How did Lenin not get lynched for obviously being an agent of the German Empire...

How did Lenin not get lynched for obviously being an agent of the German Empire? Wasn't it painfully obvious what he was up to when he showed up with over a billion dollars worth of gold and counterfeit rubles and started agitating for the end of the war and the downfall of the government? Were people just too stupid to figure it out? Did they just not care?

He did cause a civil war, you know.

people were tired of being poor and of a war that was being fought for the sake of their gladiators (the rich), so the time was ripe for a change, the normal people never really understood what communism meant, they just were fed up

>and of a war
They were also tired of losing wars and battle after battle.

because people wanted the war to end

>being an agent
that would mean he did their bidding. He did not. He received funds and transport to stir up shit.

>“Lenin's entry into Russia successful,” the German spy chief in Stockholm reported to his masters in April 1917. “He is working exactly as we would wish.”

The same reason conservashits have embraced Drumpf for being an obvious agent of the Russian Federation.

Okay in all seriousness, has it spot on. Same applies to President Trump, he was elected because people hate the status quo and he promised to burn it to the ground. Whether or not he actually will is a topic of debate unto itself though.

If you ask me, Trump's victory has arguably averted civil war because he can placate the Right (especially the Far-Right) and keep them sitting at the table instead of flipping the table over. If Clinton had won on the other hand, the Far-Right would have no recourse other than revolt.

We learned in school that he was rolled into Russia sealed in a train car, like some sort of secret bio-weapon to be unleashed upon their people.

The image I got was of Lenin strapped to a gurney with a straitjacket and muzzle on, for fear he would turn his guards with a single utterance. The elite German guards kick it off the train near the Russian border and one man is sacrificed to stay behind and loosen Lenin's bindings. Once the deed is done, something like this is reported and the German high command rub their palms in glee.

>If Clinton had won on the other hand, the Far-Right would have no recourse other than revolt.
Why? She would have been just a somewhat shittier version of Obama.

>arguably averted civil war
lol, not even close. arguably assumes there were grounds for civil war amongst enough of the population who are also willing to risk being branded as traitors and getting fucked by the most powerful army in the world. silly idea suitable for children.

>Germans introduce Lenin into Russia like a bacillus
>Later on Germans rant about the dangers of the Jewish-Communist bacillus
What did they mean by this?

>the Far-Right would have no recourse other than revolt

lol implying that a bunch of neckbeards would have done anything other than shitpost on the internet about it. If Clinton won, Republicans in general would have just continued to be the same obstructionist party that they were under Obama, and nothing more.

Who cares?

Slavs arent even white.

And the Far-Right hate Obama with a passion.

>arguably assumes there were grounds for civil war amongst enough of the population who are also willing to risk being branded as traitors

When they feel like they're demographically wiped out (tikki torched marchers chanting "you will not replace us") and no one will listen to their grievances, they've got nothing to lose.

>getting fucked by the most powerful army in the world

Yeah one problem with that, most of the military leans to the Right politically and a lot of them really hate Hillary Clinton. A right-wing insurrection would cause the military to splinter in two if anything.

>silly idea suitable for children

That's never stopped anyone before. Plenty of instances throughout history of armed revolts that had no possible chance of success and yet people took up arms anyway because they were that angry.

...

>Yeah one problem with that, most of the military leans to the Right politically and a lot of them really hate Hillary Clinton. A right-wing insurrection would cause the military to splinter in two if anything.
That's about the only situation other than the nation actually being invaded in which I would want to join up with the US military. I'd join up with whichever part of the military was fighting against the right-wingers. Not because I'm a leftist - I'm not - but to defend the liberal order.

Although, at my age, I might be more useful behind the lines. But I hope I'd at least have the guts to join up if that was the best way I could help.

>The kraut cries out in pain as he strikes you

I feel pretty much the same way except it would be defending against something as barbaric as the Islamic State (i.e. openly genocidal).

>defend the liberal order

Just out of curiosity, what do you consider to be the liberal order? I wouldn't normally ask but the definition of "liberal" has changed a lot in the past few decades.

Why would poor farmers fight against Lenin when he was promising them salvation? For the sake of the tzar and the aristocracy?lol

I mean liberal more in the broad, rather than the US, sense of the word. A political system with freedom of speech, rule of law, fair justice, civilian control of the military, multiple separate institutions rather than everything concentrated in the tip of a pyramid, separation of church and state, legal protections of life and property, free markets (but regulated and taxed, I'm not a libertarian), and so on.
I'd be opposed to any sort of radical authoritarian populists trying to grab control of the state, whatever sort of ideology it was they professed.

Any sort of civil insurrection in the US today would not go down like the American revolution or the civil war. The military has largely controlled access to shit like high explosives, armored vehicles, weaponized drones, CROWS, missiles, advanced tech like lasers and thermal imaging. The nation keeps tabs on threatening figures, it's been an open part of their playbook since vietnam and probably before. And it has agencies like the CIA who only need the OK from higher up to make anything look like an accident.

A successful revolution would have to be such a massive upheaval that the most of the military (not as white as you think outside of the combat arms professions) would check out, or literally everyone (the blacks, the latinos, the natives, asians, everyone) cutting off the military from logistical support for a sustained period of time.

Pic related, American freedom fighter employing the only effective weapon in his arsenal against a column of 40 Strykers with CROWS entering his town. Note his face is covered because if a drone or camera gets his face, the FBI will be "interrogating" his family, and they will talk.

...

That's what I thought. I feel pretty much the same way, Although I must confess that I would have the inclination to join a rebellion to preserve the liberal order (ex. "restore the Constitution") because I think the government has legitimately become far too powerful.

Problem is that for every libertarian, classical liberal, and Constitutionalist (and to a lesser extent, certain Neo-Confederates, but those are a minority) willing to take up arms to protect their rights, you have a leftist and a rightist who will take up arms to take away the rights of others. So I don't support revolt except as a last resort.

Except we've used all of those in Iraq and Afghanistan with far greater liberality than would be granted for putting down a domestic insurrection and the insurgents were still able to put up a fairly effective fight in Iraq (it's called the $3 trillion war for a reason) and arguably have the upper hand in Afghanistan. And a major reason the US had any success at all in Iraq or Afghanistan is because the insurgents can't touch the American logistics and war production. That would not be the case for a domestic insurrection, since even a lone wolf could easily disrupt production at a plant making parts for M1 tanks by simply firing a sniper rifle in the general vicinity and forcing a lockdown.

Yep. I'm not a fan of the US gov't, but the trouble with seriously destabilizing it is that this would create a power vacuum, and the nice guys wouldn't be the only ones rushing in to try to fill that vacuum. And in such circumstances, the most brutal and unscrupulous would have a certain advantage, at least a short-term one. So there'd be no guarantee that the nice guys would come out on top.

Pretty much. And it was a bomb that influenced the course of the entire 20th century. You'd think there should be more conspiracies about how Germans are behind everything.

Another question to ask is why didn't Hitler blame Ludendorff and the German military leadership for sending Lenin to Russia and causing the Bolshevik Revolution. He hated communists but he failed to accept his people's responsibility in it.

Because of that gambit Germany basically won the war in the east. By the time Hatler came into power this was basically confirmed in Locarno.