> 21% of the russian empire could read and write in 1897.
> 18% of the russian empire lived in towns or cities in 1914.
> In 1905, tsarist soldiers killed over 200 in Bloody Sunday
> In 1912, tsarist soldiers killed 270 workers protesting over bad conditions
BUT NO! NOT MY LITTLE TSARINO! NOT THE LITTLE CHILDERINO!
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>Muh communist literacy rates
Kill yourself Bernie! You lost twice and now you're gonna die
Im not a commie. Im just anti monarchist
Tell me what peasant farmers need to know how to read for?
How is reading or living in a city a good thing?
If a country is built on agriculture at the start of the 1900s and has barely even started industrializing (note: england started in the 1760s!) then its a shithole
So a country in the 1900s that hasnt industrialized yet while england has 150 years before is good?
Again.
How is reading or living in a city a good thing?
Lol if those things aren’t good for you then you probably consider africa to be a great continent?
You still haven't answered the question.
>How is reading a good thing
Don't reproduce
Answer the question, communard.
Answer my question first: would you rather be an illiterate peasent on a russian farm or be a literate factory worker in london who gets to eat much better food and can have fun?
are you still seething from yesterday, my guy? i've told you it's not politics nor history that are your problem (though you're embarrasingly illiterate in both), it's your lack of faith which condemns you to live and die like an animal, coming from nowhere and going nowhere, without any real purpose or meaning
>> In 1905, tsarist soldiers killed over 200 in Bloody Sunday
NOOOO NOT THE HECKING MOB THAT ATTACKED THE PALACE! NOT THE GOOD BOYS WHO STORMED THE GATES!
Ah yes the people who peacfully marched to it to propose a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY that EVERY OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRY HAD deserved to die?
But why do serfs and peasants need to be literate?
>Fun in London
Migrant workers in London were refugees kicked out of their ancestral farms.
Nice bait.
They could teach them to write and resettle them to towns without a leftist revolution, retard
Even if thats true. England started doing that in the 1760s. Russia started in the 1920s under Stalin
Shit happens when you start ‘peacefully’ mobbing a palace the Tsar wasn’t even at and don’t leave when told to disperse.
They could. But it was the tsars fault for not adopting a constitution like every over european country
It would not happen in any other major european power
> 21% of the russian empire could read and write in 1897.
Source on this?
> 18% of the russian empire lived in towns or cities in 1914.
No shit. Russia is fucking huge. And most of it basically a wasteland. Russia on top of that has a relatively small population compared to its territory.
So what? There were cities in Russia already with industrial workers. Not everybody has to be in a factory. If 80% are illiterate dirt farmers theres still a 20% that can read.
Oh so european armies never massacred civilians before?
Source: 1897 census for russia. It was done by the government.
>russia is huge
So is america and they were already mostly urbanized by that time
Is 20% literacy good in your opinion. Is that a sign that a country is doing great?
>18% of the russian empire lived in towns or cities in 1914.
Why do anti-monarchists want to live surrounded by 10000 niggers per square kilometer?
I mean they could have overthrown the tsar but not become a communist country. the bolsheviks terrorized and killed all their competitors
Why do you not want to industrialize?
It was fine at a time when almost all work was brute manual labor. It really made no difference, and it still makes no difference. The education meme has been pushed to be point where PHDs work bagging groceries.
>Source: 1897 census for russia. It was done by the government.
> 21% of the russian empire could read and write in 1897.
Even so, you think life under communism was any better? Communism doesn't value education at all, it just requires you to be an obedient slave to the state. (meaning a bunch of cronies who are in power). With the monarchs at least the Russians had a chance of escaping poverty. Not only that but given were things were headed the Tsar's power was bound to diminish sooner or later like in other European countries.
I'm not an adherent of the monarchist system, don't get me wrong. It's a retarded system and for every good ruler there are 10 unfit idiot, but communism is a way worse alternative
>So is america and they were already mostly urbanized by that time
Russia is like more than 2 times bigger than America (and that's Alaska included). Without it you're looking at something like 5 times. On top of that with way more hospitable territory. Who the fuck is gonna live in Siberia, for example? Russia also didn't have the luxury of millions of Europeans migrating to some new place in order to start a new life because it's so hip.
Industrialization doesnt require 100% of the population in factories, and it definitely does not require mass literacy.
Why do you want to live while being surrounded by 10,000 niggers per square kilometer?
en.m.wikipedia.org
- this was literally the main education doctorine for the tsarist times.
>doesnt value education
Thats why there were so many scientific nobel prize winners during the ussr time
>escape poverty
Russia isnt that poor its richer than your country
True, but is a country with 20% literacy as good as a country with 90% literacy (england at the time)
Its not a feelgood contest. What exactly do you even want to achieve with this mass literacy?
I can’t tell if this is bait. If you think staying an agrarian society where you can starve at any time is better than living close to others then you are retarded
Please tell me, would you want to be able to read?
The big thing he did wrong was getting buttfucked by the Japs
The whole Baltic Fleet was destroyed in like half an hour when they finally reached the Pacific
20% literacy was pretty good at those times. Comparing it to history, the Roman empire had around a 10% literacy rate at its height. Medieval, Renaissance, and pre-industrial Europe in general had around a 1% literacy rate. The fact that Russia was mostly pre-industrial, even prior to WWI, where most industry was owned by foreign land barons in the few places it existed (part of Lenin's arguments), suggests that the 20% literacy rate is quite an achievement.
based
Ok and? The country was still over a century behind the west
>renneisance europe
No, renneisance europe had much higher literacy. England had 7% in 1450. Italy had 15%
How does that boot taste
Funny how you commies like to pretend that the USSR was economically self-sufficient, when in reality US business interests kept their regime from insolvency since it's infancy.
The only reason the communists managed to feed their people and produce materials was because of corporate America.
America owned the USSR, figuratively and literally.
Commies BTFO
It was developing fast.
I know that the economy was growing at 8% in 1890s, however by WWI it was growing at 3-4%. And at that point it was still centuries behind
Джaпaн
>Answer my question first: would you rather be an illiterate peasent on a russian farm or be a literate factory worker in london who gets to eat much better food and can have fun?
London factory workers were treated like shit, working conditions were horrible, compensation wasn’t good and they had no time for “fun”. Your narrative didn’t start until the 1940’s.
>(((books)))
>economic growth
>not controlled by Jews
You Jew, I bet you work in the diamond industry
>18% of the russian empire lived in towns or cities in 1914.
And? You think everybody should become a mass of dumb cattle and live in big cities like Americraps?
can you define good?
Publishing is controlled by Jews. But seriously, it is.
>(((literacy)))
>> 21% of the russian empire could read and write RUSSIAN in 1897.
People who used their own writing systems were considered illiterate
> killed over 200
commies killed hundreds times more at such events
You industrialize and the jews that weasel their ways into management invite niggers and other subhumans into your area to work as cheap labor. Though that usually backfires and makes everything worse.
Germany was in many ways ahead much of the west and it was a monarchy prior to WW2. Britain is still a monarchy today doing well in spite of the many blunders of its parliament. Italy wasn't too far behind the west and it was a monarchy. Norway and Sweden were monarchies. Denmark was a monarchy. Austria-Hungary which was at about the same technology level as the west was still a monarchy. Russia was always behind Europe until a lot of violent reforms took place during the reign of the monarch named Stalin. Monarchy obviously does work. You have to have the right monarch for the right scenario.
>(((literacy)))
Jewteracy
Im aware, but even the little amount of people who actually worked on factories in russia in the 1910s they were about 2x more crowded than in england.
Developed in this case