[bycha]

> I’m not sure what you mean by “actual evidences.”

I’m not absolutely sure either.
But there must be something that lets us know the event actually happened.
That can be official documents, photograhps, mass graves. There are all these sorts of evidences about what was going on during the Collectivization for instance.

Ok though. I’ll read that book you recommend. Will probably be enough for me.

[bycha]

Germany in turn was way behind Britain or France.
Marx himself lived in London and the Bolsheviks tend to
gather their meetings in London as well.
Still Lenin expected the revolution specifically in Germany, and
not ‘sometime in the future’, but here and now.
I don’t actually think it was because of any of his -philia.
Rather Lenin knew some plans, or he thought he knew.

> Nicholas I decided after the Crimean War that significant
> reform of his empire was necessary to bring Russia up to …

Well yes, just i belive that the intention ‘to bring Russia up to the economic level of France…’
predated the Crimean war.
After all the idea of the war was to contain Russian quick development.
Though of course that war corrected many plans.

>The shame of it is that Nicholas II was overthrown,

Yep, it was a disaster.
I’ve been to Yekaterinburg recently and happened to visit
those places related to the last days of the Tsar’s family.
That was quite an emotional experience. Actually i didn’t expect it to be that emotional.

[bycha]

It’s quite unbeliveable Stalin’s ever officially said something like that.
It’d be the contrary to all the propaganda and the mindset of the USSR of that time. Stalin could say that “the communist revolution is inevitable in the US”, or that “the working class of the US will get rid of capitalist’s oppression”. The ‘collapse of the America’ was never the desire.

[bycha]

Still not fixed.

[bycha]

As i see this answer is to the 8th question from the Lecture 12. The result of copy-paste error most likely.
Someone can ask webdevs to remove that line.

[bycha]

Dr. Jewell,
you mentioned theories there about why civilizations first arose.
It really surprised me that you said that the Mesopotamian one is
an evidence to the ‘Challenge response’ theory.
But just a minute before that you spoke about good farmland and
easiness of cultivating. The very name ‘Fertile Crescent’ rings a bell, doesn’t it?
Do you emotionally like the ‘Challenge response’ theory?
Can you please provide any obvious evidence against that ‘prosperity’ theory? Any civilization that grew up in an unfavourable place?

[bycha]

Just finished enjoying the Lecture2.
Two corrections for Dr.J. while i didn’t forget:
you corrected the lecture on what was the Sumer,
but in the Quiz – Sumer is still supposed to be the anser to ‘ the city normally cited as the birthplace of civilization’

Eupratis is a big river. I doubt people of that age were able to take so much water from it to cause noticeable problems for those living in the mouth of the river. So that example didn’t sound serious to me.

[Author]

Posts