Why did the Reds win?

Once again we will return to the history of almostcentury old. On the topic of why the Reds defeated in the Civil War of the period 1917-1921, a lot of works are written, a huge number of dissertations are protected. The most common answers I decided to give for you in the form of a list. Well, after this list, we'll look at a couple of reasons that most researchers did not pay much attention to.

Civil War: why the Reds won

Here are the reasons that appear in scientific works and in popular scientific articles on history most often:

people under the tsarist regime greatly oppressed;
the dream of communism fully met the people's dream of paradise;
Reds were subsidized by Western Jews and Freemasons who dreamed of weakening Russia;
the Reds had a strategic advantage, which consisted in a higher mobility of troops, and White's actions were not coordinated;
The Bolsheviks managed to mobilize several times more people through violent methods, while the White recruited only volunteers.

With all these arguments one can agree orarguing, however, the researchers, as a rule, did not take into account a number of factors that were also very important for understanding why the Reds won the war. Thus, almost nothing is said about the cruelest tribal hatred of the peasants and workers towards the nobility, especially the aristocracy, including the royal dynasty itself. If aristocrats were not liked even by poor noblemen, what to speak about other estates.

Two important reasons for the victory of the Reds

In Russia at that time there were, in fact, threeclass. The first is the aristocracy, the prosperous nobility and the big bourgeoisie. The second is the petty nobility (with and without estates), kulaks (well-off peasants), philistinism, the intelligentsia, small and medium-sized traders (as now would say - small and medium business) and civil servants. And the third - workers and peasants. And the aristocracy's problem was that not only the middle class (actually in its entirety) acted against it, but also many representatives of the second class sympathizing with the third. This is one of the reasons. And the second reason is indicated by the units, and yet, it lies on the surface, since this reason is ideological. One can talk about the "tribal" hatred of the workers and peasants towards the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, but to understand why people in the majority went over to the side of the Reds, this is not enough. But what's the matter? Look at the ideology of white and red. What the reds offered the people:

to destroy the whites;
increase the importance and status of the worker-peasant class;
create a "paradise on Earth", that is, communism with excellent conditions for life.

And now about what the whites have suggested:

destroy the reds;
everything, since the rest of the details of the program were formulated so unclear that they could not be understood by workers and peasants, but by some representatives of the second estate.

That is, the Whites simply did not know that they would beto do further, their main task was to win over the Reds, and then, as they say, "after us, at least a flood." Of the two ideologies you offer, what would the majority prefer? That's right, the first, because White, in fact, ideology was not at all. In addition, the abdication of the king from the throne severely broke their fighting spirit. The bottom line: the victory of the Reds was a foregone conclusion for many reasons, and there was not a single factor in favor of White. For these wise thoughts I want to thank my teacher of history - now the late candidate of historical sciences Yu.V. Tikhomirov, a man who taught us to understand our own history and think critically.