Comments by "Андрей Борцов" (@Mentol_) on "Knowledgia" channel.

The Romanian army was the most effective: it almost took Moscow and completely captured Berlin.
1
> And Russian army had to recruit half of the country to win the war. USSR had a population of 190 million in 1941. Half is 95 million. But 34.5 million were called up in the Red Army. > Most of them were sent bear handed against tanks and machine guns. In real life, the USSR created more infantry weapons and tanks than Germany. > Great tactics. Cannon fodder Russian style. Too much Hollywood propaganda in your head. Try to quote Soviet documents. > Luckly germans run out of ammo otherwise you were all speaking german now Germany produced 16 billion bullets for infantry weapons. Apart from artillery and aerial bombs. Conclusion: you live in virtual reality created by Hollywood and Nazi propaganda.
1
Armies are guided by orders. Try to quote a Soviet order that aims to create human waves.
1
Also. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzsKnKcb1-A
1
Also #2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7BE8CsM9ds
1
Human waves are a myth that you use to create the military and moral superiority of Romania and Germany over the USSR in this war. Primitive propaganda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZXlpJkDJg
1
> Communists killed more people than Hitler Fake info.
1
@cgabriel777 1. I do not deny that the Soviet government killed people. I say that 5% of their policy was aimed at terror and 95% at the development of the state and society. Solzhenitsyn's book is propaganda because it creates the illusion that 95% of politics in the USSR is terror. I suggest you look at what was in the USSR besides terror. 2. I answered your question why the Bolsheviks fought against religious propaganda, but you ignored it. 3. You have not read a single work of Lenin or Stalin, but you have already concluded that the Bolsheviks wanted to become a new religion and turn their citizens into slaves. This is your mistake. 4. You have not read the discussion in the Soviet government about the burial of Lenin's body. 5. Excellent. Now you take another anti-communist book (Orwell who collaborated with British intelligence) and tell me what kind of society the Bolsheviks wanted to create. Why don't you read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves? It seems that your goal is not to study history, but to fight against the Bolsheviks. Moreover, these Bolsheviks are virtual because you do not study the real ones.
1
@boombap1176 Russia before the revolution had anti-Semitic laws. This was the reason why many Jews supported the revolution. But this is not a Jewish conspiracy. These Jews were not nationalists, they were internationalists. You use right-wing propaganda that calls the revolution in Russia Jewish, but you never read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves. After the revolution, any religious propaganda was banned because it has a destructive effect on the critical thinking of a person.
1
@boombap1176 The Jewish conspiracy theory is a myth created by right-wing Russian emigration. They needed to explain why they lost the civil war and they found the reason. Please do not believe those sources of information that love such theories, just take and read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves. It must be available in your country.
1
@boombap1176 The qualities of a man depend on his ideas. Your mistake is that you think that all Jews are automatically Judaists. You are looking at the nationality of a person, and not at what ideas he supports. I don't see that you read any of the works of the Bolsheviks. Instead, you use false information that the Jews control the revolution (the right-wing emigration created false lists of the Soviet government). This is a classic conspiracy theory.
1
@boombap1176 Right-wing emigration created a fake list of the Soviet government where 90% were Jews. In reality, here is a list of the first Soviet government: Vladimir Lenin - Russian. Alexey Rykov - Russian. Vladimir Milyutin - Russian. Alexander Shlyapnikov - Russian. Vladimir Ovsienko - Ukrainian. Nikolay Krylenko - Ukrainian. Pavel Dybenko - Ukrainian. Victor Nogin - Russian. Anatoly Lunacharsky - Russian. Ivan Skvortsov - Russian. Georgy Oppokov - Russian. Ivan Teodorovich - Polish. Nikolay Avilov - Russian. Iosif Stalin - Georgian. Leon Trotsky - Jew. But it does not matter because the quality of a person is determined by his views, and not by nationality. If you say that Soviet Jews were supporters of their religion, which had the goal of destroying Christianity, then you need to find in what documents or speeches they declared this. Hint: the "Protocols of Zion" is a fake that has nothing to do with the Soviet government.
1
@boombap1176 1. You have not provided any evidence that the Bolsheviks relied on Judaism. No quotations from the works of the Bolsheviks. 2. You use the fact of closing churches in Russia as evidence of Judaism. But that's just your interpretation. You have not provided evidence that the Bolsheviks put such a meaning into their policies. 3. The communist ideology arose after the French historians (Augustin Thierry, Francois Meunier and Francois Guizot) created the theory of class struggle. The first communist revolution also occurred in France in 1871. France is part of Europe, and its culture is part of Western European culture.
1
@boombap1176 1. This movie is a classic conspiracy theory that tries to swap the aggressor and his victim. Science studies primary sources of information. We have documented records of Hitler's conversations with German generals where he says that he plans to start a war in Europe. 2. As far as communism is concerned, its root is an attempt to overcome the shortcomings of the capitalist system. Neither in Marx's manifesto nor in the works of the Bolsheviks is there anything about Judaism.
1
@boombap1176 I have watched this movie twice. It contains too much fake information and misinterpretations. Here are some examples: - It says that the murder of Tsar Nicholas 2 and his family was a ritual sacrifice for the Jews, although there is no documentary evidence for this. It's just another conspiracy theory. - Or a quote from Karl Marx about the need for a revolutionary holocaust. If you open the indicated book, you will see that there is an article by Engels "the struggle in Hungary" which divides the nations into revolutionary and reactionary. - Or a quote from Trotsky where he wants to turn Russia into a desert. This fake quote is well known today in Russia, but its author is not Trotsky, but a newspaper of the Russian fascist party that was in exile in China. - The film says that communism was based on the idea of conquering the world. Although if you open Marx's manifesto, you will see what it says about the struggle against capitalist exploitation. - The film says that a slave-owning regime was organized in the USSR, but if you open the Soviet constitution, you will see that slavery is officially prohibited. - Fake information that the American bankers' money was part of the plan of Judaism. Although in reality, some bankers supported the February revolution because it was democratic in nature. - Fake information that the Red Army and the NKVD consisted of Jews. In reality, in 1920, there were 79% Russians in the Red Army, 5% Ukrainians, 3.4% Tatars, and 2.2% Belarusians. In the NKVD there were 77.3% Russians, 9.1% Jews + other nationalities. - Fake information that the white army consisted of Christians. In fact, religion and the monarchy had a low popularity after the February Revolution. - Wrong interpretation of the condemnation of anti-Semitism in the USSR as an indicator of Judaism. In reality, this is a process of democratization of society. You can find what Lenin said about this on July 25, 1918. - Quotes from the book of the nationalist Solzhenitsyn as a criterion for understanding Soviet policy. In reality, this person waged an information war against this government. Fake data from his book is well known today in Russia. - Fake information that the famine in the USSR was man-made. - Fake Lenin quotes that are not in his works. - etc.
1
@boombap1176 Science studies the subject based on primary sources of information. For soviet politics, these are soviet documents, the constitution, the works of Lenin, orders of Stalin etc. If you start watching films from foreign nationalists or their Russian counterparts (Solzhenitsyn) to study soviet communism, then you are making a big mistake. Because these people do not have full access to the documents, but they have a great motivation to show their ideological opponents as the devil. Then you tell me that my picture of the world is far removed from reality. But your reality was created by the nationalists, not the Bolsheviks. You can rely on the works of nationalists only in case of their own policy.
1
Sutton is an economist, not a historian. He created a conspiracy theory that the United States financed the revolution. Another theory says that the revolution was financed by Germany. Instead of looking for foreign roots, try to study the internal situation in Russia. Try to read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves.
1
> Sutton was not a conspiracy theorist. > You live in the NWO lie.
1
The concept of two totalitarian regimes was propagated in Europe after the capitalist counter-revolution.
1
Poland killed 17 thousand Wehrmacht soldiers in 36 days (472 people a day). France and allies killed 46 thousand Axis soldiers in 43 days (1070 people a day). The USSR killed 383 thousand Axis soldiers (1984 people per day) in 193 days (1941). The allies after the opening of the second front killed 340 thousand German soldiers in 216 days (1944), which gives 1,574 people a day. Moreover, the Allies had numerical, technical and material superiority over the enemy, in contrast to the Red Army.
1
Fake information. When the Bolsheviks gained power, they blocked access to foreign capital in the Soviet economy.
1
Can you quote any order of the Bolsheviks that aims to kill white Christians? Because it is religious propaganda, and the Bolsheviks were atheists and acted outside of religious logic.
1
Their faith was not the cause of the murder (Bolsheviks are atheists). The reason for the murder was a crime against the state, armed gangs, crimes against the revolution, class enemies, etc.
1
The Communists do not consider their activities criminal, the Nazis, too. This is how history works. The Nazis lost the second world war. The USSR lost the Cold War. As a result, the history was rewritten and the point of view of these governments was lost.
1
What exactly do you disagree with? What documents do you mean?
1
You misunderstood my position. We can find out the main facts from the documents, but we cannot recognize the position of the current government on this issue. For example, during the war, the Nazis considered the Holocaust the right policy because it cleans Europe of lower races. But Germany lost the war and the Holocaust was called a crime. But for the Nazis, crime was inaction.
1
1. Germany was not socialism because socialism is the socialization of the means of production. 2. Numerous documentary sources show that even ordinary people in the USSR wrote letters to Stalin and he even answered some of them. It's just that modern propaganda creates a virtual image of the evil empire.
1
@KenjaTimu 1. There is scientific nationalization and there is the nationalization that Hitler used. And these are two different things. 2. I only use historical facts. And you create a virtual image of an evil dictator who does not listen to criticism.
1
The war of annihilation for eastern Europe and the imperialist war for western.
1
Millions? And of course you can prove it.
1
@hughmungus1767 This is an old myth that was created by supporters of de-Stalinization in the USSR. In reality, Stalin knew that the war would be on June 10, 1941, but there was not enough time to complete the mobilization. And of course you can find "Stalin's office visit log" and see that he did not leave his workplace after the German invasion.
1
@guyvert49 left wing parties orienred to social progress. Right wing oriented to restoration traditions, nationalism, racism and a hierarchical society. In a word, it is the restoration of the laws of nature. Thats why nazis is right wing. Hitler in one of his interviews said that he could use any name for his party, even liberal one. Look with which parties inside Germany Hitler was an ally - these are right-wing nationalists. Look with which countries Germany was an ally in the war - these are the nationalists, the fascists or the monarchy.
1
@guyvert49 I read both the book of Hitler and the book of Mussolini, and the works of Lenin-Stalin. 1. I use the traditional political axis that is generally accepted. You are using an alternate axis that is often used to distort history. But it is not scientific. 2. The Nazis divided capitalism into two types - progressive national and regressive international. They supported the first, and fought against the second. This system was neither socialism nor classical free market capitalism. This is the third way. 3. The classical axis says that the left supports the idea of social progress. The Bolsheviks are on the left because they believe that society is divided into classes that have different interests. Then they say that the real form of democracy is not liberalism, but the dictatorship of the proletariat which expresses the will of the progressive class. The ultimate goal of the Bolsheviks is to build a classless society where people will have equal rights. The Nazis are fighting the division of society into classes. They say that people are united by their blood and soil. The Nazis reject the idea of democracy because Hitler believes that it leads to the moral degeneration of society. The ultimate goal of the Nazis is to build a racial state where people will be unequal according to the laws of nature. This is the right-wing idea (according to the classical axis). 4. Mussolini does not say that fascism is a form of socialism. He says that fascism is a positive alternative for liberalism. He says that a person can be free only in a strong state. He also says that fascism opposes socialism, which historical development understands as class struggle. Instead of class struggle, fascism offers the idea of national unity.
1
@guyvert49 This is not the opinion of Stalinist propaganda, but the generally accepted opinion of the scientific community. The Bolsheviks did not consider Hitler and Mussolini to be socialists. Stalin has an article where he explains that the Nazis are imperialists. But in any case, the terms must be studied from the point of view of the original source. Mussolini's book "The Doctrine of Fascism" says that fascism is not a form of socialism. It is a fact. And with regard to Hitler, everything is simple - he used the term socialism to get more supporters for his party. In the term socialism, he puts not the generally accepted meaning, but his own racist (anti-socialist) interpretation. He says the Marxists stole the term, but he actually did it himself (lol).
1
@guyvert49 1. Your alternative political axis is incorrect. 2. Your arguments about "evil" show that you are fighting against other ideologies instead of studying them. For example, the regulation of the economy in the USSR and Germany have different goals. 3. Open Hitler's book and you will see that the struggle nations is part of the laws of nature (good), and not evil. What you call evil is a liberal interpretation. 4. Open the works of Lenin and you will see that the "dictatorship of the proletariat" does not negate the idea of democracy. 5. Open the Soviet constitution and you will see that it makes slavery and racism illegal.
1
@guyvert49 "3 kinds of socialism" is just an idea in your head. You are not testing this idea for validity. You think that socialism is just state control. But who told you this? According to the primary sources, socialism is social ownership of the means of production. This is correct only for the USSR. Other countries (Italy, Germany, the United States, Britain) used state intervention to regulate the economy, rather than change the form of ownership from private to public. And I don't need to read books by foreign historians because this is a liberal interpretation of other systems. After World War II, liberalism began to dominate the world. As a result, historians began to rethink the history of the war and ideologies from the point of view of liberalism. The idea of a totalitarian state appeared as denying the personal freedom of a person. Although if you open Mussolini's book you will see that totalitarianism for him is a positive alternative to democracy.
1
@guyvert49 I read the book that you recommended to me and found several mistakes that the author makes: - The author says that Stalin never cared about losses in military operations. But if you open the transcript of the meeting after the Finnish war, you can see that this is not true. - The author repeats the old myth that Stalin did not prepare the Red Army for war against Germany. Although it is known that the concentration of the Red Army on the western border began on June 10, 1941, and in the middle of 1940 wartime rules were introduced in the economy. - The author repeats the myth that Stalin was in shock after the start of the war and went to the country. Although the journal of visitors to Stalin's cabinet is now available. - The author says that Stalin forbade the evacuation of civilians from Stalingrad, but does not show this secret order. Because it's a myth. - The author repeats the old myth that Stalin destroyed experienced commanders during the purge. But documents show that the Red Army had the same problems before and after the purge. - The author calls the Siberian troops experienced, although before that he said that Stalin weakened the Red Army. - The author says that Stalin created in the country a great atmosphere of fear in the USSR, but this is only the opinion of people with liberal convictions. The rest asked the government to continue the fight against the enemies of the revolution. - The author accuses Stalin of the fact that his intervention in the offensive near Kharkov in 1942 led to the failure of the operation. Although the documents show that the General Staff allowed this operation to be placed under the leadership of local commanders, one of whom was Khrushev. After the war, Khrushchev tried to shift the blame to Stalin. The author does not analyze the authenticity of his words. - The author says that Stalin was an inexperienced person in military affairs until 1943, although documents show that already in 1940 Stalin knew the basic issues of strategy and operational art and made corrections to the reports of his commanders.
1
> The Poles had no intention of voluntarily allowing Soviet forces into their country so this idea was (rightly) seen as impractical. Therefore, they were divided between Germany and the USSR. A good choice is to try to avoid Soviet influence in your country, but completely lose your sovereignty.
1
> probably Poland would resist better than against Germany... Stalin had killed lot's of officers and red army was in really bad condition Poland killed 17 thousand Wehrmacht soldiers in 36 days (472 people a day). France and allies killed 46 thousand Axis soldiers in 43 days (1070 people a day). The USSR killed 383 thousand Axis soldiers (1984 people per day) in 193 days (1941). The allies after the opening of the second front killed 340 thousand German soldiers in 216 days (1944), which gives 1,574 people a day. Moreover, the Allies had numerical, technical and material superiority over the enemy, in contrast to the Red Army.
1
From various sources - Rüdriger Overmans, Lopukhovsky, etc. What specific numbers do you doubt?
1
The data is plus or minus accurate. The data is plus or minus accurate. Now I have not found a source for the French campaign, but you can find it yourself using the search. Source for Wehrmacht losses in Poland - Wehrmacht Zentralstatistik, Stand 30.11.1944, Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv Freiburg (BA-MA RH 7/653). Source for losses of the Axis armies in the USSR in 1941 - video "The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front". The source of Wehrmacht casualties on the western front in 1944 is the Rüdriger Overmas - Deutsche militärische Verluste им Zweiten Weltkrieg.
1
@AtroFear You do not understand why the Soviet losses were high. There are two reasons. First, the Germans have more heavy artillery shells on the eastern front until 1944. This allows them to inflict more casualties than they themselves have because they are winning an artillery duel. Second, the great mobility of the Wehrmacht means that they can surround Soviet divisions at the beginning of the war and take many prisoners. Thus, repression has nothing to do with it. The purpose of the repression was to STRENGTHEN the state and the army, not to weaken it. Everything that could be considered the fifth column / potentially disloyal was destroyed. The old officers and the new ones had the same experience, but the new ones were more loyal. Therefore, I find it funny to read that the old officers called the most experienced. Who is this? Tukhachevsky who lost the battle for Warsaw? Lol.
1
@AtroFear 1. The big purge in the USSR took place during the summer 1937 - autumn 1938. This happened before the invasions of Poland and Finland took place. Soviet officers had experience of the civil war and the war with Poland in the 1920s. 2. The argument about Stalin's paranoia has no value. If you, instead of reading foreign literature about Stalin, take and read the books of Stalin himself, then you will see that this person retains sanity. He understood that a new big war in Europe could become a reality already in the late 1930s, so his purge of the army, the NKVD, the party and internal enemies was not a manifestation of virtual paranoia, but part of the country's preparation for a new war. Even before the purge, there was a public discussion in the party about the internal situation in the USSR and one of the speakers (not Stalin) said that: "We must destroy internal enemies in such a quantity that the positive effect lasts for a long time." 3. In fact, this topic of large Soviet losses has no real value. Why? If you compare the losses of countries in the Polish and French campaigns of the Wehrmacht, you will see that the losses of Germany's enemies exceed the German ones. Now compare the Soviet losses with these campaigns and you will understand that the difference is not so great (Polish losses are greater than Soviet ones, and French ones are slightly less). People look at these losses and see that in absolute terms, Soviet losses are greater than those of other countries, but the war in the east lasted longer. In fact, losses are more influenced by the economy than by the decisions of individual officers. If a country as poor in industry as Poland cannot provide its army with weapons and equipment in large quantities, then its losses will be higher.
1
@Abidkhan-fe3uk Because Hitler did not see England as a second front. After the destruction of France, there was only one front in Europe - the eastern one.
1
It is a myth. The evacuation from Stalingrad was in progress, but new refugees came from the west and therefore the number of civilians in the city was slowly decreasing.
1