History vs. Vladimir Lenin - Alex Gendler

[@JohnWick-xh6in]

TED-Ed just invented a new accent(Russian-Scottish)

[@michaelp.4890]

Indeed!

[@123NickSully]

Lmfao

[@can3809]

No its the all accents in one accent

[@acutechicken5798]

@@can3809 Still not as bad as my fake Russian accent.

[@cosminblk8359]

Scottish accent isn't just regular english with russian accent ?

[@MrRattlebones640]

I'm flattered.

[@arnabsaha9778]

Vladimir Lenin You are great comrade

[@Ray-mw1fx]

you're flatulence.

[@lafeinte1084]

You’re a hero

[@turtleguitar9990]

Privet mui drug kak dela

[@わさわさ和三盆]

I’m communist but I don’t like you, Lenin

[@bas8792]

It's like when introverts have argument in their head and roasting themselves

[@mr.knowitall5019]

*NERDS

[@mikewilson8221]

I’m shook from how extremely accurate that describes me.

[@Amelia_-qy9nz]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmPZqWWrqKetpqc

[@tarielkaroldan4106]

You have no idea

[@saywhatnow2173]

This is literally me every day. Jesus!

[@Memelander]

That accent on the lawyer's part is actually an attempt at portraying Lenin's accent when speaking English accurately. Since Lenin was taught English by an Irish-Scot, he spoke English with an accent similar to this. The more you know.

[@user-ry9om6es8t]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWq0h4SsfLimgas

[@EightyFourThousands84000s]

@@user-ry9om6es8t smh

[@user-ry9om6es8t]

@@EightyFourThousands84000s (^◉ω◉^)??

[@Xaviergonzalez85]

@Cristofer Andrade pretty much.

[@poc9652]

What is an 'Irish Scot' ?

[@stefanetienney2666]

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

[@lazypops3117]

2:35

[@scottskinner577]

Im all on on this. Ill send pics of the reactions I get

[@thoth7858]

If "people I don't like" means your boss, it might be an accurate description too

[@scottskinner577]

Every time you think this guys accent is fake, just think of that guy from FPSRussia saying "Trust me. Im a professional Russian!" And just like that....im a believer again 👍

[@darkjester53]

Try a French accent. It just cuts that extra bit deeper.

[@Umirua]

No matter what kind of political leader you are you'll still be considered both hero and villian.

[@Umirua]

And the argument is always unending and unanswerable

[@OfficialHighduke]

IShallUseFire! Unless you're Stalin... He did nothing good but stop the Nazi's in Russia, and even that was to the misfortune of his people.

[@100aegir]

OfficialHighduke Well, technically Stalin was the one who actually made the soviet union into the super power it became, Lenin practically did nothing in making it like that. Not saying Stalin was a good man, there is too much evidence against that idea, but he was not a pure villain despite whatever the shit Trotsky said, a man who had been a rival to Stalin long before anyone else even recognised Stalin at all, so a very biased individual is the one who tells the story of how Stalin's mass killings were different from his own mass killings.

[@Umirua]

100aegir My point exactly

[@lochlannwatling3482]

The_Pyromancer you are right

[@tylerford2370]

Me: *scrolls down to comment section expecting to see debates between Lenin’s supporters and his opponents* The comment section: fAKe ruSsIAn ACcEnT

[@tantainguyen4290]

Metoo

[@strongfp]

Because no one has an actual argument against what Lenin accomplished.

[@thesenate5913]

@@strongfp if this was about stalin the comment section would be a war zone

[@Luca-bv5ic]

@@thesenate5913 But Joseph Stalin was definitely bad. Lenin is a more ambiguous figure.

[@thesenate5913]

@@Luca-bv5ic yes Stalin only did 2 good things: Modernized Russia Beating (or helping beating) the Germans Thats just it I dont wanna talk about lennin cus i have not researched him enough

[@TheAlps36]

4:05 that's an excellent point I never thought about before. There will always be people who want the old ways to return. It happened in France and in England. Even imprisoning or banishing an heir can't stop them returning to power if they have support

[@Doublemonk0506]

That is why King Louis and Marie Antoinette were executed. If they lived and fled, which they already tried to do, foreign powers would stomp over the people to place the rulers back on the throne

[@viscountbp]

At the very least Charles I and Louis XVI had a trial to justify their execution.

[@soggmeisterlasagnagarfield]

Conservatism. That’s why revolutions are bloody.

[@shedisdumb1726]

@@viscountbp to be fair with Lous it was basically a kangaroo court trial cause really think about how the French Repblic would respond if they just went "Yeah guys we're just gonna let him live after he literally tried to run away"

[@Davros539]

True but several countries managed to get rid of their monarchies without killing the monarchs, but to be fair, a lot of those, like Romania and Bulgaria, did so later.

[@sillyloser8302]

The two men arguing: Lenin: 🗿

[@VUfElectrolyticCapacitor]

Yo Angelo!

[@rusty3073]

Ok

[@sabianrios3747]

@@VUfElectrolyticCapacitor i never expected a jojo reference here

[@yeezyyankie324]

I like your funny words, magic man

[@okuyasu1066]

Yo, Angelo

[@leovenegas5338]

Note to TED-Ed: When you mix a Russian accent with a Scottish accent, it sounds like a cat gurgling water.

[@magnumomg1427]

Lol

[@Hessonite_Dragon_Helen]

I kind of agree...and I haven’t had a cat in like 8 years

[@sillyloser8302]

Lol...

[@rashmicp4356]

😂😂😂

[@whimsinator2982]

Sounds like you’re triggered!

[@Historyjewels]

These videos aren't made to prove that a hated historical character was actually good. They're made to show us that this historical figure did both Good AND bad.

[@СемёнШиповалов-в5ж]

Unless Lenin, because... Союз нерушимый республик свободных Сплотила навеки Великая Русь Да здравствует созданный волей народов Единый, могучий Советский Союз Славься, Отечество наше свободное Дружбы народов надёжный оплот! Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт Сквозь грозы сияло нам солнце свободы И Ленин великий нам путь озарил На правое дело он поднял народы На труд и на подвиги нас вдохновил Славься, Отечество наше свободное Дружбы народов надёжный оплот Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт В победе бессмертных идей коммунизма Мы видим грядущее нашей страны И Красному знамени славной Отчизны Мы будем всегда беззаветно верны Славься, Отечество наше свободное Дружбы народов надёжный оплот Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт

[@zegpath81]

Семён Шиповалов I'm guessing this is Never Gonna Give You Up in Russian.

[@СемёнШиповалов-в5ж]

@@zegpath81 some kind of that

[@maharaja8099]

Lenin is a better hero than the Churchill and anyone u romanticize

[@prometheus5405]

@@maharaja8099 komunis indo

[@squirrele4495]

“A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals.” Fyodor Dostoyevsky The tragedy of the 20th century wasn’t the dictatorships- they were nothing new. The tragedy was the millions of politically active, educated citizens of the world who knew better, fought for a more equal world, and were aware enough to watch it all fall apart.

[@estanislaobiertosz7011]

damn, really deep. I can tell that most of every human tragedy has already happened but in many cases we are falling on the same hole. Fyodor was someone aware of things (because he experienced them) as someone who was very close to death,

[@user-ry9om6es8t]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWq0h4SsfLimgas

[@Ivan-uk4zm]

Really sad for people who are sober feeling of pain.

[@terrorgaming459]

America is a authoritarian dictionary

[@fsdds1488]

Same thing happen in both camps.

[@andreipaun5627]

Coment section: 95%-fake Russian accent 5%-it was diatlov

[@jinnwilli]

Haha! “you didn't see graphite on the roof because it wasn't there!”

[@moriarty.exe.4872]

Lol

[@MacRubik351]

Andrei Paun lmao 😅😅😂😂

[@ankitamandal6535]

Vladimir Lenin. Not great, not terrible.

[@sneakysnek8416]

Whos Diatlov?

[@lilcracker692]

As a Russian, that accent feels like a screwdriver being jammed into my ears. Great video though, very accurate.

[@Jose04537]

Yes, but they forgot the part where Lenin allowed fair elections to form a Constitutional Assambly, which his party dissolved ONE DAY AFTER it's formation, just because they lost the election. He was undeniable a tirant that didn't respect the will of the people since that day.

[@cindric3128]

@@Jose04537 Who asked you that?

[@Jose04537]

@@cindric3128 pointing an obvious inaccuracy.

[@cindric3128]

Thats not what Lil is talking about

[@unpopuler]

@@Jose04537 this kid might be Cuban

[@tion_yi]

if you're American always remember. RUSSIAN history is taught to you by AMERICAN teachers, in AMERICA.

[@souljacem]

I think the history of Russia is not nearly covered enough in European schools either. I‘ve just heard of this story after graduation.

[@blukester7994]

Yeah but they killed 3 million people in 1 1\2 years so yeah

[@mr.monhon5179]

@@blukester7994 That's just nonsense, my friend. Your point almost just do nothing than bother people looking at it. Can you express the idea in a more understandable way?

[@joshuasquire1879]

Yes but Britain be like I used to rule the world you know

[@PuglordGabe]

Lenin was a tyrant who spend his entire life turning what could of been an at least semi-prosperous democratic country (with even possible socialist elements from the socialist parties that held influence) into a horrid dictatorship that destroyed everything it touched and spiraled into disaster and ruin.

[@derekwang7330]

“You were supposed to be my right hand man, but your loyalty shriveled up like your right hand man!” - Vladimir Lenin

[@iamgreatalwaysgreat8209]

Erb

[@carlosbenavides3023]

Our future was bright, but you let your heart grow dark

[@reginaldokeke8354]

And stopped the greatest revolution since the birth of Marx!!!!!

[@carlosbenavides3023]

@@reginaldokeke8354 did somebody say birthmarks?

[@reginaldokeke8354]

@@carlosbenavides3023 I'm the host with the most glasnost.

[@Feupaleee]

An interesting fact: Lenin believed that the revolution would happen, but believed that it would happen later. He wrote that he probably did not expect her during his lifetime, but that the ground had to be prepared. But, what happened happened and we can say that the paths of history are pretty inscrutable, chaotic and random (though we tend to see patterns in everything that surrounds us)

[@unbearablyyours]

well said!

[@user-ry9om6es8t]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWq0h4SsfLimgas

[@ethanhopping7296]

He was also expecting Revolution in other parts of Europe first, that was kind of the rationale behind Revolution in the first place. He never meant for Moscow to become the headquarters of global communism, they were just supposed to hold down the fort until Revolution in Germany or somewhere else happened.

[@Feupaleee]

Lenin also wrote in May 1917: "If there had been no war, Russia could have lived for years and even decades without revolution." Perhaps this will be applicable to the Russia of the present. Will see.

[@Makarosc]

I thought that was Marx

[@luc6284]

"I honor Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realization of social justice. I do not consider his methods practical, but one thing is certain: men of his type are the guardians and restorers of the conscience of humanity." - Albert Einstein

[@CrackerBoy13]

Based comrade 😳😳

[@luc6284]

@Krzysztof Bugajewski perhaps you should study why Lenin did what he did. The policies that were adopted in the USSR were not just arbitrary, they were implemented to protect the country from capitalist invaders like the Nazis. They succeeded in defending themselves against the Nazis because of Lenin and Stalin's strategic insight (and the hard work of millions of other comrades ofc). Every leader makes mistakes, but there is no doubt the USSR improved the standard of living for the vast majority of Soviet citizens compared to what they had in the Russian Empire.

[@БерсеркерКхорна-я1ъ]

@Krzysztof Bugajewski And of course you don’t understand what you’re talking about. The famine of 21-22 was inevitable. American workers of the same years were shot in strikes, mistreated and beaten, and after that the economic crisis of the 30s broke out, where the working class had nothing to eat, and this is the problem of the capitalist world (and after all, they had no war). From 20-30 the country increased the rate of production, industrialized and soon surpassed the rate of production in pre-war Russia, the amount of food per capita increased. Perhaps there was no democracy (but the then democracy was always in the hands of the big bourgeois, fighting between each other), perhaps there were repressions (and that, as regards Lenin, it was a wartime of the civil war and this was inevitable, on the opposite side the white army entered the same, and sometimes even worse).

[@name7623]

@Krzysztof Bugajewski The Nazis weren't Capitalists - you're right. They were corporatists, which is capitalism once it starts to stay around for a while. And Fascism is capitalism in decay, so arguing that the Nazis weren't capitalist is honestly just semantics.

[@ishanpatil6951]

@Krzysztof Bugajewski dude the central planned economy is one of the biggest success of Lenin... that revolutionised Russian economy completely

[@Tiana_Do]

As a Vietnamese, Lenin is one of the most respected leaders in my country

[@jeremigawkowski9775]

why? in my country pretty much everyone hates him@@rimaq_

[@minhgiang5078]

@@jeremigawkowski9775 and we never read US or Western news cuz they have their power to control it :))

[@Prororo]

@@jeremigawkowski9775because Vietnam is a socialist country and Lenin is seen as basically a kickstarter for socialist revolutions

[@davisdelp8131]

Hahah how’s that going for you 😂

[@mikadeksjur653]

@@davisdelp8131 how dear you putting this emoji. have your country ever been bombed for couple of years straight by capitalist usa? also literally wietnam is groving so mad its impressive meanwhile we are losing our laws in jobs and slowing down with economy at the same time, not even talking about debt. communist countries was always oppressed by capitalist countries from the beggining. also west is making world unliveable for our kids, we should start putting socialist policies asap. Stay strong all of you vietnamese, keep your grind on. ❤from polish guy

[@colinrobinson1924]

The anti-Lenin guy says that Vladimir Lenin had nothing to do with the overthrow of the Tsar in February 1917, since Lenin was then in Switzerland. It's true that Lenin was in Switzerland then, but it's also true that his Bolshevik Party had a network of members and supporters within Russia, who had been working systematically for years to undermine the old regime. One way they did this was by smuggling Lenin's revolutionary newspapers into the country for opponents of the Tsar to read and pass on. Which is why Lenin got such a welcome in April 1917 when he got off the train at St Petersburg's Finland Station..

[@fredthebear277]

Colin Robinson interesting,know where I can read more about Lenin

[@fredthebear277]

Colin Robinson thank you

[@phatle2737]

so propaganda and brainwash, got it commie.

[@oddacity5883]

@Phat Le So apparently knowing the details of a specific event in history means that you’re brainwashed by propaganda Welp, there goes the years of Vietnamese History lessons, guess i’m brainwashed now

[@Babayaga34567]

@@phatle2737 McCarthyism at its finest.

[@binh3308]

*Not Le-NON, Le-NIN!*

[@jimmywaardenburg9145]

THE RUSSIAN COMMUNIST, OCH, I’LL GET HIM MYSELF

[@jimmywaardenburg9145]

WHO WANTS TO START A REVOLUTION

[@omkarnagarhalli5217]

*Soviet anthem blares*

[@howtocossackdance]

LenEEn

[@persianjew1746]

*oversimplified introduction with ussr anthem blaring intensifies*

[@killerknight123]

Oversimplified: WHO WANTS TO START A REVOLUTION.

[@alessiodelcastillo1613]

*Soviet Union Anthem Intensifies*

[@PitunghereTNOschizo100]

Oversimplified :Cold War part 1

[@alessiodelcastillo1613]

@@PitunghereTNOschizo100 facys

[@alessiodelcastillo1613]

@memequeen wwe fr

[@aidanthird]

this is exactly what happened in history. Lenin was writing a book or something, and then people exploded through the wall.

[@stazi_kz8794]

1:10 The RSFSR introduced an 8-hour working day on October 29, 1917. The Labor Codes of the RSFSR of 1918 and 1922 established this norm, and then extended to other Soviet republics.

[@stazi_kz8794]

I see that Americans try to teach Soviet’s history by making up facts

[@ScottJB]

The fake Russian accent was a little too much.

[@OtherwiseBother909]

made me jump to the next video

[@light9808]

Nah not really at least for me

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

It was bad but a fake Russian accent can be fun. But it was bad even for a fake accent. Bliat!

[@theno-trustassociation6241]

I find it weird that everyone seems more corncerned with the accent than the arguments in the comments.

[@alenaj1579]

Scott Butler nah, it was sorta funny.

[@HapticGamerHD]

Are the exaggerated accents really necessary?

[@fabrizio483]

+HapticGamerHD Yes.

[@welshzecorgi7903]

+HapticGamerHD DA, TOVARISH! EK-CENT NESSESA-RRRY FUR DRUMAT-TICK EF-FEKT!

[@thetruereality2]

+Fabrizio Aldonne lol true dat

[@chrischavez7984]

+HapticGamerHD albiet kinda cheasy it does make the narrative easier to follow by giving distinct voice to the character

[@setiem13]

Dude just watch the video l:V

[@adamweishaupt3733]

Why would anyone defend Tsar Nicholas?

[@bingisbahn3374]

Adam Weishaupt because the soldiers rebelled against him

[@hinahinananoha7783]

Adam Weishaupt Because with all the injustice of the tsar era, USSR was hell compared to that.

[@adamweishaupt3733]

Nadiya Nanoha Just because there's a worse option doesn't mean you should defend a bad one (kind of fitting for the US elections)

[@therandomguy6979]

+Adam Weishaupt im wishaupt and from the Netherlands

[@adamweishaupt3733]

TheRandomGuy My name isn't actually Adam Weishaupt, he was a German philosopher.

[@matthewmaguire2151]

I love how these videos don’t convince us to take a side but rather allow us to decide

[@asdqwe8837]

This video is presented as nuanced, but it is actually anticommunist propaganda and historically inaccurate.

[@RandomInternetUser-yi5cc]

Don't listen to the propogandist bot here. He's either brainwashed or he's being paid good enough money to write these comments.

[@matthewmaguire2151]

@@asdqwe8837 some aspects yeah but the person arguing in favor of Lenin make’s arguments that make it hard to see as anti communist propaganda

[@minhgiang5078]

@@asdqwe8837 absolutely agree

[@brennans2286]

Side with Lenin

[@kakyoin9688]

History vs Otto Von Bismarck

[@bobjimenez1716]

that'd be amazing!

[@kakyoin9688]

Bob Jimenez it would

[@kakyoin9688]

Otto Von Bismark oh hey buddy

[@kakyoin9688]

Otto Von Bismark I don't know Fredrick the great was petty good, also he's guilty

[@kakyoin9688]

Otto Von Bismark yup

[@imdrum6881]

Lenin: When I die, put anyone on power except from Stalin Lenin: *dies* Stalin: It's free real estate

[@Thunder_Sniper]

LMAO 🤣

[@cruzado3516]

@The Iron Cross trotsky was very popular,he was second man in a country.Everyone knew him as a creator of red army,as the man who with lenin was doing october revolution,cause he ruled revolutionary military council and as the great marxist theoretic.But the problem is that when lenin was alive there was a party democracy in bolshevik party,some people like preobrazhensky or buharin could argue with lenin and won.After lenin death left opposition with trotsky as a leader tried to restore party democracy,but they lost and dictatorship of stalin established

[@asgardianbouy7472]

@@cruzado3516 same Trotsky that Lenin discribed as a political prostitue.

[@daniellassander]

Not true, Lenin handpicked Stalin as his successor.

[@cruzado3516]

@@daniellassander lol,check ,,Lenin's testament"

[@constanse2625]

Serfdom was replaced by mortgage slavery .Forty years the peasants paid for their freedom (until 1905)

[@rorymosley9356]

Then that was replaced with state slavery during collectivization

[@-fm3701]

@@rorymosley9356 никакого рабства в колхозах не было

[@katharina9814]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmPZqWWrqKetpqc

[@daniellassander]

Get a grip on basic economics kid.

[@hehmda]

and now we have mortgage slavery again

[@aysenilguzel8459]

Serfdom was never abolished. Instead, it was replaced with gigantic levels of debt that the average person was still effectively in slavery.

[@logans3365]

We use the same system in America too this day. Time too remove them from power

[@flyingsquirrell6953]

They just replaced serfdom with feudalism lol.

[@glif1360]

However, the debt was abolished in 1907 by Stolypin's government. Besides abolition of serfdom refers to the fact that peasants could no longer be sold after 1861. The landlords also no longer can use corporeal punishment against them. It also granted full freedom for domestic servants ("дворове") effective since 1863.

[@playedtoomuch5259]

​@@glif1360 conditions in Russia were nevertheless very similar to before, and while the debt was abolished they kept pay low and prices to buy food high to keep them in chains, effectively enslaving them again

[@glif1360]

@@playedtoomuch5259 What are you even saying? Who in his mind would think that you can keep a peasant in chains by selling him food? Peasants GROW food it's like one thing that they don't need (assuming you don't take it away). And peasants weren't given a salary to begin with - they were selling food to pay RENT on land.

[@tompegorinno5141]

*looks at the comments complaining about the accent* Come on guys. He tried, and frankly at least they still talked about Lenin. It was still entertaining.

[@yakigesher-zion7289]

He didn’t have to try, there’s no need to use an offensive fake Russian accent, and in fact I don’t see why Ted Ed couldn’t just hire another voice actor anyway

[@kakalimukherjee3297]

@@yakigesher-zion7289 They should've brought the Slav King

[@theexcaliburone5933]

@@yakigesher-zion7289 why is it offensive? I think badly done stereotypical American accents are hilarious, I don’t take offense at all

[@LOrco_]

@@yakigesher-zion7289 Lenin was taught English by an Irish Scotsman. He probably would've spoken English like this.

[@user-ry9om6es8t]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWq0h4SsfLimgas

[@ssnorlax9597]

as a Russian. That fake accent hurt me

[@anotherthink9236]

Me too

[@nigeh5326]

It is as close to any Russian accent I have ever heard as Chekhov's accent in Star Trek. It is bloody awful

[@AnotherLifeish]

ᴉɐloʞᴉN the American southern accent he typically does makes me want to slam my head into a wall. This accent is somehow even worse.

[@onlyonemitch5049]

Why?! They tried!

[@Happy_Teddy24]

Your not Russian mate

[@risinglolreplays1299]

Ted talk has done a very good job exploring questionable leaders through international historical timelines. As a Chinese Canadian, could we try Ted Ed: History vs Mao ZeDong? I would just like to know other views.

[@ktkatte6791]

History: Mao was a big idiot who caused millions to starve to death and die during petty political struggles that set the nation back decades and didn't even manage to completely depose the nationalists lmfao

[@ktkatte6791]

+Alany Walany the famine was not inevitable what the shit are you talking about? it was directly caused by the great leap forward. Mao was an unmitigated disaster for China.

[@ktkatte6791]

Alany Walany why are you apologizing for china

[@ktkatte6791]

You sound like one of those sad little people that gets paid .50c a day to defend china on the internet

[@livinglifeform7974]

Yeah, the country that had a famine every decade wouldn't have had a famine that decade if it wasn't for mao. Smart.

[@crescent_sun482]

From now on, I'm gonna call politicians I don't like "incompetent bourgeois failures."

[@playedtoomuch5259]

If you live in capitalist countries then it's probably not an inaccurate statement

[@OnyxAgainstTheWorld]

History vs. Fidel Castro. That would be interesting.

[@petitedanni]

@Moonbat i see what you did there

[@cbenz3946]

idk about that

[@lid.or.whatever]

@Stooven McStoovenson not misunderstood, he sold the Cuban ppl one thing and ended up with another. The beginning and the idea was great, but there was poor execution and no acceptance of change, which has hurt the Cuban people.

[@lid.or.whatever]

@Stooven McStoovenson everyone who has ever done anything is worthy of been studied, but we can't mistake interest for idolizing

[@samedwards3285]

now i want a milkshake

[@surafelgeleta8533]

"Volrd Var Vone " LOL

[@vladimirlenin7930]

surafel geleta Superior Soviet Accent

[@localcrazyrussian4511]

NO

vurrrrrrrld vorrrrrrr vun

[@matthiaskonold6976]

Nice to see some anarchists here , comrad

[@flamingpi2245]

0:28 all jokes aside a “history against Lennon would actually be a great idea”

[@adiyaroy0]

After reading this comment, I kept hearing Lenin as Lennon.

[@nighty6274]

@@adiyaroy0 wha- not LENNON, LENIN the Russian Communist. What!? Why do I need a BEATLE?!

[@baseballguy3741]

@@nighty6274 “ah, I see you’re a man of culture as well”

[@bluiedaniel2739]

@@nighty6274, man of culture i see

[@poots605]

@@nighty6274 Beatle not beetle

[@addrickstich6385]

I do like that you gave a proper argument for both sides, i wish we had more of this..

[@sillynelson1]

Leonardo Dicaprio needs to play Lenin in a movie

[@ayazahamed2883]

GrapeDrank25 Robert Downey Jr took the role

[@tlr9403]

NOOOOOO

[@emiyakiritsugu4473]

Seirios yes

[@thepugawsomegamer1722]

GrapeDrank25 I think you mean Leninardo Di Capriro

[@ryanricke2247]

GrapeDrank25 yeeerre is eessssddddddddsssss

[@ruymartinez4526]

People think the Russian guy is blowing it when he says the USSR was attacked by all sides. He really isn't. People in the US and Europe were more worried about the USSR than Germany by helping the Royalists and harsh trade with the USSR (until WW2 truly began)

[@jbone9900]

there ideas almost casued a second cival war

[@lambbone8302]

*Their *caused *civil

[@halflifeger4179]

The USSR was literally invaded by the US, France, UK, Japan and many other countries during the civil war. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War

[@camelofsiberia962]

@@halflifeger4179 that still doesnt explain murderies of workers and other entire parties

[@hashly8521]

Even tho I disagree with him on some parts, you are correct. The USSR was being attacked literally and metaphorically by many outside powers.

[@arachnid83]

History vs Winston Churchill

[@Salman.914]

@@rubin6202 a good dog tho

[@boiiiii9627]

@@rubin6202 a dog who saved many more millions

[@Artist_of_Imagination]

Continue this epic battle you two. Gotta grab my popcorn.

[@Maxims1]

@@rubin6202 millions of indians who were fighting the japanese in burma a country with a large navy

[@noblechief4023]

@Masters Rubin He helped stop WW2, reformed British law and parliament, and basically helped Europe not become full of nazis. But you Idiots will continue to dog pile on him because of ONE mistake he did.

[@lucusekali5767]

I am always impressed by the fact that they always have answer to each other arguments

[@trotskycancook2400]

History vs me

[@eggofknowledge3346]

you should've stayed in my party

[@skullcrusherm7425]

How is your neck sir

[@nonh1]

Trotsky would win, because he has history on his side.

[@skullcrusherm7425]

And he had a vision of global socialism

[@ceasefire2825]

nice chance to lead Russia you have there...it would be a shame if some steel boi....stole it

[@heathercalun4919]

It's not a question of "Was this long-dead guy good or evil?". It's a question of what we can learn from his mistakes.

[@Ben-zq8ug]

we can't learn anything then can we? as lenin did absolutely nothing wrong

[@seamedsworduae3803]

wow

[@Andy-km1xp]

Ben Van Rooy what about censorship of newspapers and killing his opponents?

[@Ben-zq8ug]

It was necessary to avoid further civil war or defection to the whites, which could have potentially killed many more russians in the long run. Many other powers have detained people without trial due instability or simply misguided fear, such as america with the japanese in world war two. Many countries censor newspapers and limit freedom of speech during wars, which many democratic countries have also done, such as news having to pass through the office of war information in america during world war two. And the tsar did both of those things quite often as well as authorizing programs against the jews, who he just didn't like.

[@Andy-km1xp]

Ben Van Rooy is seizing land from its owners and dividing it among peasants also justified? And who could forget the red terror?

[@akaijuinomaha5324]

History vs. Kaiser Willhelm II

[@darthalex3]

he was great,nothing wrong there

[@Edmonton-of2ec]

Yesssssssssssss

[@RustingPeace]

@@darthalex3 He isn't he is the one who destroyed Bismarcks achievements and he is the beginn of the end of the russian empire

[@darthalex3]

@@RustingPeace what I meant is he wasnt a psychopath or a monster

[@kiancavella]

Kaiserboo detected

[@Watchingvideoslikeu]

Not gonna lie. Not saying Lenin was a good guy but arguing for the Czar isn't great as well. Russia has been in a tough spot in terms of leadership for a few centuries now.

[@alnerisoldier8081]

Lenin was a great man, pp dont know anything about him and judge

[@jelenamartinovic1647]

Lenin was one of the greatest mind of 20th century so he was a good guy. Instead of hearing propaganda,some of you can just read some history and Lenin's books :)

[@EightyFourThousands84000s]

Legit, read the books he wrote. Lenin really was good. The ruling Capitalist class just wants people to think he was bad because they're scared of the proletariat. In a socialist world, Capitalists lose power. Capitalist bourgeois like to trick us into fighting amongst ourselves so that we do not organize and take the true rulers down haha.

[@Yo-ps2pf]

Lenin was a great guy lol

[@Treblaine]

People are so quick to lay responsibility for famines on the feet of Lenin. EDIT: 10 years later I can confirm it really was all Lenin's fault, he was literally ordering his goons to steal their food and expecting them to starve.

[@whoisj]

Funny, I don't remember any British Prime Ministers having hundreds of people shot for having a differing opinion. I also do not recall when Britain's economy collapsed under its own weight due to a complete lack of competitiveness.

[@Treblaine]

***** You never heard of the brutal oppressions in Ireland? Search the "Black and Tans", ever wonder where all that anger of Irish against Britain comes from? It is from that oppression. How about Atrocities committed in British East Africa against the Mau Mau? Thousands hanged, tortured to death, even castrated and burned alive. The British governor there himself equated it to the atrocities in Nazi Germany. The gunning down of peaceful protesters in India and so many other atrocities. Boxer rebellion and Boer war. You don't know because you never wanted to know. You don't recall the 1929 Stock Market Crash? You don't recall the repeated economic crisis in Capitalist systems? In 1970's Britain had to go cap in hand to the IMF for a massive bail-out. The difference is when USSR had economic failure, western nations withheld any possibility of any loans. They would only bail out Capitalist economies. But I do not consider my nation irredeemably evil for this, so how can I condemn Lenin?

[@Treblaine]

Boo Man Yes, England DID do that. It was responsible for the deaths of millions with famines, violently crushes of rebellion and not to mention the Slave trade. Saddam was not the first to launch poison gas attacks on Kurdish Populations... the British were. Britain may have ended the slave trade... but only after 250 years of growing extremely rich on the trade. England LITERALLY DID enslave millions to serve its whim. Through out its empire, millions of indigenous people were deliberately killed in with the intent of extermination or utter submission. And remember, this is the history as written by the victors, and it's THIS BAD. And that's just the British empire, what about Belgian Congo? What about America in its treatment of black slaves, aboriginal peoples, conquering and annexing Mexican territory, invasion and occupation of Philippines, Vietnam?

[@Hottides]

Treblaine Basically Nazi and Marxist atrocities are endlessly denounced; British atrocities are conveniently forgotten. Nobody forgets the Holocaust and Ukrainian Famine; nearly everyone forgets the African Slave Trade, Irish Potato and Indian Famines.

[@gunnarangeles7298]

Exactly, I couldn't agree with you any more. I don't see why these bourgeoisie apologists with their silly straw man arguments even bother debating you like their "civilized" governments have never committed atrocities or war crimes.

[@TheLuckyRima]

The fake Russian accent makes my ears bleed. Is there a script we can read?

[@curlyfry3049]

It wasn't that bad.

[@restyecp]

Your name making my eyes bleed

[@thebenevolentsun6575]

Bold words coming from someone who's name sounds like a bad cough.

[@lucimaralves490]

@@thebenevolentsun6575 you use big papa words on your name to sound smart. shush.

[@thebenevolentsun6575]

@@lucimaralves490 It's a song lyric

[@InalienableLiberty]

History vs Woodrow Wilson

[@LukrixGaming]

This would be cool

[@StuTheDawg]

George Washington History vs Georgia Rasputin

[@beez6039]

George Washington vs history

[@joshproductions4283]

+Stuart Hatherley It's Gregori, not Georgia mate

[@StuTheDawg]

Joshproductions sorry I have some spelling problems I have dyslexia

[@ahmadtajy7178]

I think Lenin too often gets blamed for STALIN'S crimes which isn't fair in my opinion

[@RorySmith-Dube-fm7ll]

True

[@martynasmazrimas1536]

Lenin is also a psychopath who had complete disregard for human life. So what are you comparing here?

[@void5655]

​@@martynasmazrimas1536 Lenin was such a psychopath who did not appreciate human life that he devoted his life to building a socialist state to improve the living conditions of the common man

[@Subscribe_to_faledy4]

Then bro goes on to explain how the CIA is good and the USA is protecting world peace

[@Allosaurusfan2928]

@@martynasmazrimas1536did you not watch the video

[@palatonian9618]

I hate how much time was spent debating whether the monarch was awful or not. I feel like a lot of time is spent debating peripheral subjects instead of Lenin’s involvement

[@george4281]

Well to be fair if the monarch really is bad then it's a point in Lenin's favour. But they didn't do this with the French revolution, Nicolas could've got his own video and this doesn't actually talk about after Lenin had power so I see kind of

[@helrem]

​@@george4281Yeah, that's a good idea, although I'd probably do something similar to the one here.

[@samsca8529]

Would you feel the same way about the American revolution and the founding fathers as compared with the British monarchy?

[@dumbdragon2129]

Also it's a bad point, just because the previous government was bad, give you no excuse for what you did

[@mateusgreenwood1096]

Lenin had nothing to do with him, he just took over when both the monarch and provisional government imploded by themselves. The people had no choice.

[@larserikjohnsen8933]

People always say Leninism necessarily leads to Stalinism. If that is the case, why did Stalin murder every last old Bolshevik after Lenin's death? Why do this if he was following Leninism to the letter? Stalin took away all power from the workers' councils, which were central to the democracy, and gave it to the bureaucracy, which he ruled. Anyone who had seen up close the inner workings of the government during Lenin's time would have immediately noticed and possibly protested the total lack of democracy under Stalin.

[@lanler7751]

Lars Erik Johnsen funny how no one replies this comment. Most anti-communists are northamericans, its obvious they would see communism as bad, they teach good vs bad side, capitalism always being the good side. All the "communist" or "socialist" countries nowadays follows the stalin way bc stalin tried to erase lenin-trotsky ideas and it worked. US being the face of capitalism will not let true info of communism get to his people. Winners write the history i guess.

[@larserikjohnsen8933]

Tyler Nugent Exactly. It had nothing to do with Marxism or communist theory in general.

[@IAlbionI]

Are you forgetting the elections in Russia after the October Revolution?, The Bolsheviks held elections after they kicked out Kerensky and thought they'd win since they "saved" Russia. They lost, badly. What did they do?, Annul the elections, break up the assembly and rule by dictatorship. I'm going to have to call you either misinformed or a liar if you're claiming Lenin upheld democracy, only for Stalin to ruin it. Lenin wanted democracy that *agreed* with him. Stalin didn't bother at all.

[@lanler7751]

How can u say that im wrong and how can u say ur not? all i know is that lenin stood up for an actual proletarian democracy, he being the "president" lost some votings, not like he did wanted all power in his hands. And there wasnt only happening thins in russia, a lot of factors over the world, like the ww1 impacted hard on the world and especially on russia, cuz the bolsheviks got to power on 1917, ww1 was 1914-1918. And like where u have info? internet? Im on an actual political party from the left, the actual socialism, not the popular one that stalin left. And isnt like i know everything, i can be wrong but i assume that youre from usa and if u are, its obvious u would hate everything relacionated with "communism".

[@lanler7751]

Think that is easier to keep the system we have currently that entirely change it. Going from capitalism to communism will take away power from people who can avoid such thing to happen.

[@slapshack]

His accent sounds like shrek

[@vladimirlenin7930]

Lil Comment *THEY KNOW OUR SECRET*

[@jaded8578]

shrek has a scottish accent, the defendant has a russian one.. those two are very different

[@DefyDistrict]

no the accents is just terrible

[@GeodesicBruh]

SCOTLAND

[@AmyLeeBasshunter]

donkäe

[@riqueman23]

I love how both the defender and the prosecutor agreed that Stalin was a tyrannical dictator.

[@diwang3845]

I mean their putting Lenin on trial not Stalin

[@riqueman23]

@@diwang3845 I know that, but if you go to the part about Stalin, you can see that even the defender agrees that Stalin was a dictator.

[@pedroaugustodoamaral8119]

And both are wrong.

[@jeffreygao3956]

@@pedroaugustodoamaral8119 Holodomor. Nuff said!

[@handsfortoothpicks]

​@@pedroaugustodoamaral8119Stalin killed the international movement

[@realitywarper936]

One thing I like about this series is how it portrays both sides fairly and lets them make good arguments.

[@fbibarbie]

I think it is weighted a bit to heavily in the prosecutions favor it in every vid and he always seems to get the last word ect.

[@InalienableLiberty]

+Howard Ackerman The defense got the last word in Napoleon Bonaparte

[@nocucksinkekistan7321]

It's weighed way too heavily in the defendants favour.

[@apelincoln]

I wish they didnt have to keep trying new accents...

[@nocucksinkekistan7321]

Gnarly Derpderp Thats the only good thing about this series.

[@remkowangkuijs4787]

Are we really defending Tzar Nicholas?

[@MinecraftLively]

Ry Is Awesome yes. The Tsar was incompetent not a bad man. Lenin was incompetent and a bad man

[@antwerp3302]

Defualt Name you think tsar force people go to work like slaves is good?

[@calogerohuygens4430]

Russian church proclamed him and his family saints. Lenin statues fell everywhere after CCCP dissolution.

[@thesupertsar4473]

Good point.

[@Lewa500]

Of course the Russian church would do that. The communists were their ideological and political enemies.

[@ohmy9261]

History vs Stalin!

[@bigwheelfromspidamahn1037]

Not possible

[@ohmy9261]

Sean boyle ??? Why not?

[@bigwheelfromspidamahn1037]

Oh My because he was only bad

[@bigwheelfromspidamahn1037]

He didint do anything but kill innocent lives

[@ohmy9261]

He brought mass industrialization to the country and transformed Russia from a land of peasants into a superpower; not to mention how quickly he executed (pun intended) all of this

[@estanislaobiertosz7011]

I think that some of the most interesting views on Lenin (that id love to hear), are those from who lived under the soviet union regime. not saying these are necesarly more valid, but they literally lived the impact of his actions

[@daniellassander]

Well those that would complain the most are dead because he killed them.

[@jelenamartinovic1647]

@@daniellassander Nope,he didn't. It was Stalin

[@Ulfur6113]

@@jelenamartinovic1647lenin did silence and imprison his political enemies

[@BradenBlorp]

​@@Ulfur6113 they silenced him first He merely did what they did to him

[@playedtoomuch5259]

A lot of people in Russia who did were very supportive of it, the borgousie he kicked out weren't happy but who cares what they think, he didn't let them keep their indentured servants

[@brandondriver1377]

History vs. Mao Zedong!

[@jeremywan8868]

+Brandon Driver Not possible. Mao did only bad. It was Deng who reformed China into what it is now.

[@TheRacistsMustDie]

+wan jeremy From Kishore Mahbubani's The New Asian Hemisphere: "Mao's communist revolution may have failed in many ways, but there awas one area in which his revolution succeeded: it destroyed the feudal mindset that had bedeviled Chinese society until early in the twentieth century. He encouraged in China's peasants an enormous sense of pride and equal citizenship. After Mao, they stopeed believing that they were naturally inferior. When Deng delivered the economic revolution with the introduction of free-market economics, one reasono why China was able to take off so quickly was that the social revolution unleashed by Mao had already broken the class barriers to advancement." It's apologetics without doubt, but it has a logic to it.

[@garroshhellscream7178]

+Brandon Driver This would be a good one

[@pg955203]

+Brandon Driver In Chinese words, it says Mao as "Merit in founding the nation, incompetent in ruling the country, and guilty of Culture revolution. All in all a negative remark. Chinese Communist party nowadays are moving further and further away from Mao and his ideologies, but they will never Demaonize like Soviets did to Stalin because they need him as a figurehead to hold power.

[@josephang9927]

Destroyer of China's culture.

[@victorgabrielbuena]

for the longest time I never realised all three of these characters are voiced by the same person, good on Addison!

[@acrossearth4760]

You know, when I watch History versus (insert famous or infamous person) I truly dumbfounded about how complicated history and politics is.

[@masterm3487]

to be honest, some of these can be pretty hollow compared to how complicated they actually were.

[@livinglifeform7974]

Especially with Stalin in this video.

[@blackearl7891]

That's normal. History isn't a dualistic view of good, and bad but a mix.

[@dracotitanfall]

04:25 those weren't "peasants" they were kulaks, landowners who had employed actual peasants to work for them in their private farmlands. The USSR's plan to redistribute food was completely obstacled by the kulaks' stubbornness; together they owned around 50% of the USSR's food sources and destroyed them all simply because they didn't want the government to redistribute it to the general public.

[@Yo-ps2pf]

yeah I have no idea why they said peasants, it seems that they fell for the propaganda lie

[@BalkanSpectre]

@@Yo-ps2pf Lol "fell". This video was a propaganda pieve through and through. Utilizing people's own illiteracy.

[@thanos8638]

Good to see someone knows actual history

[@f.w.3823]

What i really like about this show is that they never actually pass judgement.

[@Doublemonk0506]

@@meatloaf9716, I mean, what good points can you make for a genocider. I mean, isn't that why we villainize the Nazis Edit: Never mind, it was Stalin who sucks. Lenin's not bad, or at least not as bad as Stalin.

[@chickensandwich8808]

@@Doublemonk0506 not really defending Lenin, but Stalin was the genocider. Lenin expressed regret for how his methods for laying the foundation were too abrupt and violent allowing a populist like Stalin to secure power. Russia as a country and people have had it hard. Stalin's rule was similar in practice to modern day China. The foundations for socialist/communist principles were there, but overshadowed by a kind of... cabal-like group of elite that maintained power nationally while still ensuring localized democratic elections. Stalin even allowed "Democratic Elections" of people in higher office, but those elections were still based on candidates that were more or less chosen by the ruling party that Stalin maintained. To put that in perspective. The reason people here in the states were passed off at the DNC for not platforming Bernie Sanders properly is the same kind of methods used by Stalin to ensure someone that was sympathetic to "the cause" would fall in line regardless of who was voted in. The US and USSR are not that different in regards to how higher office is held. That is a hard truth to swallow.

[@Doublemonk0506]

@@chickensandwich8808, Oh yeah. My bad. I forgot it was Stalin who did the atrocities

[@asadd_the_good7604]

@Doublemonk0506 don't you worry, it wasn't a mistake, as Lenin was a genocider too (you can look up the period known as "Red Terror")

[@realchiknuggets]

LOL wrong

[@GinoPassos3005]

I've found it nice that Lenin is given credit for the strenght Russia still carries. All countries have stories of brutal regimes, tough times and state promoted violence, directly or indirectly. Still happens now and in straight capitalist countries. Many people can be tyrants or immoral officers at charge. Few are nation builders.

[@rottytherottski522]

Gino Passos true but the genocide of Cossacks is kind of a sticking point for me since that’s why my family fled.

[@companymo7767]

@@rottytherottski522 WHERE ARE YOU FROM,, BECAUSE I AM SURE WHATEVER YOU ARE FROM. YOUR COUNTRY HAVE MADE SIMILAR ACTIONS AND IF YOU ARE FROM THE USA YOU SHOULD JUST SHUT UP HONESTLY

[@Nyghtking]

@@rottytherottski522 To be honest every single country has things like that, Amerca has several such as the banana wars, the overthrowing of leaders or the support of rebels , ect.

[@crabobserver]

@@Nyghtking except Sweden

[@Nyghtking]

@@crabobserver Isn't sweden one of those places rich people stash their money in an off shore account and did the same with the nazi's?

[@EPICFAILKING1]

The accent is to forced, sounds ridiculous. But other than that, great video xD

[@welshzecorgi7903]

DA, TOVARISH! BET PURR-HAPS EK-CENT NESSESA-RRRY FUR DRUMAT-TICK EF-FEKT! DAVOI!

[@tdfern1]

It is called authenticity.

[@aaditbhatia6551]

THEES EES THE OWNLY WAY THE PEAYPOL COD BE LEEBERATED.

[@computo2000]

But I found it berrry fun.

[@harrybadjas8492]

The accent makes it unwatchable :/

[@Your_Local_WeirdWeeb]

We all heard of the quote 'The victors get to write history', it which it just means what it means, and I gotta say, the victors don't always treat the losers nicely

[@zatderpscout2560]

0:42 there were actually two revolutions,the first one toppled the Tsar but Lenin did not take part In it,he was in the second one that replaced the provisional republican government. Also the Soviet Union wasn’t founded in 1917 but actually in 1922

[@whoami5960]

Thanks undertale sans

[@zatderpscout2560]

Who Am I? I explain history,it’s what I do

[@harounbraik868]

yep, after the reds vs whites civil war

[@Tales41]

FSSR*

[@josephpeters7627]

2:27

[@AliHSyed]

I love the History v. Series. They reflect the blurred legacy history's greats leave in their wake.

[@orsondy]

History vs Churchill

[@arachnid83]

They'll never do this. He is a very sensitive figure and debating about Churchill would mean undermining post war propaganda. Besides, he was a rear-minded colonialist and allowed things like the Bengal famine (genocide) to put Britain at an advantage. Even FDR was critical of him for his colonial mentality.

[@britaesthetics6882]

Drowned Sword ah yes it was Churchill’s fault, not the Indian nationalists blowing up railways taking food to troops in Bengal or the Japanese sinking british shipping, nah it was all Churchill’s fault

[@dhananjayjambhulkar5317]

@@britaesthetics6882 Woah.Such mindless comments from only knowing a fraction.

[@dr.nosborn6330]

@@arachnid83 That is why he deserves a episode here. Like Jackson.

[@shady8045]

Victor Mcdade no one says it was all Churchill’s fault, it was mostly due to a bad harvest, it’s impossible to deny that not only was Churchill negligent but considering food was EXPORTED, didn’t even care

[@mini-tj9cr]

현재 평범한 학생인데 이런 좋은 영상과 한국어 자막을 제공해 주셔서 감사합니다

[@mylazymood]

I would be so interested if Ted Ed did History vs Adolf Hitler.

[@mylazymood]

probably won't happen

[@Anatolij86]

+Luke D Sure because taboos are very enlightening and never backfire. They did Gengis Khan, and Lenin, but Hitler is where you draw the line?

[@Anatolij86]

+Luke D Nazism is National Socialism, Communism is International Socialism. Understanding rather than demonizing Hitler's appeal and not minimizing Lenin's methods would much benefit the discussion. For kids and grown ups alike.

[@Anatolij86]

+Luke D Demonizing men, no matter how evil or corrupt, only hinders understanding. Everyone deserves a fair trial before History. If Gengis Khan can have one, surely Hitler should as well. What of it if he himself refused it? He thought himself beyond judgement. Do you agree with him?

[@Anatolij86]

+Luke D Then judge him harshly as a human, and judge the humans he inspired, and understand their corcumstances and motivations rather than being fooled into thinking a Devil appeared on Earth and a Nation was smittened by its charm, blaming and shunning him like a traumatised child who doesn't want to face the truth. The truth behind human desire, and conformity, and resentment, and pride, that old song that shall never fade, so all you can do is study it, unempathically, for one reason only: to understand. Knowledge should not be subject to its use. It is a sad pit of liberal morality to demand humanity be shielded by notions or voices that might pervert it.

[@MikeJBeebe]

I like how balanced this was, honestly.

[@cnn8420]

LOL! More like biased. Communism also gave us Vladimir Putin.

[@katharina9814]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmPZqWWrqKetpqc

[@Jbgro]

Apparently everybody in the Soviet Union had food?

[@zidorovichburblyatya2862]

@@cnn8420 Murica gave Yeltsin to Russia then gave Russians Putin later.

[@cnn8420]

@@zidorovichburblyatya2862 you should join ted-ed LOL

[@Michelrs]

imagine trying to defend a russian tzar....smh...

[@Michelrs]

@@aayushtripathi3799 have you seen the video?

[@napoleon3026]

@@aayushtripathi3799 Michael is talking about Tsar Nicholas 2 The first half of was more about proving how tsar was better than lenin

[@RedWanderer26]

@@Michelrs actually Peter I and who ruled after him was emperors, not tsars. I'm talking this as russian.

[@alecro5124]

@@RedWanderer26 isn't tsar the russian way of calling their emperors like kaiser was the gemrna way?

[@RedWanderer26]

@@alecro5124 nope. The tsars ruled Russia before Peter I declared my country an empire and called himself an emperor.

[@Shab_Kom]

0:39, cringe. Lenin did not overthrow Nicholas II, but the provisional government. It's good that you mentioned it later (3:37)

[@captainvietnam9941]

History vs Ho Chi Minh

[@nhienleminhhue6605]

You are not ducanger

[@uchoangnguyen3934]

Gud idea !

[@thile6742]

Nhiên Lê Minh Huệ ducanger are still better than antifa, fenimist, leftist, commie who support wear che shirt,...

[@ggff3761]

Captain Vietnam oh no I couldn’t deal with the accents

[@hydrargyruschaldaecus2572]

Thats Guy ducanger did not and can not achieve anything

[@nightsoldier7462]

I feel like Leonardo DiCaprio could play a good Lenin

[@marcbaigrie2295]

they won't make a hero out of an anti capitalist in hollywood

[@potatoesandmollasses6794]

Night Soldier he is Russian

[@ОляСергеева-м9и]

Marc Baigrie hollywood is extremely left. So its possible. Actually there is a movie about russian sniper made by hollywood

[@bhutochakrabarti4173]

@@ОляСергеева-м9и They are not extreme left . They are liberal or western cultural Marxists.

[@Newman-ue9vt]

@@ОляСергеева-м9и if you think liberal is left, then you're a moron.

[@panasit]

do one on robespierre please

[@elsasslotharingen7507]

Yea.

[@tdfern1]

Panasit Ch He was mentioned in the History v. Napoleon.

[@yakovantonovich643]

robespierre was a hero

[@Andrew-jt4sb]

- Vendee and CPS intensifies -

[@caesar0frome950]

I don’t think he is Famous enough

[@mikitazhylinski5526]

1) Lenin did not "help" to overthrow Nicolai II, he was a member of political majority that did that. But at the time of the overthrow in included literal monarchists (who just did not like Nikolai personally). 2) Neither Lenin nor most of the old-time Bolchevisks did not participate in early 20th century peasant uprisings and terrorist rebellions in Russia, that was done by SRs. 3) Germany allowed Lenin and ANOTHER HUNDREDS of all kids of political exiles to return to Russia in exchange for their own German exiles 4) Regarding Stalin's "mad" regime care to read the actual plenum meetings records. Or at least Lenin's letter to the Party, where he describes in good detail flaws of each significant party member. Stalin was not mad nor delusional, he was rational.

[@amitkenan3878]

You call the mass starvation in Ukraine "rational"?

[@natasha5553]

Tankie spotted opinion rejected

[@animeneweablet]

0:30 It's also time to put Lennon on the stand in History v. John Lennon. Judge: Order, order, hmm...had I seen you before. Persecutor: Your honor, this is John Lennon, a band member of the Beatles and brought its downfall in the 1970s. Defendant: John Lennon created good music.

[@animeneweablet]

YEET

[@hannahg8439]

@@WilliamGroth-wh6rq You do seem like an arrogant, ill-informed person. Lennon was in many aspects a horrible dad to his first son Julian, that's for sure. But the way you said he beat his wife is very misleading. First of all, he hit his first wife once, back when they were both teenagers. That's inexcusable, obviously, however he was "terribly sorry" (quote Cynthia, the respective wife) immediately after and it never happened again (also according to Cynthia herself). As a matter of fact, Lennon was not a physically abusive husband. Also, Cynthia was not even the first person to bring that incident up in public - it was Lennon himself. The reason why he talked about it was that he felt ashamed of the way he used to act, the way he used to treat people. He was enormously self-critical and didn't try to excuse any of his mistakes. More importantly, he changed these negative aspects about himself. That alone goes to show how much his personality had grown since he was a teenager. He was a different man altogether when he died. This change extended to his relationship to Julian, who's forgiven his father long ago and speaks very warmly of him nowadays. It really isn't your job to condemn Lennon for things he's done to Julian, especially when Julian has made his piece with his father. "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." So, in case you've never done anything you later regretted go ahead and judge others who have shown remorse.

[@ugly_kermit6148]

He ro we’re talkin’ ‘bout the Beatles

[@rickywar8139]

I’m just happy people are still talking about John. I don’t care if it’s negative or good. His genius songwriting will live on.

[@amedievalknight6yearsago691]

@@hannahg8439 *M E R E O P T I C S*

[@CStrik3r]

2:48 "Accent.exe stopped working"

[@starchaser4eva]

Your pfp is very based

[@CStrik3r]

@@starchaser4eva made it after I got annoyed of everyone thinking people give two shits about where they stand politically. That being said eventually I'll get over how much I hate people... and everything, really

[@tnfsg1866]

Based pfp

[@yakigesher-zion7289]

@@starchaser4eva factsss

[@sleepycrusader7152]

I dont understand the pfp

[@makeromaniagreatagain9697]

4:24 When you fight so hard for the people that you acctually start to fight the people

[@engineergaming5002]

3:41 the section about the government change being “peaceful” is incorrect. For several years following the start of the revolution the communists and remaining loyalists fought over Russia during the Russian civil war, which saw many people killed. In addition it would set the stage for the Soviets to try and invade Poland the first time in the 1920’s, which would end with Poland winning.

[@ReySchultz121]

Every eastern european could tell you that they didn't see a new way of life, all they saw was a "red tsar".

[@ashishshrma]

the one dude : "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 o crush the workers in Kronstadt, who were demanding democratic self-management? Was this still fighting for the people?" The accent dude: "Yes!"

[@Zess-mi4mt]

It is worth noting that the Tambov rebels themselves showed great cruelty to anyone whom they suspected of sympathizing with the Communists, and gradually turned into bandits robbing innocent civilians - just like any unorganized and undisciplined movement in civil war. Gas was used against them only once and it was chloropicrin, which they tried to use to expel the rebels from the forest. Chloropicrin is a tear gas, not fatal. The confiscation of grain was carried out not only by the Bolsheviks - the tsarist government before the revolution and the white movement during the civil war.

[@darkjester53]

@@Zess-mi4mt And so did the Communist army, execution, deportating, slaughtering of villages no matter if they were revolutionary or not, deportation, concentration camps, men, women, children,... I mean, in any type of war, especially civil war there's cruelty and horrific events. You can't make a note for one side and just ignore the other, that would be covering up history. What one could take away from this though is that they could have settled this fast and peacefully by not confiscating the grain and reviewing their methods. They waited long for that and an estimated 240 000 people died. It might have lead to a new way of governing but at a huge cost. This was a failure of politicians.

[@JayN_101]

@A Scam Involving Corndogs Similar to how Jesus indirectly set up the crusades

[@slavicdrunkard3895]

@@darkjester53 There were never innocen villiges destroyed, or their people killed

[@KOLDERSTRAAT]

@@Zess-mi4mt The problem is not that they did it. The proplem is that communists of today are denying it. They are not denying it as usual but they blame it to others then say a truh communists will never do that and later they do it them selfs when they realyse that the cannot acheve the last stage of communism.

[@duschidee702]

This is how you deal with history. Always considering all perspectives and aspekts of a figure or an event. Really great video!

[@jeffreygao3956]

Well, there's as many perspectives as there are grains of sand on a beach and some perspectives are just flat out wrong.

[@Alk3mest]

I'm a communist, and this is definitely slanted with a pro-communist bend. Do I like Lenin? Of course, but let's not forget that it did in fact turn into a horrendous dictatorship. Or the millions of people who suffered because of it. The video laid out what the USSR did right, but it completely glossed over everything it did wrong. If you're a leftist, we should be the first ones to call that out. Why? Because we have to admit and understand what went wrong, and how to prevent it should we ever have the opportunity to make revolution. How do we avoid a Stalin utilizing mechanisms laid out by a Lenin, however well intentioned? Let's not get defensive, but think long and hard about how we could enhance human freedom and democracy, not justify and repeat an ultimately failed state like the USSR and all the crimes committed in the name of 'progress', 'revolution' or 'the people'.

[@evolved9541]

YES!!!! Finally a fellow sensible, human communist! May God praise you oh great and worthy Alk3mest

[@ValdasRBK]

u see, few people realise that all forms of country management are Ideal. but since people are not ideal, every form has its downsides. some much much more than the other. for example, if a King could manage his country alone and see all the things that need to be taken care of - he would be the greatest king. But he cant, so by ruling alone hes usualy caring for the part of his land which he can see and control manually, while leaving the rest of the country in chaos or abuse of kings hands. if in democracy people could elect the ideal people who do not care for themselves mroe than others, then such democracy would be just as idealy good as any ideal monarchy because numbers of "rulers" would not matter. But since people are Real, not ideal, then we only get people who care more or less about themsleves and their power, caring less about the country itself than they should and have been elected for. but so far, democracy has proven to be the best and the most peaceful one in our times. by having larger number of people striving for power, they themselves do not allow one or another go way beyond others, leaving them with prety much the same power (do more than u can - get down). and the result of this, is seeking for people's attention by making favorable acts(good) or getting their way with money (bad). it could be ilustrated like this: a bunch of people fighting for the ladder to get to the very steep hill. everybody wants to be on top, so nobody is ever going to be. also, where a king can go crazy with his imagination of where to spend the wealth, a bunch of elected people would try to be openly modest, but secretly crazy with their wealth (gained from "legal" means) making them unable to steal as much as they desire, in other words putting a cap on the bottle.

[@alexr6705]

lein=good he did not want stallen to take power he died to early stallen= bad HE TRUSTED HITLER!!!!! FASCIST HITLER!! U TRUSTED THE 2ND MOST EVIL MAN (stallen being the first) TOO MANY DEATHS

[@CheeseBae]

Interesting, an actual Communist. It's so difficult to separate the propaganda from the truth, so I'm curious, do you believe Communism will create a stateless, classless society?

[@VLOGERFY]

Ultimately, I believe that if one were to describe Lenin and Stalin in one word each, Lenin would be "great" and Stalin would be "necessary". Like yin and yang, Lenin is like coffee: warm, aromatic, and pleasant to the taste. But Stalin is the ceramic coffee cup: manufactured in some third-world country with child labour. Lenin was the visionary, the revolutionary, and the dreamer. But without Stalin, Lenin's accomplishments would be nothing but a pile of brown piss left to dry on the kitchen floor.

[@nickolahs7781]

Also his accent is a reference to how Lenin spoke English with A Irish accent!

[@mysteriousmuffin6017]

“I honour Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realisation of social justice.” -Albert Einstein.

[@asiandude3207]

@ኤርትራ EPLF ጎብለል ኣፍሪቃ thats true. I read somewhere on the internet that Newton also said the same thing.

[@Luca-bv5ic]

@@asiandude3207 You're joking right? Newton died centuries before Lenin was even born.

[@asiandude3207]

@@Luca-bv5ic yeah Im joking, brah.

[@mysteriousmuffin6017]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_views_of_Albert_Einstein

[@asiandude3207]

@@mysteriousmuffin6017 its wikipedua, anything can be faked. And Enstein is a scientist so his political view is just meh. Some budhists also "put words" into Enstein's mouth about his religious view.

[@jaojao1768]

History vs Mao Zedong, History vs Paul von Hindenburg, History vs Kemal Atatürk

[@ee-ef8qr]

History vs Subcomadante Marcos.

[@frogginachos0124]

Eddy Boy who's that

[@frogginachos0124]

Sir Jaojao who's that (I know the first one but not the others)

[@Autumn_red_fox]

History vs Kim Il Sung

[@Minboelf]

@@Autumn_red_fox that would be a good one

[@1helluvaguy738]

Fix the description. Lenin didn't other throw the tsar, Kerensky did.

[@1helluvaguy738]

Остроумный Тролль ah

[@davidlarking6454]

The Bolsheviks had little to do with the first revolution and Lenin wasn't even in the country. He certainly didn't overthrow the Tsar even if you have arguments about the role of Kerensky.

[@fairyoflight]

Гомигадзе Пиздабол Либерастович. yeah and then he killed himself and the rest of the family

[@taopilot2669]

"Forever changing the course of one of the world's largest countries." Not one of the largest. THE largest. By a long shot.

[@patricks1333]

How Lenin and his rule was perceived at the time strongly depended on who you asked. Because in communist circles, despite the sometimes heavy criticism of Bolshevik rule in Russia by people like Rosa Luxemburg, the Bolsheviks and Lenin were seen as fighting a particularly brutal fight against the forces of the Reaction, especially when it came to the civil war. For those who opposed the Bolsheviks, on the other hand, Lenin and Bolshevik rule represented something that went much further than our perception of the DPRK today. It is imperative to understand that for a variety of political forces, Bolshevism was perceived as a threat so severe to the established order unseen since the French Revolution of 1789. To fully grasp this, it is important to look at it in the context of the time. The First World War was a conflict that in many ways - its brutality, its totality - was perceived by many as unprecedented (despite the fact that the Balkan wars had displayed a somewhat similar pattern) but the reason why we today perceive it as a historical watershed and why this was already understood, probably even better, by historical actors at the time, was that World War One truly marked the end of a certain era. The developments towards the end of the war and especially the Bolshevik revolution overturned a political order that had been criticized before by many but was ultimately seen as relatively stable. In countries like Germany, Russia, and the Habsburg Empire, the war came to an end with actual revolution, democratic, nationalist, and - in some places - communist revolution. Lenin and the Bolsheviks represented the more dangerous kind of the end of the old order, in part because of their revolutionary program of actually trying to overturn power structures, in part because Bolshevik rule became synonymous with the kind of violence that transpired in the Russian Civil War. It didn't matter if that violence was the result of Bolshevik policy (and in many a case it was) or if it was perpetrated by one of the various factions in the Civil War fighting against the Bolsheviks. What it came down to, was that Bolshevik rule was dangerous because it would lead invariably into civil war and massive violence. Robert Gerwarth in his book "The Vanquished" about paramilitary violence from 1917 to 1922 writes that WWI didn't truly end, save for some of the Entente countries in 1918. Rather, we need to see the post-war violence in a lot of central European countries as a continuation of the conflict. WWI spawned several conflicts that were fought beyond the actual armistice in November 1918. This includes conflicts surrounding borders, such as with the Germans in the Baltics, the Russian Civil War, or the Austrian conflict with the SHS kingdom as well as conflicts surrounding revolution like the Soviet Bavarian Republic, Bela Kuhn's short live Soviet Republic and the Russian Civil War. Especially in the later, the Bolshevik Revolution and Lenin's rule was for those on the "white" side of things, a negative foil, a sort of worst-case scenario that was to be feared and fought at all cost. Gerwarth, for example, points out that for the paramilitary counter-revolutionary network in central Europe (think the German Freikorps, the Hungarian White Troops), what had been an important experience was that many of them part-took in the joint German-Habsburg occupation of Ukraine in 1918 in the midst of the Russian Civil War. There many of them who already had a negative image of socialist and communists experienced the realities of the civil war, which included atrocities perpetrated by Red and White troops. Regardless, if that violence emanated from the Bolsheviks or their enemies, the experience became an underpinning for their already present aversion to left-wing ideology and served to further their perception of the danger that Bolshevik rule represented. With the experience of the complete break-down of the established order at home, which despite all narratives about the crumbling of Empire was perceived as stable, and the actual occurrence of Bolshevik-inspired revolution, including the violence against the people perceived as the class enemy and the counter-violence, the perception of Bolshevism as the ultimate threat to what they thought of as "civilization" further compounded. This also ultimately lead to the mind-set of inter-war politics that the enemy was absolute and had to be fought with uncompromising action, a mind-set not only apparent in Carl Schmitt's writings e.g. but also a fertile ground for inter-war fascism. Lenin's rule and Bolshevism in the minds of many in the immediate aftermath of the Revolution became synonymous with the ultimate threat to everything they held sacred and dear. Churchill e.g. went from calling the post-war paramilitary conflicts "a conflict of pygmies" to calling to "strangle Bolshevism in its cradle". And while this certainly had to do with the actual actions of the Bolsheviks during the Civil War and also associated revolutionary regimes in the immediate post-war, it also came from - if not even more so - from the ideological danger the Bolsheviks were perceived as, overthrowing what had been thought of as an eternal, natural, and stable order of things. For those who did not agitate for left-wing revolution, Lenin and the Bolsheviks were more than a brutal and repressive dictator. They were perceived as a very real threat to order, culture, and civilization, and one that based on real or imagined experience had the potential to spread and thus represent for some the ultimate thread. Bolsheviks did indeed have supporters in many countries who were indeed out of a variety of reasons ready to emulate their revolution and spread communism. For many of them, the violence of the Russian Civil War was seen as a by-product of the reaction against the new regime or as an almost historical necessity, again invoking in some ways, the French Revolution. For them, it was necessary to sweep away the old ruling class in order to build a new future where their very real oppression and exploitation would vanish and it was also seen as necessary to defend oneself against the violence of the reaction in the Civil War. So, to sum up: For those who opposed them, Lenin and the Bolsheviks represented potentially the greatest danger "civilization" had faced since the French Revolution or possibly ever. For those who supported them, Lenin and the Bolsheviks represented the historical necessity of revolution including the inadvertent violence that came with that (despite the fact that some - like Luxemburg and others - did criticize a variety of manifestations of that violence). As a final word, let me say that the perception of Lenin's and the Bolsheviks' regime as a brutal and oppressive one is not only one coming from the application of what you could call the notions of rights, firmly grounded in a 21st-century liberal democracy. While the regimes people fought against under the banner of Bolshevism and communism were brutal and oppressive - e.g. Tsarist Russia - the violence of the Bolsheviks can in part be attributed to the dynamics of a particularly brutal civil war, but also in part to certain ideological tenants of the Bolshevik interpretation of how revolutions are applied. While it can be said that being up against e.g. the forces of Roman Ungern von Sternberg and people with a streak for violence similar to him, contributed to an escalation of violence in the already particularly violent matrix of a civil war, the violence exacted by the Bolsheviks against their enemies and against people agitating for what they had perceived as the promise of the revolution (Kronstadt) did have a grounding in their belief that in order to establish their rule violence was necessary and justified. A belief and application of this belief for which they have been criticized also from the Left. Sources: Robert Gerwarth: The Vanquished. Alexander Rabinowitch's excellent books on the Bolsheviks, especially, The Bolsheviks in power Moshe Lewin: The Soviet Century.

[@Kret-o]

Not reading allat

[@blubaylon]

​@@Kret-oThen don't comment?

[@Kret-o]

@@blubaylon I felt like commenting

[@yanied9646]

Thank you for the references and thorough explanations. I do agree that "civilization" was appropriately put in quotation marks here, as it is only the extant system that people could not imagine life beyond (one built with the reigning ideas in mind and none other).

[@lukatosic09]

That was a massive nothing burger

[@mapalozimba2107]

3:58 "not just the tsar, but the women and the children!"

[@romm1752]

I hate them, they're animals so i slaughtered them like animals!!

[@alexisouchakov2722]

@@romm1752 oH uhm lil seed of fact: in Animal Farm, the tzar was the only human in Russia

[@Tales41]

@@alexisouchakov2722 animal farm is a fairy story by George Orwell. Citing the little mermaid how cute

[@durema9720]

Fun fact is that Lenin didn't wanted tzars death. At least now without trial as he stated it. People who killed family were confirmed not to be part of Bolsheviks. Although you can argue that their action lead to this. But it'll be the equivalent of making your mother being guilty for being hurt cos you were born.

[@VetkinaOlga]

If Lenin could have his way, the daughters of Nicolas would've been saved. Lenin wanted the trial for the royal family. And more or less everybody knew what the outcome would be. The empress was complicit in crimes of her husband, so they both would be executed. Heir was very sick and would've die of natural causes, people with haemophilia didn't live long in those days. The daughters would've been sent to their Europe relatives. However, the royal family was in Siberia and Lenin in St. Petersburg. White forces were closing up on the city where the royal family was held and there was a real threat that royalists would save the tsar. People hated the royal family very much and only waited for the right moment to kill them and with the white army being close they decided the moment was right.

[@sergionj93]

History vs Che Guevara! Please

[@shermanbrown419]

Yeah!!

[@benjaminli3572]

"Was killing peasants with poison gas for the people?" "Yes!"

[@logans3365]

I don’t know the full story, but it sounds like they were trying too redistribute food too those in need, and those peasants were being greedy. I could have the whole narrative wrong, but given the values of communism it adds up.

[@kimbanton4398]

@@logans3365 *"I don’t know the full story, but it sounds like they were trying too redistribute food too those in need, and those peasants were being greedy."* I would really REALLY be careful with that. Don't get me wrong, I am a socialist myself. But this claim that all the massacred peasants were just greedy kulaks who refused to share their produce with the poor people who needed them, because they wanted to hoard it all for themselves, is just propaganda and an ideological excuse. Fact is, under Lenin and especially under Stalin they called every peasant a kulak who ended up having even somewhat for themselves, regardless whether they produced it through their own labor or not. And peasants who weren't literally starving were quick to be called rich well-off kulaks and were deported into labor camps. *"I could have the whole narrative wrong, but given the values of communism it adds up."* It only adds up if you are a hardcore-tankie who will immediately call every peasant who has enough to fend for himself a bourgeoisie owner. No doubt there were kulaks, but Lenin & Stalin were too quick & too paranoid to brand people as "counter-revolutionaries who wanted to cause chaos and prevent communism from realization".

[@evryatis9231]

when leningrad is near starvation due to the incessant war, can you afford to let people stall you for long in not taking grain? if that didn't happen, leningrad & moscow would have starved, and you people would have went "oh my god communist famines lol!"

[@VeeZzz123]

my favorite part of the video

[@bandav_lohengrin]

His brother's "revolutionary activities" was an assasination attempt on the tzar by hiding a bomb in a book an then throwing it at the tzar's stagecoach

[@luisdelatorre3974]

you say it like it's a bad thing

[@rashmicp4356]

That's how revolutions happen, by bringing down the people in power. Sometimes, through violent means.

[@nisargvaghela7311]

aint that REVOLUTIONARY?

[@techissus7449]

Based

[@jonytequileiro]

@@luisdelatorre3974 killing a monarch is a good thing? Oh your nick suggests me that you are from the place where France existed... understand now your stupidity

[@icyivy2424]

As a Russian I support the accent! 😄

[@maryland7586]

Spoiler: Lenin wins.

[@vladimirlenin6128]

\o/

[@maryland7586]

Vladimir Lenin o7

[@lordofdarkdudes]

+Maryland and then stalin happend :(

[@Foxygrandpa1912]

+Maryland Lenin caused mass starvation, killing millions across Russia. The video puts too much blame on Stalin, Lenin was terrible, He killed so many people. Lenin said some Inspiring stuff, really promoting equality. But his actual time in office tells a different story. He also impossed a facist pre-gostapo style fears on everyone using the Cheka (the gosatpo of Russia) and basically scared everyone shitless, if you were related to someone who had a fight in the street for example were taken to concentration camps, they could kill you on site if they wanted too for the way you looked. He did some inexcusable stuff. The video In my opinion should have been a bit longer, there was so many more things to say about Lenin and I feel that more information about him really would give a stronger impression that he wasn't a good guy.

[@StuffBunny105]

Russia was already in starvation state and a huge mess before Lenin policy of equalization came. The bearded guy said so himself, there wasn't any country in Europe at that time with everyone had food on their plate. He had to be cruel but the man was never doing it for himself but for his people, mainly poor workers.

[@StarBoundFables]

Thanks for the well-made edutainment, Ted-Ed 🙏🏼

[@اطلبالحقوالرحمة]

History vs Suleiman 1 will be great!

[@strawberryjam3670]

Mao didn't accidentally starve anyone. These famines were caused by difficult weather conditions. Now these were pretty early in Maos time, because the state couldn't build crisis reservoirs that fast, they were still in shambles after the time of Chinese Semi-Feudal rule. But there's proof that there's been no major famine ever since the last great famine. While before all the people only starved. As to Mao's death count: all the numbers are basically pulled out of thin air. There is no real documentation about him systematically killing people. The only document saying that is a book that's been discredited as propagandistic a while back. But these numbers are still believed widely.

[@alsuvarnadvipadanargentum1743]

Strawberry Jam I’d be interested to know as to what really caused these many deaths that has caused so much famine and China 🇨🇳 has good soil to feed and sustain a huge population of billions

[@alaynanoellive]

@@strawberryjam3670 You are right. It wasn't accidental.

[@huseyin_nihat]

dude why