You are right that China's rise is meteoric, but they weren't really ever "colonized." Europeans set up special districts (e.g. Hong Kong) and other powers took territory, but it was not colonized like India was, for example.
Fair enough.
Might want to look up the century of humiliation China went through.
View attachment 7575397
The February Revolution was not a communist revolution, and it bothers me a bit people consistently believe Bolsheviks were involved in it or had anything to do with it.
I was about to say. If you’re going to dunk on a perceived communist, at least get the basic facts straight.
WARNING: RUSSIAN HISTORY SPERGING AHEAD.
It was a progressive revolution: an unintentional Trojan Horse for communism. If I remember correctly, Kerensky's policy of "no friends to the right, no enemies to the left"
Kerensky was just one one of the ministers, and mind you: Kerensky had no problems with crushing Bolshevik skulls and locking them up, as we saw during the July days.
Kerensky wasn’t even originally head of the provisional government: Prince Lvov, a Kadet (the right wing opposition) was.
The February revolution was a bourgeois, liberal revolution, not a communist one and barely even a progressive one. Need I remind you that you had literal landowners, business tycoons and nobility in the Duma and the provisional government?
led him to arming the Bolsheviks in order to repel Kornilov's coup, which naturally backfired in the October Revolution.
As I mentioned, in the July days Kerensky had zero scruples going after the Bolsheviks, sending Lenin fleeing to Finland.
Arming the Bolsheviks certainly didn’t harm them, but they would have likely seized power even without the Kornilov rebellion.
They were the logical choice and the only ones who hadn’t embarrassed themselves in the chaos prior to October.
As Lenin later said: They found power laying in the streets and just had to pick it up.
In October/November 1917, the Bolsheviks were the only game in town.
.
