Laying to rest the Revolution

[Bob69Joe]

Russia: Forest bones confirmed to be last tsar of Russia and the Romanov family

https://m.dw.com/en/russia-forest-bo...ily/a-54223877

It took many decades for the Russians to reconcile what regime and what people would rule them. Ave Maria folks. This posting it out of respect to one of the great monarchies of the world. Thoughts appreciated, words less so unless ready to speak them.

[Akar]

Maybe this will finally lay to rest the ridiculous idea that Anastasia escaped.

[basics]

And what did it achieve? The killing didn't just stop at the Romanovs as it is still going on today in that land for a system that failed and still fails. All the Ruskies did was replace one dynasty for a far bigger one and yet for all the deaths and changes it is only prospering because the system they hated was the system they had to follow to give their peoples a similar standard of living that we in the rest of the world enjoy. Jobe are what makes the world go around not revolution.

[Akar]

If you're trying to posit that the Russian revolution is somehow still going on I've got some history books from the 1930s through today for you to check out.

[Sir Adrian]

The russian revolution was still going on strong in the 1930s. Remember dekulakisation and the hunt for the magical wreckers.

[antaeus]

If you're trying to posit that the Russian revolution is somehow still going on I've got some history books from the 1930s through today for you to check out.

Perhaps better explained as "laying to rest one of the last major unsolved mysteries of the revolution"

The russian revolution was still going on strong in the 1930s. Remember dekulakisation and the hunt for the magical wreckers.

That's not revolution, that's just maintenance of power.

[basics]

If you're trying to posit that the Russian revolution is somehow still going on I've got some history books from the 1930s through today for you to check out.

Akar,

Look at my post and tell me what it has achieved?

[Sir Adrian]

That's not revolution, that's just maintenance of power.

That does not make much sense. The victims of those purges were simple peasants who had more than one cow or saved up enough money to own a tractor. They're not exactly threats to the establishment. Moreoever the literature of the time repeatedly refers to maintaining the flame of the revolution alive and not letting those groups end the revolution.

[Adamat]

The undisputed government inventing enemies for political reasons is in no way a revolution. A (political) revolution by definition involves a change in the governance of a country. This is clearly not the case at hand in the '30s any longer, as the communists had firmly established themselves as the government for more than a decade already. Sure, for propaganda reasons it's appealing to call it the revolution, but really it wasn't.

[antaeus]

That does not make much sense. The victims of those purges were simple peasants who had more than one cow or saved up enough money to own a tractor. They're not exactly threats to the establishment. Moreoever the literature of the time repeatedly refers to maintaining the flame of the revolution alive and not letting those groups end the revolution.

What Adamat said.

In this case, it was all about keeping everyone on their toes. So to speak. Kind of like Mao's cultural revolution. Saying the revolution is still happening, or that it needs maintaining, or re-booting or whatever allows insecure absolutist dictatorial leaders to both create an artificial sense of other/out group out of whoever they want (it really doesn't matter), and to use that out group to charge up the base. It's only communist as far as the marketing department uses red on their posters. It was just your usual dictator rubbish.

Either way, it appears the Romanov family didn't get to see it.

[conon394]

And what did it achieve? The killing didn't just stop at the Romanovs as it is still going on today in that land for a system that failed and still fails. All the Ruskies did was replace one dynasty for a far bigger one and yet for all the deaths and changes it is only prospering because the system they hated was the system they had to follow to give their peoples a similar standard of living that we in the rest of the world enjoy. Jobe are what makes the world go around not revolution.

Well to be fair they achieved a state that was able to stop Germany cold and roll them back in WW2 (something the Czar run Russia was kinda bad at). Otherwise there be a lot less Scotsmen alive today or dead in WW2.

[basics]

Well to be fair they achieved a state that was able to stop Germany cold and roll them back in WW2 (something the Czar run Russia was kinda bad at). Otherwise there be a lot less Scotsmen alive today or dead in WW2.

conon394,

If memory serves me correct that wouldn't have happened if it were not for the supplies we had to send them to keep them in the war.

Quote, " The Soviet Union

Early in the Second World War, Germany invaded and occupied many of its neighbouring countries in mainland Europe. Germany and the Soviet Union had secretly signed a non-aggression pact agreeing that they would not attack each other, but Germany invaded the vast country in June 1941 and soon pushed deep into Soviet territory. With this turn of events, the Soviets joined the Allied powers and agreements were quickly reached to send supplies in order to assist them in their fight against the invaders. The western Allies knew that if the Soviet Union fell, Germany could then turn its full military might to the West.

The Soviets desperately needed weapons, fuel and supplies, especially after their country's most-industrialized areas had been captured by the Germans. Getting these supplies to them, however, would not be easy. Land transportation routes were cut off and the best sea routes were blocked by the enemy. Shipping supplies to the Soviet Union via the Indian or Pacific Oceans was a very long trip. That left the Soviet seaports on the Arctic Ocean as the fastest way to deliver goods—but it was also the most dangerous.
The Murmansk Run

Beginning in the late summer of 1941, a total of 41 Allied convoys sailed to the Soviet ports of Murmansk and Archangel during the war. The Arctic convoys delivered millions of tons of supplies from the United States, Great Britain and Canada, including aircraft, tanks, jeeps, locomotives, flatcars, rifles and machine guns, ammunition, fuel and even boots. From the beginning, Canadian merchant sailors served on Allied ships making the runs. These ships departed North American ports such as Halifax or New York and sailed to the northern Soviet Union, usually via Iceland or Great Britain. This route became known as the Murmansk Run. The Germans threw the full weight of their air force and navy against the convoys as they neared the coast of occupied Norway. Attacks by more than a dozen enemy submarines (known as U-boats) and hundreds of planes simultaneously were common. Indeed, more than 20 percent of all cargo on the Murmansk Run was lost and one convoy lost 24 of 33 ships at a cost of 153 lives. It was so dangerous that strict orders were given that no merchant ship was allowed to stop, even to rescue sailors who fell overboard. These unfortunate men had to be left behind. " Unquote.

That's the reality to be truly fair.

[Sir Adrian]

The undisputed government inventing enemies for political reasons is in no way a revolution. A (political) revolution by definition involves a change in the governance of a country. This is clearly not the case at hand in the '30s any longer, as the communists had firmly established themselves as the government for more than a decade already. Sure, for propaganda reasons it's appealing to call it the revolution, but really it wasn't.

Revolutions last for as long as some form of revolutionary government is in power. That was very much the case in the early 1930s soviet union. And it isn't the first occurrence either. The french revolution lasted 12 years until nappy crowned himself. The American revolution lasted almost 20 years.

[wanderwegger]

The Russian revolution also made little sense. Trading a violent, old timey but often benign oppressive oligarchy with a semi absolute executive for a more violent, modernizing and always malicious oppressive oligarchy with an absolute executive was just silly.

[Cyclops]

Russia: Forest bones confirmed to be last tsar of Russia and the Romanov family



https://m.dw.com/en/russia-forest-bo...ily/a-54223877

It took many decades for the Russians to reconcile what regime and what people would rule them. Ave Maria folks. This posting it out of respect to one of the great monarchies of the world. Thoughts appreciated, words less so unless ready to speak them.

I'm sad a family got machine gunned to death. Russia is a hard place and seems to have been so for millenia.

The Tsarist system did not serve Russia particularly well by the end, and lost the Great War with Austria and Germany. It was an aggressive state regularly invading their neighbours, an inheritance from its position in the plains and forests of Eurasia with few natural barriers and strong neighbours.

If the Romanovs survived would they have been less brutal than the Communists? Hard to see how they could survive or prosper without being so. I guess you could argue they could not have been worse.

Incompetence and evil often produce similar net results. The Romanovs incompetently led their Empire into a suicidal conflict (with famine and slaughter the result) and the Communists prospered as a result (with famine and slaughter as the result). Their dynasty dwindled to nothing because they were not up to the task, the failing of more than one monarchy in WWI.

[Lifthrasir]

Gents, I had to do some cleaning. Please stay on topic and respect the rules. Thanks for your understanding.