Display:
October Revolution
On a snowy day in St. Petersburg 88 years ago, something happened.

For me, back under the ancien regime, 7 November meant having to stand through one hour of an absolutely boring ceremony with the whole school (with, on average, a dozen of us fainting and falling); and was a rather glaring sign of foreign occupation*.

LOL, that school experience realy left you scarred for life...

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 6th, 2009 at 11:37:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the link to DoDo's excellently well written bit of historical description and analysis. Couldn't agree more about the US NeoCon's reactionary agenda--largely accomplished. I have never considered even Lenin as much of a hero. More like ruthless and bloody-minded. That die was clearly cast by March 1921, with the troops being sent across the ice to suppress the mutiny by the sailors in the Kronstadt naval base at a cost of 8,000 dead out of an attacking force of 50,000 of the Red Army.

Likewise the suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church was bloody, with priests being thrown down the well in their parish church head first, but seemed to me richly deserved , given the long and vigorous opposition by the Church to any socially progressive changes. I used to put L.M.G. down under the category "Religion" while at Oklahoma State University. The League of the Militant Godless was under Trotsky and I was clearly out from under the influence of Sunday School lessons. If anyone looked at the form they may have thought L.M.G. was a splinter group of Mormons!

I was taught that the New Economic Policy was essentially an act of desperation by Lenin to get the economy running again, one that worked to a considerable extent. But under Stalin things took a really dark turn with the purges and show trials. I never tried to Despite the brutality involved, there was a strain of idealism that ran through Soviet life and history. Gorbachev spoke of it and was, in many ways, a carrier of that idealism.

But there is little doubt that in 1919 Western countries would have been only too glad to carve up Russia into spheres of influence as had been done to China, but and Lenin and Trotsky consolidated power, broke up the large estates and Church lands, won the Civil War, drove out the British, French and US troops and preserved the lands of Imperial Russia reconstituted as the Soviet Union.

Likewise, Hitler provided Stalin with a path to status as a national hero for staving off the Nazi German attack on Russia and doing the bulk of the heavy lifting to defeat Germany in WW II.  Else Stalin might have been remembered mostly for making Ivan the Terrible look good. I could never understand those US Communist Party members who had a favorable view of Stalin, even though a friend in LA was the son of one such and got upset when I went off on Stalin.    

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Nov 7th, 2009 at 12:05:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It is heresy in the US to suggest it, but I see a very real parallel between the roles of the real and the ideal in political ideology in the US and in the former Soviet Union.  In both the ideal is honored much more in the breach than in the observance.  

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sat Nov 7th, 2009 at 12:11:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series