Cindel5 wrote:As someone from the US, I would say the opposite marcusjm. I know I've learned a lot about the Russian Civil War just reading the forums (and making the game very interesting). So kudos to Ageod for picking this part of history for a game project.
Raptor1 wrote:Though the fact that there was a Russian Revolution and a subsequent Civil War is common knowledge, the details of what followed the revolution, the events of the Civil War itself, are very seldomly known except probably in the areas directly effected by them. The course of the American Civil War is much more widespread knowledge in the west, especially in America itself.
marcusjm wrote:A white victory would have changed everything that happened in the 20th century.
marcusjm wrote: note that there would never have been any white "pogromes" with no bolshevik revolution.
ERISS wrote:There were already pogroms before the revolution, and it didn't change with the war as the Whites were always known as the bigger killers of jewish (until the nazi).
marcusjm wrote:Even today the revolution is largely blamed on the jews by eg. Latvians etc.
marcusjm wrote:Nevertheless, without Bolsheviks there would have been no Nazis in power and thus the history would have looked drastically different anyway.
ERISS wrote:Yes, that's why: No reds nor whites.
With your logic you can even say without the Whites (tsarists) there would have been no need for a revolution, so no Bolsheviks.
Raptor1 wrote:Though the fact that there was a Russian Revolution and a subsequent Civil War is common knowledge, the details of what followed the revolution, the events of the Civil War itself, are very seldomly known except probably in the areas directly effected by them. The course of the American Civil War is much more widespread knowledge in the west, especially in America itself.
Baris wrote:It's a pity then, Well russian revolution is the first practice(I can be wrong) of Marx studies. That practice had great impact also for western democracies. By giving more rights to workers or etc.. or social reforms.
It must be more global as it also questions the relation of man and religion. I imagine other areas of Europe including western part, knows better than North America.
marcusjm wrote:Another reason why this game is good so people can learn. The question was not about the Monarchy, he already abdicated long before this war. It was Bolsheviks vs everyone else. Not everyone on the white side were even monarchists, there were Social Democrats for instance on the white side.
The White side only existed out of need, there was no white side prior to the Bolsheviks taking up arms against a democratically elected government. Just like in Finland (the first country to have female voting rights).
I am expecting Alexander Seil to show up and set people straight soon .
marcusjm wrote:But the knowledge of the inner workings of those civil wars are about equal I'd say, nobody or at least very few except historians/wargamers care about those. Those Americans I talked about weren't some morons but well educated people. Few actually care about such wars(especially when there are more current conflicts to worry about). We who visit these kind of boards are fairly unique.
I'd say that the political consequences are what matters to most. I am not sure a CSA victory would have had such dramatic consequences for the rest of World History(some obviously). A white victory would have changed everything that happened in the 20th century.
Baris wrote:It's a pity then, Well russian revolution is the first practice(I can be wrong) of Marx studies. That practice had great impact also for western democracies. By giving more rights to workers or etc.. or social reforms.
caranorn wrote:Copied from http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=185469#post185469 and delted there:
Err. Wrong! How about the attacks on the protesting workers in Petrograd in July by the Kerensky government and subsequent repression of the Bolshevik movement? What about Kornilov's march on Petrograd before the October Revolution? Both these events prompted an earlier Bolshevik Revolution than Lenin, Trotsky or any other revçolutionary cadre would have wanted. One major issue with the February Revolution was that Kerensky did not end the war with Germany, which end to war was after all one of the primary drives for revolution in the first place. Therefore a second revolution to enact the people's (workers, peasants, lower middle class) will was inevitable...
marcusjm wrote:You forgot this part http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menshevik
It is what made all the difference between Russia becoming a modern democracy and the hell they had to suffer (or even more so, their neighbours).
caranorn wrote:In which way? The Mensheviks (indeed the majority of the then Social Democratic Labour Party, I will not dispute that) started to split up as early as 1904 (Trosky among others) and continued to split up in 1917 and throughout the Revolution and Civil War. They were certainly an important element in both Revolutions, but for the Civil War at the latest they were split on both sides of the Red/White divide...
marcusjm wrote:Well I guess the problem here is that we are talking about a subset of humans, the wargaming community, it is quite small as it is .
Also, if you ask someone with east-european ancestry you might get a different answer. The tragic effects are still visible today allover Eastern Europe.
Here I am hoping/thinking that a game like this could attract the more general historical crowds though. Just like Paradox games have done. Paradox have sold quite a bit covering periods that few others did before. I think if done right then any period could sell. I also hope Vainglory comes out first and becomes a success, then this game would look like a logical next step.
Raptor1 wrote:Certainly it will be more known in Eastern Europe and Russia, not only because the effects of it are more apparent, but there would also be many more sources about it (Easier to find Russian sources on the RCW than English sources).
I love playing more obscure periods in history, which are often my favourite periods (WWI, the Victorian era and the Thirty Years' War, for instance), so I'm quite happy AGEOD is tackling things like the RCW.
caranorn wrote:In which way? The Mensheviks (indeed the majority of the then Social Democratic Labour Party, I will not dispute that) started to split up as early as 1904 (Trosky among others) and continued to split up in 1917 and throughout the Revolution and Civil War. They were certainly an important element in both Revolutions, but for the Civil War at the latest they were split on both sides of the Red/White divide...
Rafiki wrote:The Norwegian Labour Party was revolutionary at the start of the 20th century, but going into the 1920s it became more "mainstream" and distanced itself from the Russian revolutionaries to the point where it got excluded from Comintern in 1923. A fraction left the party and created what became the Communist Party, but they weren't numerous enough to make any large significance.
Return to “RUS History club / Discussions historiques sur la Guerre Civile Russe”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests