this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
232 points (76.4% liked)
Memes
45373 readers
1976 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So your family were wealthy landowners of some sort? Chances are if your family was doing well prior to the revolution, they probably weren't good people. I have a friend who's family was killed during Vietnam. His family is mad because they lost their gold mine and farms. No one should prosper while others are starving.
So, you're giving away all your excessive money to charity? No matter how wealthy or poor you are, there is somebody who is doing worse then you.
First off, I would absolutely donate my excess money to charity. Unfortunately, there's two problems with that. 1: I live paycheck to paycheck and have no excess money. 2: charities in the US are not charitable, they're profitable. Look at the Susan G Komen foundation or the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. Both incredibly profitable and do very little to actually make a material difference for those in need. Some are not bad though. I've been organizing a charity drive for Alpha house, a women's abuse shelter, through my local union. Just because I don't have money doesn't mean I can't find some way to help those who need it.
Nope. My first grand-grandfather was a teacher in a university, his salary was enough to own a two-story house and spend a month in Europe with his family every year. The second grand-grandfather was a retired soldier, he bought a house with a land plot in a village. His family worked there. The third grand-grandfather was a successful director. Because he was a good manager, he was sent to raise a collective farm.
Well, if I lived in a country where people were kidnapping children, cutting them up, cooking them, and selling them for food; I'd feel really bad living comfy and cozy in my nice house. The government went to people like that and they said, "everything is fucked up, share your house and go produce food so we can improve everyone's lives. If you don't like it, you're getting shot." You're looking at things from a Western lense. I'm sorry, but if you own a bunch of land and enough money for yearly vacations, you have things to give. "From each according to their abilities to each according to their needs." You give what you can and you get what you need. A core tenant of Communism. No one should have luxuries while others starve and die.
I'm not saying the Soviets couldn't have achieved this less violently and I'm certainly not saying we should follow their footsteps. But, it was a different time in a different place. Life was brutal under Tsar Nicholas and it took a lot of work and time to undo that damage. The Church was in on it, too. Hence the brutality committed to the religious groups. Sometimes the great atrocities are outweighed by the greater good.
People talking about such things never consider the possibility of being killed for the sake of greater good. This approach gives somebody the privilege to decide who will live and who will die. And nobody knows what such people would decide, having such unlimited power. Logically, they would kill to "improve society", but nobody knows who they would choose.
Human life and property must be respected. This rule protects every member of the society from the worst traits of humanity.
If I lived in Russia at that time I would gladly have given my life to end the suffering happening under Tsar Nicholas. I would give my life now if it means lifting millions out of poverty.
Ok, you don't value your life enough.
No, I value my life a whole lot. If I was offered immortality I'd take it. But they were literally eating children to survive in 1916. It's worth fighting to end that.
I don't find any mentions of the famine in 1916. The only famine that year was a local famine in Uzbekistan. It was inflicted by the Russians as a bloody response to the fight for independence.
It wasn't a famine yet. In 1914, food was being shipped to the front line for the war. This created food insecurities for the people. Regular riots occured at markets due to scarcity and high prices. It wasn't considered a famine because it was being forced on the people by Tsar Nicholas. It did eventually lead up to the famine in the 20s though. Turns out, if you send every farmer to war and all the food with them, you'll start a famine.
Here's a decent breakdown: https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/food_and_nutrition_russian_empire