3 ms·
"Though most of the memorials were built from the 1960s through the 1980s, the most abstract designs harken back to the Russian Revolution of 1917, when Vladimi
by kushti 8y ago
"Though most of the memorials were built from the 1960s through the 1980s, the most abstract designs harken back to the Russian Revolution of 1917, when Vladimir Lenin and his Bolsheviks promised to empower workers and take the reins from the Tsarist bourgeois." - the propaganda language of the article is illiterate as there were two revolutions in Russian Empire in 1917, Tsarist regime was overthrown by February Revolution and bolsheviks overthrew bourgeois regime in October revolution, thus talking about "Tsarist bourgeois" vs bolsheviks is simply not literate.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- v_lisivka 8y agoHistorically, Russia has one revolution (February Revolution) and October coup (Putsch)[1], which was then renamed into Great October Socialist [bla bla bla]... Revolution much later. [1]: http://grachev62.narod.ru/stalin/t4/t4_38.htm http://grachev62.narod.ru/stalin/t4/t4_38.htm
- kushti 8y agoThen you need to provide a credible source which provides an explanation why FR was a revolution and other is not, not a Stalin's article from 1918 you provided which is not about that at all. Left-leaning historians often define (a real) revolution as a change in ruling class, based on that definition both FR and OR were the very real revolutions (one was about passing power to bourgeois class, another about passing power to the working class), but if you are using other definitions, please provide them.
- v_lisivka 8y agoIf direct speech of executors of coup are not credible source for you, then what I need to provide to convince you? Wikipedia article? First hand evidence is enough for any court in the world.
- davidgould 8y agoI dunno, if the direct speech of say bank robbers claims that it was "account rebalancing" not robbery, is that sufficient? That is, I don't think history is obliged to take the claims of historical actors at face value.
- a7776f88862 8y agoYou are being disingenuously pedantic by making a distinction between synonymous words. From the linked document: "Уже с конца сентября ЦК партии большевиков решил мобилизовать все силы партии для организации успешного восстания. В этих целях ЦК решил организовать Военно-революционный комитет в Питере" Which translates to: "From the end of September, the central committee of the bolshevik party decided to mobilize all party forces for the organization of a successful uprising. To these ends, the central committee decided to organize a Military-revolutionary committee in St. Petersburg" Also note the reference to the counter-revolutionary plot. For Stalin, the October coup was clearly the continuation of the February revolution.
- v_lisivka 8y agoNo, I don't. You need to understand that whole process, started in February 1917, was named "Russian revolution", while October episode was just part of it. They were separated in to two "revolutions" much later. See [1] for more details. [1]: https://pikabu.ru/story/ot_revolyutsii_k_perevorotu_i_obratno_kak_menyalos_naimenovanie_sobyitiy_1917_goda_za_proshedshie_sto_let_5717461 https://pikabu.ru/story/ot_revolyutsii_k_perevorotu_i_obratn...
- a7776f88862 8y agoDid you even bother to read the article you linked to? The citations make it quite clear that the terms were synonymous, and it was multiple groups (not just the Bolsheviks) who referred to the October Bolshevik takeover as a revolution.
- v_lisivka 8y ago