remember that fact... Communism and Democracy are both the same utopia that turned out to be lie and been distorted, turned to the "dark side" to dictatorship by inappropriate people.
Basic question, if you say people can't have equal wealth, how can be equal by the law and have free words etc etc? Money is power. Look around what is happening now? Who has money can do whatever wants
Difference between communism and democracy is... that democracy has fallen 2000 years earlier.
@alnotz In Athens... who had right? Freeborn athenians. Rest were rightless workers, outsiders, slaves, DEBT-SLAVES... those freeborns 5-6000 people could vote. NO women votes! Isnt it the same now? We are debts slaves, wage slaves, and the ruling elit makes wars in our names... deal with our hides.
That's it? I don't feel like this documentary did the best job of explaining everything, and it just kind of ends. Where does it talk about the fall of communism? What happened once Lenin came to power? I'm trying to write a 7 to 10 page paper on the Russian Revolution for my Advanced Comp class in high school and I hoped this would be a good place to start, maybe I was wrong...
@grant658 Holy crap Im glad Im finished with school :) For years after it I still had nightmares of my final exams. Anyway, I think they focussed spefically on the revolution itself and not after Lenin came to power. Maybe search for a Lenin specific doc and then match up this and that one.
I think the russian revolution is the most heart warming genuine attempt by humans to gain control of their own destiny. Rather than have it shaped by ruling elite. It's a damn shame that the love of power corrupted the leaders of this movement. The only way this could ever work is in a situation where a single leader is unacceptable to the people. a form of "direct democracy" instead with speakers rather than leaders, As well as at least 75% of the worlds countries would need to be involved.
@willweeverlearn OMFG you can't be serious.. That very comment leads me to believe you have never read a book on the Russian Revolution. Lenin destroyed everything, his own people had to be fed with emergency relief from the West. He murdered people left and right, he utterly destroyed industry and in 1921 3/4th of the food eaten was supplied through the black market.
Where does this romantic image of Communism come from in young people?
@ChannelingusLLC I never said it worked out. I also said the leaders of the revolution like all leaders were incompetent as well as megalomaniacs. The point I was making is that average working class people tried read tried to take control of thier own lives. The "failures" of communism are evident. Those working class humans were genuine in thier attempt to create a more equal society but like in all revolutions were sidelined by egocentric new rulers with their own agendas.
Too bad the last free election by Lenin was also arbitrarily nullified with unilateral arrogance by Lenin. So much for throwing out the "priviledged bureaucracy" only to impose Red Terror rule inspired by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Thank god for the CIA an outgrowth of the OSS that was also created as a response to one-party dictatorships. Hell, if 2 wrongs make a right why not a dozen more?
"If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn."
Rubbish - c'mon, that's not not the point either. People were slaughtered exactly because the power was taken by a priviledged bureaucracy, that sold out the promises and traditions of the October Revolution. How about considering the bloody crimes of capitalist regimes throughout the world, CIA-coups and what not?!
Um .... what just happened there? This started off as a well-made documentary. Then, out of the blue, it's in to three or four minutes of Reds. Back to the first doco for a bit and then it's more Reds, one or two 1960s US B&W docos, Reds .... then the original doco is totally replaced, culminating with one the B&W docos using a voice actor for John Reed, the very guy Beattie's playing. Then, um, that's it. Seriously, what just happened? Feel like i've been baited and switched, but to what?
Princip and Ulyanov caused most of the worlds problems today with their ignorant actions. Revenge and hatred is never the solution. Killing the Tsar did not bring his brother back nor did killing the Duke make Bosnia part of Serbia.
Or than Tsar should have not killed anyone but showed mercy to his bro. Ulyanov would have just been another arrogant nobleman lawyer and world would have moved on. WW1 still would have broken out though. How even Kerensky was too weak to lead Russia. It is pointless to speculate what might have happend.
@BENNYSIEGEL90 hi there=) hehe yeah thanks for the info =) hehe yeah u r right about its pointless to speculate, but still :P its so sad I mean the whole history of our world :P do you think there would be some kind of WORLD UNION some day, where all countries will unite together :P?
@BENNYSIEGEL90 "How even Kerensky was too weak to lead Russia."
"The tragedy of the Russian Revolution was that the people were too weak politically to determine its outcome". Orlando Figes.
Kerensky was a melodramatic blowhard and his task was all but impossible. For the population to suddenly go from an autocratic state to the freest country on the planet was too much. Few had any idea of how to handle it because they had not been exposed to other forms of government. They knew nothing else.
Topics: DISCUSSION ON DEMOCRACY, The Weapon That Can Break The Cycle Of War And Terrorism, Debated Issues, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
balanceddiet.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
AN IDEAL STRONGEST FORM OF DEMOCRACY INCLUDED (See Subchapter 3.1.2.1, Chapter 3, of Part One.).
If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn. If this socialist paradise is so virtueous why does violence have to be used to achieve it? I am not my brothers economic keeper and he is not responsible for my material wellbeing. From each according to his ability to each according to his need disintegrates personal responsibility;humans will lean on others unjustly
If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn. If this socialist paradise is so virtueous why does violence have to be used to achieve it? I am not my brothers economic keeper and he is not responsible for my material wellbeing. From each according to his ability to each according to his need disintegrates personal responsibility;humans will lean on others,unjustly
@chickenwretch You and others like you are holding our species back. We're meant to rely and help each other, not try to horde as much property as we possibly can, everyone else be damned. Violence has to be used to achieve communism because those in power, and those who own the means of production will always refuse to give it up voluntarily. If they did, there wouldn't be any need to kill them, as they would become one with the Collective.
@ProfHojoFan The only ones hoarding money and power were the Politboro. You think it's alright to demand the greater portion of earned wages for the collective? Invariably a good portion of that collective are inefficient or lazy or lack the natural talent (hint hint) to pull their own weight, to say nothing of contributing to the imaginary "collective". Even small, bohemian, socialist experiments fail because of individuality. You want your individualty disintegrated for for an impossible scam?
@chickenwretch Do save your weak arguments. What facts, statistics,etc, do you have that the poor are lazy? And if they lack the natural talent, but break their backs in putting in 12 hours of work every day, shouldn't someone washing toilets earn the same as someone managing a bank? Maybe some poor are lazy, but maybe the greatest problem of all is that poverty is cyclical; without having the money for education or being in the social elites to grant opportunities, the poor will remain poor.
@chickenwretch Do save your weak arguments. What facts, statistics,etc, do you have that the poor are lazy? And if they lack the natural talent, but break their backs in putting in 12 hours of work every day, shouldn't someone washing toilets earn the same as someone managing a bank? Maybe some poor are lazy, but maybe the greatest problem of all is that poverty is cyclical; without having the money for education or being in the social elites to grant opportunities, the poor will remain poor.
@Titi1ShadyLady You said it and so did Christ,"the poor will always be among you." Your answer then is to apply merit to the needy, from the producers? How long do you think that will last? Like Lady Thatcher commented, "the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money." Generalizing statements you find disagreeable only obfiscate an already perplexing issue. I know when I chose to be lazy I didn't have any money,but didn't expect others to pull my load. Talent?oh well
@chickenwretch Sad for you, that you chose to be lazy. I'm not talking about people who are born in developed countries to middle class parents, where either the government or the parents will make sure that you get the education you need, the values to shape your life. I was not defending socialism, for I do indeed believe that socialism has its pitfalls, but rather, I was defending the idea behind socialism; that to balance the differences is good.
@Titi1ShadyLady I agree, but how far can a society equitably and justly go to insure this balance? In practice all the world has seen is the cure often times being worse than the ailment, in the attempt to counter inequities. Wouldn't raising the standard of living for all be better than affecting the capital/labor balance, offsetting incentive for ideals that demand the real bloodletting? An historical model of yours and mine ideals ,have yet to be demonstrated in an humane way.
@motleycruesader I don't think your equation is accurate, alot of presupposition i.e. everyone would own a business. Not required, look at Scandinavian models, howbeit small, homogeneous nations. But this also uncovers the fact that socialism eventually collapses. Look into the evolution of the GDR, it's a perfect example of a huge failed experiment and a microcosm of larger inadequecies.
@Camerameister1 Yes I agree with your fine insight on this. Sorry for not responding as of late, I really do appreciate your communique. think we have more in common than not. Thanks for clearly demonstrating how you arrive to your conclusions. This helps me see how others think and dulls my haughty edge. Take care man.
@chickenwretch Virtually all the economic growth in this country over the past 30 years has gone to the top 5%, with the overwhelming majority of it going to the top 1%. Do you consider this a proper capital/labor balance?
@ProfHojoFan Listen to yourself, you are saying we need to help each other. Is that not holding our "species" back? If we need to help, isnt that a drain on the collective?
@chickenwretch I would think that these "bloody attempts to impose it" come from the fact that most revolutions occur in places where the situation, be it economic or humanitarian, has grown desperate. It isn't just communism that has had bloody revolutions (the French Revolution and the American one, to a lesser degree), it's just one of the newest ideas people will kill each other over. It is an ideal, and although it's unreachable through revolution, people should work peacefully towards it.
@KingLeonidas3267 Agreed with all you said but Stalins bloodletting continued for his entire reign. He employed "war communism" to achieve most of his 5 Year Plans and failed to practice "communism in one country" post WWII. All that knew him braced for yet one last purge, starting with Jews and likely slaughtering Red Army heros. Fortunately, the Soviet militars were not to tolerate this final bloodletting.
@chickenwretch Indeed, Stalin was rather insane. personally, as one who tends to sympathize with communism while remaining fairly centrist, I think he was the very worst thing that could have happened so soon after the revolution, especially considering that by the 80's, the Soviet Union was doomed to collapse, despite vast improvements in terms of freedom of speech and human rights, due to previous unsustainable economic policies by Stalin and his successors. It's kind of sad, really.
@KingLeonidas3267 Yes I agree; communist expressions were dealt a real setback with Stalins brutal regime. While viewing communism with a wary eye, I think Tito was more genuine than the Soviet or Maoist brands. Small, egalitarian co-ops can be viable provided anarchic elements aren't allowed to dissemble the structure. I know I rail against communism but am amazed and captivated by the Soviet experiment. I'm watching a doc right now called Russia the Missing Years, about Soviet intel apparatus.
@chickenwretch Well what's always unfortunate is that communism rises in countries that are in terrible economic and humanitarian situations. I'm not entirely unconvinced that, in a future where such basic things as gay marriage and separation of church and state are no longer in question, communism could be applied. Of course, given the state of the world, this seems a long way off. Even in America, these things are an issue, and they are a major problem in poorer countries.
@CharmingTenshi The majority of the Russian people took over their own country from a minority of Russian people so that they could kill this minority and give absolute power to a tiny minority of that former majority...
The Russian Revolution went the full circle from a power elite/police state to a public mandate to a power elite/police state. Take a look at the rise of the liberal zemstvos and the evolution of the soviets.
The idea of Russia being a happy kingdom which was stormed by a bunch of communist zealots who shot everyone is a pretty long way from the truth. Russia under the Tsars was every bit as bad as under the Bolsheviks.
@GummyBrains basically its jealousy at the astounding success of capitalist democracy over communist dictatorship.
capitalism has its faults of course, but the spectacular wealth it brings enriches the nation and raises the standard of living. Towards the end of the Cold War, things were so bad that the Soviet Union had to make requests for financial assistance from the United States because its economy was in complete havoc.
If you consider the state Russia was in, 90% of the population starving and in poverty 1/8th of the population lost to the German advance in one year, 4 million soldier's dead in one year, soldiers were limited -on average- to fire 3 bullets a day. Russia was in the worst state it had been since the war with Japan, only nothing was being done to stop this war. The Bolsheviks promised to end the war and they did. If the PG didn't want an uprising, why did THEY arm the Bolsheviks?
Mainly because of the many wars mainly caused by America. Mainly, Vietnam. America had no ligitamate reason to invade or set up their own government there and millions of people died including over 50, 000 Americans. The war was so unpopular that soldiers were booed by their own people as they got off the boats. I know because I was there. That is the main reason other countries hate America.
But I'm sure they don't hate American people, just things America has done.
@GummyBrains I 2nd the question; America allows selfcriticism but all these communist nations did not. Constitutional system can abide communists, to Americas detriment. But communist governments have never allowed anything but a 1 party dictatorship. Selfhating Americans are brainwashed, stoned, 1 dimensional, and lack the experience of being enslaved, at least to the degree that the former Iron Curtain nations endured. Good question though.
@chickenwretch "But communist governments have never allowed anything but a 1 party dictatorship." For a large time the soviets ruled until the armies of america and the rest of the allied powers came and killed all of the militant workers allowing the buerocracy to rise and that eventualy led to whats called state capitalism under stalin. stalins power was counter revoltionary real marxists beleive in the protection of workers private property (but not capital propety).
@1guitarkid Try your hand at something you know, obviously this isn't, We're not talking about what would have happened but what did happen. And if this struggle was hijacked by the likes of Stalin why did this oneparty rule occur in virtually every other communist paradise? Maybe they had the exact variables working against them too? No, they were not the persecuted but the persecutors. 2party rule in America hasn't led to Gulags Purges mass terror forced collectives etc. Come on, stay real.
@chickenwretch "...why did this oneparty rule occur in virtually every other communist paradise?"
You can only answer that if you know what came before. Russia was a police state from 1881 until the Revolution. During the Revolution it went full circle from police state to popular mandate to police state again.
Check Orlando Figes book "A People's Tragedy" p. 124.
On that basis, it is impossible to say why all communist states became dictatorships.
They also beleive in the revolution is individual decent. the people who tried to stop this were counter revolutionaries. Also you claim that America is democratic when only half of the poeple vote because they beleive that they do not have a choice, only two parties wo are exactly the same and support the same ruling class ideals. The democracy of the west is just as fake as the communism of the east.
@chickenwretch The system they applied to the so called "socialist states" of the twentieth century in no manner represented the communist ideology, nor even socialism for that matter.
@chickenwretch That is a very arrogant position to be on. Honestly, can you not see that your preconceived thoughts have allowed you to look at the data of history and pick out the parts that you like, fit them to your liking and leave the rest?
@TheTodd1023 You calling me arrogant, is arrogant. You don't even know me and went out of the way to achieve what? Tell me what I left out, Mr.25 year old? What in your years of experience, are you going to enlighten me about? Please think before posting.
The Bolsheviks engineered an armed coup against the new govt. They took power by force not peaceful elections. They then fought a civil war to control Russia. Marxists believed all workers would unite & end national borders. But national pride & ethnic differences proved stronger than proletarian unity.
Communism and Capitalism are great forms of government ONLY ON PAPER! people at the top get greedy like Stalin and American business man. When it Comes to government you would take power and money over your people. Most people pick power and money over there own people. Money and Power changes people... you say it don't let me ask you have you ever had Money and Power? You never been in the situation neither have I but History shows it.
@WolfytheWolf5667 It's not that evil. Without capitalism you wouldn't be able to buy a computer nor access the internet, you wouldn't have access to choice of clothing and food etc. It's not a perfect system but it beats the other alternatives i.e. communism/socialism/maoism
@roby1211 This is easy to say if you haven't read the basic tenets of those philosophies. Virtually all political and economic ideals espouse "bottom up" administration except for the likes of monarchism and theocracy.
Marxism does not espouse violent revolution. That was the work of Lenin etc. Communism is based on the liberal zemtsvos which sprang up all around rural Russia after 1861.
The Bolsheviks became powerful because they were influenced by violent revolutionary nihilists.
@Camerameister Sorry I don't quite get you're point. Are you therefore saying that capitalism is not the better alternative to communism once a better understanding of the latter is reached??
if its a crime that gaddafi is killing is own poeple, the demostrators, it is a crime in russia as well where tzars killed his own people the demostrators.
....again, this same thing happened in USA as well, Tzar Nicolai is like Gaddafi.
@stalinwasright Sorry but anyone who likes communism is either ignorant of the 150,000,000 people starved, shot and tortured to death by communists, or they're a moron. Which are you?
@Bergertim Haha your an American no? btw I'm to an American but you must open up your mind to history not be brain washed by the Teacher who teaches you. you must look at both sides then decide for yourself.
@Bergertim This is just silly. That bloke is plain dreaming but so are you. That figure is bullshit espoused by Jonah Goldberg and has little basis in fact. This video is a poor analysis of the Russian Revolution and you have to do a lot of reading to understand how it really happened and how political ideals were prostituted in the name of communism.
Resorting to political trench warfare is no way to understand how this or any other revolution, including the next evolves. Don't be a victim.
@Camerameister Actually, you're wrong. Jonah Goldberg is 100% correct. Think about it, before you repeat what the government told you to say about this subject: Fascism, just like communism, is all about a big government, which has the power of life or death over its citizens. Take away their hatred for Jews and fascism very closely resembles modern liberalism: they believed the government should control health care and virtually every aspect of the economy.
@Bergertim You have absolutely no idea how the theory of Communism works. You are confusing it completely with a totalitarian state which claimed to be communist.
Lenin advocated local government - made up of individuals - telling the national leader what to do. He called it "direct democracy". In it's theoretical form it is actually minimalist government. Of course, that has never happened.
What ever gave you the idea my government told me to say anything?
@Camerameister Communist "theory" has never been successfully tried and it never will. Every single communist state has devolved into a totalitarian state. That is why all communists must be killed.
@Bergertim By killing people because of their political beliefs you are just becoming as bad as them. If Capitalism is so good then surely it would be better to have an open discussion so people can think for themselves and decide which ideology/system is better- that's called democracy, and it's not compatible with murdering people based on what they believe.
@Bergertim And Goldberg was wrong. He makes all sorts of assumptions he can't validate.
The concept of big government/small government is the opposite how the theory works. All but monarchism and theocracy advocate "bottom up" government but how it's preached and how it's practiced are two different things.
To understand why so many so-called communist countires became totalitarian, you have to know what came first. Tsarist Russia was a police state from 1881.
@Camerameister No, you are wrong. I suspect that you never even read his book and have no idea what you're talking about. He backs up every single claim with historical examples. Goebels, for example, Hitler's propaganda minister, said himself that there was very little difference between communism and fascism. Most likely, from what you have said, you are a communist who refuses to see the similarities, due to your own misguided ideology.
@Bergertim You're wrong on both counts. I have Goldberg's book. He is neither a historian nor a political scientist and tries to make history fit his perceptions.
If you could take your ego out of the equation you'd see that my political convictions are as irrelevant as your own. FYI; I'm not a communist and if I was I'd certainly admit it.
Goebbels was probably right.
You're just another brainwashed right-wing yank who is convinced by Beck that he can think for himself.
@Bergertim And you are clearly a closed loop as far as learning anything is concerned.
You're the type who keeps on repeating what he's told; every maxim, every motto. You know the one about people who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it?
You're it friend. When you refuse to listen to people who know better and you're convinced a bunch of people must be killed, you are a totalitarian - the very thing you claim to despise.
@Bergertim "Fascism, just like communism, is all about a big government,"
What would you say the difference was between Libertarian Capitalism and Libertarian Communism? If you can grasp that concept then you will realise why Goldberg is wrong.
"...which has the power of life or death over its citizens."
Do you support the death penalty?
"...before you repeat what the government told you to say..."
@stalinwasright There is no official anarchy in Somalia, it's just a weak government, that has been overrun by militia groups in most of the country. Within those groups, there is no anarchy, there is a political/military system, that is similar to our governments. We don't yet know, what a "peaceful" and "organized" anarchy would look like, we have seen countries fall to "anarchy", meaning they don't controll their land, but a real anarchy, a deliberate lack of government doesn't exist anywhere
@eksiarvamus Look up what happened in the libertarian and anarchist communities of Aragon and Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War. Anarcho-syndicalist collectives were actually quite successful but only for a short time.
@stalinwasright Judging from your words, you must be from Russia. You were probably indocrinated to love communism at a very young age, probably your entire life. How sad. Once again, you are wrong. Somalia is an example of having no government, otherwise known as anarchy. The United States, for the first 150 years it existed, is an example of a small government, with maximum freedom for its people. We are now a socialist state and will probably soon collapse, thanks to socialism.
@stalinwasright Let me clue you in on something: there is very little difference between communism and fascism. The best form of government is a minimal government, which is for the people, by the people, with strong freedom and capitalism. People who live under either communist or fascist states are little more than slaves of the state. Communism, socialism and fascism are all based upon Marxism. They are all virtually the same thing, with slight variations.
@stalinwasright Sorry, but you are 100% incorrect. Did you even take a history class? Have you ever studied the Holodomor, where Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians of all ages, to death? And no, people don't have a choice between "Stalin and Hitler." There are many other forms of government, and to say that these are the only two is a huge lie. But, that is the only way to make people believe in communism, right? With revisionist history and outright lies. Give it up. Nobody wants communism.
Reading the video description given by the uploader, I fail to see how this documentary would convince me even for a second to become communist.
This documentary deals in a vague way with the promises given to the Russian people by the Bolsheviks, but not with the brutal reality of communism the followed it.
The world wasn't ready for socialism back then. The revolution didn't spread, the Soviet Union was isolated from the rest of the world, and soon degenerated into a state capitalist, totalitarian dictatorship. The true world revolution is yet to come. And it will come, because capitalism, as every system that is based on the exploitation of the many by the few, is already digging its own grave.
Apart from overthrowing the old order the Bolsheviks really had no plans and had to defend themselves from day one. I'm sure the repressive measures had a logic of their own until, by the time the Kronshtadt rebellion came they were defending themselves against a genuine rebellion.
I don't believe that the Bolsheviks were just inately evil.
@ironx00 Where, besides Stalin, did they lie? I'm not communist just so you know, but I like to defend the truth. In my opinion Stalin was the main problem of Russia and despite of that, it doesn't affect their ideology, just Russia. Let me describe a good example; If you go to the mausoleum in red square, you'll see on one side, Lenin, formally and intellectually dressed. If you look to the other side, you'll see Joseph Stalin, military dressed with all his decorations. Think about that.
I have been to France. The fact I don't live there doesn't mean I am any less informed about its political system than you are. France is a capitalist system, it has private ownership of the means of production, it also still has a fairly strong trade union movement and you often get 'Socialist' (read Social Democratic) governments that are in power or have a large number of seats. They are not the entirety of the government so there's no way they could produce a socialist system.
The definition of Communism is where the means of production are collectively owned, the wage system is abolished, and the state has disappeared. Social Democracy is where left wing parties attempt to reform or change the capitalist system to make it more equal. Socialism is where either through revolution or elections the state uses a high level of socialisation policies similar to that of Social Democrats. This can have can have varying levels of police or state oppression.
Many Communists or Communist Parties believe that Socialism (state redistribution of wealth) is a necessary step towards Communism (the dictatorship of the proletariat). Thus, states like the USSR were not Communist, they were Socialist - the state (as opposed to the people) controlled the M.O.P and the wage system continued to exist with inequality. They are known as Communist because they were led by Communist parties who believed such a state was IN TRANSITION towards a desired Communism.
@craigshrimpton1 I'm not sure a lot of communists still believe in dictatorship of proletariat. And socialism is not necessarly a state redistribution. However you're right on the rest. Russian Revolution was dead the day the bolchevicks had to make war to survive. I guess Trillos could interests about the Commune of Paris in 1871 (it's a key to understand how radical some socialists became). Almost nothing is natural, everything has explanation.
@craigshrimpton1 This is true of almost all political ideals including the current Libertarian fad.
Lenin believed that revolution was necessary because the natural process was too slow. He believed that the state would have to transition from Tsarist to capitalist to communist but that the capitalist phase would just enslave people for longer.
"Inside every revolutionary is a policeman" - Flaubert.
It really doesn't matter if you're a communist, libertarian, socialist or anarchist.
@craigshrimpton1 You don't need a centralized government to do the job and you can always implement more democracy and decentralization in the process. Like you said, there still existed a monetary system and disgusting class distinctions. Although some reforms were made, the so called "socialist states" were mainly socialist by word.
Say what you want about communism and socialism. But in a classes society the capitalists, monarchs and nazis go kaput!! And that's good enough for me, I can live in a world where my paycheck is fixed and I dont have to worry about people stealing from me or having a broken spirit because of my country being fascist and corrupt. I can have a home, education and time for my family.
Communism is a form of socialism. Socialism is type of economy. Communism is a form of government with a socialist economy. Which basically ruins the free idea of socialism. Because in communism your under the dictatorship of a state, and everyone has to work and to as their told. I mean look at North Korea, outsiders aren't even allowed in the fucking country. WTF!
The end of serfdom resulted from the Revolution. Statements that it was going away anyways are as credible as the notion that slavery was going away anyway in the US at the time of the civil war.
I hope this isn't how the Middle East revolutions turn out, particularly Egypt. Ayatolla Khomeini used Lenin's strategies: boycott the moderate parliament that had replaced the monarch, set up a parallel institution in its place, and then brutally take power using the army and force. Hope we have learned since then, and that the current revolutionaries are aware of what can go wrong
I hope this isn't how the Middle East revolutions turn out, particularly Egypt. Ayatolla Khomeini used Lenin's strategies: boycott the moderate parliament that had replaced the monarch, set up a parallel institution in its place, and then brutally take power using the army and force.
why cant we just be all treated equally where everyone has an equal rights, equal share,and equal life no distinction no discrimination and no classes between people no matter who you are where you are and what you do you will be treated equal to the society after all we are all equal as human beings...
@judas666iscariot we are all human beings, which is exactly the reason everyone cannot be equal. Might I recommend reading "the Prince" by machiavelli? It presents an interesting view on the human nature.
i wish phillipines my country would turn into communism
i'm sick of this capitalist state. only the rich people have freedom here if you are born poor you are just like a shit to the community if you have done something you'll go to jail but if you are rich you wouldn't go to jail
if you are poor you cant have medical attention in the hospital
but if you are rich you will have all the attentions in the hospital...
remember that fact... Communism and Democracy are both the same utopia that turned out to be lie and been distorted, turned to the "dark side" to dictatorship by inappropriate people.
Basic question, if you say people can't have equal wealth, how can be equal by the law and have free words etc etc? Money is power. Look around what is happening now? Who has money can do whatever wants
Difference between communism and democracy is... that democracy has fallen 2000 years earlier.
alnotz 1 week ago
@alnotz In Athens... who had right? Freeborn athenians. Rest were rightless workers, outsiders, slaves, DEBT-SLAVES... those freeborns 5-6000 people could vote. NO women votes! Isnt it the same now? We are debts slaves, wage slaves, and the ruling elit makes wars in our names... deal with our hides.
alnotz 1 week ago
must admit this finishes rather adruptly...what happens next??
JT2012a 1 week ago
@JT2012a Part 4 isn't uploaded for some reason, best to find another upload I guess!
Judokkaa 1 week ago
not sure why the film has a yank in it? seems a bit strange.
JT2012a 1 week ago
The Russian Revolution by Richard Pipes <-- the best analysis of early communism in print.
ChannelingusLLC 2 weeks ago
That's it? I don't feel like this documentary did the best job of explaining everything, and it just kind of ends. Where does it talk about the fall of communism? What happened once Lenin came to power? I'm trying to write a 7 to 10 page paper on the Russian Revolution for my Advanced Comp class in high school and I hoped this would be a good place to start, maybe I was wrong...
grant658 2 weeks ago
@grant658 Holy crap Im glad Im finished with school :) For years after it I still had nightmares of my final exams. Anyway, I think they focussed spefically on the revolution itself and not after Lenin came to power. Maybe search for a Lenin specific doc and then match up this and that one.
108Dax 2 weeks ago
@grant658 It only covers the revolution. Lenin survived beyond the revolution period.
ChannelingusLLC 2 weeks ago
I think the russian revolution is the most heart warming genuine attempt by humans to gain control of their own destiny. Rather than have it shaped by ruling elite. It's a damn shame that the love of power corrupted the leaders of this movement. The only way this could ever work is in a situation where a single leader is unacceptable to the people. a form of "direct democracy" instead with speakers rather than leaders, As well as at least 75% of the worlds countries would need to be involved.
willweeverlearn 2 weeks ago
@willweeverlearn OMFG you can't be serious.. That very comment leads me to believe you have never read a book on the Russian Revolution. Lenin destroyed everything, his own people had to be fed with emergency relief from the West. He murdered people left and right, he utterly destroyed industry and in 1921 3/4th of the food eaten was supplied through the black market.
Where does this romantic image of Communism come from in young people?
ChannelingusLLC 2 weeks ago
@ChannelingusLLC I never said it worked out. I also said the leaders of the revolution like all leaders were incompetent as well as megalomaniacs. The point I was making is that average working class people tried read tried to take control of thier own lives. The "failures" of communism are evident. Those working class humans were genuine in thier attempt to create a more equal society but like in all revolutions were sidelined by egocentric new rulers with their own agendas.
willweeverlearn 2 weeks ago
They`re not singing so loud today!!
Plainsfyre 3 weeks ago
Too bad the last free election by Lenin was also arbitrarily nullified with unilateral arrogance by Lenin. So much for throwing out the "priviledged bureaucracy" only to impose Red Terror rule inspired by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Thank god for the CIA an outgrowth of the OSS that was also created as a response to one-party dictatorships. Hell, if 2 wrongs make a right why not a dozen more?
chickenwretch 1 month ago
How come there's so much bloody anti-socialism under a video series that *counters* the bourgeois slander and garbage about the russian revolution.
Counterreactionary 1 month ago
"If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn."
Rubbish - c'mon, that's not not the point either. People were slaughtered exactly because the power was taken by a priviledged bureaucracy, that sold out the promises and traditions of the October Revolution. How about considering the bloody crimes of capitalist regimes throughout the world, CIA-coups and what not?!
Counterreactionary 1 month ago
It's Warren Beauty & Diane Keaton in "Reds"
CosmicFork 1 month ago
The "Ten days that shook the world"..
What movie are those scenes from, at 7:45?
Counterreactionary 2 months ago
@Counterreactionary Reds (1981)
Virgjans12 1 month ago
@Virgjans12
Thanks there
Counterreactionary 1 month ago
Watch my videos and join my dictatorship
MrRapperE 2 months ago
Communism looks great on paper
LifeSpectrum 2 months ago
thanks. now i won't have to study :)
SOFTIHUVVET 2 months ago
America won. The Soviets lost. Get over it. The soviet union was a communist dictatorship.
AmericanAirlinesRule 3 months ago
@AmericanAirlinesRule The USA and the USSR were as bad as eachother!
imperialcommisar 2 months ago
@AmericanAirlinesRule America is not a dictatorship?because they have one party more than soviet russia?
america is dictatorship to dont fool yourself presidents change but their wars never stops.
schattenfaust 2 months ago
What's the black and white movie? It looks good. Happy 94th Anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution!
somewhatichiban 3 months ago
for mother russia!
RusiianDog 3 months ago
Um .... what just happened there? This started off as a well-made documentary. Then, out of the blue, it's in to three or four minutes of Reds. Back to the first doco for a bit and then it's more Reds, one or two 1960s US B&W docos, Reds .... then the original doco is totally replaced, culminating with one the B&W docos using a voice actor for John Reed, the very guy Beattie's playing. Then, um, that's it. Seriously, what just happened? Feel like i've been baited and switched, but to what?
davidmoore651 3 months ago in playlist More videos from ricoalexander
@davidmoore651 maybe showing what happened from a movie! At least that is how I am looking at.....
nari1254 3 months ago
A bit cheap of this documentary using slices from a TV movie as filler.
madhammudeux 3 months ago
Princip and Ulyanov caused most of the worlds problems today with their ignorant actions. Revenge and hatred is never the solution. Killing the Tsar did not bring his brother back nor did killing the Duke make Bosnia part of Serbia.
BENNYSIEGEL90 4 months ago
they've got some weird ass vehicles
lovelawnangle2 4 months ago
The moive in the middel of the documentary. Wich one is it :)???
trion987 4 months ago
tzar should had killed Lenin and Stalin, then the world would look much better today =) and hitler should been allowed to enter that Art School =)
JohanOlsson 4 months ago
@JohanOlsson Eftertänksamt Johan :)
lundholm4 4 months ago
@lundholm4 haha eller hur :P
JohanOlsson 4 months ago
@JohanOlsson Ahh...the wisdom of small children...
Borzhe moi!
Camerameister1 4 months ago
@Camerameister1 hehe yeah =)))))))) have a nice weekend =) and upcoming week :P Cheers =)
JohanOlsson 4 months ago
@JohanOlsson
Or than Tsar should have not killed anyone but showed mercy to his bro. Ulyanov would have just been another arrogant nobleman lawyer and world would have moved on. WW1 still would have broken out though. How even Kerensky was too weak to lead Russia. It is pointless to speculate what might have happend.
BENNYSIEGEL90 4 months ago
@BENNYSIEGEL90 hi there=) hehe yeah thanks for the info =) hehe yeah u r right about its pointless to speculate, but still :P its so sad I mean the whole history of our world :P do you think there would be some kind of WORLD UNION some day, where all countries will unite together :P?
JohanOlsson 4 months ago
@BENNYSIEGEL90 "How even Kerensky was too weak to lead Russia."
"The tragedy of the Russian Revolution was that the people were too weak politically to determine its outcome". Orlando Figes.
Kerensky was a melodramatic blowhard and his task was all but impossible. For the population to suddenly go from an autocratic state to the freest country on the planet was too much. Few had any idea of how to handle it because they had not been exposed to other forms of government. They knew nothing else.
Camerameister1 4 months ago
Was this video composed of many different documentaries? I'm so confused ...
HAPPYGALORE 4 months ago
get that fucking typing sound out of the background
ZphykTESHD 5 months ago
Uh...is there a part 4 to this? Just wondering..amidst all the arguing...lolol
UniqueGirlXliving 5 months ago
National Socialism is The only Socialism that has ever worked.
Eldernesh 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: DISCUSSION ON DEMOCRACY, The Weapon That Can Break The Cycle Of War And Terrorism, Debated Issues, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
balanceddiet.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
AN IDEAL STRONGEST FORM OF DEMOCRACY INCLUDED (See Subchapter 3.1.2.1, Chapter 3, of Part One.).
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn. If this socialist paradise is so virtueous why does violence have to be used to achieve it? I am not my brothers economic keeper and he is not responsible for my material wellbeing. From each according to his ability to each according to his need disintegrates personal responsibility;humans will lean on others unjustly
chickenwretch 5 months ago 10
If some posit that "communism" has never been employed, what are we to make of the bloody attempts to impose it? I don't think any ism is worthy enough that has to slash and burn. If this socialist paradise is so virtueous why does violence have to be used to achieve it? I am not my brothers economic keeper and he is not responsible for my material wellbeing. From each according to his ability to each according to his need disintegrates personal responsibility;humans will lean on others,unjustly
chickenwretch 5 months ago 2
@chickenwretch You and others like you are holding our species back. We're meant to rely and help each other, not try to horde as much property as we possibly can, everyone else be damned. Violence has to be used to achieve communism because those in power, and those who own the means of production will always refuse to give it up voluntarily. If they did, there wouldn't be any need to kill them, as they would become one with the Collective.
ProfHojoFan 5 months ago
@ProfHojoFan The only ones hoarding money and power were the Politboro. You think it's alright to demand the greater portion of earned wages for the collective? Invariably a good portion of that collective are inefficient or lazy or lack the natural talent (hint hint) to pull their own weight, to say nothing of contributing to the imaginary "collective". Even small, bohemian, socialist experiments fail because of individuality. You want your individualty disintegrated for for an impossible scam?
chickenwretch 5 months ago 2
@chickenwretch Do save your weak arguments. What facts, statistics,etc, do you have that the poor are lazy? And if they lack the natural talent, but break their backs in putting in 12 hours of work every day, shouldn't someone washing toilets earn the same as someone managing a bank? Maybe some poor are lazy, but maybe the greatest problem of all is that poverty is cyclical; without having the money for education or being in the social elites to grant opportunities, the poor will remain poor.
Titi1ShadyLady 5 months ago
@chickenwretch Do save your weak arguments. What facts, statistics,etc, do you have that the poor are lazy? And if they lack the natural talent, but break their backs in putting in 12 hours of work every day, shouldn't someone washing toilets earn the same as someone managing a bank? Maybe some poor are lazy, but maybe the greatest problem of all is that poverty is cyclical; without having the money for education or being in the social elites to grant opportunities, the poor will remain poor.
Titi1ShadyLady 5 months ago
@Titi1ShadyLady You said it and so did Christ,"the poor will always be among you." Your answer then is to apply merit to the needy, from the producers? How long do you think that will last? Like Lady Thatcher commented, "the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money." Generalizing statements you find disagreeable only obfiscate an already perplexing issue. I know when I chose to be lazy I didn't have any money,but didn't expect others to pull my load. Talent?oh well
chickenwretch 5 months ago 2
@chickenwretch Sad for you, that you chose to be lazy. I'm not talking about people who are born in developed countries to middle class parents, where either the government or the parents will make sure that you get the education you need, the values to shape your life. I was not defending socialism, for I do indeed believe that socialism has its pitfalls, but rather, I was defending the idea behind socialism; that to balance the differences is good.
Titi1ShadyLady 5 months ago
@Titi1ShadyLady I agree, but how far can a society equitably and justly go to insure this balance? In practice all the world has seen is the cure often times being worse than the ailment, in the attempt to counter inequities. Wouldn't raising the standard of living for all be better than affecting the capital/labor balance, offsetting incentive for ideals that demand the real bloodletting? An historical model of yours and mine ideals ,have yet to be demonstrated in an humane way.
chickenwretch 5 months ago 4
@chickenwretch Capitalism only works because there are poor people to work for the rich people.
If you raise the standard of living for the poor then everyone would own a business and no one would work...
That is precisely the reason that the rich get richer and the poor poorer.
It is a pyramid scheme.
motleycruesader 5 months ago
@motleycruesader I don't think your equation is accurate, alot of presupposition i.e. everyone would own a business. Not required, look at Scandinavian models, howbeit small, homogeneous nations. But this also uncovers the fact that socialism eventually collapses. Look into the evolution of the GDR, it's a perfect example of a huge failed experiment and a microcosm of larger inadequecies.
chickenwretch 5 months ago 2
@chickenwretch I am not a capitalist nor communist but I rather believe in a hybrid of the political spectrum.
I suppose in theory I am a centrist but practically I am left of center and more anarchist than authoritarian.
I believe in nationalized industry and direct democracy with a value system based on time spent working and higher salaries for jobs with shortages.
I believe in the abolition of inheritance so every new generation makes it's own way economically and intellectually!
Cheers
motleycruesader 5 months ago 2
@chickenwretch But that is not a defence of Capitalism. That is a criticism of East German Socialism.
Not quite the same thing, if you see what I mean.
Camerameister1 4 months ago
@Camerameister1 Yes I agree with your fine insight on this. Sorry for not responding as of late, I really do appreciate your communique. think we have more in common than not. Thanks for clearly demonstrating how you arrive to your conclusions. This helps me see how others think and dulls my haughty edge. Take care man.
chickenwretch 4 months ago
@chickenwretch Thanks mate.
Yeah, we are politically different rather than diametrically opposed. Probably have a few things in common.
Have a good one.
Camerameister1 4 months ago
@chickenwretch Virtually all the economic growth in this country over the past 30 years has gone to the top 5%, with the overwhelming majority of it going to the top 1%. Do you consider this a proper capital/labor balance?
echatterwa 4 months ago
@echatterwa Time will prove to us because we believe in communism.
Victorcharlie1975 4 months ago
@chickenwretch Equality can't be achieved until we became android
casperblack30 1 month ago
@ProfHojoFan Listen to yourself, you are saying we need to help each other. Is that not holding our "species" back? If we need to help, isnt that a drain on the collective?
TheTodd1023 5 months ago
@chickenwretch I would think that these "bloody attempts to impose it" come from the fact that most revolutions occur in places where the situation, be it economic or humanitarian, has grown desperate. It isn't just communism that has had bloody revolutions (the French Revolution and the American one, to a lesser degree), it's just one of the newest ideas people will kill each other over. It is an ideal, and although it's unreachable through revolution, people should work peacefully towards it.
KingLeonidas3267 2 months ago
@KingLeonidas3267 Agreed with all you said but Stalins bloodletting continued for his entire reign. He employed "war communism" to achieve most of his 5 Year Plans and failed to practice "communism in one country" post WWII. All that knew him braced for yet one last purge, starting with Jews and likely slaughtering Red Army heros. Fortunately, the Soviet militars were not to tolerate this final bloodletting.
chickenwretch 2 months ago 4
@chickenwretch Indeed, Stalin was rather insane. personally, as one who tends to sympathize with communism while remaining fairly centrist, I think he was the very worst thing that could have happened so soon after the revolution, especially considering that by the 80's, the Soviet Union was doomed to collapse, despite vast improvements in terms of freedom of speech and human rights, due to previous unsustainable economic policies by Stalin and his successors. It's kind of sad, really.
KingLeonidas3267 2 months ago
@KingLeonidas3267 Yes I agree; communist expressions were dealt a real setback with Stalins brutal regime. While viewing communism with a wary eye, I think Tito was more genuine than the Soviet or Maoist brands. Small, egalitarian co-ops can be viable provided anarchic elements aren't allowed to dissemble the structure. I know I rail against communism but am amazed and captivated by the Soviet experiment. I'm watching a doc right now called Russia the Missing Years, about Soviet intel apparatus.
chickenwretch 2 months ago
@chickenwretch Well what's always unfortunate is that communism rises in countries that are in terrible economic and humanitarian situations. I'm not entirely unconvinced that, in a future where such basic things as gay marriage and separation of church and state are no longer in question, communism could be applied. Of course, given the state of the world, this seems a long way off. Even in America, these things are an issue, and they are a major problem in poorer countries.
KingLeonidas3267 2 months ago
@CharmingTenshi The majority of the Russian people took over their own country from a minority of Russian people so that they could kill this minority and give absolute power to a tiny minority of that former majority...
eksiarvamus 6 months ago
@eksiarvamus Uhhh...not quite.
The Russian Revolution went the full circle from a power elite/police state to a public mandate to a power elite/police state. Take a look at the rise of the liberal zemstvos and the evolution of the soviets.
The idea of Russia being a happy kingdom which was stormed by a bunch of communist zealots who shot everyone is a pretty long way from the truth. Russia under the Tsars was every bit as bad as under the Bolsheviks.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@GummyBrains That's a very reactionary way of viewing it.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@GummyBrains nobody hates America, just its government and economy.
michaelwuzthere 6 months ago
@GummyBrains basically its jealousy at the astounding success of capitalist democracy over communist dictatorship.
capitalism has its faults of course, but the spectacular wealth it brings enriches the nation and raises the standard of living. Towards the end of the Cold War, things were so bad that the Soviet Union had to make requests for financial assistance from the United States because its economy was in complete havoc.
hecdc 6 months ago
It's true that Lenin was funded by the Germans. The Soviets would later fund the German communists.
someguy1228 6 months ago
@AlternityGM
If you consider the state Russia was in, 90% of the population starving and in poverty 1/8th of the population lost to the German advance in one year, 4 million soldier's dead in one year, soldiers were limited -on average- to fire 3 bullets a day. Russia was in the worst state it had been since the war with Japan, only nothing was being done to stop this war. The Bolsheviks promised to end the war and they did. If the PG didn't want an uprising, why did THEY arm the Bolsheviks?
jeramahia123 6 months ago
@GummyBrains
Mainly because of the many wars mainly caused by America. Mainly, Vietnam. America had no ligitamate reason to invade or set up their own government there and millions of people died including over 50, 000 Americans. The war was so unpopular that soldiers were booed by their own people as they got off the boats. I know because I was there. That is the main reason other countries hate America.
But I'm sure they don't hate American people, just things America has done.
jeramahia123 6 months ago
@GummyBrains I 2nd the question; America allows selfcriticism but all these communist nations did not. Constitutional system can abide communists, to Americas detriment. But communist governments have never allowed anything but a 1 party dictatorship. Selfhating Americans are brainwashed, stoned, 1 dimensional, and lack the experience of being enslaved, at least to the degree that the former Iron Curtain nations endured. Good question though.
chickenwretch 6 months ago 18
@chickenwretch "But communist governments have never allowed anything but a 1 party dictatorship." For a large time the soviets ruled until the armies of america and the rest of the allied powers came and killed all of the militant workers allowing the buerocracy to rise and that eventualy led to whats called state capitalism under stalin. stalins power was counter revoltionary real marxists beleive in the protection of workers private property (but not capital propety).
1guitarkid 6 months ago
@1guitarkid Try your hand at something you know, obviously this isn't, We're not talking about what would have happened but what did happen. And if this struggle was hijacked by the likes of Stalin why did this oneparty rule occur in virtually every other communist paradise? Maybe they had the exact variables working against them too? No, they were not the persecuted but the persecutors. 2party rule in America hasn't led to Gulags Purges mass terror forced collectives etc. Come on, stay real.
chickenwretch 6 months ago
@chickenwretch "...why did this oneparty rule occur in virtually every other communist paradise?"
You can only answer that if you know what came before. Russia was a police state from 1881 until the Revolution. During the Revolution it went full circle from police state to popular mandate to police state again.
Check Orlando Figes book "A People's Tragedy" p. 124.
On that basis, it is impossible to say why all communist states became dictatorships.
Camerameister 6 months ago
They also beleive in the revolution is individual decent. the people who tried to stop this were counter revolutionaries. Also you claim that America is democratic when only half of the poeple vote because they beleive that they do not have a choice, only two parties wo are exactly the same and support the same ruling class ideals. The democracy of the west is just as fake as the communism of the east.
1guitarkid 6 months ago
@chickenwretch The system they applied to the so called "socialist states" of the twentieth century in no manner represented the communist ideology, nor even socialism for that matter.
PesiCool 5 months ago
@chickenwretch That is a very arrogant position to be on. Honestly, can you not see that your preconceived thoughts have allowed you to look at the data of history and pick out the parts that you like, fit them to your liking and leave the rest?
TheTodd1023 5 months ago
@TheTodd1023 You calling me arrogant, is arrogant. You don't even know me and went out of the way to achieve what? Tell me what I left out, Mr.25 year old? What in your years of experience, are you going to enlighten me about? Please think before posting.
chickenwretch 5 months ago
The Bolsheviks engineered an armed coup against the new govt. They took power by force not peaceful elections. They then fought a civil war to control Russia. Marxists believed all workers would unite & end national borders. But national pride & ethnic differences proved stronger than proletarian unity.
AlternityGM 7 months ago
Communism and Capitalism are great forms of government ONLY ON PAPER! people at the top get greedy like Stalin and American business man. When it Comes to government you would take power and money over your people. Most people pick power and money over there own people. Money and Power changes people... you say it don't let me ask you have you ever had Money and Power? You never been in the situation neither have I but History shows it.
000Shepherd000 7 months ago
@000Shepherd000
what good comes from Capitalism? it's EVIL, giving money to bankers who started the fucking recession.
WolfytheWolf5667 7 months ago 2
@WolfytheWolf5667 It's not that evil. Without capitalism you wouldn't be able to buy a computer nor access the internet, you wouldn't have access to choice of clothing and food etc. It's not a perfect system but it beats the other alternatives i.e. communism/socialism/maoism
roby1211 6 months ago
@roby1211 This is easy to say if you haven't read the basic tenets of those philosophies. Virtually all political and economic ideals espouse "bottom up" administration except for the likes of monarchism and theocracy.
Marxism does not espouse violent revolution. That was the work of Lenin etc. Communism is based on the liberal zemtsvos which sprang up all around rural Russia after 1861.
The Bolsheviks became powerful because they were influenced by violent revolutionary nihilists.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Camerameister Sorry I don't quite get you're point. Are you therefore saying that capitalism is not the better alternative to communism once a better understanding of the latter is reached??
roby1211 6 months ago
@roby1211 Not making any judgement. I'm just explaining how the revolutionary mind worked at the time.
The truth is that communism in its idylic form is very little different from other political/economic ideals.
Compare, if you will, the ideals of Libertarian Capitalism and Libertarian Communism.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@WolfytheWolf5667 You have completely oversimplified capitalism. What an ignorant statement.
waggy55 6 months ago
@waggy55 You can find exactly the same view of communism here on an industrial scale.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@WolfytheWolf5667 Capitalism isn't a form of government. Also, who gave the money to the bankers? The government.
eurohim 5 months ago
if its a crime that gaddafi is killing is own poeple, the demostrators, it is a crime in russia as well where tzars killed his own people the demostrators.
....again, this same thing happened in USA as well, Tzar Nicolai is like Gaddafi.
XxPhoenixHarpyexX2 7 months ago
@XxPhoenixHarpyexX2 Libya is in a civil war. What fo you want Gaddafi to do? Throw paper confetti at them?
IrishLibertyLover 6 months ago
@stalinwasright Sorry but anyone who likes communism is either ignorant of the 150,000,000 people starved, shot and tortured to death by communists, or they're a moron. Which are you?
Bergertim 7 months ago
@Bergertim Haha your an American no? btw I'm to an American but you must open up your mind to history not be brain washed by the Teacher who teaches you. you must look at both sides then decide for yourself.
000Shepherd000 7 months ago
@Bergertim
if that were true, Russia would support the Tsar.
WolfytheWolf5667 7 months ago
@Bergertim This is just silly. That bloke is plain dreaming but so are you. That figure is bullshit espoused by Jonah Goldberg and has little basis in fact. This video is a poor analysis of the Russian Revolution and you have to do a lot of reading to understand how it really happened and how political ideals were prostituted in the name of communism.
Resorting to political trench warfare is no way to understand how this or any other revolution, including the next evolves. Don't be a victim.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Camerameister Actually, you're wrong. Jonah Goldberg is 100% correct. Think about it, before you repeat what the government told you to say about this subject: Fascism, just like communism, is all about a big government, which has the power of life or death over its citizens. Take away their hatred for Jews and fascism very closely resembles modern liberalism: they believed the government should control health care and virtually every aspect of the economy.
Bergertim 6 months ago
@Bergertim You have absolutely no idea how the theory of Communism works. You are confusing it completely with a totalitarian state which claimed to be communist.
Lenin advocated local government - made up of individuals - telling the national leader what to do. He called it "direct democracy". In it's theoretical form it is actually minimalist government. Of course, that has never happened.
What ever gave you the idea my government told me to say anything?
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Camerameister Communist "theory" has never been successfully tried and it never will. Every single communist state has devolved into a totalitarian state. That is why all communists must be killed.
Bergertim 6 months ago
@Bergertim "Communist "theory" has never been successfully tried and it never will."
That is absolutely correct.
"all communists must be killed."
The verdict of a totalitarian mind.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Bergertim By killing people because of their political beliefs you are just becoming as bad as them. If Capitalism is so good then surely it would be better to have an open discussion so people can think for themselves and decide which ideology/system is better- that's called democracy, and it's not compatible with murdering people based on what they believe.
rimfa123 5 months ago
@Bergertim And Goldberg was wrong. He makes all sorts of assumptions he can't validate.
The concept of big government/small government is the opposite how the theory works. All but monarchism and theocracy advocate "bottom up" government but how it's preached and how it's practiced are two different things.
To understand why so many so-called communist countires became totalitarian, you have to know what came first. Tsarist Russia was a police state from 1881.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Camerameister No, you are wrong. I suspect that you never even read his book and have no idea what you're talking about. He backs up every single claim with historical examples. Goebels, for example, Hitler's propaganda minister, said himself that there was very little difference between communism and fascism. Most likely, from what you have said, you are a communist who refuses to see the similarities, due to your own misguided ideology.
Bergertim 6 months ago
@Bergertim You're wrong on both counts. I have Goldberg's book. He is neither a historian nor a political scientist and tries to make history fit his perceptions.
If you could take your ego out of the equation you'd see that my political convictions are as irrelevant as your own. FYI; I'm not a communist and if I was I'd certainly admit it.
Goebbels was probably right.
You're just another brainwashed right-wing yank who is convinced by Beck that he can think for himself.
Robot.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@Camerameister You are clearly a liberal fool, and no longer worthy of my precious time.
Bergertim 5 months ago
@Bergertim And you are clearly a closed loop as far as learning anything is concerned.
You're the type who keeps on repeating what he's told; every maxim, every motto. You know the one about people who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it?
You're it friend. When you refuse to listen to people who know better and you're convinced a bunch of people must be killed, you are a totalitarian - the very thing you claim to despise.
How are you any better than the Bolsheviks?
Camerameister 5 months ago
@Bergertim And you're just scared.
Camerameister 5 months ago
@Bergertim "Fascism, just like communism, is all about a big government,"
What would you say the difference was between Libertarian Capitalism and Libertarian Communism? If you can grasp that concept then you will realise why Goldberg is wrong.
"...which has the power of life or death over its citizens."
Do you support the death penalty?
"...before you repeat what the government told you to say..."
Whoa! That's just loony stuff.
Camerameister 5 months ago
@stalinwasright There is no official anarchy in Somalia, it's just a weak government, that has been overrun by militia groups in most of the country. Within those groups, there is no anarchy, there is a political/military system, that is similar to our governments. We don't yet know, what a "peaceful" and "organized" anarchy would look like, we have seen countries fall to "anarchy", meaning they don't controll their land, but a real anarchy, a deliberate lack of government doesn't exist anywhere
eksiarvamus 7 months ago
@eksiarvamus Look up what happened in the libertarian and anarchist communities of Aragon and Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War. Anarcho-syndicalist collectives were actually quite successful but only for a short time.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@stalinwasright Judging from your words, you must be from Russia. You were probably indocrinated to love communism at a very young age, probably your entire life. How sad. Once again, you are wrong. Somalia is an example of having no government, otherwise known as anarchy. The United States, for the first 150 years it existed, is an example of a small government, with maximum freedom for its people. We are now a socialist state and will probably soon collapse, thanks to socialism.
Bergertim 7 months ago
@stalinwasright Let me clue you in on something: there is very little difference between communism and fascism. The best form of government is a minimal government, which is for the people, by the people, with strong freedom and capitalism. People who live under either communist or fascist states are little more than slaves of the state. Communism, socialism and fascism are all based upon Marxism. They are all virtually the same thing, with slight variations.
Bergertim 7 months ago
Stalin was a moronic communist!
chechamigo 7 months ago
@stalinwasright Sorry, but you are 100% incorrect. Did you even take a history class? Have you ever studied the Holodomor, where Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians of all ages, to death? And no, people don't have a choice between "Stalin and Hitler." There are many other forms of government, and to say that these are the only two is a huge lie. But, that is the only way to make people believe in communism, right? With revisionist history and outright lies. Give it up. Nobody wants communism.
Bergertim 7 months ago
Fuck this documentary , commies killed more of their own people than germans killed in WW2 . FUCK communism !
MultiMetaldemon 7 months ago
THIS IS A FAKE DOCUMENTARY WITH PRO COMMUNISM PROPAGANDA!!!
WUNDENFL4MME 8 months ago
@WUNDENFL4MME
No its the truth. Communism was much much better then the aristocrat russian society.
And we need a russian revolution again - inside and outside russia.
llothar68 8 months ago
@llothar68
I don't think that the Tsar Nicholas killed 66 million of his own people.
And the Tsar also didn't sit down every night in his office and subcribe to death verdicts and add "kill 10.000 more" like Stalin did!!!
You are insane Commie!
WUNDENFL4MME 8 months ago
@llothar68
I don't think that the Tsar Nicholas killed 66 million of his own people.
And the Tsar also didn't sit down every night in his office and subcribe to death verdicts and add "kill 10.000 more" like Stalin did!!!
You are insane Commie!
WUNDENFL4MME 8 months ago
the narrative got very boring and dull in part 3, it was brilliant in part 2, i nearly fell asleep in this episode.
amc2510 8 months ago
Reading the video description given by the uploader, I fail to see how this documentary would convince me even for a second to become communist.
This documentary deals in a vague way with the promises given to the Russian people by the Bolsheviks, but not with the brutal reality of communism the followed it.
Eurofighter19 8 months ago
A bayonet is a weapon with a worker at each end.
Jackthesmilingblack 8 months ago
The world wasn't ready for socialism back then. The revolution didn't spread, the Soviet Union was isolated from the rest of the world, and soon degenerated into a state capitalist, totalitarian dictatorship. The true world revolution is yet to come. And it will come, because capitalism, as every system that is based on the exploitation of the many by the few, is already digging its own grave.
SomeoneCrazy2 8 months ago
I am a social capitalist :)
leegeorgeson 8 months ago
@leegeorgeson Contradiction in terms!
h9socialist 8 months ago
Apart from overthrowing the old order the Bolsheviks really had no plans and had to defend themselves from day one. I'm sure the repressive measures had a logic of their own until, by the time the Kronshtadt rebellion came they were defending themselves against a genuine rebellion.
I don't believe that the Bolsheviks were just inately evil.
seemorerocks 9 months ago
Thanks for this serie. It really helped me for my presentation =)
deVries015 9 months ago
All you communist lie to others and to yourselves!!! pathetic Ideology...should never rise!
ironx00 9 months ago
@ironx00 Where, besides Stalin, did they lie? I'm not communist just so you know, but I like to defend the truth. In my opinion Stalin was the main problem of Russia and despite of that, it doesn't affect their ideology, just Russia. Let me describe a good example; If you go to the mausoleum in red square, you'll see on one side, Lenin, formally and intellectually dressed. If you look to the other side, you'll see Joseph Stalin, military dressed with all his decorations. Think about that.
grimofhell 9 months ago
I have been to France. The fact I don't live there doesn't mean I am any less informed about its political system than you are. France is a capitalist system, it has private ownership of the means of production, it also still has a fairly strong trade union movement and you often get 'Socialist' (read Social Democratic) governments that are in power or have a large number of seats. They are not the entirety of the government so there's no way they could produce a socialist system.
craigshrimpton1 9 months ago
The definition of Communism is where the means of production are collectively owned, the wage system is abolished, and the state has disappeared. Social Democracy is where left wing parties attempt to reform or change the capitalist system to make it more equal. Socialism is where either through revolution or elections the state uses a high level of socialisation policies similar to that of Social Democrats. This can have can have varying levels of police or state oppression.
craigshrimpton1 9 months ago 2
Many Communists or Communist Parties believe that Socialism (state redistribution of wealth) is a necessary step towards Communism (the dictatorship of the proletariat). Thus, states like the USSR were not Communist, they were Socialist - the state (as opposed to the people) controlled the M.O.P and the wage system continued to exist with inequality. They are known as Communist because they were led by Communist parties who believed such a state was IN TRANSITION towards a desired Communism.
craigshrimpton1 9 months ago 9
@craigshrimpton1 I'm not sure a lot of communists still believe in dictatorship of proletariat. And socialism is not necessarly a state redistribution. However you're right on the rest. Russian Revolution was dead the day the bolchevicks had to make war to survive. I guess Trillos could interests about the Commune of Paris in 1871 (it's a key to understand how radical some socialists became). Almost nothing is natural, everything has explanation.
Greenbat85 9 months ago
On the other hand, saying something is genetic is just a better way to make a gift to a nazi ^^.
Greenbat85 9 months ago
@craigshrimpton1 This is true of almost all political ideals including the current Libertarian fad.
Lenin believed that revolution was necessary because the natural process was too slow. He believed that the state would have to transition from Tsarist to capitalist to communist but that the capitalist phase would just enslave people for longer.
"Inside every revolutionary is a policeman" - Flaubert.
It really doesn't matter if you're a communist, libertarian, socialist or anarchist.
Camerameister 6 months ago
@craigshrimpton1 You don't need a centralized government to do the job and you can always implement more democracy and decentralization in the process. Like you said, there still existed a monetary system and disgusting class distinctions. Although some reforms were made, the so called "socialist states" were mainly socialist by word.
PesiCool 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@failedatthis Reds
hairyjohn12 10 months ago
@failedatthis Reds
hairyjohn12 10 months ago
The rise of the fucking rabble!
bxjam85 10 months ago
Say what you want about communism and socialism. But in a classes society the capitalists, monarchs and nazis go kaput!! And that's good enough for me, I can live in a world where my paycheck is fixed and I dont have to worry about people stealing from me or having a broken spirit because of my country being fascist and corrupt. I can have a home, education and time for my family.
grimofhell 10 months ago
Under Stalin the user had a violent period but other leaders like Lenin and Nikita where understanding to the people
darkruler527 10 months ago
Links to part 4 anyone?
Byron10301 10 months ago
8:26 LoL that's the central plaza of Helsinki (Finland)... I wonder why they filmed this there instead of St Petersburg
nallepuh6969 11 months ago
Communism is a form of socialism. Socialism is type of economy. Communism is a form of government with a socialist economy. Which basically ruins the free idea of socialism. Because in communism your under the dictatorship of a state, and everyone has to work and to as their told. I mean look at North Korea, outsiders aren't even allowed in the fucking country. WTF!
skulldrix 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@skulldrix are you talking about the federal reserve and bank of america ?
SomoshiphopRadio 11 months ago
The end of serfdom resulted from the Revolution. Statements that it was going away anyways are as credible as the notion that slavery was going away anyway in the US at the time of the civil war.
P1B1U1H1 11 months ago
Man , Warren Beatty was sucking the Bolsheviks' dicks.
gumbylips2008 11 months ago
who the hell is the american?
thenotoriousadin 11 months ago
I hope this isn't how the Middle East revolutions turn out, particularly Egypt. Ayatolla Khomeini used Lenin's strategies: boycott the moderate parliament that had replaced the monarch, set up a parallel institution in its place, and then brutally take power using the army and force. Hope we have learned since then, and that the current revolutionaries are aware of what can go wrong
ptaaffe 11 months ago
I hope this isn't how the Middle East revolutions turn out, particularly Egypt. Ayatolla Khomeini used Lenin's strategies: boycott the moderate parliament that had replaced the monarch, set up a parallel institution in its place, and then brutally take power using the army and force.
ptaaffe 11 months ago
Lenin is a german spy...
gigobait 1 year ago
why cant we just be all treated equally where everyone has an equal rights, equal share,and equal life no distinction no discrimination and no classes between people no matter who you are where you are and what you do you will be treated equal to the society after all we are all equal as human beings...
judas666iscariot 1 year ago
@judas666iscariot we are all human beings, which is exactly the reason everyone cannot be equal. Might I recommend reading "the Prince" by machiavelli? It presents an interesting view on the human nature.
thenotoriousadin 11 months ago
@judas666iscariot because, as the pigs in Orwell's book "Animal Farm" stated- all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Viva Montaigne!
tristramshandy3 10 months ago
@judas666iscariot Start changing things. You have the power to do so
Zachdudeio2 10 months ago
i wish phillipines my country would turn into communism
i'm sick of this capitalist state. only the rich people have freedom here if you are born poor you are just like a shit to the community if you have done something you'll go to jail but if you are rich you wouldn't go to jail
if you are poor you cant have medical attention in the hospital
but if you are rich you will have all the attentions in the hospital...
judas666iscariot 1 year ago 14