How to start a socialist revolution?
It starts with an idea... Not just any idea, a great one. One that spreads like a virus, and is caught by many. One that manifests into a belief, or into a perceived fact. One that wil bring these now like-minded people together... Your going to have to manipulate this idea of yours so it can do all of this, which is hard, but not impossible. Once all this has been done, the support of the people will be yours, and everything from there is well... history. History in the making.
Why did the great depression create more support for socialist and communists?
Because it created a widespread sensation that something in the current system is deeply wrong. Socialists thought that the system needs to be changed in order for it to survive. Communists thought that the system needs to be dismantled altogether and replaced with a different one...
Do socialists, communists, or anarchists support revolution or reform?
Revolution. The current system can not reach those goals through reform because the system is run by people whose interests are completely in opposition to said goals.
Why did the communist revolution happen in Russia instead of a different country?
Early 1900s Russia had the perfect conditions for a radical revolution. Though Alexander II emancipated the serfs in 1861, life for the vast, vast majority of Russians was not getting better, and many historians would argue that it was in fact getting worse, as the centuries-old model of serfdom was no longer formally allowed. Sad as it was, serfdom was their way of life for hundreds of years, and very few (high or low-class) people knew how to get along differently. Poverty was added to by famine in the very late 1800s; life was horrible for most Russians.In 1905, Russia had its first legitimate attempt at revolution- instigated in part by "Bloody Sunday," in which an Orthodox priest (Father Georgy Gapon) was unnecessarily shot by the Imperial Guard during a demonstration in St. Petersburg. With him as a martyr figure, the cause was finally galvanized, and unrest ensued. But, it wasn't quite enough, the guard had certain advantages, and it failed. Several leaders of the movement were then arrested and exiled, including a certain Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin). He would return in a few years, with some more insight, and the rest is history, as they say.The point is that Russia had two revolutions: 1 failed, and the second formed the nation that would go on to send the first man into space and challenge the United States as a world superpower. The first revolution failed because the conditions just were not right- the base to which it appealed was small, the Tsar (Nicholas II) had not formally lied to the common man in the institution of the Duma (Russian parliamentary body), which was pretty much a group of people sitting in a fancy room being led around by the Tsar, and also, the Soviet movement (kind of like workers-soldiers unions) had not yet solidified in urban-rural Russian life. So, in short, if Russia had not existed, Marxism may have manifested itself in some other nation, as what happened with China and Mao Zedong, but it is uncertain as to which specific nation. Many were experiencing horrible standards of life. It's like trying to predict someone's thoughts by studying the physics of the brain- waaay too many variables and "ifs," to take into account.
Help russia's revolution (1917-1939) History?
i need help with some questions about russia's revolution that lasted from 1917-1939 1)- what was the immediate cause of the march revolution? (b) what were the long term causes? 2)-How did lenin adapt marxism to conditions in russia? 3)- What problems did the bolsheviks face after taking over the government?
Why do you support socialism and not social democracy?
I support socialism as an economic tool. As I see society as existing to help create the success of the human species any tool that can get that done is important.Capitalism can have its uses here, but part of the issue I see with social democracy is a tad stronger of a reliance on capitalism as a framework with a social overlay.I believe a framework that is more adaptable that will better serve the species uses a data driven approach to see whether socialist mechanisms are more appropriate which we know helps in areas like healthcare and education and then other areas can use a more capitalist framework, personal electronics for instance have a huge amount of development from competition and socialist/capitalist overlays can be put over those specific frameworks such as having a worker cooperative that builds personal electronics to compete against privately owned companies.It is all about the tool to get the job done and ensure that the human species as a whole is moving forward together and applying the best tool to do that. Pure capitalism doesn’t help with that and neither does pure socialism.Use the right tool for the right job, no need for rigidity just what works.
Lenin believed that a socialist revolution could suceed in russia if?
1. revolutions were carried out at the same time in other parts of europe. 2. russia became an industrial state 3. the peasants owned the land they worked 4. a small group of dedicated revolutionaries controlled the government
Would you participate in a revolution against the government if it became socialist and anti-gun?
That is never going to happen. Subversion deliberately avoids the most stupid costly way of a take over.It is far easier to subvert and demoralise citizens than fight military battles. Deluded, demoralised and subverted people do not fight. Once under control escape is unlikely from a government or power organisation that understands the principles.Firearm owners are already demoralised and subverted, the number of people willing to fight gets smaller by the day. Nobody protects the very laws, rules and standards that they were given in order to ensure their survival. Where are firearm owners protests and objection to gun control propaganda and guns laws that have no other purpose than to disarm them? If firearm organisations and owners will not protest or object now they are never going to fight. Who is going to wake them up from their current state of demoralisation and subversion. Most certainly not the organisations who promise to be the leaders and watch dogs but in fact do nothing. They are not part of the solution but the agent of subversion in there abject ignorance and deluded ideas.Apparently the American idea of an enemy is somebody who approaches you with a gun. Isolation from facts and education has seen to that fallacy.