If you actually read the contemporary analysis you would know that the ridiculous numbers that Solzhenitsyn claimed in his book (like twenty million people supposedly killed in GULAG) are tremendously exaggerated. Nowadays nearly ever serious historian agrees that the actual numbers vary from 700,000 to 1,100,000 - and that is over 30-32 years (1923 - 1955). And of course that does not look good as well but we should use the actual stats and not what Solzhenitsyn himself called "an artistic investigation" (which overall was based on the personal memoirs and witness statements of about 200-300 people - cannot blame him for that as he could never get access to the Soviet archives at the time; but we could blame him for misrepresenting his book to the world - well, he really hated the Soviet state, and justifiably so, as it destroyed his life, career etc). Just for comparison, without any hard labor, with no war for the country's survival going on, with more or less decent (on average) conditions, and with more or less appropriate medical treatment, over 100,000 people died in US prisons over the last 30 years. Anyways, GULAG Archipelago is a good book to read but it is not (by a long shot) a documentary text, it is as much a work of fiction as it is a compilation of several people's memoirs and opinions.
I wish I could hear the voices of the 10s of millions killed by capitalism: European colonialism, the Scramble for Africa, Jim Crow, South African apartheid, America's brutalisation of Latin America, Nagasaki, Hiroshima etc etc
Greetings from Ireland. I got 12:45 into this and was utterly perplexed. This isn't an argument; it's polemic. He admits he doesn't know a lot about the Russian Revolution; just Solzhenitsyn's commentary on it. That's not enough for a lecture titled 'Marx, Lenin, Solzhenitsyn, and the Meaning of the Russian Revolution'. Sit down, sir...
Post modernist thinking seems to have been developed as, amongst other things, a cognitive boot camp for cultural Marxist or in oldspeak "useful idiots".
Good comments about the harm of divorce on children. I like to suggest that where there are minor children present, divorce should only be permitted when a court determines that it is "in the interest of the children."
I get tired of people using Christ as an example of socialism. He was not a socialist. Christ commanded his followers to go after the one. To love one another. But that commandment is at a personal and individual level. He didn't command them to establish a government that would take over their personal responsibility and force it on others. Quite the contrary. The invitation to come unto Christ is entirely individual. This fits perfectly with the US Declaration of Independence statement that all men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Those rights cannot be taken away from us by anyone. Not even a well intended, if not misguided, individual.
God Bless Hillsdale College- a beacon of wisdom. Thank you, John. Oh how I would love to go back to school at Hillsdale and just drink it all in... (I went to UCD and Reed 1978-82 and missed so much...)
@@jimhemphill2841 How is Capitalism destroying his country? Nobody Conservative in the U.S. supports monopoly except the corporatists and numb nut neocon psychophants.
To the Pakistani commentator: the extremes of inequality under capitalism are ironed out by competition. If someone gets rich it’s via making others lives better. To the Russian commentator: The bolshevics including all the workers were obviously motivated by material considerations; the issue is that only under socialism does the government come to dominate
Звучит как анектот. Разбогатев капиталист сделает жизнь лучше только себе и некотрым нанятым топ менеджерам. США спонсировали и курировали диктатурой Пеночета в Чили. Но тем неменее американские компании владели долей экономики Чили. Так же государство при социализме и капитализме имеет разные задачи и механизмы.
Don’t really know what Americans believe. I know that anyone who considers Marxism a viable form of economic government is that curious mix of complete moron and pseuointellectual
Many factually dubious statements, probably based on Sholnenitzen;s interpretations of events. TheRusssian high command had formulated their plans for an invasion of eastern Germany well before they recived any request from France to invade. It is not clear whether the Russians intended to annex German territory or not. But they did hope to conquer and annex some Austrian territory, and in order to do that, the Russian high command believed they had to prevent Germany from coming to Austria's aid.The French request, for the Russian high command, was essentially a pretext .
Since watching this 4 years ago, I learned that "the right side of History" *does* have a clear meaning. 1. Marx saw "History" as marching forward towards Communist Utopia as it's final destination. 2. Marx saw Man as a kind of God who is able to direct History towards that future. 3. The wrong side of History is any activity that impedes a social transformation to Communist Revolution and Utopia. Strengthening the middle class and employees improves lives and families. Prog-Lib pro-Labor reformers of the past would approve of that. Marxists would say privately jetpro labor reforms are terrible, because they reduce the frustration that could otherwise result in a Marxist uprising or a gradual campaign to implement slow Marxism.
Really enjoying the analysis of issues both left AND right had, and refused to face, in 1911 Russia. Minute 41 is worth noting b/c of the issues of Russia excluding the Jews from full rights - which adds fuel to the concept that anti-Jewish sentiment was a Western Civilization issue, not just a German issue.
I wish i had gone to hillsdale college- insread i wasted 4 yrs snd $$$ at a state university listening to socialist/therapy minded profs w/ 0 real world experience. most of them couldn't teach a 7yr old how to tie his shoes. Lots of academics creds BUT no street creds.
The kid's name was Pavka (or Pavlik) Morozov, but I thin he denounced his parents for hoarding grain. An the peasants were emancipated in 1863, in response to the Poles' January Uprising.
Historian Paul Johnson in Intellectuals shows Marx as a pretty horrible human being, and more of an apocalyptic than an economist. He considers Communism anti-semitism applied to a class. (Marx's farther converted his family to avoid an anti-Jewish decree; I presume he saw his father's selling out for economic reasons and generalized.) My question is - if people could take Marx/Engels seriously for so long in spite of data being fudged, what does that say about scholarship and science?
Mr. Grant. I must say that this was an EXCELLENT discussion of the role of Lenin in implementing Red Terror, which Stalin merely expanded upon. Arthur Herman says Lenin was more interested in violence and vengeance than Marxism, in part due to working on labor strikes, and in part due to his brother being put to death by the Czar. Herman also describes a scary situation where the Right in Russia wanted NO CHANGE at all while the Left wanted RADICAL CHANGE and the result being that a key reformer (Peter ___) was blocked and shot to death. I may edit this later to add more specifics after I listen again.
"B-but only Trotsky among them was ever Jewish, the rest was ethnically pure White Russian or or Lettish, Polish, Georgian, Estonian, Ukrainian, and funny looking Half-german stock"
If you don’t have a “Russian mysterious Soul”, you will understand Russian writing with your head and never understand it’s visceral true meaning. Unless proven otherwise, I think in Gulag Archipelago, A.S. meant gulag as “oppression” and Archipelago as an intricate compartmentalism and pockets of the Soviet block. …Or so says my mysterious Russian soul. :p .
Good lecture, albeit I'm slightly annoyed by the proposed opposition of religion and totalitarianism. Meaning, religion is good and totalitarianism is bad. It is a very american outlook. The US is a very religious country. Meanwhile, in my eyes, religion is the first form of totalitarianism. There is no need in much argumentation, actually. Everyone could see it just looking at the history of, say, Christianity or Islam. Secular totalitarianism in the nutshell is a religion with the absence of the imaginary guy in the sky.
@@kathrynludrick4821 Your constructive criticism was very helpful, dear Kathrin. I advise you to always act like that. It is really the key to healthy and friendly relationships with people around you.
@@kathrynludrick4821 I agree with the commenter that religion is totalitarian (although I don't believe Christianity is a religion unless you turn it into a cult) but you can't get away with denouncing an argument without a logical counter argument. That is anti-intellectual and makes you look ignorant. Friendly fire.
comparison was made between Solženytcin, Dostojevsky and Nietsche??? SERIOUSLY??? Nitezche is know pervert and occultist... In my book Secret Zarathustra - it was in fact weird book because before zarathustra was Nietsche´s full life... Did you know tha he finished his life in the homosexual gay community in northen italy accompanying one rich italian duke. seriously this is exactly what is wrong with the western scholarship...
that is correct but let me ask you. would you follow somebody knowing that he is influenced by evil? Your example is the best one. Because hitler also suportet and IMPLEMENTED idea of Eugenics/Racial hygiene... Wor me the Q. is: Whywould you follow somebody you know is influenced by evil, If nothing else was medically recognised MAD!!! Just Why? If the answer is Mad Genius have bright moments. I sa How would you know which one is the bright moment? And many more problems with this kind of aproach. Not mentioning the fact that for as long as he could he was actively practicing occultism...
I did not know that. Mencken, in, The Life and Work of Friedrich Nietzsche, wrote that Nietzsche fell in love with and "hunted down" an Italian lady halfway across Europe, but that ultimately Nietzsche was a free-spirit not interested in marriage. Is there a source on the Duke-claim?
Both of you, get lives. Communism is dead. Find some other things to give your life meaning and direction. It's futile, don't become ridiculous please.
Well.... Isn't Marxism a rival quasi-religion seeking to subvert all other value systems to hold a monopoly on Values? My take is that you resent the speaker for his accurate understanding. Do you think his understanding, _as you describe it-_ is _innacurate,_ or do you prefer that he not understand?
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 Marxism is not a value system, marx or engels said hardly anything how socialism would work if institutionalized. His understanding is wrong because it's polarized to right and wrong way, selecting the comfirmation biasd of "marxism" to fit a enemy image. There is not right way of thinking, only perspectives.
@@alfredkwaak Right... Only "conformation bias" would make someone think that Marxism was opposed to religion and traditionallism. What a bunch of orwellian gobbledygook. You don't like the fact that he is addressing the reality of Marxism (in theory _and_ in practice, squarely. If you use the non-newspeak pert of your brain, you should be able to see that it is simply an accurate observation that Marxism _is_ a self-declared enemy of traditionalism and religion. What you think is "bias" is, in reality, simply honesty.
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 right.. religions are bullshit mostly, historical claim on monopoly of good values and society. Marx was against religion but not "traditionality" in 2019 sense.19th century has a historical content, thats when marx wrote his stuff. Wake up to 2019!!
@@alfredkwaak I thought it was just confirmation-bias and confusion to think that Marxism was in opposition to religion. You sound like you work for the ministry of truth here.
![[Live] : ONE 168 วันนี้!! "โจนาธาน vs ซุปเปอร์เล็ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0jIN65KgJsI/mqdefault.jpg)
I wish the voices of the tens of millions of victims of Soviet Communism could be heard on this topic.
What about the hundreds of millions of victims of Capitalism in post-Communist states of Eastern Europe?
If you actually read the contemporary analysis you would know that the ridiculous numbers that Solzhenitsyn claimed in his book (like twenty million people supposedly killed in GULAG) are tremendously exaggerated. Nowadays nearly ever serious historian agrees that the actual numbers vary from 700,000 to 1,100,000 - and that is over 30-32 years (1923 - 1955). And of course that does not look good as well but we should use the actual stats and not what Solzhenitsyn himself called "an artistic investigation" (which overall was based on the personal memoirs and witness statements of about 200-300 people - cannot blame him for that as he could never get access to the Soviet archives at the time; but we could blame him for misrepresenting his book to the world - well, he really hated the Soviet state, and justifiably so, as it destroyed his life, career etc). Just for comparison, without any hard labor, with no war for the country's survival going on, with more or less decent (on average) conditions, and with more or less appropriate medical treatment, over 100,000 people died in US prisons over the last 30 years. Anyways, GULAG Archipelago is a good book to read but it is not (by a long shot) a documentary text, it is as much a work of fiction as it is a compilation of several people's memoirs and opinions.
I wish I could hear the voices of the 10s of millions killed by capitalism: European colonialism, the Scramble for Africa, Jim Crow, South African apartheid, America's brutalisation of Latin America, Nagasaki, Hiroshima etc etc
@J Pennington Change 'communism' for 'capitalism' and never a truer word spoken
@J PenningtonUh I don't think you know what biology is
Greetings from Ireland. I got 12:45 into this and was utterly perplexed. This isn't an argument; it's polemic. He admits he doesn't know a lot about the Russian Revolution; just Solzhenitsyn's commentary on it. That's not enough for a lecture titled 'Marx, Lenin, Solzhenitsyn, and the Meaning of the Russian Revolution'. Sit down, sir...
Jordan Peterson has a lot to say on this multifaceted subject- postmodernism is cultural Marxism
And Peterson ties it all together very succinctly
Post modernist thinking seems to have been developed as, amongst other things, a cognitive boot camp for cultural Marxist or in oldspeak "useful idiots".
Jordan Peterson has a lot to say about everything, unfortunately it can usually be distilled into Jordan Peterson.
@@Johnconno Exactly!
Enjoying this during Gulag Lockdown, which oddly enough, seems to mirror events described by Grant. Great speaker.
Difficult to follow due to frequent sidebars.
He never said anything about who held the money and then distributed.
Good comments about the harm of divorce on children.
I like to suggest that where there are minor children present, divorce should only be permitted when a court determines that it is "in the interest of the children."
One does not need all-inclusive solutions .
I get tired of people using Christ as an example of socialism. He was not a socialist. Christ commanded his followers to go after the one. To love one another. But that commandment is at a personal and individual level. He didn't command them to establish a government that would take over their personal responsibility and force it on others. Quite the contrary. The invitation to come unto Christ is entirely individual. This fits perfectly with the US Declaration of Independence statement that all men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Those rights cannot be taken away from us by anyone. Not even a well intended, if not misguided, individual.
Let the adults talk... you comprehend nothing of religion or government.
@@dantescave1 You just said absolutely nothing, but did reveal you know nothing or you would have said it.
@@rndyh77 Yep.
@@dantescave1 You gave NO logical refutation. Psuedo-intellectual much?
Trashing a bank sounds pretty socialistic to me...
Communists persecuted religious believers especially Christians.
Great video and honest lecture
God Bless Hillsdale College- a beacon of wisdom. Thank you, John. Oh how I would love to go back to school at Hillsdale and just drink it all in... (I went to UCD and Reed 1978-82 and missed so much...)
More rightwing bs lol to hind what Capitalism is doing to his country, and the world, but the world is waking up. The Soviet scare is over.
joe jitsu I am graduating (late) in two weeks from a UC.... so I’ll be in recovery in time for Christmas 😊
@@jimhemphill2841 How is Capitalism destroying his country? Nobody Conservative in the U.S. supports monopoly except the corporatists and numb nut neocon psychophants.
To the Pakistani commentator: the extremes of inequality under capitalism are ironed out by competition. If someone gets rich it’s via making others lives better. To the Russian commentator: The bolshevics including all the workers were obviously motivated by material considerations; the issue is that only under socialism does the government come to dominate
Звучит как анектот.
Разбогатев капиталист сделает жизнь лучше только себе и некотрым нанятым топ менеджерам.
США спонсировали и курировали диктатурой Пеночета в Чили. Но тем неменее американские компании владели долей экономики Чили.
Так же государство при социализме и капитализме имеет разные задачи и механизмы.
Don’t really know what Americans believe. I know that anyone who considers Marxism a viable form of economic government is that curious mix of complete moron and pseuointellectual
Many factually dubious statements, probably based on Sholnenitzen;s interpretations of events. TheRusssian high command had formulated their plans for an invasion of eastern Germany well before they recived any request from France to invade. It is not clear whether the Russians intended to annex German territory or not. But they did hope to conquer and annex some Austrian territory, and in order to do that, the Russian high command believed they had to prevent Germany from coming to Austria's aid.The French request, for the Russian high command, was essentially a pretext .
66 pro socialists who’ve never lived under socialism here
Since watching this 4 years ago, I learned that "the right side of History" *does* have a clear meaning.
1. Marx saw "History" as marching forward towards Communist Utopia as it's final destination.
2. Marx saw Man as a kind of God who is able to direct History towards that future.
3. The wrong side of History is any activity that impedes a social transformation to Communist Revolution and Utopia.
Strengthening the middle class and employees improves lives and families. Prog-Lib pro-Labor reformers of the past would approve of that. Marxists would say privately jetpro labor reforms are terrible, because they reduce the frustration that could otherwise result in a Marxist uprising or a gradual campaign to implement slow Marxism.
Really enjoying the analysis of issues both left AND right had, and refused to face, in 1911 Russia. Minute 41 is worth noting b/c of the issues of Russia excluding the Jews from full rights - which adds fuel to the concept that anti-Jewish sentiment was a Western Civilization issue, not just a German issue.
A muppet issue fed by bigots
The Tulmud. The Catholic Pope. And Usury.
7:15 The wisest read by dim, flickering firelight.
His sarcasm gets in the way.
Это Геббельс нового времени?
5:50 what book is he saying here? Hard to understand.
Not a good speaker
Amateur hour much? Not a well prepared presentation or speaker .
Wonder if this speaker recently walked the streets of San Francisco!
I hate to agree with everyone (God KNOWS I do!) but he's a bit all over the place. Hopefully it truly was a result of his baby.
I wish i had gone to hillsdale college- insread i wasted 4 yrs snd $$$ at a state university listening to socialist/therapy minded profs w/ 0 real world experience. most of them couldn't teach a 7yr old how to tie his shoes. Lots of academics creds BUT no street creds.
UMASS freshmen read Howard Zinn.
Really
The kid's name was Pavka (or Pavlik) Morozov, but I thin he denounced his parents for hoarding grain. An the peasants were emancipated in 1863, in response to the Poles' January Uprising.
Крестьяне были освобождены в 1917 году.
В 1883 изменился вид эксплуатации и метода эксплуатации.
Such valuable commentary…If only he’d stop making that smacking sound every paragraph 😖😖
Préview of what became coming attractions
This man is trying to speak extempore while always checking his notes. He needs to pick a lane.
Historian Paul Johnson in Intellectuals shows Marx as a pretty horrible human being, and more of an apocalyptic than an economist. He considers Communism anti-semitism applied to a class. (Marx's farther converted his family to avoid an anti-Jewish decree; I presume he saw his father's selling out for economic reasons and generalized.)
My question is - if people could take Marx/Engels seriously for so long in spite of data being fudged, what does that say about scholarship and science?
www.unz.org/Pub/Encounter-1975jul-00018?View=PDF
mzk1, you're being conned by this propagandist. I'd love a debate with this idiot Paul Johnson with Richard Wolff.
A terrible speech, frankly. Rambling, off topic, confusing, often frivolous...
Mr. Grant. I must say that this was an EXCELLENT discussion of the role of Lenin in implementing Red Terror, which Stalin merely expanded upon. Arthur Herman says Lenin was more interested in violence and vengeance than Marxism, in part due to working on labor strikes, and in part due to his brother being put to death by the Czar. Herman also describes a scary situation where the Right in Russia wanted NO CHANGE at all while the Left wanted RADICAL CHANGE and the result being that a key reformer (Peter ___) was blocked and shot to death.
I may edit this later to add more specifics after I listen again.
Jew Bolshevik revolution
"8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"
Very true.
"B-but only Trotsky among them was ever Jewish, the rest was ethnically pure White Russian or or Lettish, Polish, Georgian, Estonian, Ukrainian, and funny looking Half-german stock"
If you don’t have a “Russian mysterious Soul”, you will understand Russian writing with your head and never understand it’s visceral true meaning. Unless proven otherwise, I think in Gulag Archipelago, A.S. meant gulag as “oppression” and Archipelago as an intricate compartmentalism and pockets of the Soviet block. …Or so says my mysterious Russian soul. :p .
Jesus was not a socialist. ... smh!
Good talk for those of us who don't know squat.
Rambling, unfocused speech.
Good lecture, albeit I'm slightly annoyed by the proposed opposition of religion and totalitarianism. Meaning, religion is good and totalitarianism is bad. It is a very american outlook. The US is a very religious country. Meanwhile, in my eyes, religion is the first form of totalitarianism. There is no need in much argumentation, actually. Everyone could see it just looking at the history of, say, Christianity or Islam. Secular totalitarianism in the nutshell is a religion with the absence of the imaginary guy in the sky.
Nonsense
@@kathrynludrick4821 Your constructive criticism was very helpful, dear Kathrin. I advise you to always act like that. It is really the key to healthy and friendly relationships with people around you.
@@kathrynludrick4821 I agree with the commenter that religion is totalitarian (although I don't believe Christianity is a religion unless you turn it into a cult) but you can't get away with denouncing an argument without a logical counter argument. That is anti-intellectual and makes you look ignorant. Friendly fire.
>
Interesting proposition.
comparison was made between Solženytcin, Dostojevsky and Nietsche???
SERIOUSLY???
Nitezche is know pervert and occultist...
In my book Secret Zarathustra - it was in fact weird book because before zarathustra was Nietsche´s full life...
Did you know tha he finished his life in the homosexual gay community in northen italy accompanying one rich italian duke.
seriously this is exactly what is wrong with the western scholarship...
that is correct but let me ask you. would you follow somebody knowing that he is influenced by evil?
Your example is the best one. Because hitler also suportet and IMPLEMENTED idea of Eugenics/Racial hygiene...
Wor me the Q. is: Whywould you follow somebody you know is influenced by evil, If nothing else was medically recognised MAD!!!
Just Why?
If the answer is Mad Genius have bright moments. I sa How would you know which one is the bright moment?
And many more problems with this kind of aproach.
Not mentioning the fact that for as long as he could he was actively practicing occultism...
I did not know that. Mencken, in, The Life and Work of Friedrich Nietzsche, wrote that Nietzsche fell in love with and "hunted down" an Italian lady halfway across Europe, but that ultimately Nietzsche was a free-spirit not interested in marriage. Is there a source on the Duke-claim?
Fake news historian
Both of you, get lives. Communism is dead. Find some other things to give your life meaning and direction. It's futile, don't become ridiculous please.
Thomas Sowell on Karl Marx the man TH-cam where nobody is somebody u should know
This gyu is clearly a christian seeing marxism as a rival religion seeing his monopoly on values threatened.
Well.... Isn't Marxism a rival quasi-religion seeking to subvert all other value systems to hold a monopoly on Values?
My take is that you resent the speaker for his accurate understanding. Do you think his understanding, _as you describe it-_ is _innacurate,_ or do you prefer that he not understand?
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 Marxism is not a value system, marx or engels said hardly anything how socialism would work if institutionalized. His understanding is wrong because it's polarized to right and wrong way, selecting the comfirmation biasd of "marxism" to fit a enemy image. There is not right way of thinking, only perspectives.
@@alfredkwaak Right... Only "conformation bias" would make someone think that Marxism was opposed to religion and traditionallism. What a bunch of orwellian gobbledygook.
You don't like the fact that he is addressing the reality of Marxism (in theory _and_ in practice, squarely.
If you use the non-newspeak pert of your brain, you should be able to see that it is simply an accurate observation that Marxism _is_ a self-declared enemy of traditionalism and religion.
What you think is "bias" is, in reality, simply honesty.
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 right.. religions are bullshit mostly, historical claim on monopoly of good values and society. Marx was against religion but not "traditionality" in 2019 sense.19th century has a historical content, thats when marx wrote his stuff. Wake up to 2019!!
@@alfredkwaak I thought it was just confirmation-bias and confusion to think that Marxism was in opposition to religion. You sound like you work for the ministry of truth here.