Log in

View Full Version : You are sent back to the year 1916



Broletariat
7th June 2010, 03:37
In a location of your choosing, knowing what you know now what would you do to change history.

Weezer
7th June 2010, 03:43
Josef Stalin RIP 1878-1916

coda
7th June 2010, 03:53
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~fianna/history/east1916.html

Bright Banana Beard
7th June 2010, 07:34
Becomes a greatest comrade ever that Mao isn't worth mentioning and Trotsky quickly "purged."

Q
7th June 2010, 07:38
...and Trotsky quickly "purged."

At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.

Pirate Utopian
7th June 2010, 09:54
Hang out with Robert Johnson at the crossroads.

bcbm
7th June 2010, 10:43
robbing banks would be soooo much easier

Devrim
7th June 2010, 11:35
At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.

I don't think that Trotsky's role was particularly crucial. Yes, he did a good job, but there was nothing spectacular. Basically he won a war, in which desertion was probably a bigger factor than battles. The British army at Archangel is the only military front ever to collapse while advancing.

The idea that the Red Army would have lost the war without Trotsky belongs completely in the 'great man' theory of history.

Devrim

Ravachol
7th June 2010, 12:12
Pffft where's the fun in fucking shit up for the bourgeoisie if you can't boast about it online and compare e-penises :rolleyes:

Sir Comradical
7th June 2010, 12:42
Josef Stalin RIP 1878-1916

You? Kill the Stalinator? Ha!

AK
7th June 2010, 12:51
You? Kill the Stalinator? Ha!
Our situation looks dire...
http://s3.media.squarespace.com/production/465215/5327199/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/stalinator_72.jpg

ContrarianLemming
7th June 2010, 15:27
Ireland 1916 rising, meet James Connelly and ask him some question regarding unions..

"Answer wisely sir.."

LeninBalls
7th June 2010, 15:28
At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.

Because Trotsky won the whole Civil War maaaaan

ContrarianLemming
7th June 2010, 15:30
At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.

Isn't that what actually happened?

zing!

Crusade
7th June 2010, 16:35
I'll buy a lighthouse somewhere far from everyone and drink a glass of lemonade.

Raúl Duke
7th June 2010, 16:55
Ireland 1916 rising, meet James Connelly and ask him some question regarding unions..

yea fuck Russia I'll be in Ireland

Wanted Man
7th June 2010, 17:05
At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.

"History is made by Great Men, who emerge from society every once in a while and determine the course of history." -Karl Marx

Q
7th June 2010, 17:09
I don't think that Trotsky's role was particularly crucial. Yes, he did a good job, but there was nothing spectacular. Basically he won a war, in which desertion was probably a bigger factor than battles. The British army at Archangel is the only military front ever to collapse while advancing.
Perhaps.


The idea that the Red Army would have lost the war without Trotsky belongs completely in the 'great man' theory of history.
I'd rather put it in the "butterfly effect", Trotsky just being a rather big butterfly.

piet11111
7th June 2010, 18:12
Get pissed i cant get beer with these worthless euro's i have in my pockets.

ed miliband
7th June 2010, 18:20
Ireland 1916 rising, meet James Connelly and ask him some question regarding unions..

"Answer wisely sir.."

If only I could give 'thanks' on this board...

Chimurenga.
7th June 2010, 18:53
Hang out with Robert Johnson at the crossroads.

:thumbup1:

NecroCommie
7th June 2010, 18:54
The young red army and the spartacists would mysteriously gain military strategies, tactics and tech a hundred years ahead of their time.

Os Cangaceiros
7th June 2010, 19:03
I would want to meet Lev Chernyi. Either that or Emma Goldman, although she seemed like she'd be a boring grouch in real life, for some reason.

Was there some kind of debaucherous libertine movement in 1916? I'd want to be part of that.

Lenina Rosenweg
7th June 2010, 19:29
I don't think that Trotsky's role was particularly crucial. Yes, he did a good job, but there was nothing spectacular. Basically he won a war, in which desertion was probably a bigger factor than battles. The British army at Archangel is the only military front ever to collapse while advancing.

The idea that the Red Army would have lost the war without Trotsky belongs completely in the 'great man' theory of history.

Devrim

Okay, but would October have happened if Lenin either did not exist or died earlier? In his History of The Russian Revolution, Trotsky himself gives a brief counterfactual take on what might have happened w/out the Bolshevik Party.

If I could go back to 1917, I would track down Rosa Luxemburg, Levi, Brandler,Lenin, Trotsky, Bordiga, Gramsci, Serrati, and a few other revolutionaries, convince them I' m from the future, and explain how events played out in my time line. Maybe things could go differently.

The Ungovernable Farce
7th June 2010, 19:47
Take out patents on most of the major inventions of the last century and get hella rich. The proletariat can go whistle.

Jazzhands
7th June 2010, 19:59
Write The State and Revolution BEFORE Lenin. :cool:

Pavlov's House Party
7th June 2010, 20:11
wear sick dress clothes everywhere, wear a fedora and mustache without looking like a hipster and be able to smoke literally everywhere without getting fined or told off by liberal teenagers.

but then of course the living standards were much worse than today's, and there are a plethora of reasons living back then as a worker would suck worse than right now.

Mendax
7th June 2010, 20:46
Take out patents on most of the major inventions of the last century and get hella rich. The proletariat can go whistle.
Well this and get arrested for homosexuality, although maybe with that much money I can just buy the planet.

Raúl Duke
8th June 2010, 00:51
Kollontai

the last donut of the night
8th June 2010, 00:52
i'd rather smoke weed

The Ben G
8th June 2010, 01:31
Become eternal emperor of the world by defeating everyone with an army with Modern Technology.

Also, Screw Ireland And Russia, im off to help out John Brown and start a slave rebellion.

Crux
8th June 2010, 06:30
1916? Enable a reactionary to shoot socialist Mussolini dead. Laugh at the irony.

AK
8th June 2010, 06:47
I'll buy a lighthouse somewhere far from everyone and drink a glass of lemonade.
Capitalist.

REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL
8th June 2010, 06:55
You guys are all worthless losers who need to have some drive and ambition

I'd invest all my money in Microsoft.

Oh and use the money to make a harem of the finest marxist babes around, I'm thinking Luxembourg and Kollentai

In before sexism.

AK
8th June 2010, 07:18
I'd invest all my money in Microsoft.
Dumbest. Cappie. Evar.

Microsoft was founded in 1975.

Tablo
8th June 2010, 07:22
Kill Lenin..... and in the process not have to listen to Leninist bs on revleft. xP

No offence intended.

Crux
8th June 2010, 07:41
Kill Lenin..... and in the process not have to listen to Leninist bs on revleft. xP

No offence intended.
Help the red army at Kronstadt.

Q
8th June 2010, 08:03
Dumbest. Cappie. Evar.

Microsoft was founded in 1975.

Pwned.

ZeroNowhere
8th June 2010, 09:08
I'd quite like being in County Meath to chat with Lord Dunsany.

Crusade
8th June 2010, 09:13
Capitalist.

They're on to me....

Il Medico
8th June 2010, 11:10
Probably try to help the German revolution succeed.

Saorsa
8th June 2010, 11:43
Figure out what I'm going to do with my time without Revleft

Tyrlop
8th June 2010, 13:40
i would meet Ernst Busch and he would be the same age as me <3 :)

Blake's Baby
8th June 2010, 16:14
Less than three? You were born in 1914?

I would try to get to Zimmerwald and Kienthal, if I could. Dublin's closer from here though.

In all likelihood I'd end up in Richmond Prison with the other Conscientious Objectors though.

Pirate Utopian
8th June 2010, 16:42
i would meet Ernst Busch and he would be the same age as me <3 :)
Was he 10 at the time?

S.Artesian
8th June 2010, 16:51
I don't think that Trotsky's role was particularly crucial. Yes, he did a good job, but there was nothing spectacular. Basically he won a war, in which desertion was probably a bigger factor than battles. The British army at Archangel is the only military front ever to collapse while advancing.

The idea that the Red Army would have lost the war without Trotsky belongs completely in the 'great man' theory of history.

Devrim

Disagree. That's like saying the French would have won the Ulm campaign without Napoleon. Has nothing to do with the "great man theory," and everything with a human being assessing circumstances and acting within the necessity of those circumstances.

What Trotsky did was indeed spectacular, creating an army that literally didn't exist, and instituting the mechanisms for the logistical support of that army. Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

Pavlov's House Party
8th June 2010, 19:01
Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

I believe the saying is: "Amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics" ;)

The Ungovernable Farce
8th June 2010, 19:01
Also, Screw Ireland And Russia, im off to help out John Brown and start a slave rebellion.
In 1916? :confused:

Honggweilo
8th June 2010, 19:05
try to talk some sence into Gorter and Pannekoek, urge Jelle Toelstra to join the SDP, and have a beer with Doemela Nieuwenhuis

Blake's Baby
8th June 2010, 19:55
I thought about looking up Nieuwenhuis, but then again, I don't speak Dutch and I'm not sure how good his English was. Certainly being somewhere neutral looks like a good plan. Maybe skip of Zurich to join the dadaists...

REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL
8th June 2010, 19:56
Dumbest. Cappie. Evar.

Microsoft was founded in 1975.

Damn you.

Sir Comradical
8th June 2010, 23:38
So no one thought it would be wise to kill Hitler?

GracchusBabeuf
9th June 2010, 00:40
So no one thought it would be wise to kill Hitler?Most revlefters are Hitlerists.

Os Cangaceiros
9th June 2010, 03:06
I have heard that Marxism-Hitlerism has been a burgeoning tendency, actually.

bcbm
9th June 2010, 03:10
well hitler was a socialist

Os Cangaceiros
9th June 2010, 03:12
Duhr. "National Socialist German Worker's Party".

I mean, it's right there in the name.

REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL
9th June 2010, 06:49
While I may not necessarily agree with the man, Hitler did have strong convictions which I respect to much to kill him.

AK
9th June 2010, 07:15
While I may not necessarily agree with the man, Hitler did have strong convictions which I respect to much to kill him.
Strong convictions?

Saorsa
9th June 2010, 07:41
This thread reveals that many people on this forum don't know very much about history

Bright Banana Beard
9th June 2010, 09:35
At which point the young Red Army loses the civil war so the Russian revolution fails and probably a fascist dictatorship gets established. Game over for you.
You had it wrong, I will be the better Trotsky.

Robocommie
9th June 2010, 14:58
I would join the British Army!

WAIT THATS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

Jeoh
9th June 2010, 15:26
So no one thought it would be wise to kill Hitler?

Fuck no. Did you know how often he fucked up? He'd be replaced by a more efficient leader.

Os Cangaceiros
9th June 2010, 19:17
It would've been interesting if somehow Ernst Rohm took power instead of Hitler.

Blake's Baby
9th June 2010, 19:17
Likely enough. Ever read 'Making History' by Stephen Fry? Some dudes with a time-machine and a sterilisation drug prevent Hitler being born. Result, the Nazis under a more ruthless leader start WWII in 1929, sterilise all the Jews in Europe and nuke the USSR by 1931 (or thereabouts).

Lyev
9th June 2010, 19:23
I would probably help Spartacus's rebel uprising in the Roman Empire.

Edit: and this nonsense about Trotsky - it's stupid to speculate about who could have done the job better than him, but his organisational skills were certainly quite an asset to the Red Army.

Crux
9th June 2010, 20:49
Oh yeah, I would kill Göbbels.

AK
10th June 2010, 04:23
I would probably help Spartacus's rebel uprising in the Roman Empire.

Edit: and this nonsense about Trotsky - it's stupid to speculate about who could have done the job better than him, but his organisational skills were certainly quite an asset to the Red Army.
Roman Empire? 1916? That's a chronological fail.

leftace53
10th June 2010, 04:28
I'll buy a lighthouse somewhere far from everyone and drink a glass of lemonade.

This is what I would do then, its what I would do now.

REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL
10th June 2010, 05:11
Strong convictions?

I was joking about that, the man had no convictions at all. Of course i'd kill him.

AK
10th June 2010, 05:11
Who needs class struggle when you have... a lighthouse?

AK
10th June 2010, 05:12
I was joking about that, the man had no convictions at all. Of course i'd kill him.
:thumbup1:

Sir Comradical
10th June 2010, 05:25
Fuck no. Did you know how often he fucked up? He'd be replaced by a more efficient leader.

Unfalsifiable.

Durruti's Ghost
10th June 2010, 06:00
Unfalsifiable.

One could make an experiment out of it. Go back to 1916, kill Hitler, see what happens. If it turns out killing Hitler just made things worse, go back to 1916 and stop your past self from killing Hitler. What could possibly go wrong? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_paradox)

The Fighting_Crusnik
10th June 2010, 06:03
Hmm, If I went back to the year of 1916, I would do all in my power to kill Hitler before the Beer Hall Putsch and make an attempt on Mussolini's life... and maybe Stalin too... that way, World War II as we know it doesn't happen :p Then I'd settle in Milwaukee and work in a factory and live a small, simple life :)

AK
10th June 2010, 06:34
What could possibly go wrong? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_paradox)
Wikipedia editors waste their time with the most meaningless things.

Zeus the Moose
10th June 2010, 08:46
Dude, we know what would happen if someone went back in time and killed Hitler? Hasn't anyone played Command and Conquer: Red Alert?

The Fighting_Crusnik
10th June 2010, 08:47
Dude, we know what would happen if someone went back in time and killed Hitler? Hasn't anyone played Command and Conquer: Red Alert?

lol, no. What would happen? XD I'm sure someone new would rise up without doubt, so killing Hitler might prove worthless. But on the otherhand, if war still pursues but the holocaust doesn't happen, then in my eyes, it's a success.

Devrim
10th June 2010, 09:00
Okay, but would October have happened if Lenin either did not exist or died earlier? In his History of The Russian Revolution, Trotsky himself gives a brief counterfactual take on what might have happened w/out the Bolshevik Party.

One could make many counter factuals. Trotsky's depicts his political views. One could equally argue that without the prestige that Lenin had within the party, the left of the party would have been stronger, and the party as a whole less bound up with 'great leaders'.

In 1917 in the April thesis Lenin basically adopted the positions of the left, but a mere six months earlier he had been arguing positions that would now be described as quasi-Menshevism.


The social revolution cannot be the united action of the proletarians of all countries for the simple reason that most of the countries and the majorities of the world's population have not even reached, or have only just reached, the capitalist stage of development... Only the advanced countries of Western Europe and North America have matured for socialism. The social revolution can come only in the form of an epoch in which are combined civil war by the proletariat in the advanced countries and a whole series of democratic and revolutionary movements... in the undeveloped, backward and oppressed nations.

Would the left have been stronger, and the party better prepared without Lenin's influence.

Of course we will never know, but it is as valid as Trotsky's speculation.

Devrim

Devrim
10th June 2010, 09:00
Disagree. That's like saying the French would have won the Ulm campaign without Napoleon. Has nothing to do with the "great man theory," and everything with a human being assessing circumstances and acting within the necessity of those circumstances.

What Trotsky did was indeed spectacular, creating an army that literally didn't exist, and instituting the mechanisms for the logistical support of that army. Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

The Bolshevik party had lots of talented organisers. Stalin was one.

Devrim

Zanthorus
10th June 2010, 11:18
In 1917 in the April thesis Lenin basically adopted the positions of the left, but a mere six months earlier he had been arguing positions that would now be described as quasi-Menshevism.

I don't see how the position in that quote is "quasi-Menshevism". It merely states that socialism cannot yet be achieved in Russia. Something which was reiterated in the April Theses:


8) It is not our immediate task to “introduce” socialism, but only to bring social production and the distribution of products at once under the control of the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies.

Lyev
10th June 2010, 16:59
Roman Empire? 1916? That's a chronological fail.Yeah, that was joke. I have a serious one - I would go back to Armenia, and help join the resistance against the genocide and Ottomans.

Das war einmal
11th June 2010, 00:36
I'll first say I'm the new messiah here to save everyone, then I would be famous and rich for being the best fortune teller in the world and then I'll make everyone obey my every order, tell them I lied about God and rule the world
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s39/topsbbq/Mr-Burns-Excellent.jpg

Os Cangaceiros
11th June 2010, 00:45
I'll first say I'm the new messiah here to save everyone, then I would be famous and rich for being the best fortune teller in the world and then I'll make everyone obey my every order, tell them I lied about God and rule the world
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s39/topsbbq/Mr-Burns-Excellent.jpg

But then you'd change the future, thus ruining your fortune teller scheme.

Saorsa
11th June 2010, 01:34
It would be too late

eyedrop
11th June 2010, 09:57
Don't go back into the past, I don't want to have to relearn all my history.

Tablo
11th June 2010, 10:20
Fuck history, we have a future to fight for.

Devrim
12th June 2010, 08:05
I don't see how the position in that quote is "quasi-Menshevism". It merely states that socialism cannot yet be achieved in Russia. Something which was reiterated in the April Theses:

I think it does. It argues against the idea that there could have been an international working class revolutionary movement, which as we know know there was, and that only 'democratic and revolutionary' movements were possible in the 'undeveloped, backward and oppressed nations'.

Devrim

Zanthorus
12th June 2010, 14:33
I think it does. It argues against the idea that there could have been an international working class revolutionary movement, which as we know know there was, and that only 'democratic and revolutionary' movements were possible in the 'undeveloped, backward and oppressed nations'.

Devrim

The Bolshevik/Menshevik debate on the nature of the state post-russian revolution was not about "socialism" though. The Mensheviks thought that the workers would immediately hand over the state to the liberal bourgeoisie while Lenin had envisioned a "democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry". In both cases the state was envisioned as carrying out the tasks of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. Even Trotsky and Parvus had argued that the proletariat once taking power would being the tasks of the borgeois-democratic revolution and only later begin to surpass them and move toward socialism.

lombas
12th June 2010, 23:43
Make sure Franco died at El Biutz.

Spawn of Stalin
13th June 2010, 00:53
Marry Stalin

the last donut of the night
14th June 2010, 03:34
Marry Stalin


:wub:

Robocommie
14th June 2010, 05:02
Roman Empire? 1916? That's a chronological fail.

Yoiurself, too. If Spartacus is around, it's not the Roman Empire, it's the Republic. :D

NoOneIsIllegal
14th June 2010, 07:24
Punch Wilson in the nuts. The I.W.W. and other revolutionaries would be somewhere better today without the first red scare.

AK
14th June 2010, 13:01
Marry Stalin
You can marry yourself now?

Lulznet
16th June 2010, 15:29
Warn the workers that Lenin was going to close the Soviets in the 20's and that Stalin was going to take full force over the USSR and kick in Totalitarianism, make a pact with Nazi Germany which would start a Second World War and just in general stir up a massive amount of problems for the European worker. :thumbup1:

Zanthorus
16th June 2010, 19:38
Win scholarly fame by pre-emptively demolishing the idea of "totalitarianism".

griffjam
16th June 2010, 21:54
Kill Nestor Makhno and stop Platformist anarchism before it even begins.

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi
26th July 2010, 19:58
Steal a horse and take it into the pub with me. http://www.theequinest.com/images/horse-pub.jpg.

Iskalla
26th July 2010, 22:56
Josef Stalin RIP 1878-1916

Do it with an icepick :cool:

black magick hustla
27th July 2010, 03:06
bonnot gang