I agree with everything you said about Soviet Union,most of russian people disappointed, capitalism have not gave us prosperity and freedom. Now we are understand what a wonderful country we lost.

@themagnificentche1119

23 күн бұрын

Why is it down to the west to “give” you prosperity? The corruption of your leaders during and after the fall of Soviet Union is why you had no prosperity. The oligarchs

@themagnificentche1119

23 күн бұрын

You’re talking about the tzars army and police network.. obviously Stalin promoted all of these freedoms? 😂😅😂😂😂

why don't you guys put money into producing a solid russian revolution documentary. it would probably end having a wider appeal to people.

Wonderfull video

Great explanation of the Russian revolt ! I loved listening to you . Thank you 💋

@Vickytoriahirt1234

3 жыл бұрын

Granted, Tsarist Russia was a backwards country, but not nearly as backwards as Pakistan today as this guy says. And the Russian Revolution was not a revolution. It was a coup. It was undemocratic. It was forced. The Bolsheviks lost the elections of 1917. You're forgetting that after Tsarist regime was overthrown, a moderate, free, democratic provisional government under Alexander Kerensky was in existence. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew the first and only democratic government that Russia ever had.

"This effort was made in the same way as the extremely centralised and Jacobin endeavour of Babeuf. I owe it to you to say frankly that, according to my view, this effort to build a communist republic on the basis of a strongly centralised state communism under the iron law of party dictatorship is bound to end in failure. We learn in Russia how communism cannot be introduced” - Petr Kropotkin on the Bolshevik regime in a message to western workers

Facinatomg. Wonderful to hear the truth about the glorious October revolution.

Thank you!

thanks a lot for this video

“We must raise the question of applying much of what is scientific and progressive in the Taylor system. The Soviet Republic must at all costs adopt all that is valuable in the achievements of science and technology in this field. We must organise in Russia the study and teaching of the Taylor system.” - Lenin

Ironically, my own country (the USA) is also a backward country, but not exactly in the sense in which Alan Woods speaks of 1917 Russia as backward. The USA is technologically advanced but politically backward. Russia was politically backward compared to most other (maybe all other) western countries, but that political backwardness coincided with its economic backwardness, the backwardness of the development o its productive forces. The USA equals or excels the technological and economic development of Western Europe and Japan, but is backward enough for millions of Americans- including millions of working class (but mostly white) Americans-could see Il Duce Don Trump (a proto-fascist plutocrat) as a popular leader. And the society is so backward that religious fundamentalism has greater influence than in any other society outside the Muslim Middle East.

@MrDXRamirez

7 жыл бұрын

Interesting premise; politically backward is also a backwardness of ideas, ideology, consciousness. Productive forces are not in the hands of the workers. From a sociological standpoint the numerically small proletariat of Russia in 1917 were able to industrialize their country by 20 times the rate of growth of western capitalism through the implementation of the the Five Year Plans and nationalization. Along the same lines the Marshall Plan reconstructed Europe. Planned economies do work. Ours is planned economy as well but one centered around the needs of capital not workers and it works like a 'finely-tuned machine' to borrow a phrase. GW Bush urged people to go shopping does indicate the backs of the ruling classes was not up against the wall as propped or a Marshall Plan of some sort would have been invoked. Could Russia had evolved into a true socialist society if it were not hostilely encircled by the west? It certainly had the ability and know how and the spirit to do so during the early stages of the revolution which to me means a person gets up in the morning not in a rut but is becoming aware that what they are doing is part of a larger construction of a new society generates a conscious human being out of that person. How long has it taken Pakistan, or Guatemala, or Paraguay, even the US to lift themselves from the rut stagnation? A host of undeveloped countries using capitalism as a way toward raising a standard of living all seem to be disintegrating before our eyes? We are fortunate to have actual proof of an alternative method is possible when America becomes as autocratic as Czarist Russia was. We are going to need an example of an alternative to develop into an industrialized society again. Further I would argue the point made that the US is technologically advanced and politically backward, when all its know how is imported and the condition of the US working class is as bad as the Roman Plebeian during the fall of the Roman Empire have absolutely no connection to that technological power, in fact, it overpowers them., puts us low on the development ladder. Given that separation we are backward in the double sense, both scientifically and intellectually, we are less advanced than we perceive ourselves to be. What would the task be to move from an ideological deficit of consciousness to a revolutionary consciousness rebuilding society according to need?

So, it was this month (February) that in 1917 Russia erupted into a popular revolution.

good video!

an educational doco needs to be made to show people the positive aspects of the Bolshevik Revolution; education, rights of ethnic minorities, rights of women etc;

"QED, full stop."

Can't wait for the videos on the Polish-Soviet War, Kronstadt, and the Makhnovists.

Interesting and informative as usual-though whether the revolution was a success depends in my opinion on what you mean by revolution-the overthrow of the czarist regime and subsequent defeat of the reactionary forces in the civil war were an amazing successful,the problem IMO starts with some of the subsequent events-the misuse of the soviet system of representation resulting in a rubber stamping form of govt subserviant to a hugely centralized system,the repression used against the left SR's,mensheviks and anarchists and general disregard for dissent that reached its foul climax in Stalin-so in my opinion an amazing event that deserves praise for many steps forward but also a system with many many faults

Lenin forever lives

A planned economy in wartime is needed in order to ensure the delivery of good, parts, weapons, as needed without having to deal with demands for more profits. Britain fought WWI with a mostly unplanned economy and still won. As to 'the West was pretty much irrelevant in WWII, that is also not quite correct as it would have been different if the Germans had not needed to keep troops in the west to guard against an invasion. Certainly, the Russians did most of the fighting, but they were also somewhat desperate for a second front to open, which would hardly be the case it the losses were not critical to them in 1941-1943. The truth is between the two extremes, the West didn't win on its own and neither did the Soviets. It is somewhat odd you need to reference films mostly 30-40 years old at least, there are plenty of works on WWII by academics in the West that freely acknowledge the role played by the Soviets.

@Vickytoriahirt1234

3 жыл бұрын

Granted, Tsarist Russia was a backwards country, but not nearly as backwards as Pakistan today as this guy says. And the Russian Revolution was not a revolution. It was a coup. It was undemocratic. It was forced. The Bolsheviks lost the elections of 1917. You're forgetting that after Tsarist regime was overthrown, a moderate, free, democratic provisional government under Alexander Kerensky was in existence. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew the first and only democratic government that Russia ever had.

@noahmendel2998

2 жыл бұрын

@@Vickytoriahirt1234 Yes, but whilst the Bolshevik seizure of power was undeniably a coup, with only 5% of the petrograd population taking part in the seizure of power, it took place at the same time as a genuine socialist revolution with the militancy of the masses being undeniable. This is the revisionist perspective taken by Orlando Figes. Also, it must be noted that the Bolsheviks had 25% of the vote, coming in second to the SRs in the November constituent assembly vote, however the ballot paper failed to distinguish between left and right SRs (with left SRs being allies of the Bolsheviks) - so in reality, the Bolsheviks had more support than first appears. Kerensky's government was flawed in numerous places: the failed summer offensive and the lack of social reform/ granting land to peasants resulted in the July days. And you forget that Kerensky was responsible for the Kornilov revolt which ruined the reputation of Kerensky's government and that of anyone associated with it (Mensheviks/ moderate socialists). Therefore, it can be argued that in October 1917, the Bolsheviks faced no opposition because of the mistakes of Kerensky and the government was in an incredibly weak position and bound to collapse. Whilst I do not agree with everything Woods says, there is certainly some evidence behind what he is saying.

You're so right. Thank you for your videos!

I thought that Capitalism was supposed to be the stage before Socialism. If Russia was so "backwards" and reactionary that it was stuck in feudal society and hadn't been able to reach the epoch of the bourgeoisie, why was it that socialist revolution occurred there and not in western Europe which was much more bourgeois?

@louisfalcone5494

2 жыл бұрын

Ya that's a question asked a lot.

@saschabenjaminmusic7472

2 жыл бұрын

For that, it’s necessary to understand the permanent revolution! The only way that Russia could develop the means of production in the age of imperialism was for the working class to seize power, but this would necessitate that some of the socialist tasks would be carried out, because when the working class has power in its own hands, it will never use that power to ensure its own exploitation

Very true regarding Russian fascism; the extent of right wing reactionary politics and the ethnic violence has really been ignored, but truly helped pave the way for the Holocaust and the horrors of WW2.

@hammondOT

2 жыл бұрын

Leftwing socialists have killed millions upon millions more people than fascists.

Marx, a left Hegelian, thought he had discovered or uncovered the inherent meaning of history, the triumph of the proletariat, as his mentor Hegel, believed he discovered the meaning of history, that it was the unfolding of the absolute spirit of liberty, (whatever that is). This lecturer could benefit from reading modern critical historicism. History, as Benedetto Croce put it so well, is the books written by historians. There is no inherent meaning to history, only the understanding each generation of historians and observers of history bring to it. Read Dilthey. Read R.G. Collingwood. Read Santayana. As the Jesuits used to say, from false premises come the most egregious conclusions. The speaker seems to have ignored the tremendous changes in communications and technology. The proletariat are in danger of being replaced by robots.

Stop Tsar

This is just one side of the story, the collectivization of the agricultural lands was a disaster and a poorly thoughtout move.. I know this was under the Stalin regime, but this too was part of the planned economy. They should have let farmers keep their market and just tax fairly. Also, the NEP during the 20s was a succes. Nationalise banks, big industry, health and transport, by all means, but small shopkeepers should have retained their markets too. They are not part of the capitalist class we're fighting. The problem of the planned economy became the scarcity of consumer goods, it was wholly a supply-economy, not a demand-economy, it couldn't be. As said, people were paid well and cared for, but they had little to spend it on. They wanted music, films, certain books, certain cars, modern clothes, whatever.. this was denied by the party and a huge black market in goods sprung up, which can be seen as a failure of government policy

@potatojxi8143

Жыл бұрын

I would recommend the book Revolution Betrayed by Leon Trotsky as it does an excellent job of explaining the reasons behind the failure and degeneration of the bureaucracy. He essentially argues that the planned economy needs democracy as much as the human body needs oxygen. The Stalinist bureaucracy proved this when they tried to run the country from the top down and caused catastrophes

Yeah socialism works. So does the Federal Reserve. They're both centralized systems. And Oh, how well they work...

Nice video, now please do the video "In defense of national socialist - workers" party, they are under constant atack of fashists :D

@kudubwrong4173

6 жыл бұрын

Lauris Tamo ... LoL.. unless you're being sarcastic, you are so freakin brainwashed! "Do a video on nationalist socialist party"? You are aware that was the German Nazi party, right? Is that what you support? The Bolsheviks and the Nazis were both funded by the same side... the fake Jewish ashkanazis,.. (notice the last 5 letters in Ashkenazi's...coincidence, I think not) who were the Rothschild's Central Bankers!! The supremacist Zionist are the fascist...who has more wealth and power than they? You unfortunately, are a product of a generation of indoctrinated public school system, student gone wrong!

@mrmoth26

Жыл бұрын

They were fascist

Granted, Tsarist Russia was a backwards country, but not nearly as backwards as Pakistan today as this guy says. And the Russian Revolution was not a revolution. It was a coup. It was undemocratic. It was forced. The Bolsheviks lost the elections of 1917. You're forgetting that after Tsarist regime was overthrown, a moderate, free, democratic provisional government under Alexander Kerensky was in existence. Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew the first and only democratic government that Russia ever had.

@aesthetic8289

2 жыл бұрын

how are elections in a bourgeois parliament democratic? how are the workers supposed to end their slavery, through voting? asking the tzar politely? Karensky democratic? man you are delusional, read the state and revolution by V.Lenin

@mrmoth26

Жыл бұрын

All wrong

Please read the history of russia from a nonpolitical view.

If planned economy is better than free economy - why Russia is not using it now? Is it because Putin is not as intelligent as you?

@letitburn449

5 жыл бұрын

this might be the dumbest comment on the internet

@mrmoth26

Жыл бұрын

Because the USSR was undemocratically dissolved. Modern Russia is worse in every way than the USSR. Planned economy, especially with modern computers and tech is better. "Free" economy isn't free, it causes class oppression.

Lenin is great !!!!

Jesus is the ONLY WAY to heaven.