Military Gear & Army Surplus Gear Blog

History vs. Vladimir Lenin – Alex Gendler

History vs. Vladimir Lenin – Alex Gendler


He was one of the most influential figures of the 20th century, forever changing the course of one of the world’s largest countries. But was he a hero who toppled an oppressive tyranny or a villain who replaced it with another? It’s time to put Lenin on the stand in History vs. Lenin. “Order, order, hmm. Now, wasn’t it your fault that the band broke up?” “Your honor, this is Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, AKA Lenin, the rabblerouser who helped overthrow
the Russian tsar Nicholas II in 1917 and founded the Soviet Union, one of the worst dictatorships of the 20th century.” “Ohh.” “The tsar was a bloody tyrant under whom the masses toiled in slavery.” “This is rubbish. Serfdom had already been abolished in 1861.” “And replaced by something worse. The factory bosses treated the people far worse than their former feudal landlords. And unlike the landlords, they were always there. Russian workers toiled for eleven hours a day and were the lowest paid in all of Europe.” “But Tsar Nicholas made laws to protect the workers.” “He reluctantly did the bare minimum to avert revolution, and even there, he failed. Remember what happened in 1905 after his troops fired on peaceful petitioners?” “Yes, and the tsar ended the rebellion by introducing a constitution and an elected parliament, the Duma.” “While retaining absolute power and dissolving them whenever he wanted.” “Perhaps there would’ve been more reforms in due time if radicals, like Lenin, weren’t always stirring up trouble.” “Your Honor, Lenin had seen his older brother Aleksandr executed by the previous tsar for revolutionary activity, and even after the reforms, Nicholas continued the same mass repression and executions, as well as the unpopular involvement in World War I, that cost Russia so many lives and resources.” “Hm, this tsar doesn’t sound like such a capital fellow.” “Your Honor, maybe Nicholas II did doom himself with bad decisions, but Lenin deserves no credit for this. When the February 1917 uprisings finally forced the tsar to abdicate, Lenin was still exiled in Switzerland.” “Hm, so who came to power?” “The Duma formed a provisional government, led by Alexander Kerensky, an incompetent bourgeois failure. He even launched another failed offensive in the war, where Russia had already lost so much, instead of ending it like the people wanted.” “It was a constitutional social democratic government, the most progressive of its time. And it could have succeeded eventually if Lenin hadn’t returned in April, sent by the Germans to undermine the Russian war effort and instigate riots.” “Such slander! The July Days were a spontaneous and justified reaction against the government’s failures. And Kerensky showed his true colors when he blamed Lenin and arrested and outlawed his Bolshevik party, forcing him to flee into exile again. Some democracy! It’s a good thing the government collapsed under their own incompetence and greed when they tried to stage a military coup then had to ask the Bolsheviks for help when it backfired. After that, all Lenin had to do was return in October and take charge. The government was peacefully overthrown overnight.” “But what the Bolsheviks did after gaining power wasn’t very peaceful. How many people did they execute without trial? And was it really necessary to murder the tsar’s entire family, even the children?” “Russia was being attacked by foreign imperialists, trying to restore the tsar. Any royal heir that was rescued would be recognized as ruler by foreign governments. It would’ve been the end of everything the people had fought so hard to achieve. Besides, Lenin may not have given the order.” “But it was not only imperialists that the Bolsheviks killed. What about the purges and executions of other socialist and anarchist parties, their old allies? What about the Tambov Rebellion, where peasants, resisting grain confiscation, were killed with poison gas? Or sending the army to crush the workers in Kronstadt, who were demanding democratic self-management? Was this still fighting for the people?” “Yes! The measures were difficult, but it was a difficult time. The new government needed to secure itself while being attacked from all sides, so that the socialist order could be established.” “And what good came of this socialist order? Even after the civil war was won, there were famines, repression and millions executed or sent to die in camps, while Lenin’s successor Stalin established a cult of personality and absolute power.” “That wasn’t the plan. Lenin never cared for personal gains, even his enemies admitted that he fully believed in his cause, living modestly and working tirelessly from his student days until his too early death. He saw how power-hungry Stalin was and tried to warn the party, but it was too late.” “And the decades of totalitarianism that followed after?” “You could call it that, but it was Lenin’s efforts that changed Russia in a few decades from a backward and undeveloped monarchy full of illiterate peasants to a modern, industrial superpower, with one of the world’s best educated populations, unprecedented opportunities for women, and some of the most important scientific advancements of the century. Life may not have been luxurious, but nearly everyone had a roof over their head and food on their plate, which few countries have achieved.” “But these advances could still have happened, even without Lenin and the repressive regime he established.” “Yes, and I could’ve been a famous rock and roll singer. But how would I have sounded?” We can never be sure how things could’ve unfolded if different people were in power or different decisions were made, but to avoid the mistakes of the past, we must always be willing to put historical figures on trial.


Reader Comments

  1. so this channel belongs to left Marxist idiots. Themselves capitalist these people propose socialist ideologies on others. Hypocrisy at it's best

  2. I think Lenin might be considered a good guy only by:
    1. post soviet citizens after brainwash
    2. american (or western in general) hipsters

  3. Давайте начнем с того, что Ленин практически никак не участвовал в свержении царя.

  4. 4:00 wrong the Bolsheviks didn’t kill them the Ural Soviet was extremely radical even by Bolshevik standards

  5. Soviet Union wasn’t even close communism Lenin had great ideology revolution but Stalin ruined it supposed to be for people

  6. Lenin was for many years an active agent of the German Secret Service.

    Documents detailing orders from German ambassador Hans Freiherr von Wangenheim,
    to two Russian agents codenamed “der Bankier” (the banker) and
    “Maulwurf” (the mole), which have been identified respectively as
    Alexander Parvus and Vladimir Lenin.

    According to these
    documents, Parvus would have served as Lenin’s liaison officer,
    transmitting him the orders and the material that came from the Germans
    through Jakob Fürstenberg, Lenin’s most trusted agent who was also known
    by various aliases such as Hanecki, Kuba, or his Party name, Ganetsky.

    An elaborate account of a meeting that took place between the Bolshevik
    leader, Parvus and Baron von Wangenheim on April 13 1917, during
    Lenin’s stopover in Stockholm, provides an incredible new perspective on
    the October revolution, as it now seems clear that the action was
    planned by the German military.

    The three men discuss the events to come and plan their course of action. The obvious aim of the
    operation was to spread revolutionary unrest. The documents show that
    Lenin was in fact an agent part of an elaborate three-point proposal:
    the infiltration of Bolshevik propaganda into Russia; an international
    press campaign against Czarism; organizing massive strikes under the
    slogan “Freedom and Peace.”

    “They transported Lenin in a sealed truck like a plague bacillus from Switzerland into Russia“- Winston Churchill.

  7. Me: scrolls down to comment section expecting to see debates between Lenin’s supporters and his opponents

    The comment section: fAKe ruSsIAn ACcEnT

  8. ДИСИЗ ИН БУЛ ЩЕТ МАЙН ИНГЛИШ БРАЗЕРС!
    АКЦЕНТ ФОР РУСИШ ОРИДЖИНАЛ!

  9. The Russian accent is terrible. I can't stand it. please remake this using real Russian voice or just without the accent.

  10. The argument made here is the same argument neo-Marxist liberals make for communism: "Communism works. It just hasn't been done correctly yet. If I was in charge, things might have been different."

  11. Fake history can't be an argument. You like bourgeois propaganda lie about points of the Russian history.

  12. Lenin's era is nearly 100 years behind ours, so we can't think of him in modern terms. Those who vilify him without cause will not know what a progressive example Lenin was in his backward age.

  13. Ok people, we got it after the 7000th comment about the fake accent. Now even the % summarizers are getting annoying. 95% fake accent, 5% Yo mamma! Shut up! Lol

  14. I don't see debates, so let's start them.
    Like anything in this world, the answer is "depends". There isn't the true hero or the true villain, the French Revolution was awsome altough it ended in that way we all know that brought the france again into imperialism.
    We should not protect and take parts in our humab history, but, we should study it with totally impartail eyes and learn from our errors ❤️

  15. The gentle laborer shall no longer suffer to the greed of Mr. Krabs! We will dismantle this established, board by board! And even if we need to! We will send the hammer of goodwill, crashing into Mr. Krabs house! And destroy his home of SERVITUDE!

  16. And to the Bolsheviks, it was necessary to murder the Tsar. Because he stood for morality when the rest of the world was full of lechery. They needed to eradicate the one thing that stood in the way of the world falling to absolute depravity.

  17. Lets not get offended he didnt get the accent, the intention is what counts, and we got another great, entertaining vid

  18. Read Krushchev Lied by Grover Furr. It's cool that Lenin is being redeemed but Stalin is not the monster everyone thinks he is.

  19. In my opinion Lenin's legacy was ruined by Stalin's hunger of power, Lenin was a savior to the poor and a threat to wealthy, he was and will be forever a hero to the socialist movement. Eat the rich.

  20. I wonder what history vs. Donald Trump would look like. But I have to wait for maybe 50 or more years for that.

  21. Creo otra, puede q el comunismo alla matado a 100 millones de personas de una, pero el capitalismo a la larga, a matado a especies y a la larga matará al humano( estoy en contra de cualquier dictadura incluso de derecha)

  22. I need to start calling people I don’t like « incompetent bourgeois failures » in that Russian accent.
    Has a nice ring to it.

  23. I’m pretty sure Lenin meant well, but Stalin took over after he died, and corrupted it using a cult-like manner

  24. But everyone had a roof on their head and food on their plate… except for the innocent who were killed for the socialist cause. Sounds very selfish and unhumane.

  25. So I’m summary:
    Because of Nicholas Russia was never able to advance with the modern world and was considered one of the worst developed nations of its kind. Because of Lenin they were finally able to progress and become one of the world superpowers.

  26. History occasionally forgives or even glorifies people who loot. But when it involves people who preach racial and gender equality before it became cool, history disgraces them for just being against the ones in power.

  27. Мерзкий, антисталинский, а значит антибольшивистский и антикоммунистический ролик!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *