Smh Joe What did you expect the bolsheviks to allow themselves to be murdered ? One American general noted in the Far East that for every one person the reds killed the whites killed 100.
True story. With the words "The guard is tired" a certain Constituent Assembly was forcibly dispersed and overnight the entry was nailed shut, ending its existence. You can't make it up.
The Czechoslovak Legion didn't return by going through Soviet territory. They went the long way, through Vladivostok. Some went by ship through the Indian Ocean, some around the world through the Panama Canal, before getting back to Europe.
@Сладенький Czech and Slovak minorities living in Russia volunteered to fight alongside Russians against Central Powers in exchange for the support of Czechoslovak independence. They were enlisted in the Russian army as regular soldiers and the brigade was extended up to 80 000 men strong corps (all Czechs and Slovaks). So yes, they were to be paid, such as any other Russian soldiers. As the revolution began, Czechoslovak legions were on the side of the Tsar, since he was the one guaranteeing their independence. The bolsheviks were against that and refused the Czechoslovak troops to move home, planning them to be sent in the work camps. Thus Czechoslovaks moved through the entirety of Russia, aiding whites and repelling anyone who refused to let them pass. Moreover, the Soviet Union caused much larger economic damage to both nations, with the mined natural resources, while under Soviet control. There is nothing to be paid and if someone should, it is Russia, yet nobody blames them now.
I mean that’s kinda where we get our ideas lol. I wouldn’t necessarily call it a bible or even a handbook. It’s more like a piece of influential literature that many different interpretations can be derived and practiced from
Made the original comment 5 years ago and have since read theory and history. Lenin and the Bolsheviks were actually the best outcome for Russia and all other constituent nations of the former Empire. I've learned from my ignorance.
The election for the constituent assembly was incredibly flawed. The largest party in Russia was the peasant based Socialist Revolutionary party which had split into a pro-Bolshevik left faction and an anti-Bolshevik right faction. This split did not become official until after the electoral lists were already sent out so there was only one SR option on the ballot. As the right SRs comprised the leadership of the unified party the lists were stuffed with right SRs. This had the effect of making the entire election incredibly unrepresentative because a majority of those who voted for the SRs supported the left SRs. Scholars agree that if there was an option for both SR parties on the ballot the Bolsheviks and left SRs would have won enough seats to form a coalition government, the same as the Soviet government at this period. By the way, the only reason the Soviet government became a one party system was because the left SRs betrayed the Bolsheviks and rebelled against them because they did not support ending the war.
@@beegyoshi8797 universal basic income, seems nice, but Capitalism needs regulation, stuff like the cost of healthcare, medicine and housing should be regulated, otherwise you get the late state capitalism shit, where a house costs 30 years of wage, skyscrapers and houses are empty, because realestate moguls want to always make a profit.
Lenin implemented some really progressive and good reforms! It's just a shame that he refused to accept the Democratic decisions of the people though. The Soviet Union would've been a very different place if he did. What's even more of a shame is the fact that Stalin reversed many of the progressive and good reforms that Lenin had put in place. Take for example Homosexuality. It was De-Criminalized under Lenin and then Re-Criminalized under Stalin.
It was the only official position of any authority Lenin left behind I thought, or the way things got worked out with the power vacuum of Lenin's death. (Not unlike after J. Edgar Hoover died in 1972.)
@@elmascapo6588 it wasnt 8 million, ot was between 1 or 2 million but it was the kulaks and ukrainians fault, altough stalin could deal with that without starving them
That's pretty much the story of Russian history for several hundred years. Decades and decades of stagnation then a powerful central leader suddenly drags Russia kicking and screaming into the modern era, more stagnation, then rinse and repeat.
@@robertrichard6107 Stalin took Europe with his Red Army. He needed no permission. He had 4 times more troops and 2 times more tanks than the Americans and the British combined.
@@ComradeHellas Eastern Europe; Uncle Joe didn't want a repeat of WWI or 1920. He requested not to halt Lend Lease supplys so we didn't, but it put off Overlord until 1944. Ike would give Patton choice intel, and he could run with it. But ol' Blood and Guts wasn't going to get a fifth star going into Eastern Europe, let alone Russia, Belarus et.
@@liolio7545 The whites had the backing of 17 independent nations including Great powers such as UK, France, USA, Japan as well many factions within the Russian Empire, still lost, stop whining.
I do know thats a joke but it makes kinda sense that the reds stayed strong in the west. With cities and industry in that region a huge part of the population was workers who didn't own means of production and had nothing to loose if the reds sub stain power. In the rest of russia however the society was mainly agrarian and the people owned small amounts of means of production with their farms. At least what i am thinking, ain't a historian lol
That "long story short" really deserves a few more minutes to be honest. Stalin's consolidation of power and how he defeated the Left and Right Oppositions is really interesting and worthy to note in the video.
i mean he only has 10 minutes to cover the whole russian revolution, many very interesting details will inevitably have to be left out to make the story cohesive and informative without missing the bigger picture. i'm sure you could make a video that's like 4 hours long and still miss some details.
Correction: The Czhecko-Slovakian legion traveled ALL-AGROUND the world to get back home, in other words, they had to cross the Syberia to Vladivostok, board ship to America and finally back to Europe.
the thing with history is you have to memorize so much shit. i just can't do it the way schools teach it, like i don't care about every random empire from 4000 years ago. that being said, world war 1 and onwards is very interesting and i do enjoy learning about it on my own time. it's much better when you're not having to cram a million different details for an exam, and you can just learn as you wish. that's where you figure out what parts of history are interesting to you and what parts you really care to memorize.
Short, concise, but dense and relevant, great work, exactly what You’d need when you don’t have time to read a book to watch a full documentary but still want to have a general idea. Thank you!
Em, five...That Russian Bloody Sunday due to a vodka shortage or some Tsar or what not, The U2 Bono Bloody Sunday concert event, the other Irish Bloody Sunday due to the great Guinness & Whiskey depression of the 1970's and the Bloody Sunday where you get out of bed on Sunday and step on Lego in your bare feet and scream "Bloody Sunday!!!" and the islamic Bacon Sundae slaughter over none halal Subway sandwiches...
There were two in Ireland, in November 1920 in Dublin during the Irish war of Independace from the UK, and in Derry in January 1972, when Catholics demanded more civil rights in Northern Ireland.
Fantastically well done, man. I just took 10 pages of notes, and I'm ready for my European History final tomorrow. I have a better understanding of the Russian revolution, even though I've read 20 pages from a History textbook. Your way of explaining things made things perfectly clear! Please keep doing videos like this!
These videos are so helpful! I always watch them twice so that I can focus on the history content as well as the funny animations and signs. I especially agree that Trotsky had great hair. Thank you so much.
I go on UA-cam all the time but literally NEVER comment. Today I choose to break my silence to tell you that you're videos are very well done and fun to watch. Kepp up the fantastic work m8.
1:03 I still love how that is a pretty accurate type 38 on the right, although they would have been using the type 30 mostly since few type 38's were used in the Russo-Japanese war since it was introduced in 1905.
Amazing again! Congratulations! I'm from Brazil, and here we do not learn European History with so much details and in a fast paced rhythm. Thanks! And please keep doing this amazing job!
Altar Göktunca Sicily is not a city, it's a region. There were many city states in it for a long time. Just like Tuscany. Florence but also Pisa and Siena ecc. All in the region of Tuscany. Apart from that, good choice.
Wow this is so much better than reading 30 pages of the textbook. It’s short , accurate and lists all the important events. And I love the way you explain things with brutal honesty and sarcasm 😂
Makes you wonder just how powerful the USSR would have been if people didn't kill each other. The US became the leading superpower exactly because of the two world wars, amongst the major powers it gained the most and lost the least.
@@jipeh Well, the USSR likely wouldn't have existed without WWI (Lenin's "bread, peace, land" promise), and it might not have gained its status as a world power if it weren't for the second world war (which was the nail in the coffin for the European empires and effectively left USA and USSR as the dominant powers). The loss of Germany and Austria Hungary also left a vacuum in eastern Europe which the USSR filled; likewise, the decline of western Europe allowed the US to dominate affairs west of the Iron Curtain. Still, without the world wars, Tsarist Russia and the US would likely become leading powers, albeit without the overwhelming dominance created by the collapse of the old European empires. Especially since Russia would not have suffered the catastrophic loss of population and industry to the war, let alone the turmoil of civil war.
@@bluesaberproductions8991 No, the Tsardom would have probably collapsed in WW2 if not for being overrun. We see its economic groqth, the biggest factor in war to be projected by 1950. The Tsardom would have been to weak ho fight and Nikolas the second was an idiot. At least Stalin did something right in WW2
@@MTH444 Stalin made huge blunders and was totally unprepared for the German invasion. He nearly had a mental breakdown when it came. Whereas under the tsars, Russia was constantly prepared for war, and they had an alliance with France. Whereas the USSR had no allies, only temporary co-belligerents. Remember, Russia was one of the first countries to begin developing submarines. Their military was fairly advanced under the tsars. And I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have had armies of white Russian exiles willingly joining the Axis to "liberate" the homeland without a Stalin in power (although assuming Poland was still under Russian rule, they and other ethnic groups could pose a problem).
@@madpig7120 yup and most likely the USSR would have fallen much sooner under Trotsky's leadership. Stalin (and I can't belive I'm saying this as a US army veteran who's grandfather fought in Korea and uncle fought in Vietnam) had the right idea, worry about what we control at the moment fixing the economy and infrastructure and THEN try to expand our ideology to other nations. USSR was extremely large and had just gotten somewhat stable, spreading too thin so soon would just make things much harder to control
I love these video's. Although they only touch on the sides of events and are very simplistic at least if you want to understand world history they give you some basic fundamentals at which to start.
@@PANZERFAUST90 I'm starting a linguistic revolution to change the world for the better. In my new linguistic world order the proletariat will never have to worry about the bourgeoisie criticising their reasonably acceptable, "you now what I meant so why make an issue of it", but often incorrect grammar.
@@roland20002000 LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL 🤣 Can I have a seat on the linguistic council? I'll purge all those who are counter-revolutionary to the new language.
@@PANZERFAUST90 Well you did criticise my grammar so you should really be purged BUT like most revolutionaries I'm a power hungry hypocrite with no real morals. Welcome on board. P.S. Have you got any mates who may want to join?
"It believed that the economy should be controlled entirely by the central government." False. That's beyond Marxism, beyond Leninism and right into Stalinism. Marx said the workers should seize the means of production (the capital) of a capitalist system and the economy should be owned publicly (abolish private property) and reoriented toward fulfilling the needs of the people rather than the pursuit of profit. An equal society will result as there is no longer a class struggle. This will not be a system of government, but an entirely new stage of society, of which Marx wrote very little what it would actually look like. Any claim of what a "Marxist government" would be like is going into Marxist-Leninism, which is completely different. Stalinism (that even if a capitalist-oriented industrial base to be seized by the workers to achieve communism doesn't exist, as it didn't in Russia because it was too backward, the workers can build one up and achieve socialism in one country) is one outgrowth of that. That's where the notion of communism being "the state owns everything" and "everything is set by inefficient economic planning done by bureaucrats" comes from. Don't believe me? Consider that before the USSR, a "socialist country" did not exist. The closest you could maybe get would be the Paris Commune which lasted all of two months before it was crushed. NO ONE could say what a "Marxist country" would look like.
@@elmascapo6588 true. Because human psychology works on the need for profit. And innovation is a result of these drive of going beyond our "needs" and achieving our "wants". The idea of sharing only what we have, and not let individuals pursue what they want (for their pursuit of greed, glory or growth), goes against the very psychology of what drives humans.
a planned economy isnt inefficient at all, russia grew MUCH faster than any capitalist country ever, and it rebulit on the fly multiple times during the war which wouldve NEVER happened in a capitalist country. trump cant even make these companies make masks lmao capitalism is extremely inefficient, theres more homeless people than houses, we throw out food all the time to "preserve the market" this is lunacy , dont get me wrong i agree with what you want but state capitalism is much better than private capitalism, in what other area does not planning something work better than planning ? its literally only in this scam economy. its absurd
@@elmascapo6588 it did not fail in brazil at all, lula lifted 40 mill out of poverty and the gdp went up tremendously. and america interferes constantly , those countries are sancitoned or blockaded and their leaders are constantly under threats of a coup and you think when there are problems its due to "socialism" ? youre a fuckin moron or youre privileged
Your description of communism at the beginning is wrong. It doesn't advocate that industrial output should be owned by everyone, it's that industrial output should be owned by the workers who produce it. And it doesn't advocate that the economy should be controlled by a central government - in fact, depending on how orthodox you want to be the end goal is for there to be no central government at all. Lenin himself called state ownership of the economy "state capitalism". State ownership of the economy doesn't make it a different economic system if the hierarchy is still the same. The ownership of economic output, again, should fall to the workers who produce that output - not the state.
Pretty fantastic video all round! I disagree with your explanation of Karl Marx's idea that he wanted everything to be controlled by "the central government". Both his and Engels texts HEAVILY emphasise that yes the means of production must be seized but put into the hands of people (the actual people not the unelected bureaucratic elite that we saw in the USSR) Apart from that, a great video that summarizes one of the most significant events in human history. Especially since 2017 will mark 100 yrs since the October revolution of 1917!
mankytoes Actually, Marx didn't advocate for any government control, temporary or not. That was a Leninist idea, which comes to speed up the process of going from feudalism to Communism What Marx said was that there should be a government that will help establish and protect the new means of control of the means of production (factories etc) before dissolving itself after a few generations and that it couldn't happen in the anarchist way (which said that the end goal society (communism) would come overnight or in a very short time, so it doesn't make sense to build a government to protect it (this is my very poor understanding of Anarchism, tbh))
Jayden Sorry, I was unclear as well, what I meant was "controlled by a temporary central government", the "Socialism" stage of the historical progression to Communism.
You could do an entire 10 minute episode on Rasputin’s assassination. Also it’s either really cute or creepy how similar Nicolas II & George V of England looked. Like… they had the exact same face.
This whole thing works excellently as a string of memory cues for my A level course. It was also pretty funny, glad to finally see someone else laughing at how insane Russia was back then.
One minor point. The Czechoslovakian legion was on neither side of the cival war, and yet was responsible for the capture of Kolchak, which was the major event that allowed the Reds to win the war.
Famines of citizens were due to climate and the halt on trade from the USA (because they were greedy and wanted money, instead of trade) and the rest were in gulags which were fascists and people that decided not to provide anything for society.
@@joshr8293 And because people like you who are seriously mind sick and dangerous for humanity we should rebuild gulags but this time for you and your comrades. Culturalmarxism will be eradicated.
@@joshr8293 Actually alot of them were just petty landowners who didn't want to be fucked over by the disastrous collectivisation. Also the bit about fascists is untrue propaganda
@@boozecruiser I'm Ukrainian and I know the holodomor is a load of shit, our holodomor museum even admits to using pictures of starving children from great depression.
I'll have you know I was trying to take a fucking dab when I saw the Obvious Trotsky with the Hair sign and immediately understood. I almost knocked my bong over laughing, and completely missed all the smoke. Worth it.
9:40 - a flaw in that argument though is part of what fuelled support for the Nazis was fear of a communist revolution, which would likely have been weaker if communists hadn't seized power in Russia.
They had to start somewhere. They hate Gentile Christian Monarchy. They hate physical work. They hate the truth. Communism is a front for something else. Investigate the affiliations of Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and other officers in the party.
Support for the NSDAP had a lot to do with socio-economic despair during the Weimar Republic. Thousands of non-Germans, including Jews and non-Europeans volunteered to fight against the USSR in WWII. I see what you're getting at, but Stalin would've threatened Europe anyway based on his associations regardless of his philosophy. He could've been a progressive capitalist or a constitutional liberalist. Stalin, Churchill, FDR, Truman and Eisenhower were brothers in the same club. The NSDAP opposed that club.
Lenin: I will grant the people whatever they want.
People: We want to be ruled by somebody else.
Lenin: Now let's not get carried away.
lol
Nice meme except the civil war showed that wasn’t true.
BritTrot Yeah cause all the dissenters were shot
Stalin: *Boner*!
Smh Joe What did you expect the bolsheviks to allow themselves to be murdered ? One American general noted in the Far East that for every one person the reds killed the whites killed 100.
”But the Duma was mostly useless and Nicholas II could still do what ever he wanted to” So basically just like the modern Duma.
More like Dumber & Dumber
Russia's had a bad go of it for the last ..forever.
Has Russia ever been a non-autocratic country?
@@michellesheppard9253 Novgorod before was some kind of a republic or oligarchy i think
@@michellesheppard9253 briefly under Yeltsin. And Gorbachev was a benevolent despot, mostly. Otherwise, no.
"My feet hurt!"
Truly, the voice of the people
:-()
True story. With the words "The guard is tired" a certain Constituent Assembly was forcibly dispersed and overnight the entry was nailed shut, ending its existence. You can't make it up.
@@georgesmith6218 woah
The Czechoslovak Legion didn't return by going through Soviet territory. They went the long way, through Vladivostok. Some went by ship through the Indian Ocean, some around the world through the Panama Canal, before getting back to Europe.
@Алексей Савицкий You're pretty funny. That's a funny joke.
@Алексей Савицкий When Russia pays for fucking eastern europe for half a century. Then maybe.
@Сладенький Czech and Slovak minorities living in Russia volunteered to fight alongside Russians against Central Powers in exchange for the support of Czechoslovak independence. They were enlisted in the Russian army as regular soldiers and the brigade was extended up to 80 000 men strong corps (all Czechs and Slovaks). So yes, they were to be paid, such as any other Russian soldiers. As the revolution began, Czechoslovak legions were on the side of the Tsar, since he was the one guaranteeing their independence. The bolsheviks were against that and refused the Czechoslovak troops to move home, planning them to be sent in the work camps. Thus Czechoslovaks moved through the entirety of Russia, aiding whites and repelling anyone who refused to let them pass. Moreover, the Soviet Union caused much larger economic damage to both nations, with the mined natural resources, while under Soviet control. There is nothing to be paid and if someone should, it is Russia, yet nobody blames them now.
@Сладенький I wouldn't explained this better then @Ranko Vašek
They actually betrayed White General Kolchak and had him killed by the Bolsheviks.
"Why are we speaking English" lmao
Even funnier because, technically, they're not saying anything, just carrying signs!
@@darreljones8645 the signs speak with letters tho
Говорить поРусский??
@@Cjnw damn you got the whole squad laughing
Please keep it up, this stuff is fantastic. Keenly waiting on more.
Oh, hey. I love your content!
exurb1a wow you watch this to
exurb1a followed the link from your video which I’ve watched about 4 times now.
*multiple existential crises*
I'll support your channel if you reply to me all you have to do is reply to my me and subcribe to me ill subscribe to you☝️💫
Love it when one legend drops a comment on another one's video
'Things you need to get:
-out'
Amazing😂😂😂😂
If Russian Revolution stopped whev Stalin begun collectivisation than USA civil war stopped when draw low begun
What?
@@alanmalan3819 You off the goop bro?
are you a girl
@@alanmalan3819 goop
He left his Marx on history
metalhead 93 actually it has. Engels' and Marx's writing were like the Holy Bible of the Communist Party
I mean that’s kinda where we get our ideas lol. I wouldn’t necessarily call it a bible or even a handbook. It’s more like a piece of influential literature that many different interpretations can be derived and practiced from
@@Red_Anon
Sounds like the Bible to me. Or at least the Torah anyway.
TheUltimate...
I prefer to come at it from another Engel
@@festethephule7553 Talmud.
Made the original comment 5 years ago and have since read theory and history. Lenin and the Bolsheviks were actually the best outcome for Russia and all other constituent nations of the former Empire. I've learned from my ignorance.
The election for the constituent assembly was incredibly flawed. The largest party in Russia was the peasant based Socialist Revolutionary party which had split into a pro-Bolshevik left faction and an anti-Bolshevik right faction. This split did not become official until after the electoral lists were already sent out so there was only one SR option on the ballot. As the right SRs comprised the leadership of the unified party the lists were stuffed with right SRs. This had the effect of making the entire election incredibly unrepresentative because a majority of those who voted for the SRs supported the left SRs. Scholars agree that if there was an option for both SR parties on the ballot the Bolsheviks and left SRs would have won enough seats to form a coalition government, the same as the Soviet government at this period. By the way, the only reason the Soviet government became a one party system was because the left SRs betrayed the Bolsheviks and rebelled against them because they did not support ending the war.
Supplemented Health bernie is joo right?
@@beegyoshi8797 universal basic income, seems nice, but Capitalism needs regulation, stuff like the cost of healthcare, medicine and housing should be regulated, otherwise you get the late state capitalism shit, where a house costs 30 years of wage, skyscrapers and houses are empty, because realestate moguls want to always make a profit.
Sam1370 lol every communist government ever
Lenin implemented some really progressive and good reforms! It's just a shame that he refused to accept the Democratic decisions of the people though. The Soviet Union would've been a very different place if he did. What's even more of a shame is the fact that Stalin reversed many of the progressive and good reforms that Lenin had put in place. Take for example Homosexuality. It was De-Criminalized under Lenin and then Re-Criminalized under Stalin.
"Why are we speaking English"
fucking died
In fact, in 1924, General Secretary wasn't very important. In next few years Stalin made it important.
As General Secretary, Stalin hired people who were ready to support him against Trotsky.
It was the only official position of any authority Lenin left behind I thought, or the way things got worked out with the power vacuum of Lenin's death. (Not unlike after J. Edgar Hoover died in 1972.)
@@elmascapo6588 60 million didnt die, check the population of the ussr, 60 million doesnt make sense
@@elmascapo6588 it wasnt 8 million, ot was between 1 or 2 million but it was the kulaks and ukrainians fault, altough stalin could deal with that without starving them
@@elmascapo6588 the census was made by the league of nations in that time.
This is mad lit fam.
This is Russia :D
This is America.
this is Patrick
Feature History NO! THIS IS PATRICK
Feature History 7 Years war is better :D
The next episode is 'The Unification of Germany (1805-1919)'.
What else would you like to see?
Ten Minute History Cold war please :)
Ten Minute History - Portuguese Succession Crisis (1383-1385) would be fun :)
Ten Minute History Formantion and dissolution of Yugoslavia.
Ten Minute Irish Troubles (1912-1998)
cold war with focus on the ongoings in Germany
god my history teacher loved this so much that he made us take notes on it. thus a literal 10 minute video became over 80 minutes. thanks.
Kai _ I made sure to make you know I disliked
My history teacher put a video from this channel on once for something about the FRG
W history teacher
10 minute history? More like 9 minutes and 59 seconds history!!
Are you the one that sued Subway?
ikr 🙄
Fucking disgusting how he could lie to us like that.
winstonsmithdeservedtherats it’s close to 10 minutes
@@arsalanw2001 did you not get the joke
8:33 Maybe Stalin should have just kept on dancing happily through the flowers.
Kulaks and western powers did help him tbh
That was the only action that'd bring him around after the Fuhrer with the Charlie Chaplin mustache invaded (Barberroastednuts)
Stalin received Russian with ploughs in 1923 and left with it Nuclear power plants in 1953. Bitch please...
That's pretty much the story of Russian history for several hundred years. Decades and decades of stagnation then a powerful central leader suddenly drags Russia kicking and screaming into the modern era, more stagnation, then rinse and repeat.
@@HolgerLovesMusic the black book of communism is western garble
"Failed to conquer Eastern Europe"
Stalin: For now.
Joshua Arroyo jews " consider it done"
@@liolio7545 muh juws
FDR gave Stalin permission to take over Eastern Europe on back of an envelope at Tehran.
@@robertrichard6107 Stalin took Europe with his Red Army. He needed no permission. He had 4 times more troops and 2 times more tanks than the Americans and the British combined.
@@ComradeHellas Eastern Europe; Uncle Joe didn't want a repeat of WWI or 1920. He requested not to halt Lend Lease supplys so we didn't, but it put off Overlord until 1944. Ike would give Patton choice intel, and he could run with it. But ol' Blood and Guts wasn't going to get a fifth star going into Eastern Europe, let alone Russia, Belarus et.
Trotsky's hair IS amazing.
Adam Latosiński Heh, blocky Trotsky coming up with his sign was great
If both said then
"Im not saying its Aliens"
He had a Jew fro.
@Tigran Abazyan No but he just gave trotskys hair a name. Trotsky was good and military mastermind
6:05 So basically the Reds had better spawn locations than the Whites.
Valve, pls fix
omfg why does red team get 2 scouts plz fix 6s valve
@@liolio7545 The whites had the backing of 17 independent nations including Great powers such as UK, France, USA, Japan as well many factions within the Russian Empire, still lost, stop whining.
I do know thats a joke but it makes kinda sense that the reds stayed strong in the west. With cities and industry in that region a huge part of the population was workers who didn't own means of production and had nothing to loose if the reds sub stain power. In the rest of russia however the society was mainly agrarian and the people owned small amounts of means of production with their farms. At least what i am thinking, ain't a historian lol
@@marxmags6189 You are more or less right
Omg 😂😂😂
2:41 "Down with this sort of thing" "careful now" nice reference.
FINALLY someone commented this reference
Reference to what?
@@TheMCzorro Father Ted.
That "long story short" really deserves a few more minutes to be honest. Stalin's consolidation of power and how he defeated the Left and Right Oppositions is really interesting and worthy to note in the video.
It can be forgiven, the video focused mostly on the Russian Revolution
A secret police force to kill, intimidate and strike fear in political opponents is definitely an interesting tactic and worth taking note.
i mean he only has 10 minutes to cover the whole russian revolution, many very interesting details will inevitably have to be left out to make the story cohesive and informative without missing the bigger picture. i'm sure you could make a video that's like 4 hours long and still miss some details.
In short, Lenin basically tried to make sure it was known that Stalin was a power hungry psychopath and he should not take over after Lenin’s death.
Correction: The Czhecko-Slovakian legion traveled ALL-AGROUND the world to get back home, in other words, they had to cross the Syberia to Vladivostok, board ship to America and finally back to Europe.
No wonder people find history a difficult subject, coz it is a mess in its own right
It is a mess if you try to remember every little detail and date. If you just learn the gist of it then you are perfectly alright.
Pikkabuu yeah that’s why I enjoy history so much, it’s pretty much just a massive, overarching, and convoluted story
History has always been difficult, which what makes it ammusing and fun (for us student historians and real historians of course).
the thing with history is you have to memorize so much shit. i just can't do it the way schools teach it, like i don't care about every random empire from 4000 years ago. that being said, world war 1 and onwards is very interesting and i do enjoy learning about it on my own time. it's much better when you're not having to cram a million different details for an exam, and you can just learn as you wish. that's where you figure out what parts of history are interesting to you and what parts you really care to memorize.
Short, concise, but dense and relevant, great work, exactly what You’d need when you don’t have time to read a book to watch a full documentary but still want to have a general idea. Thank you!
How many Bloody Sundays are there
Sunday just brings the massacre out in people.
Yahir Tapia perhaps both
Em, five...That Russian Bloody Sunday due to a vodka shortage or some Tsar or what not, The U2 Bono Bloody Sunday concert event, the other Irish Bloody Sunday due to the great Guinness & Whiskey depression of the 1970's and the Bloody Sunday where you get out of bed on Sunday and step on Lego in your bare feet and scream "Bloody Sunday!!!" and the islamic Bacon Sundae slaughter over none halal Subway sandwiches...
There were two in Ireland, in November 1920 in Dublin during the Irish war of Independace from the UK, and in Derry in January 1972, when Catholics demanded more civil rights in Northern Ireland.
When Jesus ressurected?
Fantastically well done, man. I just took 10 pages of notes, and I'm ready for my European History final tomorrow. I have a better understanding of the Russian revolution, even though I've read 20 pages from a History textbook. Your way of explaining things made things perfectly clear! Please keep doing videos like this!
How did u do in your exam?
@@ryrygoogoohe passed!
"My hair is amazing."
- Leon Trotsky, 1918
These videos are so helpful! I always watch them twice so that I can focus on the history content as well as the funny animations and signs. I especially agree that Trotsky had great hair. Thank you so much.
I go on UA-cam all the time but literally NEVER comment. Today I choose to break my silence to tell you that you're videos are very well done and fun to watch. Kepp up the fantastic work m8.
Thank you. There's many more to come.
Brady Newman ... lol do you sometimes "figuratively" never comment? (as apposed to "literally")
I totally agree, they're brilliant.
your*
Well you had your first comment and you failed. How do you feel?
@@tylerdurden3722 well no becasue if you never comment, you never comment.
This is going to be a great channel
It is now. It is a great incipient channel.
It became even greater.
Facts
2:30 Ra-Ra-Rasputin, lover of the Russian Queen....
Ra ra rasputin russias greatest love machine
@heuheuheu hyuk hyuk I have no idea right now maybe i replied to the wrong comment
heuheuheu hyuk hyuk lol
oh those russians...
What the fu-
i swear youre one of the best channels out there on youtube, good job
1:03 I still love how that is a pretty accurate type 38 on the right, although they would have been using the type 30 mostly since few type 38's were used in the Russo-Japanese war since it was introduced in 1905.
"Was a certain Joseph stalin"
ah you mean Russian mario
He was not Russian, he was Georgian Mario.
Russian super man
That’s a great way to get shot in the USSR
I commend you
Technically Stalin is Georgian, but yeah
Amazing again! Congratulations!
I'm from Brazil, and here we do not learn European History with so much details and in a fast paced rhythm.
Thanks! And please keep doing this amazing job!
Can you do the forming of Italian states? Such as Roma, Naples and Papal States?
I really want to see this one!!
And Tuscany,Milan, Siena, Parma, Sicily, Genoa, Venice.
Altar Göktunca Sicily is not a city, it's a region. There were many city states in it for a long time. Just like Tuscany. Florence but also Pisa and Siena ecc. All in the region of Tuscany. Apart from that, good choice.
He did it.
Your wish has been granted
Wow this is so much better than reading 30 pages of the textbook. It’s short , accurate and lists all the important events. And I love the way you explain things with brutal honesty and sarcasm 😂
9:24
Actually, pre-war Tsarist Russia was projected to become an economic powerhouse by 1950. People in the west were afraid of its economic might.
Makes you wonder just how powerful the USSR would have been if people didn't kill each other.
The US became the leading superpower exactly because of the two world wars, amongst the major powers it gained the most and lost the least.
@@jipeh Well, the USSR likely wouldn't have existed without WWI (Lenin's "bread, peace, land" promise), and it might not have gained its status as a world power if it weren't for the second world war (which was the nail in the coffin for the European empires and effectively left USA and USSR as the dominant powers). The loss of Germany and Austria Hungary also left a vacuum in eastern Europe which the USSR filled; likewise, the decline of western Europe allowed the US to dominate affairs west of the Iron Curtain. Still, without the world wars, Tsarist Russia and the US would likely become leading powers, albeit without the overwhelming dominance created by the collapse of the old European empires. Especially since Russia would not have suffered the catastrophic loss of population and industry to the war, let alone the turmoil of civil war.
@@bluesaberproductions8991 No, the Tsardom would have probably collapsed in WW2 if not for being overrun. We see its economic groqth, the biggest factor in war to be projected by 1950. The Tsardom would have been to weak ho fight and Nikolas the second was an idiot. At least Stalin did something right in WW2
@@MTH444 Stalin made huge blunders and was totally unprepared for the German invasion. He nearly had a mental breakdown when it came. Whereas under the tsars, Russia was constantly prepared for war, and they had an alliance with France. Whereas the USSR had no allies, only temporary co-belligerents. Remember, Russia was one of the first countries to begin developing submarines. Their military was fairly advanced under the tsars. And I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have had armies of white Russian exiles willingly joining the Axis to "liberate" the homeland without a Stalin in power (although assuming Poland was still under Russian rule, they and other ethnic groups could pose a problem).
@@bluesaberproductions8991 So you eccuse the dact that Nicolas himself was a terroble leader. He was a blithering idiot, no other way to put it
*Just imagine how different it would have been if Trotsky was in charge instead of Stalin*
Just exchanging one tyrant for another.
@@jbshiva865 not exactly. The USSR would have been far more aggresive
@@madpig7120 yup and most likely the USSR would have fallen much sooner under Trotsky's leadership. Stalin (and I can't belive I'm saying this as a US army veteran who's grandfather fought in Korea and uncle fought in Vietnam) had the right idea, worry about what we control at the moment fixing the economy and infrastructure and THEN try to expand our ideology to other nations. USSR was extremely large and had just gotten somewhat stable, spreading too thin so soon would just make things much harder to control
An early cold war
There would've been actual Soviet democracy instead of every Bolshevik being murdered and socialism being reversed
Does anyone think that history matters is better than Oversimplified? Because BOTH of them Are *Amazing!!!*
For people who do not know what the island in 1:29 is, its called Sakhalin.
The illustrations make me laugh so hard. Makes watching these vids for an exam so much more worth it
I love these video's. Although they only touch on the sides of events and are very simplistic at least if you want to understand world history they give you some basic fundamentals at which to start.
videos*
Why would you put an apostrophe there?
@@PANZERFAUST90 I'm starting a linguistic revolution to change the world for the better. In my new linguistic world order the proletariat will never have to worry about the bourgeoisie criticising their reasonably acceptable, "you now what I meant so why make an issue of it", but often incorrect grammar.
@@roland20002000 LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL 🤣
Can I have a seat on the linguistic council? I'll purge all those who are counter-revolutionary to the new language.
@@PANZERFAUST90 Well you did criticise my grammar so you should really be purged BUT like most revolutionaries I'm a power hungry hypocrite with no real morals. Welcome on board.
P.S. Have you got any mates who may want to join?
WOTWU!
The Bolsheviks switched Russia over to the Gregorian Calendar-one of the few things that they did right.
I lost it when I saw the Emperor's reaction to Pyotr getting assassinated.
What a great new years eve gift! :)
2:42 How is it that I have watched this dozens of times and only just noticed the Father Ted reference?
these videos are getting better and better man, keep it up!
The Russian Revolution is so damn interesting. To think that we’re still seeing the effects of it today.
Communism is a disease that just keeps killing.
@@morgenholz7937 The free market is great. I can earn as much wealth as I care to try. I live quite well, thank you 😊💰💰💰
How's that bread line?
@@morgenholz7937 lol Yeah everyone is equally poor and impoverished but hey, no unemployment right? 🤣🤣🤣
@@morgenholz7937 LOL You sure are a funny one :)
Have fun with your shitty economy and poor life.
@@morgenholz7937 lol Sure, believe in your delusions, commie.
"Another thing which was probably important was World War I."
History Matter's deadpan humour is PRICELESS.
Very well done. For a 10-min video, you included lots of points most (even "historically literate" people) have never heard of.
I feel the opposite. Very simplistic and superficial
2:16 "Another event which was probably important was the first world war." lmao
"It believed that the economy should be controlled entirely by the central government."
False. That's beyond Marxism, beyond Leninism and right into Stalinism. Marx said the workers should seize the means of production (the capital) of a capitalist system and the economy should be owned publicly (abolish private property) and reoriented toward fulfilling the needs of the people rather than the pursuit of profit. An equal society will result as there is no longer a class struggle. This will not be a system of government, but an entirely new stage of society, of which Marx wrote very little what it would actually look like. Any claim of what a "Marxist government" would be like is going into Marxist-Leninism, which is completely different. Stalinism (that even if a capitalist-oriented industrial base to be seized by the workers to achieve communism doesn't exist, as it didn't in Russia because it was too backward, the workers can build one up and achieve socialism in one country) is one outgrowth of that. That's where the notion of communism being "the state owns everything" and "everything is set by inefficient economic planning done by bureaucrats" comes from.
Don't believe me? Consider that before the USSR, a "socialist country" did not exist. The closest you could maybe get would be the Paris Commune which lasted all of two months before it was crushed. NO ONE could say what a "Marxist country" would look like.
@@elmascapo6588 true. Because human psychology works on the need for profit. And innovation is a result of these drive of going beyond our "needs" and achieving our "wants". The idea of sharing only what we have, and not let individuals pursue what they want (for their pursuit of greed, glory or growth), goes against the very psychology of what drives humans.
@@piyushvaidya5086 so human beings are selfish pos in your mind? lmfao what bullshit and totally unproven garbage
@@elmascapo6588 wrong moron, btw hows capitalism doing right now ? lmfao failing all over
a planned economy isnt inefficient at all, russia grew MUCH faster than any capitalist country ever, and it rebulit on the fly multiple times during the war which wouldve NEVER happened in a capitalist country. trump cant even make these companies make masks lmao capitalism is extremely inefficient, theres more homeless people than houses, we throw out food all the time to "preserve the market" this is lunacy , dont get me wrong i agree with what you want but state capitalism is much better than private capitalism, in what other area does not planning something work better than planning ? its literally only in this scam economy. its absurd
@@elmascapo6588 it did not fail in brazil at all, lula lifted 40 mill out of poverty and the gdp went up tremendously. and america interferes constantly , those countries are sancitoned or blockaded and their leaders are constantly under threats of a coup and you think when there are problems its due to "socialism" ? youre a fuckin moron or youre privileged
2:46 I enjoyed the subtle Father Ted reference. Made me smile.
I fuckin' lost it when Trotsky showed up with the "my hair is amazing" sign
This video cleared up so much for me, I'm in history12 rn and i had such trouble understanding the timeline of events so this helped a lot! Thank you!
Love the animations man, they always make my day.
Down with this sort of thing!- haha at the Father Ted reference! You rock!
As always, great video; well researched and well presented!
You sir are becoming one of my favorite channels on UA-cam!
Stumbled upon your videos, great stuff! Would love to see a follow up to this one about the history and fall of the USSR.
Your description of communism at the beginning is wrong. It doesn't advocate that industrial output should be owned by everyone, it's that industrial output should be owned by the workers who produce it. And it doesn't advocate that the economy should be controlled by a central government - in fact, depending on how orthodox you want to be the end goal is for there to be no central government at all. Lenin himself called state ownership of the economy "state capitalism". State ownership of the economy doesn't make it a different economic system if the hierarchy is still the same. The ownership of economic output, again, should fall to the workers who produce that output - not the state.
Amen!
Pretty fantastic video all round! I disagree with your explanation of Karl Marx's idea that he wanted everything to be controlled by "the central government". Both his and Engels texts HEAVILY emphasise that yes the means of production must be seized but put into the hands of people (the actual people not the unelected bureaucratic elite that we saw in the USSR)
Apart from that, a great video that summarizes one of the most significant events in human history. Especially since 2017 will mark 100 yrs since the October revolution of 1917!
Curious Zee This. So much this.
Yeah, he just needed to make that "temporarily controlled by the central government".
mankytoes Actually, Marx didn't advocate for any government control, temporary or not. That was a Leninist idea, which comes to speed up the process of going from feudalism to Communism
What Marx said was that there should be a government that will help establish and protect the new means of control of the means of production (factories etc) before dissolving itself after a few generations and that it couldn't happen in the anarchist way (which said that the end goal society (communism) would come overnight or in a very short time, so it doesn't make sense to build a government to protect it (this is my very poor understanding of Anarchism, tbh))
Jayden Sorry, I was unclear as well, what I meant was "controlled by a temporary central government", the "Socialism" stage of the historical progression to Communism.
De Jure, you are right, but a de facto communist country requires a government, unless 100% of people agree with communism in their country.
Trotsky’s hair was, indeed, amazing.
Thanks for coming in clutch when I go the entire unit without taking notes in class and have a test tomorrow!
did you pass?
I loved the Father Ted reference! Down With This Sort of Thing!
Careful now!
0:19 -- "...abolished by Peter the Great in 16" -- Wow, he goes way back!
How kids look at you in public: 7:45
10/10 coment made me giggel
7:44 wow Lenin totally looks like Charles manson.
He looks like a crackhead
@@DamianLopez-td3rc LMAAOAOA STOPPPSKWO
@@catlilicat am I wrong
@@DamianLopez-td3rc You made the dude die of laughter, especially since lenin in the picture does look like he took a bunch of crack in one night 😂
Trotsky's "My Hair is Amazing" sign is just magnificent.
I feel like it defiantly bears mentioning that the farming collectivisation lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
48 MILLION
@@dan080467 That seems wildly to high Were did you get that number?
You could do an entire 10 minute episode on Rasputin’s assassination. Also it’s either really cute or creepy how similar Nicolas II & George V of England looked. Like… they had the exact same face.
They were distant cousins
Not that distant, they both had the same grandmother, Queen Vic
@@09dinodino34Queen Victoria was not the grandmother of Nicholas II.
3:17 my hair is amazing XD
Those little guys with facial hair looks cute by the way
This whole thing works excellently as a string of memory cues for my A level course. It was also pretty funny, glad to finally see someone else laughing at how insane Russia was back then.
Still is insane
This will help my exam tomorrow
*me, only listening the video and focus playing"
WHAT DOES COURTNEY LOVE HAVE TO DO WITH THIS!! 3:40
If anyone was wondering more about the Czechoslovakian legion the channel Kings and Generals did a very well made video on them
One minor point. The Czechoslovakian legion was on neither side of the cival war, and yet was responsible for the capture of Kolchak, which was the major event that allowed the Reds to win the war.
This the only revision ima do for history tomorrow lmfaooo thanks dude
Edit: kinda regret that now
Kolchak was mostly a navy officer what would you expect putting him in charge of an army?
Not to commit war crimes and to keep basic discipline in the ranks
I love your channel keep up the great stuff!!!!!
thank you! this video is very helpful for revision :)
Me: oh a short ten minute video which will give me a few notes- perfect!
Me after an hour: how did I end up with 5 pages 😭✋
No didn't mention that Stalin's great reforms also caused mass starvation, famine and led people cannibalism. Such great economic success..
Famines of citizens were due to climate and the halt on trade from the USA (because they were greedy and wanted money, instead of trade) and the rest were in gulags which were fascists and people that decided not to provide anything for society.
Iker Vita like China now
@@joshr8293
And because people like you who are seriously mind sick and dangerous for humanity we should rebuild gulags but this time for you and your comrades.
Culturalmarxism will be eradicated.
@@joshr8293 Actually alot of them were just petty landowners who didn't want to be fucked over by the disastrous collectivisation. Also the bit about fascists is untrue propaganda
@@boozecruiser I'm Ukrainian and I know the holodomor is a load of shit, our holodomor museum even admits to using pictures of starving children from great depression.
Great Father Ted reference! (“Down with this sort thing!” Careful now”)
Love this simplified version. Also easy to understand why my grandfather left for the USA in 1906.
Two father ted references? Best channel in the world!
Another fantastic episode!
I'll have you know I was trying to take a fucking dab when I saw the Obvious Trotsky with the Hair sign and immediately understood. I almost knocked my bong over laughing, and completely missed all the smoke. Worth it.
Stalin holding the "DO BETTER" sign in people's faces is my permanent mood
This video helped me beyond belief, i was really struggling on where to start for my Russia revolution revision! Thank you!!
Great video. I think at one point or another you should do a video on the doctors plot, there isn't much out there on it.
9:47 WW2, in which the USSR joined UK, US, etc. in an alliance literally called the Allies: "Am I a joke to you?"
Great video mate!
Good documentary. Short and sweet 👌🏻.
7:40 Lenin had become a welder?
Unwell
Not one mention of Snowball, Napoleon, Mr Jones, or Benjamin ...
9:40 - a flaw in that argument though is part of what fuelled support for the Nazis was fear of a communist revolution, which would likely have been weaker if communists hadn't seized power in Russia.
They had to start somewhere. They hate Gentile Christian Monarchy. They hate physical work. They hate the truth. Communism is a front for something else. Investigate the affiliations of Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and other officers in the party.
Support for the NSDAP had a lot to do with socio-economic despair during the Weimar Republic. Thousands of non-Germans, including Jews and non-Europeans volunteered to fight against the USSR in WWII. I see what you're getting at, but Stalin would've threatened Europe anyway based on his associations regardless of his philosophy. He could've been a progressive capitalist or a constitutional liberalist. Stalin, Churchill, FDR, Truman and Eisenhower were brothers in the same club. The NSDAP opposed that club.
These are great keep up the good work!
These videos are GREAT. Subscribed, for sure.