Why the Communists subjugated half of Europe - WW2 Legacy Documentary Special

[@WorldWarTwo]

This is Sebastian’s debut as co-host on the WW2 channel. You’ve already seen his writing in several episodes, and you’ll see more of him on screen in the future - especially when we start covering the Cold War and the nuclear arms race on the TimeGhost channel in 2025. Welcome on the WW2 channel Sebastian! To be part of creating the future of history, join the TimeGhost Army at www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory

[@dziban303]

Who else thought it was Alec from Technology Connections at first?

[@Gojoe107]

​@@dziban303it's not!?!😂

[@Ramoreable]

​@@dziban303no effort november, am I rite?

[@antonisauren8998]

@@dziban303 I could swear he was in some prior episodes. Maybe just as writer on team meetups.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

@@antonisauren8998 Yes I was in some of the team meetups and also one episode on the TG channel!

[@jliller]

The Soviets remaining convinced that all the Capitalists were working together against them is particularly interesting because during the Cold War the Americans quickly became convinced all communist countries were taking orders from Moscow. It was certainly the image the Soviets tried to project. Yet while the Soviets kept most of Eastern Europe under their heel, the West was slow to understand that wasn't true for Beijing. Even North Vietnam was playing the Soviets and Chinese against each other to get support from both against South Vietnam and the Americans.

[@Unknownstatus_521]

And it actually became a major issue between the two powers. That's why you can see Soviet support for Vietnam during the war with China

[@vksasdgaming9472]

There were plenty of communist and socialist parties in Europe, but many of them did not want to be Stalin's disposable puppets. Eastern Europe gave Stalin chance to establish puppet (colonialist/occupier) regimes by force of arms. During Winter War general secretary of Finnish communists told Finnish communists to fight AGAINST Stalin's aggression which was not proper way to reach stated goal of communism.

[@bluemarlin8138]

@@vksasdgaming9472That’s because the driving force was always Ruzzian imperialism, with the Ruzzian communists rationalizing it to themselves by cloaking it in communist dogma.

[@fearedjames]

@@bluemarlin8138 Exactly this. The ultimate thing is, for all they said, the USSR maintained identical foreign diplomacy as the Tsars before them and the Republic after them. Their tactics shifted as they could utilize ideologically aligned groups, but they still wanted to conquer basically the same exact groups and had essentially the same exact goals. They used the same exact strategies in diplomacy and made similar enemies, ignoring the US who basically took over the role of Britain at the world stage anyway. People seriously undermine the influence of Russian nationalism on Soviet thinking.

[@shryggur]

Albania, Yugoslavia, North Korea - all of them played their own game. The other Marxist's prediction was that capitalists can't not wage war with another. But it were Communist USSR and China, China and Vietnam, Vietnam and Cambodia, Albania and Yugoslavia who either fought each other or were on the verge of active fighting, not the Western allies. So much for the understanding of international relations at the time.

[@andrzejplocki6438]

Welcome Sebastian. A pretty solid debut, excellent job. Considering all the complexities, this is one of the best comprehensive précis of the subject. Another excellent vid, well done.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you very much kind sir

[@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding]

Kind of ironic how the only other european country that actualy had a revolution (Yuguslavia) would distance itself from the USSR as much as posible.

[@gawkthimm6030]

because Tito didn't want to bend over for Stalin

[@josepmasdeufigueras4434]

​@@gawkthimm6030 Badass Chad Tito.

[@gawkthimm6030]

@@josepmasdeufigueras4434 yeah running an insurgency on the ground against Nazi's can do that to you

[@TwoSouthFarm]

Tito was one hell of a dude. It's a shame that after he died everything he tried to build, maintain and protect crumbled and shattered in a horrifyingly spectacular way. Balkanization and whatever economic scheme employed by the West eventually ensured the massive wreck would never truly recover.

[@gawkthimm6030]

@@TwoSouthFarm also because he wasn't prepared to give away any autonomy to the various minority ethnicities

[@mickmac2223]

Welcome Sebastian - a very good debut!!!

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you very much!

[@ronan5228]

@@Sebastian_Brandstetter Well done!

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

@@ronan5228❤

[@jessediaz9051]

😳

[@secretsfullofsaucers]

I know you hint that it's debated but I think it is pretty clear that Stalin was far less internationalist that Lenin and Trotsky, he wanted to cement his own power and his paranoia and focus turned inwards against internal enemies (perceived or not). I think the lack of enthusiasm in helping with the Spanish Civil war showed this. He thought more like the old Russian Imperialists than an idealistic communist that's for sure.

[@mojrimibnharb4584]

And convinced himself that he could "get along" with the capitalist world. It wasn't until Korea that he understood.

[@jliller]

Lenin and Trotsky were genuinely committed to their political ideology, dubious as that ideology was. Stalin wanted power for its own sake. He was a leftist Richard Nixon.

[@glebperch7585]

What lack of enthusiasm? Stalin sent huge amounts of aid to the Republic while the liberal "democracies" like France and England did nothing to stop the fascist invasion

[@warlordofbritannia]

Ironic that a Georgian would be such a proponent of Russification.

[@bluemarlin8138]

@@mojrimibnharb4584The Korean War that he instigated, you mean.

[@leisti]

This is one of the best history videos I've seen on KZbin. A great summary of the issues in question, and a top-notch script.

[@naveenraj2008eee]

Hi Sparty and Sebastien Welcome Sebastien. Informative video Thanks

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching!

[@christopherholder9925]

One slight modification or correction: the Soviets did not overthrow the Czar, but those who had overthrown him.

[@windingkiwi1030]

Similarly, calling Winston Churchill 'Prime Minister of the British Empire' just doesn't sound right when dominions like New Zealand and Australia had their own Prime Ministers. New Zealand, specifically, only invoked the Statute of Westminster after the war.

[@raymondhartmeijer9300]

There is a lot more to be corrected in this video than just that

[@kensurrency2564]

Didn’t the Bolsheviks assassinate the Romanov family, thus ensuring that the Czar could not retake power? Lenin planned to dispense with them well before the revolution.

[@arithmetikmilitantpoetry9548]

NICE!!! what no one else cared to elaborate about Stalin's obsessiveness with Trotsky and Poland.

[@GQSmoke]

Probably cuz of extreme exaggerations from the west making that up...oh and trot is a known and dangerous traitor and Poland was part of their state and never were comfortable them breaking away correctly predicting and invasion through poland. Makes more sense looking at if from their point of view rather than repeat lies. Think america would allow alaska to break away and be fine russia aiding them? No? Then why should the USSR be fine with us doing that to them? But sure lol Stalin obsessed, Stalin evil....ya know ironically most of EARTH sees Stalin and the USSR the exact same way and worse as the west sees the USSR. We have statues of Lenin and Stalin in Africa and even a giant statue from N.Korea in Senegal but tearing down colonizers statues we never wanted up to begin with. Hmmmmm. Just saying...don't believe everything you're taught by the west even as an westerner...and most of earth actually preferred the USSR over the colonizing capitalist neo colonial west....just look at W.Africa alone. And didn't ukraine just aided al Qaeda killing many Malian troops in the process?

[@NVRAMboi]

I don't think "outsiders" to Poland and eastern European nations/cultures can remotely imagine the death, suffering and lifetime trauma experienced by the Poles (before, during and after WWII). I do wonder today, WTH the people of Belarus (and Ukraine) must be thinking?

[@mojrimibnharb4584]

They're both quite simple. Trotsky was a rival with internal legitimacy, Poland is the gateway to invading Russia and often allied against it.

[@jliller]

@@NVRAMboi They can't imagine and, for a long time, they didn't care enough to try. Americans have strange historical attitudes toward the Poles. At the time and in the decades that followed, Casmir Pulaski was beloved for his service in the American Revolution. During the Ellis Island era, American WASPs frequently viewed Poles and Lithuanians as inferior people, although not as inferior as Italians or Irish. Even when I was in elementary school in an elementary public school in the USA circa 1990, I distinctly remember that there were a number of jokes told among the children about "a white guy, a black guy, and a Polack" and the punchline was always about the Pole. Mind you, this was in a Florida county that had been segregated only 25 years earlier, yet that prejudice had been supplanted by the nonsensical racial prejudice of transplants from places like New York. Even as a child I found it incredibly strange.

[@JDVassar]

Thanks!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for the superchat!

[@Jargolf86]

Gut gemacht Sebastian, sehr seriös und Professionell!

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you

[@williestyle35]

Last time I was this early to a World War Two channel video, the Bolsheviks were still fighting multiple forces to secure the future USSR ...

[@nazgulsenpai]

John Titor?!

[@williestyle35]

​@@nazgulsenpai _Time Travel_0_ (while I do live in Florida, I am not from Tampa. Nor am I Larry Haber or John Rick Haber. Just a commenter to say I was here early.) 😀

[@_-Wade-_]

Glantz/House are critical of the theory the Red Army intentionally let the Warsaw uprising fail. The Reds were at the end of their logistical tail post Operation Bagration.

[@nazgulsenpai]

@@williestyle35 ​ If you were John Titor, you know, theoretically, would you happen to know where I can find an IBN 5100?

[@millipedic]

This was very good. How did I miss it when it came out? Well done, Sebastian and Sparty!

[@johntipper29]

Very interesting and very well presented - as usual. Thank you TimeGhost for these thought provoking insights.

[@jaylowry]

At Potsdam, when Averell Harriman asked Stalin if it was gratifying to be in Berlin after four years of bloody battle, Stalin replied, "Tsar Alexander got to Paris."

[@kantemirovskaya1lightninga30]

Wow, I knew this episode was coming and I knew the host lineup from the previous things you guys did. However, it still caught me by surprise. I thought KZbin had skipped after Sparty did his intro and Sebastian started speaking. I swear, I thought KZbin just advanced the video to something else - I had to look down lol it’s good keeping us on our toes

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, and thanks for being apart of the TimeGhost Army!

[@VictorianEra.]

Lenin did not overthrow the "Tsarist Empire", he overthrew the Russian Republic.

[@pathutchison7688]

Nice to see Sebastian in a vid. Been enjoying his writing for a long time.

[@danielnavarro537]

Stalin after defeating Hitler Eastern Europe: "We freed!" Stalin: "Oh I wouldn't say freed. More like under new management."

[@admaneb]

I've finally caught up with the timeline?! Fantastic work Time Ghost!

[@Gszarco94]

Great video and welcome Sebastian to the WW2 channel!

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you

[@rosswebster7877]

Another great immediate postwar special Spartacus, Sebastien and Time Ghost Crew! Glad to have Sebastien aboard and look forward to more content with him!

[@bluemarlin8138]

Ruzzians: “The West is imperialist!” Also Ruzzians: “It’s not imperialism when 85% of our territory is conquered lands populated by Asians, Ukrainians, and Turks. Oh, and we also want coloni-we mean spheres of influence-in Europe!”

[@brucetucker4847]

Russia remains the last 18th-19th century European colonial Empire. And they're really trying to get the band back together.

[@kg7162]

Both where imperialist

[@Game_Hero]

@@kg7162 Congrats, you did a whataboutism.

[@tkm238-d4r]

At least the Russian Empire was quite consistent with a Russia-1st policy. Meanwhile the West kept trying to present itself as not really imperialist but it was unable to maintain consistency. This contradiction was maintained right up till 2016. As a result, the global imperialists hated Trump because Trump decided to just do things the Russian way. America-1st. 😊😊 America was not supposed to be America-1st. It was supposed to be for universal human rights and democracy. 😁😁

[@Game_Hero]

@@tkm238-d4r And what, you want to give them a medal for being open about being imperialist? Just...why? What's the point of your comment?

[@dunerv]

I am eagerly waiting for the episode in which these guys will discuss operation gladio and the part General Reinhard Gehlen played in it!

[@HomercleeseSimpson]

I wonder will they do it with the same tone, sneering at the *silliness* of the West.

[@giannisionas]

I have a better idea, the Duke of Winsdor and his pro -nazi sympathies, or Churchill and Mussolini before the enter of Italy in ww2.

[@laurend9829]

@@HomercleeseSimpson I really don't see them sneering here, so clearly, you just don't like what they're saying.

[@HomercleeseSimpson]

@laurend9829 thanks for your in-depth psychoanalysis Lauren. I feel like I owe you for that professional level skillset. Shall we say a penny?

[@TheGuy-cf2rg]

Seeing someone other than Indy next to Spartacus was surprising! Not bad, just Surprising!

[@nigelhamilton815]

Solid broadcast and debut from seb. The politics of the time are so very interesting.

[@Brusselpicker]

How is easy, Roosevelt didn't listen to Churchill and rolled over and let Stalin tickle his belly.

[@mega-chad8809]

Who’s this Sebastian guy and what did he do with Indy?

[@jliller]

Indy is busy with the fighting in Korea.

[@mega-chad8809]

@ modern Korea? Checks out

[@ShubhamMishrabro]

He is ussr plant to spread communism

[@tkm238-d4r]

@@jliller He is trying to contact the media representative of the Gold (Kim) Leader. 😊😊

[@DustyForgotten]

Welcome aboard, Sebastian! Look forward to seeing more of you in the future!

[@TrickiVicBB71]

Welcome Sebastian

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you!

[@maybesami4270]

Didn't Indy say in the weekly episodes that Stalin did not abandon warsaw deliberately?

[@markcangila1613]

Yeah this video is questionable

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Here's sparty's reply from a similar comment above: "Two things can be true at the same time, and to be clear both Indy and I said both things as it was happening. I’ll reiterate: a full blown insertion into the battle was not tactically possible, but support was, and she safe haven for those crossing the Vistula to fight another day was. Instead of providing any kind of support the Red Army stood back on Moscow’s orders, and large numbers of Armia Krajowa fighters trying to regroup on the other bank were arrested by the NKVD."

[@Pelaaja20]

I think the Allied intervention in the russian civil war should’ve been talked more about. It does make the USSR’s attitude towards the West more understandable in their ideological logic.

[@eduardomoraes2650]

Exactly, and to call it "cosmetic at best" made me question how accurate is this channel...

[@jliller]

@@eduardomoraes2650 The Allies' intervention in the Russian Civil War certainly played a major role in the Soviet Union's paranoia toward the West, but it was never more than half-hearted. Worn down by WW1, the Allies lacked the resolve to commit the manpower and resources necessary to strangle infant Bolshevism in its cradle. And the world has suffered greatly for a century because of it.

[@spartacus-olsson]

@@eduardomoraes2650I think you need to look up what they actually did, or should I say what they didn’t do. What they most certainly didn’t do was to provide any kind of significant, potentially outcome altering support. Far from it, they committed themselves to what can only be called lip serve and symbolic gestures. Like when the troops the British committed were sent to far away places that had no significance in the civil war itself, like the Pacific Rim, and the Arctic Sea. Places of strategic importance for them, but of little to no significance to the cause of the whites. Material support was… well, half hearted at best. Therefore we accurately use the term “cosmetic.”

[@ThealmightyMatt]

Early on in the civil war, the Allies did provide a substantial amount of weapons to the Whites, with the Whites receiving about as many guns as the Reds were producing. But, that was only really near the beginning of the civil war. In terms of actual combatants and fighting, it wasn't much. The Allied governments only allowed for defensive actions near major ports like Arkhangelsk, or along rail lines in the far east, officially to help the Czechoslovak legion. Of course, different Allied governments and militarirs had different intentions. Britain was more in favour of direct military action than the US. For example, British officers tried to use the US Polar Bear Expedition to aid White forces near Arkhangelsk, but had to stop after protest by the US government because the Polar Bears were only meant to defend the port and nothing else. More famously, the Japanese military was more aggressive and was hoping to set up a puppet government in the far east, undertaking a large-scale propaganda campaign. Though, with the withdrawal of US forces, the Japanese government overruled the military and also ordered a withdrawal. The Great War Channel has some amazing videos about the Russian Civil War and the Allied intervention. TLDR, in the grand scheme of things, even though the Allied intervention did impact relations between the USSR and the Western countries following the civil war, it had rather negligible impact on the actual civil war itself.

[@m.a.118]

Or Patton's attitude towards the USSR- or Operation Unthinkable, or Churchill's pre-1939 stances on the USSR... BUT ANYWHO.

[@DN-yt9fy]

Great video guys , congratulations ! keep going . As a child from Albanian immigrants , I have heard those stories with deep compassion for all those countries of Eastern Europe that had to face this subjugation by USSR . It was horrible hearing about all these events , I would be grateful if someone could provide me with some answers on few questions . Most russian and soviet historiography insist that : 1) Poland helped and collaborated with Nazis , when in 1938 partitioned that small area or Czechoslovakia called Zaolzie . So they claim ,that USSR cannot be blamed for doing the same under Molotoff - Rippentrop pact between 1939-1941. 2) Western historiography often claim that Soviet Union , helped economically nazi germany providing her , with vital resources , basically during 1939-1941. But , they say , the economic and commercial relations soviet union had with nazi germany , was smaller and lasted temporarily , compared to western economic and trade activities , via investments etc, Britain , France and USA had with the Nazis . They say also , that there were US investments that operated in nazi germany even between 1939-1941. Activities that in value were larger than those of Soviet Union . 3) Lastly , they say , that someone cannot blame USSR for helping nazis partitioning Poland , as Munich Agreement helped nazis do the exact same thing with Czecholsovakia . Thank you guys , for this great video , once more and I would be extremely grateful if someone could provide me with few answers ,in order to understand those points from that side of history and if they can have valid points .

[@imcbocian]

1. There was no collaboration between Poland and Germany. The Poles simply took advantage of the opportunity to demand that the Czechs hand over Zaolzie (then inhabited by Poles). Identical to the Czechs who took Zaolzie from Poland in 1920, taking advantage of the Bolshevik attack. Nobody here claims that the Czechs planned it and collaborated with the Bolsheviks. There is no similarity here to the Ribentrop-Molotov Pact 2. The essence of a free market economy is not to limit private investment. The West allowed trade and investments in Germany in the same way as it allowed trade and investments with the Soviets (all factories, machines and technologies in the USSR came from the West, mainly from America). And there was no ill will in it. And even though the West shunned interventionism, and had little control over private investors, in 1939 business with Germany was curtailed (even though several businesses managed to bypass sanctions, e.g. through Switzerland, this does not change the overall picture). On the other hand, we have the Soviets who pride themselves on controlling all trade and the economy for the benefit of humanity and to prevent exploitation. No one blamed them for trading with Germany before the war (if they had ended it then, they could have at least pretended that they did not plan this war and did not want it). But when the war broke out, they intensified trade with the aggressor even more. Judge for yourself how much sense it makes for Russians to seek moral superiority here. 3. Just because someone did something wrong doesn't mean you are justified in doing the same. Especially when you do something even worse. The Munich Agreement allowed Germany to occupy part of one country to avoid war. The British, French or anyone else had no material or territorial benefit from this. The Russians, on the other hand, helped start the war precisely to take over several other countries, some entirely. Such searching for morality in the actions of their dictators and denying their responsibility, even though they were one of the greatest victims of these mistakes, is a typical nationwide Stockholm syndrome for Russians.

[@gianlucagarattoni6394]

I would be interested in a video on the status of post-war Finland

[@blackore64]

Well, to sum it up: Communists got to the point where they took over the Interior Ministy after massive election success in 1945 which included the The Secret Police that had spend the last 20 years jailing Communists. (And thanks to Stalin's Butchery in 1937 somehow ended up as the lesser evil in terms of survival of Finnish communists.) West left Finland diplomatically to USSR's mercy, though CIA supported social Democrats financially. Communists kinda played their role as part of government coalition, using their shiny new Secret police to really scare the remnants of the far right in Finland. However, other parties turned against them, and they were voted out in 1948. Soviet Union of course could have lend their diplomatic and military muscle to help the Finnish communists, but decided not to. I quess they decided not to push their luck, since the finnish pre-war order had kinda remained intact, because there wasn't a fascist coup that would have wrecked the system. That kinda would have put the communists into equal footing, as was in other countries.

[@leisti]

A good summary of the immediate post-war years. The continuation: Finlandization set in, that is, Finland deferred to the Soviet Union in foreign policy matters; for instance, it did not vote to condemn the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the UN General Assembly. On the other hand, Finland did what it could to keep and enhance its links with the West, for example by joining the Nordic Council in 1955, and becoming an associate member of EFTA in 1961. Finland also retained control of its military forces, and though it was never stated publicly, remained focused on repelling a possible invasion by the USSR. When the Soviet Union fell, Finland took the opportunity to get out from under Russia's thumb, by unilaterally ditching the part of the WW2 peace treaty that restricted its armed forces. It then joined the EU in 1995, and NATO in 2023, which can be seen as the final line under the post-war period.

[@Azra2769]

What's up with all hand waving, is Astrid directing behind the camera?

[@WorldWarTwo]

Of course she is…

[@jliller]

Some people talk a lot with their hands.

[@PaulDekleva]

Churchill was not prime minister of the British empire; he was prime minister of the United Kingdom. Australia, New Zealand and Canada had their own prime ministers.

[@alphamikeomega5728]

Those countries were dominions, and thus not part of the Empire but the Commonwealth.

[@francesconicoletti2547]

@@alphamikeomega5728as dominions those countries did not see themselves having independent foreign policies. The PM of Australia in his speech declaring war or germany said something like , Britain is at war therefor Australia is at war. Dominion troops fought for Imperial ( that is UK ) interests automatically. While the PM of the UK never had a title like the King of England in the rest of the Empire and Commonwealth he certainly had a lot of power if he wanted to use it.

[@BumBumTheBarbarian]

wOAH Indy really turned back the years

[@konstantintenko]

This is very imprtant video, giving a context for a lot of things going on today, including war in positions of "post-soviet" coutries.

[@korbell1089]

Machiavelli Not sure if Stalin ever read Machiavelli, but he certainly elevated Machiavellianism to an art form!😮

[@ralphranzinger4197]

I think it is highly possible Stalin read Machiavelli. In fact, he had a vast library with thousands of Books and was kind of an self learning guy. And he could wait, play a long game and be patient. Stalin was definitely a very unique type of dictator, that is for sure.

[@Zadrigo]

Machiavelli was a Stalinist before it was cool.

[@wanfu5634]

Movie Pitch (maybe a play): A story showing how each political leader plotted and predicted how the war would play out, and how their mindset impacted how they led their countries' respective war efforts. The title for the show is "Chess". Now all I need is talent as a playwright/screenwriter and I'm set.

[@jonathanwebster7091]

"We shall establish workers' and soldiers' councils in Berlin and Warsaw, in Paris and London, and the might of the Soviets will one day extend throughout the whole world". -ermmmmm, I guess two out of five ain't bad.

[@jonathanwebster7091]

@panoskatrin4910 yes; I know.

[@hebl47]

Wow, I must say that Indy looks completely different without a tie!

[@NigelDeForrest-Pearce-cv6ek]

An Excellent and Outstanding Analysis of The Imposition of the Iron Curtain!!!

[@jovanweismiller7114]

It would have come as a surprise to William Lyon Mackenzie King, Prime Minister of Canada, John Curtin, Prime Minister of Australia, Peter Fraser, Prime Minister of New Zealand, and Jan Christiaan Smuts, Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa, that Winston Churchill was "Prime Minister of the British Empire" as Sebastian referred to him.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Why? they might not have seen themselves as part of it anymore, but the variety of subjugated colonies the British held at this point clearly made them an empire, not to mention that Chruchill himslef saw and reffered to it as an empire.

[@alecmcfarlin3364]

To say that the west’s opposition to the USSR during the interwar years was “cosmetic at best” ignores the multiple international networks that worked towards both counterrevolution inside the USSR and creating an anti-Bolshevik internationale in Europe. While these networks weren’t always directly in control of western nations like france and Britain, given the nature of their membership consisting largely of wealthy aristocrats, industrialists, and military higher ups, they held considerable sway wherever they were located. The rise of the Nazi party is one major result of these parastate networks.

[@1987retroman]

This channel is very anti communist.

[@nyakimen]

@@1987retroman This channel only states the facts. As someone who is from eastern Europe, they say it as it was.

[@rationalbasis2172]

The anti-communist bias of this channel is its greatest toxin, distorting and making woefully inaccurate their historical analysis. The Soviet Union was under effective economic embargo from most of the developed world - that's not "cosmetic," it's concrete and material.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

@@rationalbasis2172 Yes but they were so after the beginning of the cold war! Not in the early 20's, as the quotes from Lenin show the Soviet Union did not mind being ostrachised in the beginning of the 20s. Did you even watch it?

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

@@rationalbasis2172 Its crazy how under videos about the USSR we are called anti communists, and under videos criticising western allies, pick whichever one you want, we are called left wing conspirators and communists. Its almost as if it isn't about the video but about some people not being able to handle the truth ...

[@DominikFleury]

Great video

Such a shame that all these people had to endure Dictatorships for so long, after just having been through WW2

[@stonozka]

As Czech I'm waiting for our story how we get to communism. Don't get me wrong I know something. But it will be nice to understand it in context. I was going to school not long after revolution and we still learned a lot of communist misrepresentations and lies.

[@glebperch7585]

Those weren't lies but in fact were the truth

[@kacodemonio]

@@glebperch7585 troll detected

[@OneEye-m4u]

Thank you Spartacus & Sebastian. Your programs always raise my blood pressure. That wouldn't happen if you had no effect.

[@benismann]

7:55 Sounds ridiculous, but they proceed to allow germany to gobble up austria and czechoslovakia afterwards, so I wouldn't say they were too far off on the "blessing" part

[@honestbaguette]

Welcome on screen Sebastian !

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you!

[@augiesasso]

I read Anne Applebaum's book, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe, 1944-1956. A great speaker, the book was quite different. I forgot why I even picked it up. In it she details just this topic. No secrets. War weariness. Correctly positioned. Subterfuge and coercion. Military might. But it wasn't inevitable. Still, it's good to look at the details. An anatomy of a fall is much different than saying, an Iron Curtain descended on Eastern Europe. Makes it look like everyone became an automaton. No. You had Hungary in 1956. Czechoslovakia in 1968. Also, both Albania and the they Yugoslavia were not under the Soviet yoke.

[@raymondhartmeijer9300]

Applebaum is not a scholar, but more of a pop-history/journalist writer. It's better to invest in works of an academic nature

[@sergeantpapa]

Danke!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for the superchat!

[@Minikin1]

Woo! Welcome to the co-hosting chair, Sebastian!

[@keiranallcott1515]

23:58 interesting fact, king Michael of Romania was dethroned while he was out of Romania , attending the marriage of princess Elizabeth to prince Phillip in London.

[@jakegarvin7634]

Now how did Spartacus Olson manage to find the German version of the Technology Connections guy

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

I don't think we look alike 😂😂

[@jakegarvin7634]

@@Sebastian_Brandstetter To be honest, I think its mostly in your voice. Love all the Timeghost guys and girls and the content you all make! Best of luck this time of transition

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

❤❤❤ I need to check out his voice haha

[@umjackd]

I live in Poland now, and several Polish people have told me that they were taught that they were abandoned by the Western allies, both in 1939 and in 1945. In the first case I understand, but in the second case I just can't see a reasonable way for Poland to escape Soviet control. Could be a good question to ask in the Patreon questions, or if anyone has some input.

[@JuleyC]

Brittan and the US gave Poland to Stalin at Yalta, they never really tried to force fair elections or anything else they claimed to the Polish authorities during the war that they would. Thus a second abandonment or betrayal in 1945.

[@vksasdgaming9472]

@@JuleyC UK sheltered Polish government-in-exile for DECADES until lawful government had a chance to overthrow Stalin's henchmen.

[@JuleyC]

@@vksasdgaming9472 I was only responding to why some might see there being an abandonment/betrayal in 1945 that is all. I've seen both words used for what happened in 1939 & 1945.

[@vksasdgaming9472]

@@JuleyC If anything is Stalin's betrayal - not Western democracies betraying Poland. In 1939 looking at map tells why Western powers were not that efficient at helping Poland. Of course writing was on the wall of Allies breaking apart after Germany surrenders, but how it would happen was unknown. By 1947 it was clear: Stalin is the traitor.

[@benismann]

@@vksasdgaming9472 the government is but a fraction of all people

[@xamishia]

Thanks as always

[@bugman2333]

I bet Sebastian can do a killer Marlon Brando impersonation. 😉

[@bradleysmith2021]

Probably, but every time I see the thumbnail for Dr. Strangelove I think it’s Indy! 😂

[@Deridus]

​@@bradleysmith2021 "The point... of a Doomsday Weapon is lost *if you keep it a secret!* why didn't you tell the world, eh?" I so want to see Indy recite that line.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Thank you very much! ;)

[@antonindanek9294]

Thank you for very much for this one especially as I had a course on this in college and you have refreshed my memory! Also, never forget that Poland, Austria and Czechoslovakia among others lie in Central Europe as well. While Poland has historic ties to the East, it very much is part of Central Europe. ☺

[@larrykapp3409]

Listening. Thanks

[@shawnr771]

Thank you for the lesson. Welcome to the front side of the camera, Sebastian.

[@larrykapp3409]

Listening late on thanksgiving

[@WorldWarTwo]

Hope you had a good one Larry!

[@larrykapp3409]

@WorldWarTwo we meet the other daughter and the toddler a day late. Yes great days.

[@DavyBoy007]

Excellent analysis

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for the comment Davy!

[@euchale]

Indy forgot to wear his tie today.

[@JenniferinIllinois]

I guess after two world wars, it was bound to happen that Indy would become unrecognizable. 🤣🤣🤣 Seriously though, welcome Sebastian. Great debut as on-screen talent. 😉

[@tohkai1959]

Congrats on being the first English speaker saying coup de grâce properly

[@Frank-the-tanky]

there are a few videos missing in the ww2/war against humanity playlist

[@Mustapha1963]

Because the Western Allies allowed it to happen. Great Britain had been at war by 1945 for almost six years. Even though they were on the winning side, the populace were tired of war (and understandably so). They'd even voted out of office Winston Churchill, who was the spine of British resistance when things were going poorly and among the very few in Britain who saw the threat that Stalin presented. In the United States, it was even worse. To a great extent, FDR was enchanted by Stalin. Part of that was due to the presence in the Roosevelt Administration of communist sympathizers- and also not a few outright Soviet spies. Stalin made a series of promises to the Western Allies- and broke pretty much every single one of them. When Truman became President upon the death of FDR, he also seemed disposed to trust Stalin- until Stalin broke enough agreements that even Truman learned he was untrustworthy. Could the Western Allies have prevented the Soviets from conquering- and I use that term deliberately- most of Eastern Europe? I think they would have had to go to war to stop it, and there is no guarantee that the hot was would not have become a nuclear hot war.

[@DavidBall67]

It was a rehash of 1849, only the communists had better networking a century on. It wasn’t Stalin brilliance, but opportunism.

[@charliedontsurf334]

I can’t imagine Stalin preplanned everything. Unless you have a Time Machine, there is no way to know the future in any significant detail.

[@24meandyounothing]

Over the top hand movement and ABBA look at each other type moments distracting (to me) from the story.. but still love this channel ! Map looks great ..shows the after war position of the Great Lakes. CHEERS from CANADA!

[@christiansimbarashe]

Hi Sebastian, from South Africa

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

Hi 👋

[@greggweber9967]

26:00 Did Stalin have planned steps and make a favorable crisis and conquest, or did he just not let a crisis go to waste?

[@igorGriffiths]

As the Time Ghost team highlight, history explains why many things happened and why the world is the way it is. Now understand Stalins obsession with Poland

[@RePeteAndMe]

13:35 It was a valid fear. There was a possibility that somebody in Britain was sane enough to not lose the war on purpose even though we had nukes and Russia didn't.

[@bobtaylor170]

It's ironic that the quite talented new co - host's name is Sebastian. There is a play, The Great Sebastians, which takes place around the whole Jan Masaryk matter.

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

thank you for the kind words!

[@drawingsbyjacob]

Does anyone recall the name of the painting that the thumbnail of this video borrows the subject from?

[@davidbush697]

Although it primarily covers the last decades of the Cold War, take a look at The Point of the Spear: The Cold War Years published by Austin Macauley in Nov 2023. It may aid you in preparing your Cold War Series.

[@iamnolegend2519]

Stalin was one hell of a sociopath.

[@tommy-er6hh]

I don't know this fits your thesis, but the 1929 switch is based on the 1938 Czech crisis. You see capitalist Czechoslovakia was trying to secure form Germany, so they made an ally of USSR as well as France. USSR was going to give troops and especially planes, which the Czechs were short of vs Germany. Stalin even sent in an air support regiment thru Romania during the crisis. but when France especially showed weakness and caved, Soviet troops were rapidly recalled. From that point Stalin gave on the "weak" West, and with Japan sending an army to fight Siberian troops in Mongolia, Stalin thought Hitler was the best ally, instead of a 2 front war.

[@EldestBoy]

"Any opposition to a socialist revolution centred on the domestic, not on the destruction of the Soviet Union." Not according to one Western European country in 1941.

[@arithmetikmilitantpoetry9548]

Phenomenal! The more you know! Well explained

[@ajc-ff5cm]

Didn’t the USSR claim that the centralized socialist nature of Nazism was conveniently more in line with the USSRs ideology than the west as a whole? I recall something said about that after the fall of Poland. Democracy can’t stand up to the centralized power and command structures of Germany and the USSR?

[@mrlodwick]

AWESOME!

[@chrismacphail7041]

you got a side kick, nice

[@m.s.b.8929]

The optimist says subjugated half of Europe. The pessimist go to Gulag.

[@brickproduction1815]

Wait is Indy stepping down?

[@Sebastian_Brandstetter]

no far from it! I'm just here to add onto Sparty not take away from Indy!

[@discourses3]

Wouldn't the communists in the USSR have good reason to consider a conspiracy by 'imperialists' against themselves due to their experience in the Russian civil war, when pretty much the whole of entente, at some point, invaded them?

[@Dustz92]

Yes, plus they had the Paris commune as an experience

[@thebunkerparodie6368]

that doesn't justify subjugating it sneighbour tho

[@Giveme1goodreason]

My ex worked as an escort behind my back, does this mean I should treat every woman I meet as though she trades access to her for money. Or should I treat individuals on an individual basis?

[@blackore64]

​​@@Dustz92 Yeah, found it kinda weird how they laughed off Germany and France allying against the revolutionaries, when that is literally what happened with the Paris Commune.

[@mojrimibnharb4584]

🔔🔔🔔🔔

[@rojodobi6944]

You forgot the Munich agreement of 1938 when the West powers divided Czechoslovakia republic between Germany and Poland. Kamarada Stalin was not invited to participate, which increased Soviet suspicion over.

[@kidmohair8151]

welcome to the lens side of the camera Sebastian! the paranoia was somewhat justified. all of the major Entente allies had sent troops to Russia, ostensibly to “protect their interests”. this had the very real effect of securing the rear areas of the White Russian forces, and covertly allowed supplying those forces with arms, thereby freeing up the Whites to more fully engage the Red Army. add to that, the very active but equally covert attempts to foment a counter-revolution in the areas under the control of the Red Army, and the paranoia, which Stalin preternaturally possessed, got re-enforced.

[@ianblake815]

Sometimes it takes a communist to stand up to another communist

[@tiedeman39]

After the WW2 and post-war series, have you guys thought of going backwards in time, and doing wars like the Crimean war?

[@WorldWarTwo]

Well our Rise of Hitler series did go back in time, to 1930, we have also discussed doing other historical events pre-WW1 too but it's not something we are focused on right now or plan to do anytime soon. Who knows what the future (or past) may hold though!

[@Mr.DalekLK]

The fault of the Americans and the English.

[@davidcoquelle3081]

The Soviets were scared of the Allies because of the entetes intervention in the Russian civil war. Where there intentions was the destruction of communism. I’m not in favour of communism but you presented some inaccurate information in regards to this I hope you address it

[@shaider1982]

The world probably would be a better place if only Lenin did not read a book by Marx.

[@bendafyddgillard]

it's sad that all this conflict was unnecessary. Stalin was a disaster for socialism.

[@raymondhartmeijer9300]

Lenin's pragmatism and sense of realism shouldn't come as a surpise when you read his biographies. Yes, he was a strict Marxist, but he also often knew exactly when to take a pragmatic stance. Often opposed to the Menshevik-faction who were blinded by ideology and wishful thinking a lot of the time. Lenin always took a more practical stance

[@madsadamsen8996]

Hey guys, call me reactionary but I get this feeling that this guy Stalin might not be a good guy after all.