Vladimir Lenin: A Monster or a Product of His Time and Circumstances?

[беспокойный путешественни]

Russians are very religions.

Largely useless knowledge: Russia is home to the Mari, one of the last European peoples who have never abandoned their pagan tradition.

 

[Stevicus]

That's absolutely untrue. They prevented them from leaving Russia, they basically imprisoned them.
There were so many countries they could go to: I can just name Italy, where the Queen Elena was a friend to the Russian Imperial Family.

Kerensky wanted to get them out as soon as possible, but his problem was that no one would take him. Plus, there was the logistical issue of how to get him out of there while Russia was still at war and in a state of political upheaval. Nicholas was just too weak-willed, vacillating - fighting a losing war and unable to reverse the course of the corrupted, incompetent, morally-bankrupt regime he inherited from his father and grandfathers. There was no safe place for him in Russia, as he was universally hated and despised. Kerensky wanted to protect him, but was also severely hampered and hobbled, even by tsarist generals like Kornilov who worked against Kerensky and tried to weaken the regime. The Tsar's generals failed him and couldn't protect him anymore, so it was left to Kerensky, but once he was gone, the Tsar was at the mercy of the Bolsheviks.

If they could have gotten him out sooner, then maybe he could have been saved, but I don't think anyone really knew or actually expected that they would all be executed like that. I think the Kaiser was upset about it, and given the terms of the recent Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, I heard that he wanted to march on Russia again, against the Bolsheviks. Although he was in pretty deep doo doo in his own country at that point. It would only be a few more months before he would be seeking out escape and exile (which he found in the Netherlands, right next door).

It doesn't add up...because the Americans and the British had just defeated Germany, and the czar had been their ally, in the fight against the German-Austrian colossus.
Let's say that Rockefeller funded Lenin. And that explains it all.
There are demoniac forces behind all this

I suppose one could look at it as cause and effect. I'm not sure what Rockefeller's role might have been, but if any monied interest funds a politician, they do so because they expect to gain something in return. The Kaiser allowed Lenin to pass from Switzerland through Germany to get to Russia. In doing so, he pretty much signed the Romanovs' death warrants, although he probably didn't realize it at the time. Of course, there was no guarantee that Lenin was going to gain power. Funding and outside assistance can always help, but it's still a gamble.

The phrase "peace without annexations or indemnities" was used by the Provisional Government as a possible plan for peace in WW1. Russia was faring quite badly in the war, and they just wanted it to end. The other countries in the West were locked in a stalemate and being slowly worn down. They wanted Russia to stay in the war and offered financial assistance to the Provisional Government. But that wasn't really enough. If they had been willing to go along with the idea of peace without annexations or indemnities, that would have boosted the prestige of the Kerensky regime and would have shown his commitment to peace with honor. It might have been at least enough support to stay in power a while longer. It might have even saved the Tsar. But if the people were no longer willing to die for the Tsar and his empire, they were certainly not going to die for the British, French, or American empires either.

I don't really believe in supernatural or demoniac forces being at work, but if I did, I would observe that there had been a great deal of sinful and possibly demonic activity in the centuries leading up to WW1 and the enormous consequences it has had in shaping the world into what it has become today.

But I would ask you this: Which individual is more likely to be influenced by demonic forces?

A: "We just want to quit this war, with no annexations or indemnities."
B: "We want to continue this war so that we can annex more territory and acquire as much loot and booty as we can."

 

[PureX]

You don't take Russians' religiosity into account.
Russians are very religions.
You can't compare a Leninist system that persecuted priests with a "slightly undemocratic" regime where the President protects the Russian Church, according to the caesaropapist principle inherited from the Byzantine Empire. Caesaropapism - Wikipedia

Lenin is no longer relevant. The solutions of the present and future are beyond his ideological scope. The only reason he gets brought up is to try and slander any new solutions with the failures of the past.

 

[Estro Felino]

Lenin is no longer relevant. The solutions of the present and future are beyond his ideological scope. The only reason he gets brought up is to try and slander any new solutions with the failures of the past.

I perfectly agree.
I like what you said.

 

[Estro Felino]

Kerensky wanted to get them out as soon as possible, but his problem was that no one would take him. Plus, there was the logistical issue of how to get him out of there while Russia was still at war and in a state of political upheaval. Nicholas was just too weak-willed, vacillating - fighting a losing war and unable to reverse the course of the corrupted, incompetent, morally-bankrupt regime he inherited from his father and grandfathers. There was no safe place for him in Russia, as he was universally hated and despised. Kerensky wanted to protect him, but was also severely hampered and hobbled, even by tsarist generals like Kornilov who worked against Kerensky and tried to weaken the regime. The Tsar's generals failed him and couldn't protect him anymore, so it was left to Kerensky, but once he was gone, the Tsar was at the mercy of the Bolsheviks.

- The Imperial Family wanted to quit Russia as soon as possible
- They prevented them from doing it.
- I have already told you that in Italy there was Elena of Montenegro that had studied in St. Petersburg and wanted to save them.

I advice you to watch this movie. It's historically accurate.

I don't really believe in supernatural or demoniac forces being at work, but if I did, I would observe that there had been a great deal of sinful and possibly demonic activity in the centuries leading up to WW1 and the enormous consequences it has had in shaping the world into what it has become today.

But I would ask you this: Which individual is more likely to be influenced by demonic forces?

A: "We just want to quit this war, with no annexations or indemnities."
B: "We want to continue this war so that we can annex more territory and acquire as much loot and booty as we can."

The Triple Entente just wanted to give the Western Slavic world independence from the German-Austrian colossus.

I don't see how Lenin and Bolshevism could care less about continuing the war.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

A Nihilist.
A monster.
A murderer.

^This. A sick psychopath responsible for an ocean of blood. I spit on his memory. They need to chuck that gross husk of his in Red Square into the garbage.

 

[Stevicus]

- The Imperial Family wanted to quit Russia as soon as possible
- They prevented them from doing it.
- I have already told you that in Italy there was Elena of Montenegro that had studied in St. Petersburg and wanted to save them.

I advice you to watch this movie. It's historically accurate.

I'll try to watch it later. The Bolsheviks didn't let him leave, but Kerensky did want to get the Tsar out. They only had a short period of time in which the Tsar could have been able to escape, but they missed their opportunity. If Elena of Montenegro offered him asylum and refuge, I would wonder how they would propose to transport him there.

The Triple Entente just wanted to give the Western Slavic world independence from the German-Austrian colossus.

I don't see how Lenin and Bolshevism could care less about continuing the war.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks didn't want to continue the war. The Western Allies wanted to continue what they had already been doing, and with Germany and Russia both becoming severely weakened and crippled, they knocked out two major competitors for world domination. They had to get used to the idea of America becoming the world's largest economy, but they didn't seem to mind that as much than if Germany or Russia had gotten into the top spot. Germany and Russia eventually recovered, and then fought each other again, only this time, Russia had America's help, something that was lacking in the last war. And then in the aftermath, Russia was devastated and crippled, while the US put all its efforts into rebuilding Germany and Japan and turning them into staunch bulwarks against communism.

In some ways, it was kind of clever. Switching sides like that, turning enemies into friends, friends into enemies - all for our own gain. Your own Machiavelli would have been proud of us, no?

 

[Estro Felino]

I'll try to watch it later. The Bolsheviks didn't let him leave, but Kerensky did want to get the Tsar out. They only had a short period of time in which the Tsar could have been able to escape, but they missed their opportunity. If Elena of Montenegro offered him asylum and refuge, I would wonder how they would propose to transport him there.

Via Black Sea. Odessa-Istanbul- Patras-Italy.

 

[libre]

In your opinion, was Lenin really a monster beyond the norms of his time, or was he merely another relentless leader from the extremely turbulent period of the early 20th century? Would his opposition had been better if they had defeated him in the civil war and held power instead?

Lenin was the first grandmaster of social science.
He was a revolutionary who proved that revolutionary defeatism could lead to a socialist revolution in an Imperialist country.
Those that have studied his work have been able to lead successful national liberation movements in the third world and developed his analysis of imperialism to practical policies to combat Fascism and overthrow their colonizers.

The Imperialist press has done a good deal to warp public opinion on Communists in the west.
There is nothing the west loves more than a dead communist who died without implementing his theories, and there is nothing they hate more than a communist who lived long enough to prove their theories. Lenin falls in the second category.

 

[Estro Felino]

Lenin was the first grandmaster of social science.
He was a revolutionary who proved that revolutionary defeatism could lead to a socialist revolution in an Imperialist country.
Those that have studied his work have been able to lead successful national liberation movements in the third world and developed it.

The Imperialist press has done a good deal to warp public opinion on Communists in the west.
There is nothing the west loves more than a dead communist who died without implementing his theories, and there is nothing they hate more than a communist who lived long enough to prove their theories. Lenin falls in the second category.

Mussolini was a socialist, for example.
While the Freemason Teddy Bear Roosevelt was doing his Freemasonic stuff, Mussolini was in jail for striking with farm workers.

Do you know why the Fascism rose to power? Thanks to Leninism. Thanks to Lenin and Trotsky.
Because the Italian élites were disgusted and terrified by what Leninism was doing in Russia, and so they gave the power to a former socialist, Benito Mussolini as the lesser of two evils, and because they knew that the violent fascist squads hated the Communists who admired Lenin.

The fascist squads basically hindered the Bolshevik wind in Italy.

So...if the king of Italy considered Mussolini the lesser of two evils, compared to Lenin, it means that Lenin was a monster.

 

[беспокойный путешественни]

Or the king of Italy was an idiot.

 

[libre]

Mussolini was a socialist, for example.
While the Freemason Teddy Bear Roosevelt was doing his Freemasonic stuff, Mussolini was in jail for striking with farm workers.

Do you know why the Fascism rose to power? Thanks to Leninism. Thanks to Lenin and Trotsky.
Because the Italian élites were disgusted and terrified by what Leninism was doing in Russia, and so they gave the power to a former socialist, Benito Mussolini as the lesser of two evils, and because they knew that the violent fascist squads hated the Communists who admired Lenin.

The fascist squads basically hindered the Bolshevik wind in Italy.

So...if the king of Italy considered Mussolini the lesser of two evils, compared to Lenin, it means that Lenin was a monster.

The fascists were the last refuge of the ruling class who would do anything to hold onto their power and property.
The fact that the king of Italy considered Mussolini to be a preferable choice to Lenin only makes me more confident in the stance of Lenin.

Mussolini was not a socialist in any meaningful sense when he was in power. He did more harm to the Italian labour movement than anyone, repressing them openly.

 

[Estro Felino]

Or the king of Italy was an idiot.

Considering that Leninism mass murdered his own citizens, just for being kulaki ....anyone was a kulak in the countryside..

 

[Estro Felino]

The fascists were the last refuge of the ruling class who would do anything to hold onto their power and property.
The fact that the king of Italy considered Mussolini to be a preferable choice to Lenin only makes me more confident in the stance of Lenin.

Mussolini was not a socialist in any meaningful sense when he was in power. He did more harm to the Italian labour movement than anyone, repressing them openly.

Excuse me, that's re-writing history.
Mussolini expropriated so many lands from aristocracy and big landowners and distributed them among farmers. Lex Serpieri.

He was the most socialist Prime Minister in Italian history.

 

[ajay0]

^This. A sick psychopath responsible for an ocean of blood. I spit on his memory. They need to chuck that gross husk of his in Red Square into the garbage.

Lenin is also considered a monster and anti-christ by feudalist lords and capitalists around the world for reducing their abundant profits and ultra-luxurious lifestyle in favor of better worker and peasant wages and conditions, and forcing them to get off their high horses to behave in a more humane, caring and charitable manner to the 'despicable' lower classes so as to prevent an outbreak of revolution in their respective regions.

 

[Stevicus]

Via Black Sea. Odessa-Istanbul- Patras-Italy.

That would have been problematic, considering that Turkey was part of the Central Powers. When (what date) did this offer of asylum from Elena of Montenegro take place?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Lenin is also considered a monster and anti-christ by feudalist lords and capitalists around the world for reducing their abundant profits and ultra-luxurious lifestyle in favor of better worker and peasant wages and conditions, and forcing them to get off their high horses to behave in a more humane, caring and charitable manner to the 'despicable' lower classes so as to prevent an outbreak of revolution in their respective regions.

One can certainly argue that both the French and Russian revolutions served notice to Europe’s rulers and oligarchs, that they ignore the interests of the common people at their peril.

Not sure that justifies in any way though, the murderous excesses of Robespierre and Lenin.

 

[ajay0]

One can certainly argue that both the French and Russian revolutions served notice to Europe’s rulers and oligarchs, that they ignore the interests of the common people at their peril.

Not sure that justifies in any way though, the excesses of Robespierre and Lenin.

I am against the violent excesses of the French and Russian revolutions, as well as the American revolutionary war which killed thousands of people, as well as the English civil wars between Royalists and Parliamentarians which took a heavy human cost.

But as Kennedy stated, if there are no timely progressive reforms of a peaceful nature, there are bound to be violent revolutions.

 

[Stevicus]

One can certainly argue that both the French and Russian revolutions served notice to Europe’s rulers and oligarchs, that they ignore the interests of the common people at their peril.

Not sure that justifies in any way though, the excesses of Robespierre and Lenin.

It doesn't justify anything, but it can help to explain the causes and effects of history.

 

[Estro Felino]

That would have been problematic, considering that Turkey was part of the Central Powers. When (what date) did this offer of asylum from Elena of Montenegro take place?

In 1918 the Ottomans and Germany were already on their knees.
I don't think they would have ever prevented the czar and his family from fleeing from Russia.
I think they couldn't care less.

Let's face the truth: the Leninist murderous complex did prevent them from quitting Russia, they incarcerated them in Siberia and then murdered them.