Yankeesftw
New member
Okay, I have taken the Conservative point of view in regards to change of government, economics, all that stuff-
My biggest example is the Russian Revolution, but I also have 1830, 1848, and Iran's Revolution.
Take Russia for example. What the Czar was doing was not exactly smart. But the Reds fed off of the discontent of the population, and the people were swept into a frenzy. The people thought that they would be given freedom, relief, and entire equality (everyone helps everyone, and everyone shares). They believed a false hope, and they ended up stamping out the Orthodox Church, the Whites, and their new Republic in exchange for something far worse then what the Czar ever did. What the bolsheviks did was just say that they wanted to give the people more of a say, more equality, and more rights, when in reality the people who followed like sheep ended up suffering the most. So, isnt it better to just leave things alone and slowly make changes then to simply oppose the ruling party with all your might and put all of your faith in a group that may not do what they really say.
Just so you know, this is a poorly worded synopsis of what I wrote. In a nutshell, I said about France that the people were so desperate for stability after their changes that they ended up with another empire after 50 years of switching from Republics-Limited Monarchy-Absolute Monarchs (Charles X)- and then a swing around the circle.
My biggest example is the Russian Revolution, but I also have 1830, 1848, and Iran's Revolution.
Take Russia for example. What the Czar was doing was not exactly smart. But the Reds fed off of the discontent of the population, and the people were swept into a frenzy. The people thought that they would be given freedom, relief, and entire equality (everyone helps everyone, and everyone shares). They believed a false hope, and they ended up stamping out the Orthodox Church, the Whites, and their new Republic in exchange for something far worse then what the Czar ever did. What the bolsheviks did was just say that they wanted to give the people more of a say, more equality, and more rights, when in reality the people who followed like sheep ended up suffering the most. So, isnt it better to just leave things alone and slowly make changes then to simply oppose the ruling party with all your might and put all of your faith in a group that may not do what they really say.
Just so you know, this is a poorly worded synopsis of what I wrote. In a nutshell, I said about France that the people were so desperate for stability after their changes that they ended up with another empire after 50 years of switching from Republics-Limited Monarchy-Absolute Monarchs (Charles X)- and then a swing around the circle.