What's new

100-year anniversary of the Russian Revolution thread

Solomon2

BANNED
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
19,475
Reaction score
-37
Country
United States
Location
United States
Worthy of note. All are invited to contribute. I'll start with this 2013 article from The Commentator:

So, how many did Communism kill?
The historical reality of communist oppression is being ignored. But the truth must not be buried
Khmer_Rouge.jpg

The killing fields of Cambodia

Robin Shepherd, Owner / Publisher
On 5 October 2013 07:56

Why isn't The Black Book of Communism on the curriculum of every school in Europe? Because it isn't exhaustive enough? Because its authors lack credibility? Because there is still more to be understood and researched on the matter?

At more than 850 pages of carefully sifted evidence by a group of top-level scholars from a variety of countries and disciplines, the Black Book is as solid a piece of scholarship as any other you'll find being taught in our schools.

Is it definitive? How could it be? Communist regimes went to great lengths to conceal their crimes, and one of the most oppressive of all, North Korea, still exists to this day. What the book does is use the best available evidence to give a sense of the scale of what we are dealing with.

In introducing the Black Book, lead author Stephane Courtois, Director of Research at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) in Paris, offers the following rough breakdown of the numbers of people that communism killed:

USSR -- 20 million
China -- 65 million
Vietnam -- 1 million
North Korea -- 2 million
Cambodia -- 2 million
Eastern Europe -- 1 million
Latin America -- 150,000
Africa -- 1.7 million
Afghanistan -- 1.5 million
Communist movements, parties not in power -- 10,000

Related

In total, this is not far short of 100 million deaths at the hands of a single ideology. Nothing like this has ever happened before. (As an aside, my personal view is that the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews was the greatest single crime of the modern era, while communism was the greatest criminal system.)

To be sure, these numbers are approximations. Courtois gives a figure of 20 million for the Soviet Union. Alexander Yakovlev, formerly the chairman of Russia's Presidential Commission for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repression, estimates the numbers executed or done to death in prisons and camps for purely political reasons at 20-25 million.

But, in his book A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia, he reminds us not to forget the 5.5 million victims of famine in the Civil War and the 5 million in the artificial famine of the 1930s. Other respected authorities offer even higher numbers.

What should be clear from the Soviet Union and beyond is the staggering scale of what we are being asked to internalise.

Apologists have adopted a number of strategies -- beyond outright denial which lasted for decades. One of the most popular and enduring is that we should not spend much time on the crimes of communism because Western countries have also committed crimes, most particularly when they had their empires.

To say that this is disingenuous is an understatement. Even if it were true that Western countries had committed similar crimes -- which it most certainly isn't -- why would that be an obstacle to discussing the crimes of communism? Jack the Ripper isn't any the less of a killer because Ted Bundy was too.

But more importantly, Western imperialism was no more oppressive, and in many ways it was a good deal less oppressive, than any of the other imperialisms throughout history. The British Empire was the first ever to abolish slavery, for example. In any case, imperialism isn't a blueprint for societal governance. It isn't in the same category as ideologies such as communism, fascism, Nazism or even liberal-democratic capitalism anyway.

This is all easy to pin down, which brings us back to the question posed at the beginning of this piece: Why isn't the Black Book of Communism on the curriculum of every school in Europe?

The answer is not all that difficult to get to. The reason why the crimes of communism are given so little societal prominence is that very large sections of Western political society were supporters of or apologists for the Leftist ideology that gave rise to those crimes.

To talk openly about the history of communism is to talk openly about the history of the Left. And even among those who were not communists themselves, vast swathes inside the Leftist tradition stayed far too close to the communists for comfort.

It's their very dirty big secret, and although they can't do much these days about tracts such as the Black Book of Communism lying on the dusty top shelves of our public libraries, they'll be damned if they're going to start handing them out to children in the classrooms.

Of course, I am using the school curriculum issue as a proxy for a wider reluctance fully to come to terms with one of history's darkest chapters.

The angry reaction of the British Left this week to the Daily Mail's discussion of Labour leader Ed Miliband's Marxist father suggests that that reluctance is as deeply embedded as ever.

Robin Shepherd is the owner/publisher of The Commentator
 
Last edited:
.
Here's a website containing articles written by Karl Marx, the godfather of communism, interesting to see his perspective about (political) situations back then:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/newspapers/new-york-tribune.htm


A simple video explaining the revolution:

Some propaganda used back then:

tov_lenin_ochishchaet.jpg



Sovetskaya%20Repka.jpg




'Confronting' the British soldiers who were sent to the Russian north as part of a military expedition, which attempted to re-establish the eastern front in WW1, after the Bolsheviks stopped fighting the Germans in 1917.

propaganda%20-%20why-have-you-come-to-murmansk--hs_74_2193.jpg


source: https://www.bl.uk/russian-revolution/articles/propaganda-in-the-russian-revolution
 
.
mlogo.jpg

November 16, 2017
Special Dispatch No. 7182
Duma Speaker Volodin: 'It Is Unacceptable To Romanticize Revolution'

On the eve of the Russian Revolution's centenary, Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin, who formerly headed the presidential administration's internal policy department, warned against new revolutions. During the meeting of the XXI World Russian People's Council, devoted to the theme "Russia in the XXI century: historical experience and prospects," Volodin added that it is unacceptable to romanticize revolutions and glorify individuals, who toppled legitimate governments.

The event was opened by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, who stated that Russian society should learn from its "mistakes" and remain united, avoiding the trap of fomenting new political revolutions as in 1917. The Patriarch explicitly singled out the color revolutions for opprobrium, as they have become a "technological concept", defining the "change of power by force" and justifying the "violation of the Constitution" and "norms of international law."[1]

According to a survey on how Russians assess the October coup performed by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the majority of Russians have mixed feelings about the 1917 Revolution. The institute's findings show that 32% of the respondents could not make up their minds regarding the events of 1917. Another 29% felt that the coup had caused the country good and harm in equal measure. 21% of the citizens saw positive changes after the revolution. 19% of the respondents believed that the Bolshevik coup had caused the country more harm than good. With regards to its significance, the October coup was treated by Russians on an equal footing with the abolition of serfdom in 1861. The former was seen as an element of national pride by 6% of the respondents, the latter -- by 7%. The majority of those interviewed (76%) called the victory in the Second World War the most important event in the country's history.[2]

Following are excerpts from Volodin's speech and the reactions to it:

planet.jpg

New Planet, 1921 by Konstantin Yuon, symbolizing the comic dimension of the Russian revolution. (Source: Pinterest)

volodin_2.jpg
Duma Speaker Volodin (Source: Sputniknews.com)

Volodin: 'The Lack Of Justice May Ruin The Foundations Of Statehood'


During the meeting of the XXI World Russian People's Council, Volodin enumerated five main values that should drive the Russian society:

"We have to learn to appreciate and defend the existing living arrangements. We have to understand how our core values are expressed in this way of life: family, faith, unity, Fatherland. And of course justice. The lack of justice may lead to a schism and give rise to the revolutionary activities of the marginalized –and eventually, the lack of justice may ruin the foundations of statehood, which might seem immutable."

(Interfax.ru, November 1, 2017)

Volodin: Changes In Society Should Not Occur Through Revolutions

In his speech, Volodin warned that viewing revolutions in romantic colors posed a danger:

"It is unacceptable to romanticize revolutions and glorify individuals, who toppled legitimate governments, , condemning their people to senseless suffering.

"The highest mission of the authorities is to strive for consensus on the major issues and seek social compromises on contentious issues, solve them and not allow [these issues] to deteriorate into serious problems.

"The main lesson in this tragic history of revolutionary upheavals is that the much needed creative and constructive development of society occurs not via revolution, but via social consolidation and the freedom of self-realization for every person".

(Kp.ru, November 1, 2017)

Volodin: Revolutionary Upheavals Are Negatively Evaluated By Our Society


Volodin also added: "Our country has chosen a creative and a peaceful path of development. Revolutionary upheavals, including those taking place in neighboring countries, are negatively evaluated by [our] society, while definitely they do not serve as an example for emulation". Therefore, concluded Volodin, the Russians should develop "evolutionarily" based simultaneously on national traditions and modern democratic institutions.

(Rbc.ru, November 1, 2017)

Russian Journalist Shevchenko: 'What Is A Legal Power In Russian History? The Power Of The People Or The Power Of Tyrants?'


Russian journalist, Maxim Shevchenko, who generally supports the Kremlin, wrote a reply to Volodin, criticizing him for delegitimizing the Russian revolution:

"Volodin said: 'It is unacceptable to romanticize revolutions and glorify individuals, who toppled legitimate governments, condemning their people to senseless suffering. For the majority of citizens the revolutionary spirit became synonymous with bias, criminality and backwardness'.

"Was the Russian Provisional Government legitimate, Vyacheslav Vladimirovich [Volodin]? What law was it founded on? Was it legitimate by the virtue of recognition by Britain and France...? Do you also see in that way your own power [authority] which started with mindless 1991 and the bloody 1993 [when Yeltsin used force to break the deadlock with the Duma]? If the authority of the revolutionary February Provisional Government, according to Volodin, is illegal, then wouldn't an uprising to topple the illegal government be legal? …

"What is a legal power in Russian history? The power of the people or the power of tyrants? Which one is it forbidden to topple?"

(Facebook.com/shevchenko.maxim.leonardovich, November 1, 2017)

Russian Journalist Zhelenin: The Government Exploits Centenary To Demonize Political Change

Also commenting on Volodin's speech, Russian journalist Aleksandr Zhelenin writing for the Rosbalt news agency, accused the government of exploiting the centenary to prove its infallibility in internal and external policy.

"What does [Volodin's term] 'legal governments' mean? An upheaval against authorities, that destroy the citizens' freedoms and rights and kills them, is considered just in democratic society and hence legal."

"As for us, we get it that 'to romanticize revolutions and glorify individuals, who toppled legitimate governments,' is a bad thing. Instead, to romanticize imperialist, predatory wars - in which millions of people are being sent to the slaughter to defend the interests of a handful of wealthy and powerful people – that is the easiest thing to do. How beautiful is this new, topsy-turvy world…"

(Rosbalt.ru, November 2, 2017)






[1] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 7177, At The Opening Of Russia's Wall Of Grief, Patriarch Kirill Criticizes The Bolshevik Revolution On Its 100th Anniversary And Warns Against Fomenting New Revolutions, November 13, 2017.

[2] Politsovet.ru, October 24, 2017.
 
.
@Solomon2 , how many did NATO kill in trying to impose capitalism and what are your sources for those numbers??

In the Korea War alone, which NATO calls "Police Action" in trying to hide the severity, there were four million North Koreans killed.

In Indonesia, the puppets of NATO killed half a million or more communists/sympathizers.
 
. .
@Solomon2 , how many did NATO kill in trying to impose capitalism and what are your sources for those numbers??

In the Korea War alone, which NATO calls "Police Action" in trying to hide the severity, there were four million North Koreans killed.

In Indonesia, the puppets of NATO killed half a million or more communists/sympathizers.
Not to mention victims of the Nazi Reich, which was capitalist country. And also all the world's genocides committed by the Western empires during the colonization - dozens of millions victims only in America.
 
. . . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom