100th Anniversary of the February Revolution

All Kerensky had to do was pull out of the war. That's all he had to fucking do. Why did he have to fucking screw it up?

he should have made peace with germany and genocided the bolsheviks

The Allies threatened to cut financial help which he needed desperately while the Germans didn't offer him shit.

>I have no idea that I'm talking about, but that doesn't stop me from projecting my simplistic and outdated political views
Were was no Whites nor Red in February 1917. Nor was the Whites monarchists in 1918-1920. At the time everybody agreed that the monarchy was shit and the Tsar was an idiot, romantic white monarchism developed latter, during the emigration.

> All Kerensky had to do was pull out of the war
It would be a political suicide, Bolsheviks did that and became the object of universal hate, what helped to kickstart the Civil War.
If anything, all he had to do is to go into defense, recall loyal units from the front and to suppress the Soviets with force, so that the provisional government would be the only locus of power in the country. The problems was that to do this he would had to cooperate with Kornilov and Kornilov was too stupid and too arrogant not to try to establish military dictatorship at the moment he have the capital under his control.

Kerensky didn't exactly try to make amends with Kornilov.

Yeah, if only someone like Denikin was the supreme commander at the time I think they would be able to cooperate.

The story of the Russian revolution is really the story of regimes that crumbled mostly on their own volition.

Most of Lenin's support came from the city workers who wanted to pull out of the war, desu

>lenin was behind the February revolution
lol

Probably the worst politician of all time.

>no enemies to the left
>of course i will give weapons to the bolsheviks to fight an imaginary right-wing reaction, why could possibly go wrong
>the russian people will be euphoric about this new offensive, they didn't hate the war, just hated fighting for an undemocratic regime, and my regime is totally democratic

He should have been shot, not those White generals who stayed and fought.

>loyal units from the front

Nice joke.

There was no loyal units. The soldiers, not the workers or peasants, were the biggest pillars of the Bolsheviks. If he tried to suppress the Soviets with force, the soldiers would join the Soviets and fuck him.

What went wrong wasn't that the Provisional Government didn't manage to get rid of the Soviets. What went wrong is that the Soviets didn't manage to get rid of the Bolsheviks.

A Menshevik Soviet Union would have been perfect for Russia at the time. And it was a real possibility, while everything else was delusion.

A menshivik Russia would've utterly failed to collectivise the countryside. It wouldn't have lasted a year.

Where did I say Lenin was responsible? He simply benefited most from the chaos.

Truly one of history's biggest egomaniacs.

>White Russia was the God appointed government
>God appointed government
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_(Russia)
Oh, yes.
>Red Russia was nothing but left-wing, Marxist materialists in rebellion against God, morality, sanity, and most of all the Russian people themselves.
>against God
Yes, that's true
>morality
What? Can you explain this?
>sanity
Huh?
>most of all the Russian people
No. Russian people were joining the Read Army in droves.

It still blows my mind how badly he fucked up. He had Russia ant his command and the people loved him yet he made one bad decision after another and had to flee from St. Petersburg.

>It would be a political suicide
No, it was what the people wanted

>pogroming Jews
>bad in any way
I want reddit to leave

>le reddit boogeyman
Why is killing jews good?
>Those villages whose population meets troops with arms, burn down the villages and shoot the adult males without exception. If hostages are taken in cases of resistance to government troops, shoot the hostages without mercy.

>hehe le j00s

idk why collectivization is considered a good thing - it never worked, quite the opposite. Yes, in Russia it helped in terms of giving the actual farmers some land and protection, but there are other, much more effective ways of doing so.
Tbh the vést example of this for me is Czechoslovakia, where collectivization literally ruined the agriculture of the country - as far as I know, at least in modern history, there has not been a case of wide-spread hunger in the country, not even during WW1, but it was a serious issue in first years of the communist rule. The solution was simple, deliveries from other communist countries since the Czechs still weren't under such control as the rest of the East.

I know agricultural collectivisation was a catastrophe, but Stalin needed to do something to control the countryside. The red flags and soviet rifles disappeared as soon as you left urban centers.

If you want to see what works for the countryside, look at NEP. And then they went and burned it all down again.

Honestly, the nature of the Soviet regime is:
>the real elites flee as they come to power
>need scapegoat elites to explain ideology to new subjects
>persecute middle class with economic/industrial/agrarian know-how
>put all manual labourers with no sense of basic economics in large barn, give slightly bloody tools repossessed from eliminated middle class
>be surprised production falls by 90%, when conducted by illiterates
>repeat until collapse