Russians

sounds based

which is it

Russia is about dualism. People can accept both Soviet Union and Russian Empire without contradiction.

That was because they wanted chance to get independence from Russian Empire.

Lativia and Estonian reds were as much popular to the local population as much as nationalists were. Fins and Germans basically saved the nationalists from destruction.

>Estonian reds
no such thing
>Fins and Germans basically saved the nationalists from destruction.
?

do I have to answer?

>Estonian reds

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commune_of_the_Working_People_of_Estonia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_Red_Riflemen

>Finns and Germans basically saved the nationalists from destruction.

youtu.be/HBA0xDHZjko?t=197

Foreign support was essential for Estonia's survival.

>6000 members
wow yeah just as popular
>Foreign support was essential for Estonia's survival.
Finns sent volunteers yes and no doubt it was helpful but far from ''basically saving the nation''
Also what the fuck do you mean by germany

Towards the USSR of course.
The Empire was a shithole that no one with a brain would ever support

Not democratic. It was a bourgeois republic

neither, but it really depends on your history teacher.

sopa de macaco

This is the country produced both NazBols and people calling for making Stalin an Orthodox Saint

And they actualy got it, because Lenin had a policy of allowing the ethnicities of the empire to become independent if they wanted

> Finns sent volunteers yes and no doubt it was helpful but far from ''basically saving the nation''

Estonia was at brink of collapse with red army marching towards Tallinn right before British and Finnish help arrived. German troops also helped Lativian whites and Estonian whites.

>6000 members

Estonia's First Division was merely composed of 3300 soldiers.

No

We are biased to Chechnya and Afghanistan tho.

But majority of empire were starving peasants who were illiterate. Also the calendar was cancerous.

>right before British and Finnish help arrived.
The british provided some shore bombardment, thats pretty much it. Finnish volunteers numbered a couple thousand at most.
Of course the first division was small. Towards the end it was closer to 100k

>It's not democratic if people more successful than me get elected

Attached: 1582170450023.jpg (728x728, 245.8K)

There is no contradiction, both are periods in the history of our country. We can be proud of both but also acknowledge the problems with each of them.

I don't think OP's question makes that much sense. Neither of the periods is presented as the "better" one in history lessons. The revolution and civil war are studied as a complicated series of events without passing judgements and saying that these events were right or wrong.

That's your average Hillary supporter

soviet propaganda

> The british provided some shore bombardment, thats pretty much it.

and machineguns.

> Finnish volunteers numbered a couple thousand at most.

And they were elite units. Few thousand is incredibly useful when it's few thousand estonians vs few thousand reds.

> Towards the end it was closer to 100k

I'm talking about when Estonia was almost falling to the reds. Wrong time period. There were only 4450 Estonians in 1919, meaning that few thousand Finnish volunteers were a great relief for them.

i.imgur.com/PU7wB4p.jpg

how can soviets lie when they never existed

yes
wow I never think of it that way, guess that's why people both worship Nicholas as a saint and going to Victory parade and other Soviet themed holidays

What do you mean? The other guy answered yes to an either or question.

4450 estonian troops, but you know what I mean.

50 million worked in agriculture in 1940 Soviet Union, Soviet Union was more bavkwatter than the emprie bankrolled by western capitalists.

Attached: Screenshot_20200321-233328.png (1080x2160, 192.57K)

There wasn't any election

Why would there be a bias either way, OP? History class is supposed to be objective.

>Stalin an Orthodox Saint
I dont think that was ever on the table lmao.
Also see the other posts. You got us all wrong.

It wasn't.
The Empire was a aristocratic hell

> 50 million worked in agriculture in 1940 Soviet Union,

Which means that 3/4 of population was not working on agriculture, which is a huge advance compared to Imperial era.

> Soviet Union was more bavkwatter

More backwater than the west, yes.

> than the emprie

80 percent of empire were peasants. USSR was one of the greatest industrial powers of the world.

jstor.org/stable/152912?seq=1

Are you Russians?

Why are namefags soo fucking stupid?

yes

No.

>And they were elite units.
uh huh
>There were only 4450 Estonians in 1919, meaning that few thousand Finnish volunteers were a great relief for them.
Thats not quite how it works, they didnt all just arrive at once and drove the reds away, they slowly trickled in, just as our own mobilization did

Russian empire urbanization was naturally growing as it's rural population was needed in the cities while the land is used for machines and smaller populations.

> uh huh

Finnish troops were absolutely elite compared to the people they were fighting against.

> Thats not quite how it works, they didnt all just arrive at once and drove the reds away, they slowly trickled in, just as our own mobilization did

youtu.be/HBA0xDHZjko?t=253

They were significant when they were saving Estonia from destruction.

>which is a huge advance compared to Imperial era.
The empire ended in 1921, in 20 years the rate of growth of the Soviet Union based on its land and resources was abyssmal testament to illiterate mongoloids in power through killing gangs trying to do the work of a job for suits and ties

> Russian empire urbanization was naturally growing as it's rural population was needed in the cities while the land is used for machines and smaller populations.

So? USSR had greater levels of industrialization than tsarist russia. Topic closed.

извини, я нe pyccкий, нo я мoгy гoвopить нeмнoгo пo-pyccкий

>History is supposed to be objective.
You would think so. Too bad the people running Western schools aren't that bright.

That doesn't matter. None of that contradicts what was stated. Imperial Russia had less development than USSR, and that's what matters only.

> illiterate mongoloids in power through killing gangs trying to do the work of a job for suits and ties

Most of soviet leaders weren't asians.

The rate of growth was not greater than tsarist Russia, Russia's growth was retarded and slowed down by communists mongolism

Is that supposed to prove something? my point still stands. Yes there were finnish volunteers in Estonia. No they didn't all arrive in 1 wave. The offensive started once we had time to mobilise enough troops for it. Its not like we were an independent nation with a standing army.

Have sex

Dumb namefag.
Have you ever heard about WWI? Yeah, it fucked Russia's economy.

There's no proof to what you say.
You're just a retarded turk rapebaby

I thought your point was that there was no such thing as Estonian reds?

Prove that foreign support was important for Estonia? Machineguns, German, and Finnish divisions saved Estonia when there were only few thousand Estonian soldiers. Offensive started when Estonia only had 3500 soldiers.

They weren't mathematicians, scientists or physists either

Attached: coulter28n-1-web.jpg (1200x799, 56.6K)

Plenty of bolsheviks were scientists.

Need some names

Point me one stem graduate that was a bolshevik leader in pre revolution and after revolution.

On the contrary, it grew at a much faster rate under the Soviet Union, despite being smaller in size.

Attached: 26-1.png (967x570, 31.05K)

>stem graduates
>leaders
People that go into STEM aren't supposed to lead anything

Mongoloids should not be leaders, they should be in special school.along with the special masses.

Not in any relevant numbers
Yea. 3500 soldiers. That was enough. Or do you think every finn was concentrated in that one location? Finns may have made up at best 200 men in that battle.

The same should be applied to namefags
Seriously, what kind of subhuman uses a name in a website known for it's anonymity?

As there were so little amount of troops on both sides, even small amount of foreign aid was important for Estonian victory.

This isn't that hard to understand.

> Not in any relevant numbers

6000 at a time when there were few thousand estonian national army?

I'd argue that those are pretty relevant numbers.

By the late 1890s, Witte’s reforms had visibly transformed the Russian economy. Large amounts of foreign capital, chiefly from France and Britain, had funded new plants and factories in St Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev and other cities. By 1900, around half of Russia’s heavy industries were foreign-owned – but the Russian empire was the world’s fourth-largest producer of steel and its second-largest source of petroleum.

As ive already stated several times. Important, yes. Helpful, yes. Decisive, no.
>6000 at a time when there were few thousand estonian national army?
6000 in total from 1918 - 1919. Compared to 1.3m nationalists.

Doesn't seem to have had much of an effect according to the chart.

Sure its to be expected. a small fraction will always fight for the other side for various reasons. Same way some russians fought in the german army and chechens fought in the russian army during chechen wars.

>worship Nicholas
Kek, please don't judge all Russians by Poklonskaya. She's completely bat shit crazy.

There were no GDP charts then or internet

>people arguing with the CHI schizo again
Man can't wait to wake up and get on /esp/ to babysit John Alberto for another shift, jolly me.

So what? USSR was also largest oil producer

> 1.3m nationalists.

> entire population of estonia

> As ive already stated several times. Important, yes. Helpful, yes. Decisive, no.

But those aid was what turned the tide. The Estonians were near-defeat before those aid arrived.

They were not a small fraction.

Sure, but it's easily visible if majority of people are peasants who are largely uneducated.

The Russian empire or the republic of the Duma would have 100% copied the USA and British model and have industrialized as did western capitalists and Russia would be just as Germany or Sweden

Attached: Screenshot_20200324-004544.png (1080x2160, 508.3K)

Saint Petersburg population:
1890 - 954,000
1916 - 2,416,000

Literacy Rates:
1897 - 21%
1917 - 40%

Please.
DO NOT
Argue with Hellenismos.
We work hard to keep him entertained in the Spanish general, so PLEASE ignore him when he is out of his pigpen.

>The Estonians were near-defeat before those aid arrived.
There had been barely any fighting until then. As ive already stated, several times, we did not have a standing army. We needed to mobilise, train and equip a peasant army from scratch. I know you americans have trouble with reading comprehension but please put some effort into it.

Duma was a complete sham. Tsar was able to simply disband it if he wanted to.

We are also talking about what happened in our world, not about counterfactuals.

Yes
Russia is correctly portrayed as the cool older brother who lets you play his playstation