kotkin is convinced it's a fake, and I would defer to him.
Lenin testimony was fake.
Made by lenins wife.
There is absolutely no proof Lenin wrote that while catatonic
Next Video: “Is Transnistria technically the entire USSR?”
Transnistria believes it's the modern-day successor also their flag looks very Soviet.
You might be onto something
@@modmaker7617 How do they feel about the whole Ukraine was business, and the fact that Putin isn't exactly brimming with nostalgia for the Soviet Union outside of wanting to own what was inside its borders?
Apart from flag Transnistria has almost nothing to do with the Soviet Union
@@iokai4118
Their architecture is Soviet and in the capital they have Soviet statues.
LOVE the part at 3:07 where the guy next to Stalin gets erased. Art imitates life!
That's Nikolai Yezhov, head of the NKVD. Stalin was relying on Yezhov's brutality and unwavering loyalty during the Great Purge, but after the purge was complete he had Yezhov arrested and killed and literally erased from history. Published photographs where Yezhov stood next to Stalin were altered, you guessed it, by removing Yezhov completely. It's pretty funny, google the "before and after" photos. I find it hilarious to think that somewhere in Russia someone looked at the photo in a newspaper and thought to themselves: "Wait, I've seen this photo before. Wasn't Yezhov just there, next to Stalin? I must be imagining things."
Also, there's a sad part to this story, kind of. Yezhov never stopped venerating Stalin. He upheld his loyalty to the very end, and after he was sentenced he said he will die with Stalin's name on his lips. He was shot in a small room in the basement of a provincial NKVD office. The kind of room that is easy to clean after each execution, ironically, built according to Yezhov's own design.
@@B3RyL Ya just like American liberals Stalin wanted to rewrite history. Democratic Party liberals were allied the racist southerners and the KKK. Today they claim to be the ones who ended racism rather than part of the problem. Liberal like Biden lie though their teeth about their alliance with racists Democrats in both the North and the South.
There's also a modified version where the angry eyebrows are removed.
God, that animation beneath the credits is both appropriate and chilling
What Animation. Comrade Stalin is just so emotive and sincere, that you forget your looking at a still-portrait.
@@blenderbanana NO
@@blenderbanana lol
Still waiting for you to do the following videos!
1. Why did the Revolutions of 1848 fail in Germany and Spain?
2. Why do people drive on different sides of the road in different countries?
1848 revolution in spain ? barely anything happend in spain
I can think of a few more good topics:
1. What were relations like between Italy and Japan during WWII?
2. Did the Aztecs and Incas know about one another's existence?
3. Why did it take so long for anyone to build anything taller than the pyramids?
4. How close were the political ties between the "axis of evil" countries?
@@ALEXIUSTHEGENERAL Hence the term fail. Reading comprehension is your friend.
I have already answered the second question in a comment in an earlier video.
I'm not sure if you were the one asking, but I suppose you were.
And that can be answered in 15 seconds or so, so not worth an entire video.
@Laurence Winch
1. depends on when
2. no idea
3. because it just wasn‘t practical and there was space enough to build new buildings on instead
4. depends on when again xD
Lenin: "I want Trotsky to be in charge"
Trotsky: "Nice pick"
Stalin: "Ice pick"
he never said that though my man
@@ALEXIUSTHEGENERAL What?? You mean it wasn't a joke but meant to be taken as a serious comment? My mind is blown.
fun fact: … no
Lenin never wanted Trotsky in power.
@@gilbert8162 “Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events . . in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky”
“What a swine this Trotsky is - Left phrases and a bloc with the Right . . ! He ought to be exposed”
“Trotsky has never yet held a firm opinion on any important question of Marxism. He always contrives to worm his way into the cracks of any given difference of opinion"
- V. I. Lenin
Trotsky: utilizes workers tools as a symbol
Also Trotsky: *gets killed by a worker’s tool*
He died as he lived!
*ice pick intensifies*
@@mathieucozien5736 In death he was, as in life.
@@P0PG03S Stalin was the murder of Lenin's Party. Trotsky's works are still published by Pathfinder Press. Stalin death in 1953 marked the beginning of the decline of the Stalinist movement and the rise of a new communist movement in Cuba lead by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
🎯😆
C'mon, we all know its because he picked the wrong civil war path
Dude gotta pick the national focus in correct order.
Trosky selected the incorrect decisions and got blocked of his national focus.
Jesus this is a dark joke 🤣😭💀
And then he took an arrow to the knee.
@@TheStickman419 why dark?
“After Lenin came down with a case of the deads” the absolute humor of this channel is amazing.
Edit: MOM I’M FAMOUS :D
It's the dryness with which absurd phrasings are said that makes it beautiful
IKR?? The narrator’s use of deadpan humor is spot on!
@@bluegold1026Brits are good at that, generally speaking. They know how to crack that kind of joke. Just look up Philomena Cunk for example. Or any English banter
Exactly! I love every single phrase that the narrator uses to say that somebody died.
My favorite is always “But fun fact: No”
What a way to start the video. Your sense of humor is vastly underrated and is one of the main reasons I enjoy your content so much.
For old time's sake, I would have liked "It's 1924 and Lenin... is dead." *Bonk*
Amazing work mate keep it up 👍
Could you make a video on the short lived Chinese empire of 1915-16? It’s a VERY fascinating topic that doesn’t get talked about much
no
Yuan Shikai used to control the main army around Beijing during the Imperial era. When China became a republic, he assassinated the elected President- *China's only elected President*, then tried to declare himself Emperor. He failed, he died, everyone hates him, the end.
@@JohnSmith-qi6pm He wasn't asking you Mr Smith
Stalin never fails to impress me with how diligent he was with purges lol
He put in the hours.
The sheer number of death sentences he personally signed.
Very impressive!
Except he literally wasn’t. Most of the people being purged weren’t even guilty of anything. The purges were so disastrous that after the Nazis invaded many of the generals and scientists that were purged were forgiven by Stalin because they weren’t actual threats and he needed people to fight.
That's ironic, but it's actually the Stalin Constitution which gave amnesty to kulaks, became one of the sources of unrest and increased numbers of purge.
Stalin was the greatest killer of communists, even greater than the US
“CLASSIC STALIN xD”
Also worth mentioning is that Lenin never endorsed any successor and never ruled out Stalin.
He had issues with Stalin and the way he opperated certain things in his later years, but he never said ‘’anyone but Stalin’’. Stalin was also closer to Lenin and hanged out with him more often.
There’s a famous photo of Lenin and Stalin sitting together which is claimed to be one of Stalin’s fabrications but has actually been proven to be real.
The idea of Lenin hating Stalin comes Trotsky who felt Stalin betrayed the revolution and this line of thinking was later adopted by anti-Stalinists when the darker sides of his rule was revealed.
Kind of what cheesed me off about this video. Lenin was quite positive about Stalin, and in fact, preferred Stalin to Trotsky. Lenin despised Trotsky, as Trotsky would always try and prove he was an equal or better than him. The central committee voted against him in any case, they thought his theory of permanent revolution was a load of malarky.
@@Literally-hw6jv These are just lies told by Stalinist who need to defend Stalin who became a criminal in the workers movement. Once the outbreak of problems in the Soviet Union occurred with Gorbachev. Fidel Castro would explain that Cuba would never adopt capitalist methods and the Soviet party had never come to terms with the injustice of the Stalin era.Cuba entered a process of rectification of errors while in the Soviet Union the bureaucracy would adopt the neo liberalism of Milton Friedman as a way back to capitalism. As so the Stalinist carried out the final betrayal of the Soviet Union in 1989.
It’s because that’s what James Bisonette wanted
@The LIM Report because he lost the civil war to aaron the red
@@Rojob this comment is gold lmfao
Things never were the same after spinning 3 plates was purged...
Real answer.
James Bisonette > the rothchilds
2:41 I just love the little detail of “made in Albania” on the bunker
Stalin, the OG of photoshoping undesirables out of history. Also nice touch at 2:41, the bunker looks like it was made by professional and very experienced people.
What was the bunker a reference to?
@@bprw12 Enver Hoxha and his constant bunker building.
Just like Canada did with Russell Williams
One thing not brought up here that my professor noted in my history of the Soviet Union class is the importance of Stalin's position as general secretary. At the time, it was an unprestigious job within the politburo, but it allowed Stalin to simultaneously gather dirt to blackmail others and place his friends and loyalists in important positions, allowing for his eventual seizure of power. It was Stalin who made the position of General Secretary become the de facto position of leadership within the Soviet Union.
From what I remember, General Secretary was known to be a very powerful position with a lot of trust behind it. You could argue that this trust was misplaced but thats another argument
For real. That role was probably the key to stalin getting so far
@@FivePotter This was only the second time in history that a workers had taken state power after the Paris Commune. The Commune lasted 70 days. Lenon declared a victory when they lasted 71 days. They all looked for aid from the German Proletariat that never came. Lenin then vowed to tear Imperialism limb from limb and in 1920 the Congress of Peoples of the East was held. This was the internationalist perspective of the revolution that Stalin and the bureaucracy would give up for the so called building of Socialism in one country. This was when Trotsky would write the "The Draft Program of the Communist International: A Criticism of Fundamentals" for the sixth Congress of the Communist International.
Btw, I appreciate your humor. I really think its important to have a good sense of humor when discussing history which can often be a pretty dry subject when explained poorly.
That is why I think every middle schooler should read the great book, 'The Smart Aleck's Guide to American History,' for history class.
what's more important than humor in regards to history is accuracy which this channel clearly lacks.
Lenin getting the 'No' sign from the gates of heaven is the funniest thing I've seen on the channel
Yeah
Lenin, an atheist, sees heaven. 'Well... shit'.
@@TBone-bz9mp
"Today I witnessing acknowledge realms,
That once I thought the mummery of The Church."
Iqbal, Lenin before God.
I caught that too
"That'll teach you to rename my city."
“In response, Trotsky dribbled some incomprehensible nonsense and was generally an idiot”.
The newspaper was pure gold 😂
A rare example of Pravda telling the truth.
I can't decide if my favorite comment is that one or the bit about rifle butts really hurting
@@vinnynj78 Have to admit, that one is really good too!
@@sloeginandsleep1170 Trotsky would end up in Mexico and help create the nucleus of another Leninist Party in the United States the Socialist Workers Party which still publishes "The Militant." since 1928. While the CPUSA had long ago abandoned the class struggle for class collaboration with bourgeois liberalism.
The bunker graffiti "Made in Albania" had me rolling.
Let’s not forget the time when mr krabs sold SpongeBob’s soul for 62 cents
A truly tragic act of greed.
I just realized after so many years, that plot point was a reference to Judas selling out Jesus Christ for 30 pieces of silver. Bravo Hillenburg RIP
A fair value on the open maket
average crapitalist
Capitalism and it's consequences
This history channel has the best humor
I have been considering subscribing to this channel for a while because I watch every video and am always excited whenever he uploads. This video was definitely the final push I needed. The newspaper in this video was just the peak of historical comedy. When I read the newspaper this episode I burst out laughing twice, I just couldn't hold the laughter in, the jokes on there were not gold, but priceless. I would advice anyone who is in a similar position as me to not hesitate as I did, but just click the subscribe button; I can assure you that you won't regret it. Thank you History Matters for the time and effort you put into your content. You have gained a new subscriber.
This is a question I've been digging into recently, what a coincidence!
I've found that one of the damning parts of Trotsky's downfall was that he isolated himself, and never presented the final Testament of Lenin to the Politburo and the party when he died. This would've denounced Stalin, while empowering Trotsky.
There was one issue with this, and that was Lenin's high opinion of Bukharin in his testament, which ultimately would've forced Trotsky to keep the Bukharinists on his side indefinitely
The so-called "Lenin Testament" was presented to the Politburo with Stalin and Trotsky in the room as well. Everybody knew about the letter and knew it only existed because Stalin was rude to Lenin's wife, Krupskaya, for giving political information to a debilitated man which was against medical recommendation. So much so that, in the letter, Lenin says that he would prefer to be in charge someone "as good as Stalin, *but more polite".* That was the whole reason. Also, the letter also criticized Trotsky a lot, pretty much calling Trotsky an narcissistic elitist b*tch who don't know how to work with people that don't 100% agree with him. Neither was Bukharin exempt of scrutiny.
Stalin, after the Politburo had read the letter, offer his position in the hands of the party, saying that if they thing he's doing a bad job, it's the party's right to remove him. Nobody was interested in removing Stalin, not even Trotsky at the time.
@@davidedeus12 Very interesting, but at the end of the day, does that mean the Politburo ultimately held more belief in Stalin's ability rather than Lenin's word? I suppose it would make sense considering Stalin's job and his exploitation of his position. I don't recall seeing that much criticism of Trotsky, although he absolutely was a lone wolf. Do you know if the letter presented to the Politburo expressly stated Lenin wished/recommended for Stalin's removal, or was the Politburo convinced that keeping Stalin was right?
@@NorShii In the letter, Lenin stated explicitly that Stalin wasn't cut for the job, but I don't remember if he said, word by word, that the Party should get rid of Stalin. Now here the thing I don't think most people understand: The leader of a communist party isn't the one with the final word. Those parties work with something call "democratic centralism", which it means that everyone in the party has the right to debate a topic, being positive or negative, but as soon as the party made an official voting and everyone has voted (in the SCP, this number would it go to almost a million members), that should be no disagreement and they'd need to act in the same line. I'm saying all of this to explain that neither Lenin nor Stalin held complete control over the party. For instance, Lenin was outvoted about how to deal with WWI Germany because the Party choose the Trotsky's line. So even if Lenin had said that Stalin should no only be removed from his position, but removed from the party and exiled to Siberia, the ultimate decision was on the hands of the Party. During Stalin's administration, this was also a very true story.
@@davidedeus12 Those who remember the cold war and the way the Stalinist acted in the mass anti war movement can attest to their rudeness and idiocy.
@@kimobrien. ... I can't even comment on what you said because I didn't understand what you tried to say in the first place
Saying Lenin solely opposed Stalin becoming leader of the USSR is mildly disingenuous. Lenin opposed all kinds of "succession" because he wasn't a monarch and didn't act like one. Lenin was a first among equals and had to rely on alliances and compromise to stay at the top. His last testament was deeply critical of all his colleagues including Trotsky. He stressed the importance of maintaining Democratic Centralism and knew the gigantic personalities of Stalin and Trotsky would distort it
I like your videos but usually you have to simplify for the sake of time but this once you have out done yourself you managed to touch every important point in the story!
The timing of this is so perfect bc at school in social studies we are learning about Stalin rn
I don't know why but this channel has a perfect sense of humor
@1:26 I appreciate the time taken to write the actual article contents. :)
This is a great summary! My grandfather was one of Trotsky's bodyguards when he lived in Norway so I've always been curious about who he was.
When you find out who he was you won't be too proud of your grandfather's career if you have any sense in you whatsoever.
@@melchior2678 I'm well aware of the dark side of Trotsky, however it's a part of my family's history and that's just how it is.
@@melchior2678 Trotsky did nothing wrong
Yeah, and my grandmother was a second cousin of the girl that attempted to assassinate Lenin.
See, I can make things up too.
@@Petriefied0246 We are still Trotsky's publisher Pathfinder Press. This a very poor explanation of what the political disputes between Trotsky and Stalin were. It assumes that that actual communists are just simpletons like the petti bourgeois far leftist Greens and Greta Thornberg.
I have to admit I was so shocked by your pronunciation of levers that the rest of the video passed me by, the first half was very interesting though.
Many of the Soviet higher-ups believed Trotsky was too much of an idealist to be in power. They saw Stalin as a more practical leader. An example of this was Trotsky’s insistence that communism in Russia would not remain unless it took root in Western Europe first. Stalin’s view was that communism must first be firmly established in Russia before focusing on exporting it elsewhere.
I always love reading the newspaper articles in these videos
This is the only channel that features content that I watch all the way to the end, always.
I'm a Skye Chappelle fan, for whatever reason.
The empty birthday party accompanying "...did not win him any friends" was very fine work.
"Pravda: Printed in English for some Reason" The visual comedy on this channel is truly top tier. 👌
I'm pretty sure they had an English version
I just love the endscreen of Nikolai Yezhov getting the Polish removal therapy...
1:45 Not only was Stalin willing to concede points, he also adopted views purely as tools for politicking. He took opposing view of Trotsky just to be in a block opposing him. Once he got all the power, he didn't continue holding those views (i.e. allowing some private business in this case).
It's called opportunism lol
@@fenceyhen4249 This is why bourgeois politicians admire him so much.
@@kimobrien. Who, Stalin? I wouldn't say they admire him, but they definitely try very hard to falsely equate Stalinism with Communism by making it seem like communism will always be repressive and murderous
The detail of the ice axe or “piolet” was the “icing” on the cake…
It's cant be stated enough how much Trotsky was what we would call "a dick".
He failed to make political alliances because he was the sort of person who is extremely talented (even a genius you could say) and knew it, expecting people to bend to him as a result - the problem is, politics doesn't reward talent, it rewards people skills.
During party meetings, he would never listen to opposing arguments, instead choosing to read a novel when it was his opponent's turn to speak. When he first met Stalin, Stalin made a dirty joke he didn't like - his response was to lecture Stalin and basically humiliate him in front of other party members.
It was all fine so long as Lenin was alive to protect him, but I think his downfall was inevitable after that.
Good I’m sick of people putting Trotsky on pedestals. It’s all that darn Eric Arthur Blair’s fault!
@@jeffreygao3956 Trotsky's works and his writings will stand the test of history as the class struggle rises once again and while Stalin fades as more discredited than ever.. .
@@kimobrien. Hahaha! Trotsky was just no different from Stalin!
@@jeffreygao3956 For the bourgeois and those who believe capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread we are all the same anyway. The world wars of the twentieth century were the result of capitalist nations inability to arbitrate disputes in the world markets and capitalism long term tendency for profit rates to decline. The capitalist ruling classes have once again entered a crisis from which the capitalist ruling classes have no simple exit strategy. The long retreat by labor in the Imperialist nations is coming to an end. The lessons of the October revolution and the Cuban victory over American Imperialism stand as examples that can be repeated by those who are the leaders of the next and coming Socialist Revolutions.
@@kimobrien. It's not just class struggles! Besides, Castro was a dictator in his own right!
Case of the deads... I nearly died too laughing so hard I choked on my drink... Love your work mate
I really appreciate you history matters , for pumping our so many videos for our entertainment and Education.
Wish I could release videos in half your time lol
Another reason being that Trotsky came from a wealthy family and was highly educated, whereas other members of the party were mostly from proletariat backgrounds. He especially failed to see the threat Stalin posed since he considered him to be nothing but a brainless brute. And that was exactly where he was wrong. Stalin was a very shrewd and intelligent politician. All of his actions and alliances which he made with other party members and decisively sidelined Trostsky are it's ultimate proof.
The fact that Stalin was a Georgian and managed to become the head of system that favored Russians is also a testament to his skills.
@@shevek2954 Stalin's actions were unprincipled involved secret intrigue like the creation of the secret voting troka. His kind of politics may be fine and even expected for a bourgeois politician but not for a member of a Leninist Party. Political skills like creating "enemies of the people", shouting down others instead of debate, rewriting history and manufacturing evidence for frame up trials are to be expected from the defenders of a dying capitalism NOT revolutionaries.
Saint Peter: Days like this I remember why I love this job.
Lenin: "tell whoever is in charge of giving people jobs to not let that jerk Stalin take over, btw who in charge of giving people jobs"
Officer: "that'd be Stalin, sir"
Lenin: *dies*
Took far too much scrolling to find this
Its might blow your head off, but Lenin was the guy who created this position in the government and he assigned Stalin on it.
Nice oversimplified reference
It's actually doubtful that's what happened. This story comes from a single account from Lenin's spouse who wasn't keen on Stalin
But it sounds like a cool story, also doesn't make Stalin look good, so many people like it
East Berlin is YOURS
Holy moly, if I ever find myself in a situation where I'm sharing power with someone like Stalin, I'm super duper "Hey man, you're doing great work. I'm retiring from politics. Think I'm going to head out, maybe to X, as I've always had an interest in minding my own friggin' business on a farm, avoiding politics until the heat death of the universe. If ya ever desire a good recommendation or reference, let me know!"
Then go do exactly that. Yeah, not the bravest move ever but I'd rather be alive than a speedbump.
He'd be paranoid and still purge you lol
the question everyone who learns about the soviets asks- glad it got covered!
Nice shadow-ban reference at the credits! Living under Stalin was like being in a Forum and waking up one day with your account deleted without warning or explanation, your IP blocked, and all your posts removed from the board.
Actually there's no record of Lenin not wanting Stalin to succeed him. His so called testament is just a series of reflections on the attributes and flaws both of Stalin and Trotsky, and you can't draw any conclusion whatsoever on Lenin's preference. Besides that, let's remember he was practically rambling on his deathbed, being angry at Stalin for talking harshly to his wife. It's not a political reflection on his successors whatsoever.
Lenin on his deathbed: Iosef I doubt you are the best candidate to success me. Only half the people will follow you.
Stalin: don't worry, it does not matter, the other half will follow you.
@@martijnb5887bro is writing stalin and lenin fanfiction 💀💀
Lenin didn't want anyone to succeed him, he viewed ussr was his own thing
This is true. I am happy for these facts, in place of elementary stupidity
The vaguely fuzzy hair on all the characters is another tiny comical detail I'm really noticing tonight lol. Thank you for another funny and informative episode!
God be with you out there everybody! ✝️ :)
this is my favorite part of the video 3:07 As many of you will know, Stalin really liked to erase the presence of his victims/ex-allies from the photos next to him after he purged them.
This is the content I watch while eating food
I love these videos, and the humour is just beyond perfect.
Great video! I was always under the impression Trotsky was more of a moderate but this sounds like he was more of a hardliner than Stalin (ignoring the whole being a paranoid, purge-happy megalomaniac thing).
Trotsky would have been worse. He might not have consolidated as much power, but he wasn't against people dying or purges. Chances are he would just start ww2.
Ultimately, what mattered was that Stalin was a savvy politician and benefited greatly from his opponents' lack of skill in that regard.
Trotsky? A moderate? He was such an fanatical zealot of the Church of Marx that even other die-hard *communists* thought he was a bit of an unrealistic loon whose ideas would never work in practice.
Trosky was 100% NOT moderate
@@shevek2954 Right he was like the kind of Bourgeois politician you all love so much liars like Biden and Trump.
''After Lenin came down with a case of the death'' is probably the best start to any video ever
Need to mention, Stalin was a head of HR in Bolshevik party. Basically, he hired people on key position based on loyalty to him only. Even before Lenin's death, Lenin complained that some people in the party disobeying him, because they were loyal to Stalin. Later in 1935, Stalin in his speech said a quote, that "HR is everything" or full quote "The most valuable resource are people. HR is everything". So yeah, Negan is a Stalinist.
This is why the Bourgeois love him so much.
Explain baarle-hertog en baarle-naasau, or just the really weird borders of Belgium next!
"Belgium, this little country between France and the bad one."
Fucking incredible LOL.
This sums up politics very well with the point that inorder to achieve something concessions have to be made.
I love the outros in videos that stalin is in. Every single one he is standing next to someone glaring at them and then they get erased
Got himself unelected, i love how you spin things.. Its the very best
i love how the title just takes it for granted that he could’ve just done that if he wanted to
Please write in your description sources like you used to. Also, thanks for the video!
Stalin was granted the seat of general secretary by Lenin. Purely viewed as a administrative role but which held way more power. It was Stalin who vetted and put forward candidates for party positions and thereby who ruled what. It made him able to pick only those that would in the future ally with him. Further he had oversight and control of communication and transcripts during party meetings. Making him free to edit who said what as he pleased while also knowing full well each members stance on him and others.
During Lenin's time the nr 1 spot in the Soviet government was the chairman followed by the premier. As Lenin's time ended both posts were superseded by the general secretary which was Stalin, a title and post he kept throughout his reign.
Great summary. Informative and well done!
Super simplified. But in a wrap-up quite correct, except - they all had different views on the socialism and development of the USSR. There were many personal issues (including women), and even after this triumph Stalin faced multiple struggles within the party and with the army.
Fun fact: Trotsky's killer was the brother-in-law of Vittorio De Sica, the film director.
By the way, Vittorio De Sica also called himself a "communist" as well, although I don't know his specific faction.
Dude really just went full hunger games
Stalin: let's form an alliance
Everyone else: okay, sounds like a good plan. Safety forever
Stalin: oh yeah, sure sure. "Forever" -however long that might be-
Stalin - You'll be safe until the end of your life.
Triumvirates, great to get to power, and then someone always wins from there. As Caesar, Augustus Caesar and Napoleon how prior ones worked out.
The fact that you actually filled out a small newspaper in 1:26 is brilliant. And, also hilarious.
Trostky: the most popular figure, all over the place, but held little REAL executive power
Stalin: dark figure, only in Moscow, right in the middle of the government, with HUGE REAL executive power.
Lesson: Real power beats popularity
I like that little detail in the outro
Was hoping the fact that Stalinorganized a fancy funeral for Lenin would have been mentioned as well because that was a huge deal as well that won Stalin a lot of support.
I might be the only one, but I sooo wish these videos were a bit slower paced :(
Saint Peter saying no to Lenin entering heaven made me laugh out loud. 0:24
@@nandortorok5876 So the Ukrainians could sink the Leninkva a century later.
We all know James Bissonette would of became the Soviet leader if not for being a patreon supporter
As always pausing to read the newspaper was awesome
Hey man, big fan here. Can you make a video about reactions to fourth crusade when crusaders attacked constantinople.
Lav Trocki suddenly being unemployed is splendid.
Saying Lenin was not a fan of Stalin is a bit silly. Even though I'm a Bukharinist and don't agree with Stalin's policies, Stalin was an extremely reliable Bolshevik, and played a crucial role in solidifying Bolshevik power in Russia both through military means as well as going out of his way to secure funds for the party while leading members like Lenin and Trotsky were in exile. Stalin would arrange bank robberies to acquire funds to funnel Bolshevik activities. Additionally Stalin wrote books that Lenin was praiseworthy of, namely "Marxism and the National Question" even though, it's widely believed that he had a lot of help from Lenin and Bukharin in writing this book. Stalin become the General Secretary while Lenin was still alive. He expressed no reservations about Stalin becoming General Secretary until Stalin was rude to his wife Krupskaya on the phone. Supposedly, Lenin wrote in his last testament that he would rather see a man with better social skills to replace Stalin as he was understandably quite pissed off with Stalin's behaviour, he didn't however name Trotsky. Historians debate as to the validity of Lenin's testament, many believe that this was written by Lenin himself, some like Stephen Kotkin believe that this was forged by Krupskaya.
I think we need to move past the cold war narratives about the Soviet Union and look at things objectively, even if it means sometimes giving people we don't like the benefit of the doubt. It's better to do history the right way, rather than live in ideology.
Oh gawd. I came down with the deads twice last week. Bad at first but then time kind of blurs.
You know another thing Stalin did to increase the Soviet people's support for him was not only organizing Lenin's funeral but personally leading the precession
And he also purposely gave Trotsky the wrong date for the funeral
I still get a kick out of the 'death thump'.
☮
"Politicians may be flawed"
Mmmh yes, the floor is made out of floor
Another excellent video! There's so much more about this particular subject that I've yet to learn!
Excellent and informative content as always!
Yay History Matters video for my birthday :)
Nice video bud. Can you make one on why French Guiana stayed with France?
Because it generates a big chunk of its GDP from U.N spaceships being launched i there, they launch them there because it's the closest European land near the equator
@@barakato UN spaceships??? You mean ESA. And you can have a spaceport in a foreign country, Russia has theirs in Kazakhstan.
Nice touch at the end
“The Soviet government has congratulated Belgium on not becoming Western Germany, but would remind its own neighbors that such independence is not guaranteed.”
‘Belgium, a country between France and the bad one.....’ How are the Netherlands ‘the bad one’?
1:26 the newspaper cutiing, it's hilarious😂
Trotsky did initially support the New Economic Policy and in fact proposed something of the sort one year before its implementation, finding no support for his proposals at that time.
However, Trotsky and the Left Opposition opposed the New Economic Policy later on because circumstances changed that warranted a new policy. So Trotksy and the Left Opposition advocated more state industrialisation and gradual land collectivization (not the forced land collectivization as Stalin would do later on).
Also, Stalin always kept silent when internal disagreements occurred because he never want to burn bridges with whatever other side won. While others fought for their beliefs, Stalin fought for his position.
St. Peter with the no sign made me laugh out loud