Krishtotter Posted April 19, 2019 Author Share Posted April 19, 2019 27 minutes ago, Raksha 2014 said: Actually, serfdom had been outlawed in Russia for some time (?100 years or 50 years) before Nicholas II's reign. But most of the Tsars were hardly model rulers. You are absolutely right, in 1861. What the Bolsheviks claimed in 1917 was that the malignant residue of feudalism hadn't been expunged from Russia, and that this was evidenced by the dire poverty of most of the country, and that the liberal Kerensky regime which had initially replaced the Tsars was but the front for a corrupt class of capitalists imposing what Lenin called "wage-slavery". In the Marxist-Leninist mind, a capitalist economy was a new type of slavery or serfdom. Lenin's actual words were: "Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners. The modern wage slaves - the majority of the population - owing to the conditions of capitalist exploitation, are debarred from participating in social and political life. Democracy for an insignificant minority, democracy for the rich - that is the democracy of capitalist society." (Lenin, The State and Revolution, 1917). He cast both the Tsars/aristocracy and Kerensky. representing the bourgeoisie liberals, as slave-owners. So the Bolsheviks claimed that their Revolution was "liberating" Russia from wage-slavery and thus the final residue of the old serfdom/feudalist system, towards a new proletarian, classless paradise. Of course, the resulting Soviet Union turned out rather differently. Lenin turned out to be a demagogic rascal, motivated by a cult of materialist-teleological-utopian violence, who committed a slew of extrajudicial atrocities against the very peasants he had claimed to be fighting for against the Tsarist, and then liberal-capitalist Russian state. He was the midwife of totalitarian Stalinism, the KGB and its mass murder of millions of defenceless people, not to mention its ethnocide and forced relocation of minority nationalities, as well as the gulag terror system that decimated so many lives from Lithuania to Kazakhstan The basic point being, that there are many prototypes/archetypes of Daenerys in real world history and they aren't exactly positive role models, to say the least (attractively moralistic ideals aside). Robespierre and Lenin started out with the most wonderful of visions for human betterment. And it all ended in bloody, totalitarian tragedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.