Why does COMMUNISM kill so many people??? (IT'S NOT THE GULAGS OR PURGES!!)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лип 2024
- I have just started a Patreon. Any support would be greatly appreciated! :)
/ henrystewarthistory
My instagram - / henry_stewart_filmmaker
This video was made with the help of Theodoros Pelekanidis PhD, a researcher and writer in Berlin.
He is available for freelance work on upwork
www.upwork.com/freelancers/~0...
Never change your cadence or manner of speaking. It’s a unique mix of, relaxing, authoritative, definitive, and relatable. Most underrated and easy listening historian on UA-cam ❤
Was just about to write the same thing! Thank you for wording it so perfectly. Such a unique and engaging reading style and voice. Keep up the great videos.
Isn’t that how people describe Hitler’s tone of voice 👀😂
I agree. I just found this channel yesterday, and I subscribed after watching your video on how Germany could have possibly pulled off a victory over the Soviet Union.
@@aaronblank2318Totally agree! Me, too! I also just found this highly educational and informative channel!
For real. I fully expect Unintentional ASMR to pick up an episode 😅
"We pretended to work and they pretended to pay us." a quote from a Soviet factory worker.
The more I learn about communism, the worse I find it to be. Every time I think I understand just how bad it is, I learn something that shows me I have underestimated.
The more I learn about it, the more I realize how many lies have been told by the west.
Great summary. The general under-education on the topic remains astonishing. To me, as an Eastern European, it is comical whenever a Western student makes it clear that he understands Communism as bad because of the ruling class and the Iron Curtain. These were symptoms rather than causes.
The only people who actually support communism are professors and other useful idiots who have no real-life experience with it.
Pity university students dont take heed of this.
In school we never learned about communism. The internet had to be my teacher on that.
Have you wonder why??
@@ThiagodMoraes Many times. Never came to a satisfying conclusion because it is not as if my history teachers seemed hugely leftist.
@@SporkyMcFlynot the best source for learning dude 😂
@@baptizednblood6813 Then what is?
S@@baptizednblood6813 same with tabloids
Obviously it's not a contest, but it is nothing short of baffling how Hitler is universally considered the persona synonymous with evil when Stalin was so clearly and glaringly a far far more evil man and it's not even close... I've never known of a figure to be so hell bent on simply causing as much misery and suffering as Stalin and it was almost entirely on his own people, yet Hitler is the epitome of evil for atrocities against his enemies but a clear love and humanity for his people? Someone make it make sense lol
It’s strange isn’t it how a woman can appear on Good Morning Britain(Ash Sakar) and declare that’s she’s “literally a communist”, and that’s ok. Marches take place with the Soviet flag and flags with Stalins face and again that’s ok. Why then, is it considered beyond evil, to declare that you’re a National Socialist? Why can someone not form a National Socialist party. There is no evidence that Hitler wanted to impose National Socialism on other countries, whereas Stalin wished to impose it on the world.
It's mostly a coping strategy as a way to justify Allied support of Russia in WW2.
Look at the majority of the leaders of the communist movements in Europe and you will find that they mostly belong to a specific tribe... Communism is a creation to annihilate the west ...
We learned about communism. Also through animal farm. But the real number of casualties, and the famines were never mentioned.
There was no great effort against communism. We talk endlessly about defeating German fascism in Europe . We sacrificed millions of lives and changed the balance of world power to do so ,so I guess we talk about it . We didn’t spend millions of lives marching to Moscow and dragging Stalin out from his bunker under the Kremlin . Or to Beijing and dragging Mao out through waves of brainwashed red guard .
They either collapsed under the weight of their own mounting failers. Or we exported our manufacturing to them and tried to pretend they’re just like us and we’re all friends really .
No sacrifice really required barring a few proxy wars and a near nuclear exchange.
@@megaduck7965 it's the other way around
In my school, and I think a lot of US schools, history ended after WWII. communism was covered to the extent of “communism bad”. The famine and scope of loss of life is never talked about for whatever reason
A small tidbit about the famine. In the year 1926 before the collectivisation and still under the NEP the Soviet Union conducted a population census. The same happened in 1937 after the famine and during the great terror. When Stalin got the results of 1937 census in which the result of the famine could be seen with an unaided eye (number of Ukrainians had shrunk by 5 million instead of expected growth of 2 million, number of Kazakhs shrank by 800k instead of expected growth of 500k, number of Belarusians and Jews stayed the same despite expected growth of 300k each), Stalin declared that the scientists working on it were counter-revolutionary and the data was hidden and published only in 1990 by Gorbachev's government.
Of the main scientists, Kraval and Kvitkin were shot as Trotskyists while the third one - Kurman came off "cheaply" and spent 17 years in Siberian labor camps before being released after Stalin's death. The victims of the famine were written off as victims of world war 2 under the census of 1959.
Stalin was truly evil
This is essential to understand. Too many forget how destructive communist regimes actually are. It stands to reason that centrally-planned economies do not work.
Excellent show as always, keep them coming friend!
When I point this stuff out to the neighbor liberal arts college kid he tells me that is because they didn't have "real" Communism. That is what he was taught in college.
"Marxism aims for a classless society with communal ownership of production means. Stalin's regime, however, centralized power and imposed a totalitarian state, contradicting Marxist principles."
So he would be true saying that it wasn't "true" communism because stalin just abused it's name as a legitimation of power as did every "communist" state
The guy has been brainwashed
Henry your videos are amazing, the way your voice sounds and your delivery is unlike any other, keep pumping them!
Very well done indeed!! This is a highly educational and very eye opening channel! So glad that I found this informative channel!
Very good resume about very tragic events!
it's baffling that we human beings from time to time are so blind to learn from others' mistakes and end up making the same if not worse mistakes..
What an amazing channel. Keep up the great work.
Your channels make me happy for talk two languages :D
It's a great video with lots of facts those were simply scary. Great work. I share your conclusion: We hope and pray that humanity has learned its lesson.
Excellent as ever ,very informative indeed ,really do love and enjoy your content..
I never learnt at school of the 13 famines in India under the 250 years of British rule. (I went to school in U.K.)
How dare you! Any mention of the IDEA that capitalism caused millions of deaths is FORBIDDEN. FORGET ABOUT the British in India, Spain in Latin America,Belgians in the Congo, French in West Africa, USA in Vietnam and much more. Those deaths DON'T COUNT. I guarantee you Henry Stewart will never investigate this topic. He couldn't even conceive of the possibility. That's typical of western chauvinist.
Your research and presentation on this topic is very thorough, as it is consistent with many books, articles, and primary sources I have read. I would caution against using Wikipedia other than as a means to find primary sources. It was surprising and satisfying that you included Cambodia, which a lot of people have forgotten about (as well as Vietnam and Cuba). You might consider a video about the French revolution, which when examined closely, can be considered a proto-communist playbook.
Government dictates in general lead to stupid policies, whether it's under communism or any government that has too much power over production. Decisions are better made by individuals who have a profit motive, than by high ranking government bureaucrats thinking they know what is best.
In the US and most of the West, we are being forced to embrace electric vehicles and will be denied gasoline-powered cars. This despite that EVs have limited range, are difficult to charge, are dangerous with high intensity fires and heavy/low centers of gravity, tear up roads, their tires send toxic microparticles into the air, and they have uncomfortable rides due to stiff suspensions made necessary by their weight.
Furthermore, there's little evidence that EVs are even good for the environment, all things considered. Yet Western governments push EVs to the same extent that Mao pushed idiotic ideas like peasants making steel, killing off sparrows, planting seeds close together, etc.
And today's government intrusion is not limited to forcing EVs on the public. Yes communism kills, but the bigger point is that authoritarian government impoverishes and kills no matter what it's called, communism or otherwise.
Another of the main causes of the famines was the use of Lamarckism in the USSR and China. It stated that by changing the body (or rather the mindset) would also result in changing the genetics. Also in China, ineffective methods such as close cropping (seeds of the same type of plant would be densely sown because it was believed that plants don't compete against member of their own species, which anyone who works with plants will tell you is completely false) and deep plowing (because Mao believed the most fertile soil was several feet below the surface and merely churned up rocks and sand and buried the topsoil). Also in China, it was believed that it was better to overcrowd especially fertile land rather than distribute crops over moderately productive areas.
How did they expect farmers to work for no money or without food?
People on the left that havent ever had to work themselves don't think that far ahead.
The kulaks were always going to be class enemies; Marx called them “petite bourgeois”. Its almost like bad logic leads to terrible logical conclusions.
Outstanding video, well organized and very thought provoking! Communism has proved to be the scourge of humanity indeed, however the Nazi's fatal flaw, of hate ended up being it's demise! You have hammered out that Flaw and have exposed that any ideology with HATE, as it's main premise, is doomed to failure! Our love of life family and a commitment to defeating coercion, as well as defending the God Given human rights of Liberty and the pursuit of happiness, is the strength of a Constitutional Republican form of Government ! The facts of this war, should always be remembered, however the Globalist/Corporatist are utilizing, the same Ideological schemes, used by both the Communist and the Nazis, to subjugate the masses! All though my response to your post is Highly political, I enjoy the fact the that you have a non political delivery, of the historical facts!!! Thank You!
Marxism actually shares a lot of similarities with Christian principles (ignoring the fact that it heavily promotes atheism). Marxism is about social justice and equality, emphasizing care for the less fortunate and communal sharing of resources. It focuses on solidarity, compassion, and collective well-being which should resonate with Christian values of love and charity.
But well... Stalinism and Maoism isn't Marxism (or by extent communism) it's just about abusing it's name as a legitimation of power.
The part at 28:08 is disturbing. Its describing a little too accurately todays college students.
Hollywood is the reason why.
Unfortunately, The current Australian government doesent share your final remark.
The ussr and communist china surely were a scary place to live
Depressing video but important to understand
Solid video . Let me to mark that term “kulak” did not exist to describe farmers in Russia prior to bolshevism of 1920s .
Although communism is bad, so is democratic central banco- capitalism. We are forced to go to education centers (or they imprison you and/or your parents). There you are taught to obey an authority figure (usually a complete stranger). You must ask permission to do basic human functions, such as go to the bathroom (a human rights violation imo). All classes end before you have spent enough time to grasp anything, making it all seem petty and useless. It also teaches to always seek something new and different, teaching consumerism and addictive behavior. It forces children into unnatural contact with each other, without parental or familial support, where the only authority is a complete stranger to all, this bullying is rampant. Children are taught, when, how and what to learn, suppressing natural curiosity. Now the state is corrupting our sacred children's minds with perverse and abominable ideas without the parents consent. It's no surprise that homeschooling is increasing at such a rapid rate.
Great video very deep research about the horrors of Communism.
A more pressing question that you should ask is why Communism still manages to appeal to so many people living in the urban West.
Ignorance and propaganda mostly.
I think there are lots of ideas we can take from actual communism (not Tankie communism which is the only one we every tried btw.) to improve Kapitalism and reduce it's abusiveness and unfairness
Communism is advocated by professors who have never endured the consequences of their idiotic beliefs. Impressionable and idealistic students are attracted to high-minded theories. The best time to be a communist or socialist is when you're in university, supported by your parents. The zeal for socialism disappears once you work your first job.
@@ShiinaShy Communism has been sold as an economic theory that is a counterpoint to capitalism. It is not. It is more a blueprint for acquiring, consolidating, enforcing, and retaining political power, masquerading as economics.
You really are deluded arent you@@ShiinaShy
Oh boy O boy guess who going to be in the history books next the irony!
Albo
Explain Tito
Extraordinary video.very important. Leftists should heed the lessons here.
Russia is such a fascinating place sadly in some of the worst ways
Yeah, sadly they like to spread this shit on neighbours nations
And to state a few facts:
Capitalism and the United States WON the Cold War while the Soviet Union disintegrated under its own weight without a single shot being fired; Socialism is the obsolete ideology that failed miserably in Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Grenada, Vietnam, North Korea, East Germany, Yugoslavia, Libya, Sri Lanka, Chile, Hungary, Nicaragua, Poland, El Salvador, Mozambique, Romania, Honduras, Mongolia, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Angola, China (which has been Capitalist in everything but name since the economic reforms of 1964 by Deng Xiaoping), Russia (of course), and everywhere else it has been tried.
Capitalism continues to be the best and only option while Socialism continues to be the worst, the most failed and most lethal after having caused at least 120 million deaths in less than 90 years which would translate in more than 1 million deaths per year.
BTW, how come reds keep bitching about American "imperialism" but never mention Chinese imperialism in Vietnam or North Korea? Or Soviet imperialism in Afghanistan, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary, East Germany or Yugoslavia? Or Cuban imperialism in Angola, Mozambique, Grenada, Nicaragua or Venezuela? Or Yugoslav imperialism in Albania?
And let's finish with the Socialist prayer:
If it's a Socialist atrocity, it never happened
If it happened, it wasn't that bad
If it was that bad, they deserved it
If they didn't deserve it, mistakes might have been made
If mistakes were made, that wasn't real socialism.
Don’t go against the collective
The death toll from famine under capitalism is also staggering. I haven't studied every economic system in history but I wouldn't be surprised if they all had this problem.
Idiot detected
Heh, interesting that every communist country has famine but not all capitalism country has it
Egregious.
All of you who think centrally planned economies don't work do the following thought experiment. Where would you rather live? In a centrally-planned Germany or in free-market based Pakistan? Pre-existing cultural and national factors are at least as important as economic organization in explaining the success and failure of cultures. Communism was defeated not because of a moral or economic inferiority but because the national power of Russia yielded to the far superior national power of the United States.
Germany has far greater private property rights than Pakistan. Therefore it is more Capitalist.
Farming is not decentralised under capitalism. You keep making that claim but it simply isn't true at least today in the modern era. The entire production of food from the ground to the store is controlled by maybe 4-5 companies each running a centralised system. I think the loss of expertise and the people in charge just not caring is a much more interesting angle to examine, a lot of the problems stem more from people making nonsensical decisions than the structure itself. A lot of your other supposed problems with the communist systems also describe modern capitalist farming as well. For example most farm hand earn a flat wage they also don't benefit from producing more food. Most of what you say about capitalist farming sounds like the kind of academic drivel people spout who don't know anything about the reality of farming.
Stalin and Mao weren't even communists. Anyone calling the Soviet Union or China communist is stupid. And of course this guy never even set foot on a farm.
Famines had occurred in both Russia and China way before communism. They happened in your beloved imperial system of serfdom as well.
Collectivization of agriculture is land reform, not communism and in the context of war nonetheless? Besides, the causes of failure you mention seem to be more operational errors than ideology or communist praxis.
so serfs who now were given wages for farm work on farms that previously belonged to kulaks and were now
allowed to sell their grain were worse off? They were wage earning "slaves"?
Shameless, stupid, dishonest, and immoral is no way to go through life. You're desperate.
"Famines had occurred in both Russia and China way before communism."
Correct. They happened across the world way before then. Indeed the video mentions that with the Chinese famine of 1907. But if you want to make proper comparisons, control for...
A: Technology, logistics, and contacts with the wider world. Simply put, Churchill could (AND DID) arrange for cereals like wheat to be transported from Canada to Bengal to try and alleviate the 1943-44 famine there without disrupting the wartime supply lines. Such a thing would literally be UNTHINKABLE to someone living as recently as the 1500s not because every ruler or government or businessperson was more racist or callous or indifferent than Churchill, but because without semi-modern refrigeration and packing the food'd rot long before it got there.
B: Extenuating circumstances like War (you'll note we don't cover things like the 1947 post-Soviet famine, because while obviously worsened by Stalin's paranoia and persecutions that was largely due to the devastations of WWII) or temperature (It's hard to blame governments for summer being 30 some degrees below what's needed for growing because some Indonesian Volcano coated the atmosphere in ash and dimmed the sun).
C: Scale.
"They happened in your beloved imperial system of serfdom as well. "
Yeah about that...... That is NOT a flex that actually works for you. The last peacetime famine in Tsarist Russian history happened in 1892-3. It happened because THE FREAKING GROUND FROZE SOLID DURING SPRING AND SUMMER GROWING SEASONS, with climate conditions being FAR worse than those that (supposedly) caused the famines of the 1930s in the Soviet Union.
But it caused far fewer deaths. Why?
Well, for starters the Tsarist Government - for all of its MANY Sins and flaws - did NOT deny the famine was happening. Indeed, it actively solicited and organized aid (and unlike the Bolsheviks in 1921 it did not politicize that aid by seeking to dole it out only to the obedient). It also cooperated extensively with private charity and often didn't interfere in dissident or even revolutionary charity efforts.
All of which were roundly condemned by the "men" that would go on to be called Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin, who condemned even revolutionary grassroots aid and refused to have any part of it. They claimed the famine was "progressive" because it would kill of large portions of the peasantry and force many survivors into the cities to become an industrial proletariat they believed could be more readily radicalized. The potential or actual deaths of millions for this was something to be lauded.
Gee, I wonder why Soviet "The Holodomor was totally a natural disaster or caused by simple misgovernment guise" apologists don't address this?
"Collectivization of agriculture is land reform, not communism"
At best it is a FORM of land reform. Moreover, even if collectivization of land reform is not communism, THE FACT REMAINS THAT COMMUNISM DEMANDS A SPECIFIC FORM OF AGRICULTURAL COLLECTIVIZATION. THIS IS SOMETHING MARX HIMSELF QUITE LITERALLY SPELLS OUT. SEE POINTS 6, 7, 8, AND 9 (ESPECIALLY 8 AND 9) OF THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO.
It's also an UTTER, ABJECT FAILURE and Humanitarian Disaster. This has been borne out pretty much everywhere it has been tried, requiring incredibly inhumane force to obtain substandard, unproductive results (to say nothing of other measures like attempts to dismantle inheritance). This is not Cao Cao's Common Well System. This is not "Land to the Tiller" Land Redistribution like what the Gracchi proposed thousands of years ago. This is something distinct and utterly inhumane as well as counterproductive.
"and in the context of war nonetheless?"
To which I'd point out: What caused the war?
"Besides, the causes of failure you mention seem to be more operational errors than ideology or communist praxis. "
According to Literally Who? Because the timelines, records, and so on do not add up. This is particularly evident when you see catastrophic, large scale famines in the 1930s during peacetime in a bunch of different climate zones (that by logic SHOULD be insulated from individual failures or factors in one of them without some overriding interference like Tambora erupting again, which was not the case).
But the calculated indifference ranging to outright malevolence by Communist ideologues and regime enforcers towards groups like the peasantry and farmers (and especially to the rural middle class) underlines that.
Even particularly cruel serf owners have at least SOME incentive to see to the wellbeing of their serfs, because they are in a relationship (call it symbiotic, call it parasitic, the exact nature doesn't matter) where the owner exploits their labor and lives, and they form a key foundation of the owner's power (and by extension that of any heirs or heiresses they have). But if you view the entire peasantry as an anachronism - worse, a group of "reactionaries" clinging to their bibles, bigotries, or (sometimes) guns, standing in the way of the Arc of History - you're not going to be interested in "sustainably" exploiting them (because a sustainable population base of people you hate and distrust is going to help create the economic and social conditions for things you don't want to happen). You're going to try and get rid of them, whether by death or forcibly reassignign them.
"so serfs who now were given wages for farm work on farms that previously belonged to kulaks and were now
allowed to sell their grain were worse off?"
Yes, yes they absolutely were. Especially when you realize "wages" were rare and pegged to a centrally planned economy. There's a reason why most of the microeconomic studies of the economic health of the Russian and Ukrainian countryside see things getting WORSE OFF, and that'd remain the case until the reinstitution of private plots.
It's also important to note just how godawful this situation is, because this is contrary to what you'd expect while it's happening at the same time as a massive die off. The Black Death managed to kill a vaster part of the population than Communism (though in places it was much closer than it should have been), but those who survived could then go onto abandoned territory and reclaim it, negotiate for better conditions for their work, and so on. Here you see a collapse in the population AND a collapse in the average prosperity of the surviving people. Do I have to explain how utterly Effed Up this is to you, or do you get it?
"They were wage earning "slaves"?
"
You act as if this is somehow unusual, but it was rather common explicitly in history. See the League of Nations report on Liberian Slavery in Portuguese and Spanish colonies for an example of that.
Why do you lie so much? That's the real question.
Where?
VIVA LA LIBERTAD CARAJO!!! 🦁🦁🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇲🇺🇲🇦🇷🇦🇷🇹🇼🇹🇼🗽🗽🗽🗽🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁
When you compare the top rankings of economic freedom with the top rankings of GDP per capita, you'll find that they often feature the same countries.
This is a clear fact.
China's rapid growth can be attributed to its shift from a closed, agrarian, and collective economy to a more capitalist model.
The core lesson here is that no one can dictate or manage your life, liberty, and property better than yourself.
The primary role of government should be to protect its citizens (defense and security) and uphold justice (judicial system).
Additionally, the government must practice fiscal responsibility, meaning it cannot spend more than it collects from taxes.
Without government intervention in the economy, people will prosper on their own.
This means that if I open a shoe store, the government shouldn't dictate the prices I charge, who I sell to, or who I buy my raw materials from.
Knowing about economics is crucial in my country, Argentina. If you don't understand this subject, you won't succeed.
VIVA LA LIBERTAD CARAJO!!! 🦁🦁🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇲🇺🇲🇦🇷🇦🇷🇹🇼🇹🇼🗽🗽🗽🗽🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁
The government still has an obligation to protect employees and customers from abuse tho. For example, you shouldn't be able to reject someone on a sale of shoes because they're a member of a protected group such as "colored only" shoestores as an example etc. And businesses should not he allowed to put toxin in their food they sell there are other examples but "too much freedom" can also be disastrous.
@@spikespiegel4928 Clearly, I don't subscribe to collectivist ideologies such as fascism, communism, or socialism like you.
These issues fall within the functions of the judicial system that I have already outlined. My stance is based on the belief that the most important minority is the INDIVIDUAL, regardless of race, ethnicity, or culture.
Here are some reasons why excessive freedom isn't inherently dangerous:
1. Innovation and Progress: Freedom fuels creativity and allows for breakthroughs in various fields such as science, technology, and the arts.
2. Personal Development: Unrestricted freedom fosters personal growth and responsibility by enabling individuals to learn from their choices and shape their own paths.
3. Diversity of Thought: Freedom encourages diverse perspectives, leading to richer and more productive discussions that help society adapt and evolve.
4. Protection Against Oppression: High levels of freedom safeguard against authoritarianism and oppression by empowering individuals to hold their government accountable.
5. Enhanced Civil Rights: Freedom supports the expansion and protection of civil rights for all individuals, giving everyone the chance to voice concerns and contribute to society.
6. Economic Growth: A free market fosters innovation and prosperity by allowing individuals to start businesses and compete, creating opportunities for all.
7. Equality Before the Law: Unrestricted freedom ensures equal treatment under the law for everyone, laying the foundation for a fair and just society.
Striking the right balance is important, but a society that promotes and protects freedom can thrive and create a more vibrant, inclusive environment.
The core is like Milton Friedman famously stated, "A society that puts equality ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. A society that puts freedom first will, as a happy by-product, end up with both greater freedom and greater equality.
@@WensBlog tl;dr