Podcasts about Joseph Stalin

The discussion turns to Joseph Stalin and his relationship with the legacy of Leninism. Stalin was a more "ideologically flexible" and savvy political operator than Trotsky, who was relentlessly focused on immediate and continuous revolution. While both Lenin and Trotsky employed political violence, the terror under Stalin was a different phenomenon because much of it was directed at high-ranking members of the Communist Party and the secret police in the Great Purge. The purges were motivated by Stalin's paranoia and the need to find scapegoats for the regime's failure to deliver prosperity and freedom. The assassination of Trotsky in 1940 is often seen as wrapping up the Great Terror, though arrests and executions continued.

The focus shifts to Mao Zedong and Chinese communism, which was highly influenced by sharp anti-imperialism and xenophobia, blending the Marxist binary struggle with resentment of foreign exploitation. After Stalin's death, Mao began to "experiment," resulting in the Great Leap Forward, which aimed to rapidly "catch up and surpass the West" by radically overturning agriculture and simultaneously industrializing. This chaotic effort, including the collectivization of agriculture and communal organization, led to a vast famine that caused the deaths of tens of millions of people.

The Fall of Communism: Top-Down Collapse and the Legacy of Violence in Modern Russia Professor Sean McMeekin The final segment discusses the collapse of communist regimes in 1989, contending that these regimes generally did not fall because of a rising from the bottom. Instead, the collapse was largely top-down, driven by the disappearance of Soviet coercion or inside palace coups, such as the one that overthrew the Ceaușescus in Romania or the mutiny that lined the armed forces up behind Yeltsin in Russia. In modern Russia, there is a hybrid system that includes statism, control of media, and nostalgia for the Soviet period and Stalin's legacy as a "builder" and "conqueror," but it has jettisoned Lenin and full communism. The core thesis reaffirmed is that extreme violence is the predicate for the communist vision.

-At some point in the last couple days, Grok began to offer extremely over the top opinions about Musk. The bot claimed that Musk is the "undisputed pinnacle of holistic fitness" and that he is more fitter than LeBron James, smarter than Albert Einstein, better fighter than Mike Tyson, morally superior to Jesus, and a better communist than Joseph Stalin. -FoloToy, a company selling AI-enabled toys, suspended sales of its products after a consumer safety report showed there were few restrictions around what its toys would talk about. -After what was apparently a successful testing period, OpenAI has announced that it is rolling out group chats in ChatGPT to "all logged-in users on ChatGPT Free, Go, Plus and Pro plans globally over the coming days." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

WARNING!!!  You have until Dec. 1st to make Dr. Glidden your doctor (ND) for 55 cents a day!  Use Code: Daniel for 50% Off, locked in for life!  That's only 16.67/month.  Use this link:  https://leavebigpharmabehind.com/?via=pgndhealth Use Code: Daniel on the annual membership.If you choose to still go with the monthly, use code baalbusters for a 25% discount.Twitter Account: https://x.com/KristosCastPatreon: https://patreon.com/c/DisguisetheLimitsHurting Murphy/Frojax making Points, and MusicGuest Links: https://www.youtube.com/@hurtingmurphy https://www.youtube.com/@FrojaxOfficial https://www.instagram.com/hurtingmurphy/ https://www.instagram.com/frojax_/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/ba-al-busters-broadcast--5100262/support.

Tucker Carlson's interview with Nick Fuentes exposed more than a media dust-up—it showcased a toxic blend of relativism, ethno-nationalism, and Holocaust denial dressed in Christian language. Kevin and Bill walk through Fuentes' praise for Stalin, the minimizing of Nazi atrocities, and the chilling parallels to abortion as a modern holocaust. The conclusion is blunt: race won't save anyone; only Christ crucified offers mercy to red, yellow, black, and white.

[AUTOPROMOCJA] Pełnej wersji podcastu posłuchasz w aplikacji Onet Audio. Jak władza sowiecka traktowała kulturę - z kijem, ale i z marchewką? Dlaczego Stalin miał lepszy gust niż Putin, a złote karty kredytowe okazały się skuteczniejszym narzędziem kontroli niż gułag? W najnowszym „Raporcie Międzynarodowym" profesor Hieronim Grala odsłania paradoksy rosyjskiej kultury, od czasów stalinowskiego terroru po współczesną „złotą klatkę" Putina. Jak to wszystko ma się do zamknięcia kolejnej rosyjskiej placówki dyplomatycznej w Polsce?  O tym usłyszycie:  Kultura w ZSRR – kij i marchewka Władza sowiecka nigdy nie była wobec kultury obojętna. Stalin osobiście ingerował w scenariusze, ratował spektakle Bułhakowa, a jednocześnie szalał terror, w którym ginęli twórcy i artyści. Paradoks: zbrodniarz, ale oczytany i świadomy znaczenia sztuki. Stalin kontra Putin – kto miał lepszy gust? Zdaniem Grali, Stalin był bardziej wykształcony i miał większe horyzonty niż Putin. Seminarium duchowne okazało się lepszą szkołą niż leningradzki wydział prawa. Władza sowiecka, mimo brutalności, traktowała kulturę poważnie, czego dziś w Rosji brakuje. Wentyle bezpieczeństwa i kultura „między wierszami" W ZSRR istniała przestrzeń dla aluzji i podtekstów – teatr na Tagance, underground rockowy czy sztuki plastyczne. „Czytać między wierszami" to rosyjski wynalazek, który przeniknął do języka PRL. Od krat do złotej klatki Władza sowiecka stosowała represje, ale też nagrody. Największe gwiazdy muzyki klasycznej dostawały złote karty kredytowe, by nie uciekły na Zachód. „Pieniądz okazał się lepszy od krat" – mówi prof. Grala. Kultura jako ostatni kanał dialogu W obliczu zamykania konsulatów i zerwania więzi dyplomatycznych, profesor podkreśla: „Została już tylko kultura". Chopin w Petersburgu, polska literatura w rosyjskich bibliotekach – to jedyne mosty, których nie da się wysadzić.

چگونه یک انسان معمولی، از جنس گوشت و استخوان، به نمادی مقدس تبدیل می‌شود؟ این تجربه ای است که تاریخ به ما یاد داده : از هیتلر در آلمان نازی گرفته تا صدام در عراق، از استالین در شوروی تا مائو در چین، و حتی در دوران معاصر در کره شمالی و ترکمنستان. از مراسم‌های پرشکوه نورنبرگ تا عصر دیجیتالی، کیش شخصیت همچنان در جوامع حضور دارد. .در این اپیزود می‌شنویدچگونه یک انسان عادی در سیستم گیش شحصیت به موجودی ماورایی تبدیل می‌شودنقش کنترل کلمات و زبان در تقدیس یک فردچگونه معماری، تصویر و نماد می‌تواند حضور یک رهبر را تداوم بخشد حتی در غیاب اوچرا مردم علیرغم ترس و سرکوب، خود را وابسته به رهبران تمامیت‌خواه می‌کنندتاریخچه کیش شخصیت در ایران و نمونه‌های معاصرچگونه یک فرد عادی می‌تواند تفکر انتقادی را حفظ کندپژوهش و متن: سیده سمانه هاشمی نژاد، پیمان بشرذوست تدوین: ساسان موسوی تماشای ویدئوی چای ماچا، ره آورد ژاپن مدت اپیزود 64 دقیقه است. در صورتیکه در دانلود کامل مشکل دارید ایرادی در فایل اپیزود نیست، لطفا راههای دیگر مثل سایر اپلیکیشنها، کانال تلگرام و یا وبسایت داکس را امتحان کنید .لینکهای حمایت مالی از پادکست داکس: حامی باش و پی پل وبسایت پادکست داکسکانال یوتیوب داکساینستاگرام پادکست داکسمنابع:مقالات)- A tale of two presidents: personality cult and symbolic nation-building in Turkmenistan | Abel Polese and Slavomir Horak- "Saddam is Iraq, Iraq is Saddam": Saddam Hussein's Cult of Personality and the Perception of his Life and Legacy | Ella Nalepka- The Personality Cult of Stalin in Soviet Posters, 1929–1953: Archetypes, Inventions & Fabrications | Anita Pisch | Published by ANU Press- Charismatic authority and the YouTuber: Unpacking the new cults of personality | Hayley L. Cocker and James Cronin | Published in Marketing Theory, 2017کتاب‌ها)- آداب دیکتاتوری: کیش شخصیت در قرن بیستم | نوشته فرانک دیکوتر | ترجمه مسعود یوسف حصیرچین | انتشارات گمان- وحشت، عشق و شستشوی مغزی؛ دلبستگی به فرقه‌ها و سیستم‌های تمامیت‌خواه | نویسنده: الکساندا استاین | مترجم: عهدیه عبادی | نشر سایلاومقالۀ سایت)- Beware the Corporate Cult of Personality | Big Think- Cults of Personality and Where to Find Them | Psychology Today- Cult of personality | Encyclopedia Britannica Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr James Loxton on how modern democracies can crumble as tyrannical leaders take hold, but also how freedom and democracy can rise again, from the Americas to Europe and into Asia.James grew up in stable Canada, where he spent his summers herding sheep in the middle of forest plantations.As a teenager, he hatched a plan to escape his "rough as guts" bush town and the life of a shepherd, moving to India on his own to finish high school.At an international school in Maharashtra, James' classmates taught him about the world outside of democratic Canada, and he became fascinated by military dictatorships and guerilla insurgencies. Later on, years of living in Latin America showed him firsthand how dictators operated, how they are feared and hated, but also revered and loved by some of the people they control.Now James, and many other political scientists, have their eyes turned to America, watching closely to see how the world's most powerful democracy is changing right before our eyes.Authoritarianism: A Very Short Introduction is published by Oxford University Press.This episode of Conversations was produced by Meggie Morris, executive producer is Nicola Harrison.It explores Donald Trump, Putin, USA, regime, dictators, ICE, Clinton, Epstein, politics, democracy, Chilean presidential election, Russia, China, Taiwan, Philippines, government, globalisation, Latin American politics, Whitlam, dismissal, divisive politics, left versus right, parliamentary versus presidential forms of government, united kingdom, British colonies, Javier Milei, Venezuela, Argentina, Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, Maduro, elitism, drain the swamp, populism, power for the people, tariffs, Peru, Cuba, straw man, Stalin, Hitler, competitive authoritarianism, substance abuse, addiction, alcoholism, alcoholic mothers, homelessness, losing a mother.To binge even more great episodes of the Conversations podcast with Richard Fidler and Sarah Kanowski go the ABC listen app (Australia) or wherever you get your podcasts. There you'll find hundreds of the best thought-provoking interviews with authors, writers, artists, politicians, psychologists, musicians, and celebrities.

En dix ans, entre 1939 et 1949, l'URSS passe du rang de nation isolée au statut de superpuissance faisant jeu égal avec les États-Unis.Pour ses dirigeants, la Seconde Guerre mondiale est marquée par l'esprit de sacrifice et l'héroïsme. Pour le peuple, cette période est synonyme de grandes catastrophes : Shoah, famine de 1946-1947, guerre civile en Ukraine et dans les pays baltes. Cette « Grande Guerre patriotique », que Staline et ses successeurs s'emploient à glorifier, fait plus de 26 millions de victimes.Dans cette fresque historique, Alexandre Sumpf revient sur tous les aspects du conflit, s'attachant à retracer les événements militaires comme à comprendre cette décennie de guerre à travers ceux qui l'ont vécue, du Soviet Suprême aux ravins de Babyn Yar.Un travail considérable et sans équivalent, qui s'appuie sur de nombreux témoignages et archives inédites.Alexandre Sumpf est notre invité en studio, pour les Interviews HistoireHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

GATEWAY CINEMA is a multi-part series of conversations centered on key ideas in film studies. In these conversations, we interpret and celebrate a set of eclectic feature films from across generations and from around the world, including “La Haine”, “Drum”, “Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)”, “Come and See”, “Perfect Days”, “Sweet Smell of Success”, “The Swimmer”, “Amadeus (Director's Cut)”, “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia”, “Friday”, “Marie Antoinette”, “The Night of the Hunter”, “Crank” and “Crank 2: High Voltage”, “Portrait of a Lady Fire”, “The Fabulous Baron Munchausen”, “Joker: Folie à Deux”, “Welcome to the Dollhouse”, “Heathers”, and “The Death of Stalin”.***Referenced media in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 17:“Flirting with Disaster” (David O. Russell, 1996)“Fargo” (Coen Brothers, 1996)“I Shot Andy Warhol” (Mary Harron, 1996)“Dead Man” (Jim Jarmusch, 1995)“Mission: Impossible” (Brian De Palma, 1996)“The Cable Guy” (Ben Stiller, 1996)“Tropic Thunder” (Ben Stiller, 2008)“Lone Star” (John Sayles, 1996)“Independence Day” (Roland Emmerich, 1996)“Courage Under Fire” (Edward Zwick, 1996)“Trainspotting” (Danny Boyle, 1996)“Strangers on a Train” (Alfred Hitchcock, 1951)“Superbad” (Greg Mottola, 2007)“The Princess Diaries” (Garry Marshall, 2001)“Ugly Betty” (Silvio Horta, 2006-2010)“Little Miss Sunshine” (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, 2006)“Happiness” (Todd Solondz, 1998)“Stand By Me” (Rob Reiner, 1986)“Eighth Grade” (Bo Burnham, 2018)“Star Wars” (George Lucas, 1977)Audio quotation in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 17:“Welcome to the Dollhouse” (Todd Solondz, 1995) 

Collapse of Independent States and the Purposeful Famine of the Holodomor. Professor Eugene Finkel examines the period following the 1917 collapse, when attempts to form independent Ukrainian states—the UNR and the ZUNR—failed, facing invasion by various Russian forces united in the belief that Ukraine must belong to Russia. Subsequently, Stalin implemented collectivization, leading to the Holodomor, a purposeful famine from 1932 to 1933 designed to break Ukrainian resistance and secure grain for export to modernize the Soviet military. This tragedy killed millions and decimated the landscape before World War II began. Guest: Professor Eugene Finkel. 1855

The Historical Roots of Russian Brutality and Putin's Ideological Driver. Professor Eugene Finkel explains that the pervasive cruelty in Russian forces stems from a historical willingness to use extreme violence, where human life is cheap, evident from Stalin's cynical fears of losing Ukraine to modern conflicts. Russians are willing to make Ukraine a desert to secure control, employing methods consistent with their actions in Chechnya and Syria. In 2022, Putin, trapped in isolation with like-minded nationalists, believed Ukrainians would not fight back. His motivation was the fundamental belief that Ukraine is not a real state and must not defy Russia by choosing its own path. Guest: Professor Eugene Finkel.

•⁠ ⁠தீவிரமடையும் வடகிழக்கு பருவமழை: 8 மாவட்டங்களுக்கு ஆரஞ்சு அலர்ட்; சென்னை நிலவரம் எப்படி? •⁠ ⁠தமிழ்நாட்டில் 93.67% SIR படிவங்கள் விநியோகம்? •⁠ ⁠S.I.R - ஜனநாயகப்படுகொலை - பிரகலா பிரபாகர். •⁠ ⁠S.I.R : 'BLO -க்களை திமுக கட்டுப்பாட்டில் எடுத்துவிட்டது!' - தவெக ஆர்ப்பாட்டம். •⁠ ⁠SIR பணிகள் புறக்கணிப்பு: வருவாய்த் துறை சங்கம். •⁠ ⁠விஜய் மீது துணை முதல்வர் உதயநிதி மறைமுக தாக்கு •⁠ ⁠ராகுல் காந்தியைச் சந்தித்தாரா விஜய்? - மறுக்கும் செல்வப்பெருந்தகை! •⁠ ⁠கூட்டணி அமைச்சரவை அமையும் - பிரேமலதா விஜயகாந்த் •⁠ ⁠எடப்பாடி பழனிசாமியுடன் ஜி.கே.வாசன் சந்திப்பு •⁠ ⁠“டிச.12ம் தேதி தமிழ்நாடே குலுங்கும்..” - ராமதாஸ் அறிவிப்பு. •⁠ ⁠பீகார் தேர்தல்: `உலக வங்கி நிதி ரூ.14,000 கோடி கடன் வாங்கி செலவு' - பிரசாந்த் கிஷோர் குற்றச்சாட்டு. •⁠ ⁠பட்னாவில் இன்று கூடுகிறது NDA கூட்டணி MLAக்கள் கூட்டம். •⁠ ⁠தேஜஸ்வி மீது சகோதரரி குற்றச்சாட்டு? •⁠ ⁠Delhi: "செங்கோட்டையில் நடந்தது தற்கொலைப்படைத் தாக்குதலே'' - உறுதி செய்த NIA * டெல்லி குண்டு வெடிப்பு சம்பவத்தில் திடீர் திருப்பம்! •⁠ ⁠சவுதி அரேபியாவில் விபத்து: 42 இந்தியர்கள் உயிரிழப்பு? •⁠ ⁠வங்கதேச வன்முறை: ஷேக் ஹசீனா குற்றவாளி என தீர்ப்பு

durée : 00:58:58 - Les Grandes Traversées - par : Marie Chartron - Lorsque se produit la révolution de février 1917 qui le libère de son exil sibérien, Staline a déjà 38 ans. Quelle fut la première vie et la formation politique de celui qui s'appelait encore Joseph Djougachvili, né en 1878 dans la petite ville géorgienne de Gori ? - réalisation : Diphy Mariani

Lea Ypi, a professor of political theory at the London School of Economics, grew up in Albania under communism, when it was the last Stalinist outpost in Europe.She was 10 years old when the Berlin Wall fell, and a year later she saw the collapse of communism in Albania. Statues of Stalin and Enver Hoxha, the country's leader for 40 years, were toppled. Democratic elections followed - but so did civil unrest.Lea wrote about these turbulent years in her book Free, which won prizes and widespread acclaim: 'essential - just as much for Britons as Albanians' according to one critic.She has delved further into her family history, looking into the past of her grandmother, in her book Indignity.Lea's musical choices include Beethoven, Wagner, Dizdari and Bach.

Rogers for America with Lt. Steve Rogers – Now it's apparent that both parties experience a setback in the outcome. Now, why do I say both parties? People believe that the Democrats won big and the Republicans lost big, but I've got to tell you, the Republicans did lose big, but the Democrats, I think, they're beginning to cheer a little too soon, because as things settle down, they're going to realize the dangerous path that their party is on.

Ngày 01/12/1934, đảng viên trẻ Đảng Cộng sản Liên Xô Leonid Nikolayev bí mật lẻn vào điện Smolny ở Leningrad dùng súng lục bắn chết Sergey Mironovich Kirov, ủy viên Bộ Chính trị, người lãnh đạo Thành ủy thành phố Leningrad. Hung thủ bị bắt ngay tại chỗ. Để điều tra vụ ám sát này, một ban chuyên án do Stalin lãnh đạo lập tức từ Moskva đến Leningrad.Xem thêm.

GATEWAY CINEMA is a multi-part series of conversations centered on key ideas in film studies. In these conversations, we interpret and celebrate a set of eclectic feature films from across generations and from around the world, including “La Haine”, “Drum”, “Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)”, “Come and See”, “Perfect Days”, “Sweet Smell of Success”, “The Swimmer”, “Amadeus (Director's Cut)”, “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia”, “Friday”, “Marie Antoinette”, “The Night of the Hunter”, “Crank” and “Crank 2: High Voltage”, “Portrait of a Lady Fire”, “The Fabulous Baron Munchausen”, “Joker: Folie a Deux”, “Welcome to the Dollhouse”, “Heathers”, and “The Death of Stalin”.***Referenced media in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 15:“Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde” (Rouben Mamoulian, 1931)“The Wolfman” (George Waggner, 1941)“The Adventures of Baron Munchausen” (Terry Gilliam, 1988)“Barry Lyndon” (Stanley Kubrick, 1975)“A Trip to the Moon” (Georges Méliès, 1902)“Monty Python's Flying Circus” (Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, Michael Palin, and Terry Gilliam, 1969-1974)“Pee-wee's Playhouse” (Paul Reubens, 1986-1990)“Star Wars” (George Lucas, 1977)“Pinocchio” (Ben Sharpsteen and Hamilton Luske, 1940)“South Park” (Trey Parker and Matt Stone, 1997-present)“Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” (David Hand, 1937)“The Adventures of Prince Achmed” (Lotte Reiniger, 1926)“The Lord of the Rings” (Ralph Bakshi, 1978)Audio quotation in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 15:“The Fabulous Baron Munchausen” (Karel Zeman, 1962)

GATEWAY CINEMA is a multi-part series of conversations centered on key ideas in film studies. In these conversations, we interpret and celebrate a set of eclectic feature films from across generations and from around the world, including “La Haine”, “Drum”, “Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)”, “Come and See”, “Perfect Days”, “Sweet Smell of Success”, “The Swimmer”, “Amadeus (Director's Cut)”, “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia”, “Friday”, “Marie Antoinette”, “The Night of the Hunter”, “Crank” and “Crank 2: High Voltage”, “Portrait of a Lady Fire”, “The Fabulous Baron Munchausen”, “Joker: Folie à Deux”, “Welcome to the Dollhouse”, “Heathers”, and “The Death of Stalin”.***Referenced media in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 16:“Joker” (Todd Phillips, 2019)“Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery” (Jay Roach, 1997)“Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me” (Jay Roach, 1999)“Austin Powers in Goldmember” (Jay Roach, 2002)“Alien 3 (Assembly Cut)” (David Fincher, 1992) (Assembly Cut in 2003)“Aliens” (James Cameron, 1986)“Gremlins 2: The New Batch” (Joe Dante, 1990)“Gremlins” (Joe Dante, 1984)“Deadpool & Wolverine” (Shawn Levy, 2024)“Alien: Romulus” (Fede Alvarez, 2024)“Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” (Tim Burton, 2024)“Transformers One” (Josh Cooley, 2024)“Mary Poppins” (Robert Stevenson, 1964)“The Rocky Horror Picture Show” (Jim Sharman, 1975)“Singin' in the Rain” (Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen, 1952)“La La Land” (Damien Chazelle, 2016)“Hated: GG Allin and the Murder Junkies” (Todd Phillips, 1993)“Kneecap” (Rich Peppiatt, 2024)“Wicked” (Jon M. Chu, 2024)“Braveheart” (Mel Gibson, 1995)“Megalopolis” (Francis Ford Coppola, 2024)“The Minecraft Movie” (Jared Hess, 2025)“E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” (Steven Spielberg, 1982)“Shoa” (Claude Lanzmann, 1985)Audio quotation in GATEWAY CINEMA, Episode 16:“Joker: Folie à Deux” (Todd Phillips, 2024), including the songs “Uh Oh, I'm in Trouble” (2024) by Hildur Guðnadóttir, https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBKadB95sF45I8ypDP8cYu5glfXTT0FyH, and “That's Life” (1963) by Dean Kay and Kelly Gordon, performed by Lada Gaga, “Bewitched (Bothered and Bewildered)” (1940) by Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart, performed by Lady Gaga and Joaquin Phoenix, “To Love Somebody” (1967) by the Bee Gees, performed by Lady Gaga and Joaquin Phoenix, “If You Go Away” (1959) by Jacques Brel, performed by Joaquin Phoenix, and “(They Long to Be) Close to You” (1963) by Burt Bacharach and Hal David, performed by Lady Gaga and Joaquin Phoenix, https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKUcDyFltysbYrVO-rWYqfQqSuIKkxxgI

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, there's a cabal of grifters who absolutely lack principles. First, Megyn Kelly questioned whether Jeffrey Epstein was a pedophile, claiming he preferred "barely legal" 15-year-old girls who could pass as older, rather than younger children, based on an insider's view. This is disgusting. Then there's Steve Bannon who exchanged hundreds of emails and met at least once with Epstein.  Bannon created videos with Epstein to teach him how to handle hostile press. Why would anyone associate with Epstein? There's newly unsealed federal court documents detail how a 17-year-old homeless girl in Florida allegedly had sex with former Re. Matt Gaetz for $400 to fund braces for her teeth. And lastly there's Tucker Carlson who targeted Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the anti-Nazi Christian evangelist who tried to kill Hitler. It's time to clean up our own house who have a twisted version of American First.  Later, the U.S. healthcare system is the world's best, but some sort of health savings accounts that put more money in people's pockets, enabling them to choose and pay for their own healthcare premiums would be a great idea. Afterward, Gov Gavin Newsom's former chief of staff was indicted on 23 federal counts including conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud. Finally, will Barack Obama's library feature sections on figures like Mao, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Marx, and Engels, as well as racist America? To build his library Obama demolished a cherished national landmark—designed by Frederick Law Olmsted for the 1893 Chicago World's Fair. It's ironic that Obama protects monuments elsewhere but destroys this historic area. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome back to The Tom Bilyeu Show Live, where thought-provoking debate and unfiltered takes collide in real time. In this explosive episode, Tom Bilyeu and co-host Drew dive headfirst into the week's most controversial headlines—starting with the freshly unearthed email allegations linking Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, and what that means for public perception, accountability, and the ever-shifting boundaries of scandal. But that's just the beginning. The conversation takes a sharp turn into the heart of political ideology, as Tom Bilyeu draws bold lines between socialism, communism, state-run capitalism, and authoritarianism. He doesn't shy away from naming names, unpacking the influence of public figures like Mamdani, and warning of the historical dangers he sees in popular movements—citing examples from the writings on Mao, Stalin, and beyond. Is the current direction of democratic socialism a slippery slope, or a misunderstood path to progress? How do ideas—dangerous or otherwise—gain momentum, and what's the true cost when policy meets real-world consequences? Alongside Drew, the pair weigh up everything from government spending, deficits, and the logic—or lack thereof—of modern monetary theory, to why “free” often comes with a hidden price tag. If you've ever wondered how the economic choices of today shape the society of tomorrow, or where the line is drawn between strong leadership and dangerous dogma, you won't want to miss this candid, high-stakes conversation. So, get ready for riveting insights and sharp commentary—it's all here, right now, on The Tom Bilyeu Show Live. What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business: join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER:  https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business: see if you qualify here.:  https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox: sign up here.: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Linkedin: Post your job free at https://linkedin.com/impacttheory HomeServe: Help protect your home systems – and your wallet – with HomeServe against covered repairs. Plans start at just $4.99 a month at https://homeserve.com Bevel Health: 1st month FREE at https://bevel.health/impact with code IMPACT ButcherBox: Your choice of holiday protein — ham or turkey in your first box, or ground beef for life — plus $20 off at https://butcherbox.com/impact Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code IMPACT at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/impact BlandAI: Call it for free today: https://bland.ai Or for enterprises, you can book a demo directly:  https://bland.ai/enterprise Connectteam: 14 day free trial at https://connecteam.cc/46GxoTFd Raycon: Go to https://buyraycon.com/impact to get up to 30% off sitewide. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SPONSORS: 1) MIZZEN & MAIN: Right now, Mizzen & Main is offering our listeners 20% off your first purchase at http://mizzenandmain.com , promo code JULIAN20 2) GHOSTBED: Right now, GhostBed's Black Friday Sale, you can get 25% off already-reduced prices, PLUS a free Massaging Neck Pillow with your mattress purchase. Just go to http://GhostBed.com/julian and use promo code JULIAN at checkout PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey (***TIMESTAMPS in description below) ~ Elizabeth Lane is an investigative journalist and Chief Operating Officer at UNIFYD TV. ELIZABETH's LINKS: X: https://x.com/imelizabethlane IG: https://www.instagram.com/elizabethlaneofficial/?hl=en FOLLOW JULIAN DOREY INSTAGRAM (Podcast): https://www.instagram.com/juliandoreypodcast/ INSTAGRAM (Personal): https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey/ X: https://twitter.com/julianddorey JULIAN YT CHANNELS - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Clips YT: https://www.youtube.com/@juliandoreyclips - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Daily YT: https://www.youtube.com/@JulianDoreyDaily - SUBSCRIBE to Best of JDP: https://www.youtube.com/@bestofJDP ****TIMESTAMPS**** 0:00 - John Kiriakou, Georgian Roots & Elizabeth's Story, JFK 11:15 - USSR & Gorbachev, Fascism vs Communism, Elites 22:49 - Brainwashing, Lobbying, CIA & Corporations 33:52 - Why Julian Thinks America is Still the Best, Economic Hitman 43:38 - JFK's Vision, NASA Moon Landing, Conspiracy Overload Problem 55:29 - Delusional Power, Soviet History, Joseph Stalin 1:07:36 - Types of Communism in USSR, Stalin vs. Leninists 1:26:02 - Generalizing Problems, Elites & Hitler during WW2 1:38:45 - Shadow Government, Relationship w/ Russia 1:48:08 - Vladimir Putin 2:03:00 - Putin Dictator Actions, Putin k1lling Nemtsov 2:13:15 - Julian's Hang Up With What is Happening Today 2:21:39 - Elizabeth's Coverage of Charlie Kirk Shooter's Trial 2:31:57 - Who is lying about Charlie Kirk Assassination, “Miracle” Tweet 2:42:06 - Stupid Conspiracies Around Charlie's D3ath, Investigating what happened 2:56:05 - Understanding counterarguments CREDITS: - Host, Editor & Producer: Julian Dorey - COO, Producer & Editor: Alessi Allaman - https://www.youtube.com/@UCyLKzv5fKxGmVQg3cMJJzyQ - In-Studio Producer: Joey Deef - https://www.instagram.com/joeydeef/ Julian Dorey Podcast Episode 355 - Elizabeth Lane Music by Artlist.io Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hitler is still popular, even 80 years after his death. People still compare politicians to him, make documentaries, and do impressions. A REAL headline this morning: Hitler's DNA Reveals Nazi Leader Likely Had Syndrome That Can Affect Genitals. We aren't sure why we needed to know that, but we break down the entire research. Also on the show: TSA workers are getting $10,000 bonuses personally by Kristi Noem for working through the shutdown, Trump threatened a billion-dollar lawsuit against BBC for a doctored January 6 clip, and syndicated columnist Ron Hart joins the show to talk about the Epstein/Trump emails. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

SHOW 11-12-25 CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR 1930 THE SHOW BEGINS IN THE DOUBTS ABOUT CHINA'S LEADERSHIP. FIRST HOUR 9-915 Allied AI Competition and Submarine Requests. Scott Harold examines the crucial role of allies Japan and South Korea in the AI competition against China. Japan is developing locally tailored AI models built on US technology for use in Southeast Asia. South Korea aims to become the third-largest AI power, offering reliable models to counter China's untrustworthy technology. Harold also discusses South Korea's surprising request for nuclear-powered, conventionally armed submarines to track Chinese and North Korean vessels, signaling a greater public willingness to contribute to China deterrence. 915-930 Rare Earths Monopoly and US Strategy. General Blaine Holt discusses China's challenge to the US and its allies regarding rare earths, noting that China previously threatened to cut off supply. The US is securing deals with partners like Australia and is on track to replace China entirely, despite initial processing reliance on Chinese predatory practices. Holt suggests a two-year recovery is conservative, as technology for domestic processing exists. He also notes China's leadership is in turmoil, trying to buy time through trade deals. 930-945 Russian Economic Stagnation and War Finance. Michael Bernstam confirms that the Russian economy is stagnating, expecting no growth for years due to exhausted resources and reliance on military production. Oil and gas revenues are down significantly due to Western sanctions and high discounts, widening the budget deficit. Russia is increasing taxes, including the VAT, which drives inflation in staples. This economic pain damages the popularity of the war by hurting the low-income population—the primary source of military recruitment. 945-1000 Buckley, Fusionism, and Conservative Integrity. Peter Berkowitz explores William F. Buckley's consolidation of the conservative movement through "fusionism"—blending limited government and social conservatism. Buckley purged the movement of anti-Semites based on core principles. Berkowitz uses this historical context to analyze the controversy surrounding Tucker Carlson giving a platform to Nick Fuentes, who openly celebrates Stalin and Hitler. This incident caused division after the Heritage Foundation's president, Kevin Roberts, defended Carlson, prompting Roberts to issue an apology. SECOND HOUR 10-1015 Commodity Markets and UK Political Instability. Simon Constable analyzes rare earth markets, noting China's dominance is achieved through undercutting prices and buying out competitors. Prices for key industrial commodities like copper and aluminum are up, indicating high demand. Constable also discusses UK political instability, noting that Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer lacks natural leadership and confidence. The major political driver for a potential leadership change is the party's broken promise regarding income taxes, which severely undermines public trust before the next election, 1015-1030 Commodity Markets and UK Political Instability. Simon Constable analyzes rare earth markets, noting China's dominance is achieved through undercutting prices and buying out competitors. Prices for key industrial commodities like copper and aluminum are up, indicating high demand. Constable also discusses UK political instability, noting that Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer lacks natural leadership and confidence. The major political driver for a potential leadership change is the party's broken promise regarding income taxes, which severely undermines public trust before the next election 1030-1045 Austrian Economics, Von Mises, and the Fight Against Interventionism. Carola Binder discusses the Austrian School of Economics, highlighting its focus on free markets and Ludwig von Mises's opposition to government "interventionism," including rent and price controls. Mises argued these policies distort markets, leading to shortages and inefficiency. Binder emphasizes Mises's belief that economic literacy is a primary civic duty necessary for citizens to reject socialism and interventionist panaceas, especially as new generations are exposed to such ideas. 1045-1100 Austrian Economics, Von Mises, and the Fight Against Interventionism. Carola Binder discusses the Austrian School of Economics, highlighting its focus on free markets and Ludwig von Mises's opposition to government "interventionism," including rent and price controls. Mises argued these policies distort markets, leading to shortages and inefficiency. Binder emphasizes Mises's belief that economic literacy is a primary civic duty necessary for citizens to reject socialism and interventionist panaceas, especially as new generations are exposed to such ideas. THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 Philippine Missile Deployment to Deter China. Captain Jim Fanell reports that the Philippines unveiled its first operational BrahMos anti-ship cruise missile battery in western Luzon to deter Chinese aggression. This supersonic missile system, part of the $7.2 billion Reorizon 3 modernization program, gives the Philippines "skin in the game" near disputed waters like Scarborough Shoal. The deployment signifies a strategy to turn the Philippines into a "porcupine," focusing defense on the West Philippine Sea. The systems are road-mobile, making them difficult to target. 1115-1130 AI, Cyber Attacks, and Nuclear Deterrence. Peter Huessy discusses the challenges to nuclear deterrence posed by AI and cyber intrusions. General Flynn highlighted that attacks on satellites, the backbone of deterrence, could prevent the US from confirming where a launch originated. Huessy emphasizes the need to improve deterrence, noting that the US likely requires presidential authorization for retaliation, unlike potential Russian "dead hand" systems. The biggest risk is misinformation delivered by cyber attacks, although the US maintains stringent protocols and would never launch based solely on a computer warning. 1130-1145 Sudan Civil War, Global Proxies, and Nigerian Violence. Caleb Weiss and Bill Roggio analyze the civil war in Sudan between the SAF and the RSF, noting both factions commit atrocities, including massacres after the capture of El Fasher. The conflict is fueled by opposing global coalitions: the UAE and Russia support the RSF, while Iran, Egypt, and Turkey back the SAF. The Islamic State has called for foreign jihadis to mobilize. Weiss also addresses the complicated violence in Nigeria, differentiating jihadist attacks on Christians from communal farmer-herder conflict. 1145-1200 Sudan Civil War, Global Proxies, and Nigerian Violence. Caleb Weiss and Bill Roggio analyze the civil war in Sudan between the SAF and the RSF, noting both factions commit atrocities, including massacres after the capture of El Fasher. The conflict is fueled by opposing global coalitions: the UAE and Russia support the RSF, while Iran, Egypt, and Turkey back the SAF. The Islamic State has called for foreign jihadis to mobilize. Weiss also addresses the complicated violence in Nigeria, differentiating jihadist attacks on Christians from communal farmer-herder conflict. FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 Corruption, Chinese Influence, and Protests in Serbia. Ivana Stradner discusses protests in Serbia demanding accountability one year after a canopy collapse killed 16 people, with investigations linking the accident to high-level corruption involving a Chinese company. Leader Vučić suppresses discontent by alleging the West is plotting a "color revolution." Although Vučić aligns his heart with Russia and China, he needs EU money for political survival, prompting him to offer weapons to the West and claim Serbia is on the EU path. 1215-1230 The Muslim Brotherhood and Its Global Network. Cliff May discusses the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the progenitor of Hamas, founded in 1928 after the Ottoman Caliphate's abolition. The MB's goal is to establish a new Islamic empire. Qatar is highly supportive, hosting Hamas leaders, while the UAE and Saudi Arabia have banned the MB. Turkish President Erdoğan is considered MB-adjacent and sympathetic, supporting Hamas and potentially viewing himself as a future Caliph, despite Turkey being a NATO member. 1230-1245 Commercial Space Records and Political Impacts on NASA. Bob Zimmerman covers new records in commercial space: SpaceX achieved 147 launches this year, and one booster tied the Space Shuttle Columbia for 28 reuses. China also set a record with 70 launches but had a failure. Commercial space faced temporary impacts, such as an FAA launch curfew due to a government shutdown and air traffic controller shortages. Zimmerman speculates that Jared Isaacman's conservative-leaning public appearance at Turning Point USA might have convinced Trump to renominate him for NASA Administrator. 1245-100 AM Commercial Space Records and Political Impacts on NASA. Bob Zimmerman covers new records in commercial space: SpaceX achieved 147 launches this year, and one booster tied the Space Shuttle Columbia for 28 reuses. China also set a record with 70 launches but had a failure. Commercial space faced temporary impacts, such as an FAA launch curfew due to a government shutdown and air traffic controller shortages. Zimmerman speculates that Jared Isaacman's conservative-leaning public appearance at Turning Point USA might have convinced Trump to renominate him for NASA Administrator.

Delhi car explosion: DNA test confirms that Dr. Umar Nabi was involved in the incident!NIA conducts searches across 5 states?Delhi car blast: “Are even educated people turning into extremists?” – asks P. ChidambaramDelhi car blast case: Ponnar links Rahul Gandhi – Vijay Vasanth condemns!“What happened in Delhi was indeed a terrorist attack!” – Marco Rubio, U.S. Secretary of StatePakistan's army chief Asim Munir gains supreme powers over the military, judiciary, and nuclear authority!Bihar: Vote counting tomorrow!Tamil Nadu: 50 million people have received SIR forms so far“I myself am struggling to fill the S.I.R. form – which relative's name should I mention?” – Selvaperundagai“If Karnataka fails to comply with the order!” – Supreme Court issues stern warning in Cauvery water casePetrol bomb thrown near Governor's residence: 10 years imprisonment?“After seeing PM Modi's actions, Trump said he's scared and will reduce taxes” – BJP State President Nainar NagendranBJP TN chief Nainar Nagendran reacts to Thamizhaga Vettri Kazhagam leader Vijay's commentsPM Modi to visit Coimbatore on the 19th?Sivakasi: Railway flyover issue heats up – “Our leader is Modi; our daddy too!” – Rajendra BalajiJanuary 2: Vaiko's walking campaign… will the Chief Minister greet him?PMK: “DMK works actively during elections, but what about us?” – Anbumani in party administrators' meetingVaithilingam denies reports of rejoining AIADMKRussian President Vladimir Putin to visit India on December 5!Rajasthan: IAS wife files complaint against IAS husband – police register FIR!

Tucker Carlson remains at the center of conservative media attention following a series of high-profile interviews and controversies in recent days. Most notably, Carlson has continued to grow his independent media platform, “The Tucker Carlson Show,” which now reaches millions on YouTube, Facebook, and X. Last week, he aired an in-depth interview focusing on the Armenian political crisis, featuring Narek Karapetyan—the nephew of imprisoned Armenian philanthropist Samvel Karapetyan—and Karapetyan's attorney, Bob Amsterdam. During the 80-minute segment, Carlson strongly criticized Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, alleging an assault on the Armenian Apostolic Church and accusing Pashinyan of authoritarian tactics. The interview rapidly spread across social media, with millions of views on X and significant engagement on other platforms. Pashinyan's allies attempted to discredit Carlson by suggesting that the interview was paid for, though these claims have not been substantiated and were dismissed by those involved.Simultaneously, Carlson has generated major backlash for broadcasting a lengthy, friendly interview with Nick Fuentes, a figure widely recognized for white nationalist, antisemitic, and extremist views. Fuentes used Carlson's platform to amplify several controversial positions, including antisemitic stereotypes about “organized Jewry in America” and expressing admiration for Joseph Stalin, who orchestrated deaths of millions, including many Jews. The episode sparked immediate and significant condemnation, even from within conservative ranks. Prominent Republicans, such as Senator Lindsey Graham at the Republican Jewish Coalition meeting, publicly distanced themselves from the ideologies expressed, with Graham joking that he belongs to the “Hitler-sucks wing of the Republican Party.” Jewish advocacy groups and numerous commentators warned that Carlson's interview represented a normalization of antisemitism and extremist rhetoric.The controversy has caused turmoil at the influential Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind Project 2025. Heritage's president, Kevin Roberts, initially defended Tucker Carlson, calling him a close friend and decrying efforts to “cancel” him. This defense attributed criticism of Carlson to “slander” and a “venomous coalition,” but was met with internal dissent and public criticism. Some Heritage Foundation staff, prominent donors, and allies objected to Roberts' statements, arguing that defending Carlson overlooked the seriousness of providing a platform to extremist voices. Senior research fellow Robert Rector and other members stated that such figures must be actively pushed out for the movement's credibility. The backlash led to the disaffiliation of leaders from the Foundation's antisemitism task force and prompted Roberts to release an apology asserting he did not know much about Fuentes and recognizing his handling of the situation as a mistake, but refusing to step down as president.In response to criticisms about the Fuentes interview and his approach to controversial guests, Tucker Carlson sat for an interview with Megyn Kelly. When Kelly challenged him on why he hadn't confronted Fuentes on his history of hateful statements, Carlson responded dismissively, telling Kelly to “buzz off” and suggesting that those who disagreed with his editorial choices could interview Fuentes themselves. This exchange was widely discussed, highlighting Carlson's refusal to adopt a more conventional broadcast approach of pressing extremist guests on their past comments.Beyond these immediate controversies, Carlson remains a vocal critic of perceived surveillance state tendencies, with commentary on platforms like X involving the Trump administration's technology partnerships—such as with Palantir—drawing attention from supporters across the right and further tying him to debates around privacy, civil liberties, and state power.Carlson's current influence on the broader media and political landscape remains substantial. His willingness to engage fringe or inflammatory figures has escalated calls within conservative circles to more clearly define their boundaries regarding extremism and antisemitism. At the same time, some supporters frame ongoing criticism of Carlson as an attack on free speech and an attempt by establishment forces to constrain grassroots conservative discourse.Thank you for listening to the Tucker Carlson News Tracker podcast and don't forget to subscribe. This has been a quiet please production, for more check out quiet please dot ai.For more http://www.quietplease.aiGet the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOtaThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

The Apology podcast is back, and with such a guest! Henry Rollins, the musician, author, radio DJ, and actor, is here to speak with your host Jesse Pearson about many book-related topics such as his yearly re-reading of The Stooges history, obscure Stalin-era Russian writers, seeking solace in libraries as a youth, and managing his reading and writing time as mortality looms ever on the horizon. An inspiring and uplifting episode, and one we are sure you'll savor. Thanks for listening!

The full notes and charts are here.I can't get a sense of whether this will scale up. It keeps seeming like it has to; like this is the Achilles heel. I am not getting why it's being made so obvious that he's into pre-teens and underage teenagers right in front of everyone's faces; this is obviously a form of moral torture. The disclosures that Jon Stewart pulled together in July were vexing, including deposition testimony and comments on Howard Stern indicating that a girl 12-years-old was too young but that was his limit. He said this ON AIR in the studio.Stewart pulled this together in July; I saw it about two weeks ago. He is sourcing his documents. I lean toward trusting Jon Stewart as he was the one public presenter, though retired at the time, to question the covid shots, on the Colbert show, and Steve understandably did not appear happy about that. Notably Comedy Central and CBS are now part of the same company (Paramount). Black Rock, State Street and Vanguard all hold large portions of Paramount. So all the “hedge fund parties” are represented here. Well, except for Blackstone.---I assume those who are stage managing the Epstein scenario are the same ones that did Kirk and Butler. (I think the evidence is strong that Erika Frantzve Kirk's nonprofit was involved in child trafficking, though it really was hers in name only.) The three emails (released by Democrats in congress) are here, including one from a political strategy discussion with author Michal Wolff (who allegedly received Epstein's final message before his claimed 2019 death and who wrote three books about Trump claiming Epstein as a cloaked source).From this email you can see the strategy that surrounds Epstein and his handlers, which is kompromat, a Stalin-era KGB word for “compromising material.” That seemed to be the whole Epstein game. But I suspect there is far more; that Epstein is the coverup and not the crime.So the question is, does this pan out? The astrology says this is the thing that ultimately will. Under the rules of litigation and investigative journalism, the emails are primary source materials reportedly released by a government authority and presumed to be authentic; but that is a legal presumption. It can be challenged but it's difficult to refute.Here is the follow up story about 20,000 emails released by Republicans a few hours later. This seems like a pissing match to see who will ultimately take him out.Thank you for visiting. You are listening to Planet Waves. You can hear my full length show every Friday night at https://planetwaves.fm My Substack is: https://planetwaves.substack.com/ Visit the Astrology Boutique https://www.astrology.boutique/

The White House marked Anti Communism Week, and we're digging into why it matters. Todd lays out the hard truth history won't erase—communist regimes murdered roughly 100 million people in the 20th century—then traces the ideology from Marx to Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, and why today's “democratic socialism” still points the same direction. We contrast equality of outcome with equality under freedom, revisit wisdom from Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan, and explain why America's founders built guardrails against government control. If you want clarity on the difference between compassionate charity and coercive state power—and why free people flourish—this one's for you. Conservative, not bitter… and absolutely pro-truth and pro-freedom.

The White House marked Anti Communism Week, and we're digging into why it matters. Todd lays out the hard truth history won't erase—communist regimes murdered roughly 100 million people in the 20th century—then traces the ideology from Marx to Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, and why today's “democratic socialism” still points the same direction. We contrast equality of outcome with equality under freedom, revisit wisdom from Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan, and explain why America's founders built guardrails against government control. If you want clarity on the difference between compassionate charity and coercive state power—and why free people flourish—this one's for you. Conservative, not bitter… and absolutely pro-truth and pro-freedom.

For three years following the Russian Revolution, the small South Caucasian country of Georgia was a democracy, but Stalin later ordered the Red Army to invade and to bring the country back under Russian rule. Communist attacks on political opponents, trade unions, cooperatives, and even the church sparked resistance, and an armed uprising broke out across the nation in 1924. It was swiftly crushed, with massacres of thousands, including hostages. Social Democratic and Labor parties across Europe reacted with shock and indignation. Soviet opponents began to describe communism as “red fascism” and their own movement as “democratic socialism.” What followed—including Socialist support for the creation of NATO—resulted from the Georgian uprising and its aftermath. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine a century later, the long-forgotten Georgian experience examined in The August Uprising, 1924: The Georgian Anti-Soviet Revolt and the Birth of Democratic Socialism (McFarland, 2025) seems more relevant than ever. The website for this book is here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

For three years following the Russian Revolution, the small South Caucasian country of Georgia was a democracy, but Stalin later ordered the Red Army to invade and to bring the country back under Russian rule. Communist attacks on political opponents, trade unions, cooperatives, and even the church sparked resistance, and an armed uprising broke out across the nation in 1924. It was swiftly crushed, with massacres of thousands, including hostages. Social Democratic and Labor parties across Europe reacted with shock and indignation. Soviet opponents began to describe communism as “red fascism” and their own movement as “democratic socialism.” What followed—including Socialist support for the creation of NATO—resulted from the Georgian uprising and its aftermath. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine a century later, the long-forgotten Georgian experience examined in The August Uprising, 1924: The Georgian Anti-Soviet Revolt and the Birth of Democratic Socialism (McFarland, 2025) seems more relevant than ever. The website for this book is here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

For three years following the Russian Revolution, the small South Caucasian country of Georgia was a democracy, but Stalin later ordered the Red Army to invade and to bring the country back under Russian rule. Communist attacks on political opponents, trade unions, cooperatives, and even the church sparked resistance, and an armed uprising broke out across the nation in 1924. It was swiftly crushed, with massacres of thousands, including hostages. Social Democratic and Labor parties across Europe reacted with shock and indignation. Soviet opponents began to describe communism as “red fascism” and their own movement as “democratic socialism.” What followed—including Socialist support for the creation of NATO—resulted from the Georgian uprising and its aftermath. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine a century later, the long-forgotten Georgian experience examined in The August Uprising, 1924: The Georgian Anti-Soviet Revolt and the Birth of Democratic Socialism (McFarland, 2025) seems more relevant than ever. The website for this book is here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

For three years following the Russian Revolution, the small South Caucasian country of Georgia was a democracy, but Stalin later ordered the Red Army to invade and to bring the country back under Russian rule. Communist attacks on political opponents, trade unions, cooperatives, and even the church sparked resistance, and an armed uprising broke out across the nation in 1924. It was swiftly crushed, with massacres of thousands, including hostages. Social Democratic and Labor parties across Europe reacted with shock and indignation. Soviet opponents began to describe communism as “red fascism” and their own movement as “democratic socialism.” What followed—including Socialist support for the creation of NATO—resulted from the Georgian uprising and its aftermath. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine a century later, the long-forgotten Georgian experience examined in The August Uprising, 1924: The Georgian Anti-Soviet Revolt and the Birth of Democratic Socialism (McFarland, 2025) seems more relevant than ever. The website for this book is here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

To what extent does the course of history turn on the force of individual personalities? It's a question that looms large when examining the unlikely alliance forged between Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union that ultimately triumphed over the Axis powers in the Second World War. Danny Bird speaks with author Tim Bouverie to explore the complex, often uneasy rapport between Winston Churchill, Franklin D Roosevelt and Josef Stalin. Tim delves into the secrets, suspicions and towering ambitions that defined this remarkable chapter in wartime diplomacy, revealing how the fragile unity among these three leaders not only shaped the path to victory but also laid the uneasy foundations of the postwar world order. (Ad) Tim Bouverie is the author of Allies at War: The Politics of Defeating Hitler (Bodley Head, 2025). Buy it now from Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Allies-War-Struggles-Between-Allied/dp/0593138368/?tag=bbchistory045-21&ascsubtag=historyextra-social-histboty. The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Dean Karayanis, New York Sun columnist and former Rush Limbaugh staffer, sits in for Derek. Topics include Scott Bessant and George Stephanopoulos sparring over the filibuster, Senator Moreno calling out Senator Schumer on Obamacare subsidies for millionaires, and GOP messaging going forward. Plus, the take of the ghost toilet, and how Communist China uses counterfeit products to hurt productivity — illustrated by the 1991 film, “The Inner Circle,” on Joseph Stalin's projectionist. The baseball great Darryl Strawberry's pardon by President Trump rounds out the show.

Last time we spoke about the Changsha fire. Chiang Kai-shek faced a brutal choice: defend Wuhan to the last man or flood the land to slow the invaders. He chose both, pushing rivers and rallying a fractured army as Japanese forces pressed along the Yangtze. Fortresses at Madang held long, but the cost was high—troops lost, civilians displaced, a city's heart burning in the night. Wuhan fell after months of brutal fighting, yet the battle did not break China's will. Mao Zedong urged strategy over martyrdom, preferring to drain the enemy and buy time for a broader struggle. The Japanese, though victorious tactically, found their strength ebbing, resource strains, supply gaps, and a war that felt endless. In the wake of Wuhan, Changsha stood next in the Japanese crosshairs, its evacuation and a devastating fire leaving ash and memory in its wake. Behind these prices, political currents swirled. Wang Jingwei defected again, seeking power beyond Chiang's grasp, while Chongqing rose as a western bastion of resistance. The war hardened into a protracted stalemate, turning Japan from an aggressive assailant into a wary occupier, and leaving China to endure, persist, and fight on.   #175  The Soviet-Japanese Border Conflicts Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. So based on the title of this one, you probably can see we are taking a bit of a detour. For quite some time we have focused on the Japanese campaigns into China proper 1937-1938. Now the way the second sino-japanese war is traditionally broken down is in phases. 1937-1938, 1939-1942 and 1942-1945. However there is actually even more going on in China aside from the war with Japan. In Xinjiang province a large full blown Islamic revolution breaks out in 1937. We will be covering that story at a later date, but another significant event is escalating border skirmishes in Manchukuo. Now these border skirmishes had been raging ever since the USSR consolidated its hold over the far east. We talked about some of those skirmishes prior to the Sino-Soviet war in 1929. However when Japan created the puppet government of Manchukuo, this was a significant escalation in tensions with the reds. Today we are going to talk about the escalating border conflicts between the Soviets and Japan. A tongue of poorly demarcated land extends southeast from Hunchun, hugging the east bank of the Tumen River between Lake Khasan to the east and Korea to the west. Within this tongue stands Changkufeng Hill, one of a long chain of highlands sweeping from upstream along the rivers and moors toward the sea. The twin-peaked hill sits at the confluence area several miles northwest of the point where Manchuria, Korea, and the Russian Far East meet. The hill's shape reminded Koreans of their changgo, which is a long snare drum constricted at the center and tapped with the hands at each end. When the Manchus came to the Tumen, they rendered the phonetic sounds into three ideographic characters meaning "taut drum peaks" or Chang-ku-feng. The Japanese admired the imagery and preserved the Chinese readings, which they pronounce Cho-ko-ho. From their eastern vantage, the Russians called it Zaozernaya, "hill behind the lake." Soviet troops referred to it as a sugar-loaf hill. For many years, natives and a handful of officials in the region cultivated a relaxed attitude toward borders and sovereignty. Even after the Japanese seized Manchuria in 1931, the issue did not immediately come to a head. With the expansion of Manchukuo and the Soviet Far East under Stalin's Five-Year plans, both sides began to attend more closely to frontier delimitation. Whenever either party acted aggressively, force majeure was invoked to justify the unexpected and disruptive events recognized in international law. Most often, these incidents erupted along the eastern Manchurian borders with the USSR or along the 350-mile frontier south of Lake Khanka, each skirmish carrying the seeds of all-out warfare. Now we need to talk a little bit about border history. The borders in question essentially dated to pacts concluded by the Qing dynasty and the Tsardom. Between the first Sino-Russian Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689 and the Mukden Agreement of 1924, there were over a dozen accords governing the borders. Relevant to Changkufeng were the basic 15-article Convention of Peking, supplementing the Tientsin Treaties of November 1860, some maps made in 1861, and the eight-article Hunchun Border Protocol of 1886. By the 1860 treaty, the Qing ceded to Tsarist Russia the entire maritime province of Siberia, but the meaning of "lands south of Lake Khanka" remained rather vague. Consequently, a further border agreement was negotiated in June 1861 known as "the Lake Khanka Border Pact", by which demarcations were drawn on maps and eight wooden markers erected. The border was to run from Khanka along ridgelines between the Hunchun River and the sea, past Suifenho and Tungning, terminating about 6 miles from the mouth of the Tumen. Then a Russo-Chinese commission established in 1886 drew up the Hunchun Border Pact, proposing new or modified markers along the 1860–1861 lines and arranging a Russian resurvey. However, for the Japanese, in 1938, the Chinese or Manchu texts of the 1886 Hunchun agreement were considered controlling. The Soviets argued the border ran along every summit west of Khasan, thereby granting them jurisdiction over at least the eastern slopes of all elevations, including Changkufeng and Shachaofeng.  Since the Qing dynasty and the house of Romanov were already defunct, the new sovereignties publicly appealed to opposing texts, and the Soviet side would not concede that the Russian-language version had never been deemed binding by the Qing commissioners. Yet, even in 1938, the Japanese knew that only the Chinese text had survived or could be located.    Now both the Chinese and Russian military maps generally drew the frontier along the watershed east of Khasan; this aligned with the 1861 readings based on the Khanka agreement. The Chinese Republican Army conducted new surveys sometime between 1915 and 1920. The latest Chinese military map of the Changkufeng area drew the border considerably closer to the old "red line" of 1886, running west of Khasan but near the shore rather than traversing the highland crests. None of the military delimitations of the border was sanctified by an official agreement. Hence, the Hunchun Protocol, whether well known or not, invaluable or worthless, remained the only government-to-government pact dealing with the frontiers.  Before we jump into it, how about a little summary of what became known as the Soviet-Japanese border conflicts. The first major conflict would obviously be the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905. Following years of conflict between the Russian Empire and Japan culminating in the costly Battle of Tsushima, Tsar Nicholas II's government sought peace, recognizing Japan's claims to Korea and agreeing to evacuate Manchuria.  From 1918 to 1920, the Imperial Japanese Army, under Emperor Taishō after the death of Meiji, assisted the White Army and Alexander Kerensky against the Bolshevik Red Army. They also aided the Czechoslovak Legion in Siberia to facilitate its return to Europe after an Austrian-Hungarian armoured train purportedly went astray. By 1920, with Austria-Hungary dissolved and Czechoslovakia established two years earlier, the Czechoslovak Legion reached Europe. Japan withdrew from the Russian Revolution and the Civil War in 1922. Following Japan's 1919-1920 occupations and the Soviet intervention in Mongolia in 1921, the Republic of China also withdrew from Outer Mongolia in 1921. In 1922, after capturing Vladivostok in 1918 to halt Bolshevik advances, Japanese forces retreated to Japan as Bolshevik power grew and the postwar fatigue among combatants increased. After Hirohito's invasion of Manchuria in 1931–1932, following Taishō's death in 1926, border disputes between Manchukuo, the Mongolian People's Republic, and the Soviet Union increased. Many clashes stemmed from poorly defined borders, though some involved espionage. Between 1932 and 1934, the Imperial Japanese Army reported 152 border disputes, largely tied to Soviet intelligence activity in Manchuria, while the Soviets accused Japan of 15 border violations, six air intrusions, and 20 cases of "spy smuggling" in 1933 alone. Numerous additional violations followed in the ensuing years. By the mid-1930s, Soviet-Japanese diplomacy and trust had deteriorated further, with the Japanese being openly labeled "fascist enemies" at the Seventh Comintern Congress in July 1935. Beginning in 1935, conflicts significantly escalated. On 8 January 1935, the first armed clash, known as the Halhamiao incident, took place on the border between Mongolia and Manchukuo. Several dozen cavalrymen of the Mongolian People's Army crossed into Manchuria near disputed fishing grounds and engaged an 11‑man Manchukuo Imperial Army patrol near the Buddhist temple at Halhamiao, led by a Japanese military advisor. The Manchukuo Army sustained 6 wounded and 2 dead, including the Japanese officer; the Mongols suffered no casualties and withdrew after the Japanese sent a punitive expedition to reclaim the area. Two motorized cavalry companies, a machine‑gun company, and a tankette platoon occupied the position for three weeks without resistance. In June 1935, the first direct exchange of fire between the Japanese and Soviets occurred when an 11‑man Japanese patrol west of Lake Khanka was attacked by six Soviet horsemen, reportedly inside Manchukuo territory. In the firefight, one Soviet soldier was killed and two horses were captured. The Japanese requested a joint investigation, but the Soviets rejected the proposal. In October 1935, nine Japanese and 32 Manchukuoan border guards were establishing a post about 20 kilometers north of Suifenho when they were attacked by 50 Soviet soldiers. The Soviets opened fire with rifles and five heavy machine guns. Two Japanese and four Manchukuoan soldiers were killed, and another five were wounded. The Manchukuoan foreign affairs representative lodged a verbal protest with the Soviet consul at Suifenho. The Kwantung Army of Japan also sent an intelligence officer to investigate the clash. On 19 December 1935, a Manchukuoan unit reconnoitering southwest of Buir Lake clashed with a Mongolian party, reportedly capturing 10 soldiers. Five days later, 60 truck‑borne Mongolian troops assaulted the Manchukuoans and were repulsed, at the cost of three Manchukuoan dead. On the same day, at Brunders, Mongolian forces attempted three times to drive out Manchukuoan outposts, and again at night, but all attempts failed. Further small attempts occurred in January, with Mongolians using airplanes for reconnaissance. The arrival of a small Japanese force in three trucks helped foil these attempts; casualties occurred on both sides, though Mongolian casualties are unknown aside from 10 prisoners taken. In February 1936, Lieutenant-Colonel Sugimoto Yasuo was ordered to form a detachment from the 14th Cavalry Regiment to "drive the Outer Mongol intruders from the Olankhuduk region," a directive attributed to Lieutenant-General Kasai Heijuro. Sugimoto's detachment included cavalry guns, heavy machine guns, and tankettes. They faced a force of about 140 Mongolians equipped with heavy machine guns and light artillery. On February 12, Sugimoto's men drove the Mongolians south, at the cost of eight Japanese killed, four wounded, and one tankette destroyed. The Japanese began to withdraw, but were attacked by 5–6 Mongolian armored cars and two bombers, which briefly disrupted the column. The situation was stabilized when the Japanese unit received artillery support, allowing them to destroy or repel the armored cars. In March 1936, the Tauran incident occurred. In this clash, both the Japanese Army and the Mongolian Army deployed a small number of armored fighting vehicles and aircraft. The incident began when 100 Mongolian and six Soviet troops attacked and occupied the disputed village of Tauran, Mongolia, driving off the small Manchurian garrison. They were supported by light bombers and armored cars, though the bombing sorties failed to inflict damage on the Japanese, and three bombers were shot down by Japanese heavy machine guns. Local Japanese forces counter-attacked, conducting dozens of bombing sorties and finally assaulting Tauran with 400 men and 10 tankettes. The result was a Mongolian rout, with 56 Mongolian soldiers killed, including three Soviet advisors, and an unknown number wounded. Japanese losses were 27 killed and 9 wounded. Later in March 1936, another border clash occurred between Japanese and Soviet forces. Reports of border violations prompted the Japanese Korean Army to send ten men by truck to investigate, but the patrol was ambushed by 20 Soviet NKVD soldiers deployed about 300 meters inside territory claimed by Japan. After suffering several casualties, the Japanese patrol withdrew and was reinforced with 100 men, who then drove off the Soviets. Fighting resumed later that day when the NKVD brought reinforcements. By nightfall, the fighting had ceased and both sides had pulled back. The Soviets agreed to return the bodies of two Japanese soldiers who had died in the fighting, a development viewed by the Japanese government as encouraging. In early April 1936, three Japanese soldiers were killed near Suifenho in another minor affray. This incident was notable because the Soviets again returned the bodies of the fallen servicemen. In June 1937, the Kanchazu Island incident occurred on the Amur River along the Soviet–Manchukuo border. Three Soviet gunboats crossed the river's center line, disembarked troops, and occupied Kanchazu Island. Japanese forces from the IJA 1st Division, equipped with two horse-drawn 37 mm artillery pieces, quickly established improvised firing positions and loaded their guns with both high-explosive and armor-piercing shells. They shelled the Soviet vessels, sinking the lead gunboat, crippling the second, and driving off the third. Japanese troops subsequently fired on the swimming crewmen from the sunken ships using machine guns. Thirty-seven Soviet soldiers were killed, while Japanese casualties were zero. The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs protested and demanded the Soviet forces withdraw from the island. The Soviet leadership, apparently shocked by the incident and reluctant to escalate, agreed to evacuate their troops. By 1938 the border situation had deteriorated. The tangled terrain features, mountain, bog, stream, forest, and valley, would have complicated even careful observers' discernment of the old red line drawn in 1886. Fifty years later, the markers themselves had undergone a metamorphosis. Japanese investigators could find, at most, only 14 to 17 markers standing fairly intact between the Tumen estuary and Khanka—roughly one every 25 miles at best. The remainder were missing or ruined; five were found in new locations. Marker "K," for example, was 40 meters deeper inside Manchuria, away from Khanka. Japanese military experts noted that of the 20 markers originally set along the boundaries of Hunchun Prefecture alone, only four could be found by the summer of 1938. The rest had either been wrecked or arbitrarily moved and discarded by Russian or Chinese officials and inhabitants. It is even said that one missing marker could be seen on display in Khabarovsk. The Chinese had generally interpreted the boundary as the road line just west of Khasan, at least in practice. Free road movement, however, had become a problem even 20 years before the Japanese overran Manchuria in 1931–1932 during the so-called Manchurian Incident. The Japanese adopted, or inherited, the Chinese interpretation, which was based on the 1886 agreement on border roads; the key clause held that the frontier west of Khasan would be the road along the lake. Japanese sources emphasize that local residents' anger toward gradual Soviet oppression and penetrations westward into Manchurian territory fueled the conflict. Many natives believed the original boundaries lay east of the lake, but the Soviets adjusted the situation to suit their own convenience. In practice, the Russians were restricting road use just west of Khasan by Manchurian and Korean residents. There was speculation that this was a prelude to taking over the ridgelines, depending on the reaction of the Manchukuoan–Japanese side. Villagers who went to streams or the lake to launder clothing found themselves subjected to sniper fire. Along a 25-mile stretch of road near Shachaofeng, farmers reported coming under fire from new Soviet positions as early as November 1935. Nevertheless, Japanese and Koreans familiar with the Tumen area noted agrarian, seasonal Korean religious rites atop Changkufeng Hill, including fattened pigs sacrificed and changgo drums beaten. Village elders told Japanese visitors in 1938 that, until early the preceding year, no Russians had come as far as Changkufeng Hill. Looking only at the border sector around Changkufeng, the easy days were clearly behind us. In the summer of 1938, Gaimusho "Foreign Ministry" observers described the explosive situation along the Korea–Manchuria–USSR borders as a matter of de facto frontiers. Both sides pressed against each other, and their trigger-happy posture was summed up in the colloquial refrain: "Take another step and we'll let you have it." Near dawn on 13 June 1938, a Manchurian patrol detected a suspicious figure in the fog swirling over Changlingtzu Hill on the Siberian–Manchurian frontier. Challenged at 15 feet, the suspect hurled two pistols to the ground and raised his hands in surrender. At headquarters, the police soon realized this was no routine border-trespassing case. The man was a defector and he was a Russian general, in fact he was the director of all NKVD forces in the Soviet Far East. Beneath a mufti of spring coat and hunting cap, he wore a full uniform with medals. His identification card No. 83 designated him as G. S. Lyushkov, Commissar 3rd Class, countersigned by Nikolai Yezhov, NKVD head in Moscow. Lyushkov was promptly turned over to the Japanese military authorities, who transferred him to Seoul and then to Tokyo under close escort. On 1 July, the Japanese press was permitted to disclose that Lyushkov had sought refuge in Japan. Ten days later, to capitalize on the commissar's notoriety and to confound skeptics, the Japanese produced Lyushkov at a press conference in Tokyo. For the Japanese and foreign correspondents, who met separately with him, Lyushkov described Soviet Far East strength and the turmoil wracking the USSR, because for those of you unfamiliar this was during the Stalinist purges. Clearly, the Japanese had gained a unique reservoir of high-level intelligence and a wealth of materials, including notes scratched in blood by suspects incarcerated at Khabarovsk. A general tightening of Russian frontier security had recently been reported. Natives of Fangchuanting asserted that a Soviet cavalry patrol appeared in June, seemingly for the first time. Contact with Yangkuanping, northwest of Khasan, was severed. More importantly, Japanese Army Signal Corps intelligence detected a surge of Soviet message traffic from the Posyet Bay district. After Lyushkov's defection, a drastic reshuffle in the local Russian command apparently occurred, and responsibility for border surveillance seems to have been reallocated. Japanese records indicate that the Novokievsk security force commander was relieved and the sector garrison replaced by troops from Vladivostok. Gaimusho intelligence also received reports that a border garrison unit had been transferred from Khabarovsk or Chita to the Tumen sector. The Kwantung Army signal monitors also intercepted two significant frontline messages on 6 July from the new Russian local commander in the Posyet region, addressed to Lieutenant General Sokolov in Khabarovsk. Decoded, the messages suggested (1) that ammunition for infantry mortars amounted to less than half the required supply; and  (2) a recommendation that higher headquarters authorize Russian elements to secure certain unoccupied high ground west of Khasan.  The commander noted terrain advantages and the contemplated construction of emplacements that would command Najin and the Korean railway. As a start, at least one Russian platoon should be authorized to dig in on the highest ground (presumably Changkufeng) and deploy four tons of entanglements to stake out the Soviet claim. Korea Army Headquarters received a telegram from the Kwantung Army on 7 July conveying the deciphered messages. On the same day, the 19th Division in North Korea telephoned Seoul that, on 6 July, three or four Soviet horsemen had been observed reconnoitering Manchurian territory from atop a hill called Changkufeng. The alarming intelligence from the Kwantung Army and the front warranted immediate attention by the Korea Army. Some Kwantung Army officers doubted the significance of the developments, with one intelligence official even suggesting the Russian messages might be a deliberate ploy designed to entrap the Japanese at Changkufeng. On 7–8 July, all staff officers in Seoul convened at army headquarters. The name of Changkufeng Hill was not well known, but maps and other data suggested that neither the Japanese nor the Russians had previously stationed border units in the ridge complex west of Khasan. As early as March 1936, Army Commander Koiso Kuniaki had distributed maps to subordinate units, indicating which sectors were in dispute. No patrol was to enter zones lacking definitive demarcation. Until then, the only Japanese element east of the Tumen was a Manchurian policeman at Fangchuanting. Ownership of the high ground emerged as an early issue. A number of other points were raised by  the Kwantung Army: At present, Soviet elements in the area were negligible. The intrusion must not be overlooked. The Russians could be expected to exploit any weakness, and half-measures would not suffice, especially regarding the Japanese defense mission along a 125-mile frontier. In Japanese hands, Changkufeng Hill would be useful, but two excellent observation posts already existed in the neighboring sector of the Manchurian tongue. With dissidence and purges underway, the Russians may have judged it necessary to seal border gaps, particularly after Lyushkov's defection. They may also have sought to control Changkufeng to offset Japanese dominance of the high ground to the north. Soviet seizure of Changkufeng would upset the delicate status quo and could provoke a contest for equivalent observation posts. In broader terms, it mattered little whether the Russians sought a permanent observation post on Changkufeng Hill, which was of relatively minor strategic value. Japan's primary concern lay in the China theater; Changkufeng was peripheral. The Japanese should not expend limited resources or become distracted. The matter required consultation with the high command in Tokyo. In the absence of more comprehensive intelligence, the assembled staff officers concluded that the Korea Army should, at a minimum, ignore or disregard Soviet actions for the time being, while maintaining vigilant observation of the area. The consensus was communicated to Major General Kitano Kenzo, the Korea Army chief of staff, who concurred, and to Koiso. Upon learning that the recommendation advocated a low posture, Koiso inquired only whether the opinion reflected the unanimous view of the staff. Having been assured that it did, he approved the policy. Koiso, then 58, was at the threshold of the routine personnel changes occurring around 15 July. He had just been informed that he would retire and that General Nakamura Kotaro would succeed him. Those acquainted with Koiso perceived him as treating the border difficulties as a minor anticlimax in the course of his command tour. He appeared unemphatic or relaxed as he prepared to depart from a post he had held for twenty-one years. Although neither Koiso nor his staff welcomed the Soviet activities that appeared under way, his reaction likely reflected a reluctance to make decisions that could constrain his soon-to-arrive successor. On 8 July Koiso authorized the dispatch of warnings to the 19th Division at Nanam, to the Hunchun garrison, and to the intelligence branch at Hunchun. These units were instructed to exercise maximum precautions and to tighten frontier security north of Shuiliufeng. In response to the initial appearance of Soviet horsemen at Changkufeng, the Kucheng Border Garrison Unit of the 76th Infantry Regiment maintained close surveillance across the Tumen. By about noon on 9 July, patrols detected approximately a dozen Russian troops commencing construction atop Changkufeng. Between 11 and 13 July, the number of soldiers on the slopes increased to forty; there were also thirty horses and eleven camouflaged tents. Operating in shifts on the western side, thirty meters from the crest, the Russians erected barbed wire and firing trenches; fifty meters forward, they excavated observation trenches. In addition to existing telephone lines between Changkufeng, Lake Khasan, and Kozando, the Russians installed a portable telephone net. Logistical support was provided by three boats on the lake. Approximately twenty kilometers to the east, well within Soviet territory, large forces were being mobilized, and steamship traffic into Posyet Bay intensified. Upon learning of the "intrusion" at Changkufeng on 9 July, Lt. General Suetaka Kamezo, the commander of the 19th Division, dispatched staff officers to the front and prepared to send elements to reinforce border units.  The special significance of Suetaka and his division stemmed from a series of unusual circumstances. Chientao Province, the same zone into which Lyushkov had fled and the sector where Soviet horsemen had appeared, fell within Manchukuo geographically and administratively. Yet, in terms of defense, the configuration of the frontier, the terrain, and the transportation network more closely connected the region with North Korea than with southeastern Manchuria. Approximately 80% of the population was of Korean origin, which implied Japanese rather than Manchukuoan allegiance. Consequently, the Korea Army had been made operationally responsible for the defense of Chientao and controlled not only the three-battalion garrison at Hunchun but also the intelligence detachment located there. In the event of war, the Korea Army's mission was defined as mobilization and execution of subsidiary operational tasks against the USSR, under the control and in support of the Kwantung Army.  The Korea Army ordinarily possessed two infantry divisions, the 19th in North Korea and the 20th stationed at Seoul, but the 20th Division had already departed for China, leaving only the 20th Depot Division in the capital. Beyond sparse ground units, devoid of armor and with weak heavy artillery, there were only two air regiments in Korea, the nearest being the unit at Hoeryong. The Korea Army was designed to maintain public security within Korea as well as fulfill minimal defensive responsibilities. Such an army did not require a full-time operations officer, and none was maintained. When needed, as in mid-1938, the task fell to the senior staff officer, in this case Colonel Iwasaki Tamio. In peacetime, training constituted the primary focus.  Thus, the 19th Division was entrusted with defending northeastern Korea. Its commander, Suetaka, a seasoned infantryman, resented the fact that his elite force had never engaged in combat in China. He intensified training with zeal, emphasizing strict discipline, bravery, aggressiveness, and thorough preparation. Japanese veterans characterized him as severe, bullish, short-tempered, hot-blooded, highly strung, unbending, and stubborn. Nonetheless, there was widespread respect for his realistic training program, maintained under firm, even violent, personal supervision. His men regarded Suetaka as a professional, a modern samurai who forged the division into superb condition. Privately, he was reputed for sensitivity and warmth; a Japanese phrase "yakamashii oyaji" captures the dual sense of stern father and martinet in his character. At the outset, however, Suetaka displayed little aggression. Although not widely known, he did not welcome the orders from army headquarters to deploy to the Tumen. Until late July, he remained somewhat opposed to the notion of dislodging the Soviets from the crest, a proposition arising from neither the division staff nor, initially, Suetaka himself. Colonel Sato noted that, for a week after reports of Soviet excavation at Changkufeng, the division's response was limited to preparations for a possible emergency, as they perceived the matter as a local issue best settled through diplomacy. Korea Army officers acknowledged that, around the time the Soviets consolidated their outpost strength at Changkufeng, an informal and personal telegram arrived in Seoul from a Kwantung Army Intelligence field-grade officer who specialized in Soviet affairs. If the Korea Army hesitated, the Kwantung Army would be obliged to eject the Russians; the matter could not be ignored. While the telegram did not demand a reply and struck several officers as presumptuous and implausible, the message was promptly shown to Koiso. Koiso was driven to immediate action, he wired Tokyo asserting that only the Korea Army could and would handle the incident. One staff officer recalled "We felt we had to act, out of a sense of responsibility. But we resented the Kwantung Army's interference." The Korea Army staff convened shortly after receipt of the unofficial telegram from Hsinking. Based on the latest intelligence from the division dated 13 July, the officers prepared an assessment for submission to the army commander. The hypotheses were distilled into three scenarios: The USSR, or the Far East authorities, desires hostilities. Conclusion: Slightly possible. The USSR seeks to restrain Japan on the eve of the pivotal operations in China: the major Japanese offensive to seize Hankow. Conclusion: Highly probable. The Posyet district commander is new in his post; by occupying the Changkufeng ridges, he would demonstrate loyalty, impress superiors, and seek glory. Conclusion: Possible. Late on 13 July or early on 14 July, Koiso approved the dispatch of a message to the vice minister of war, and the Kwantung Army chief of staff:  "Lake Khasan area lies in troublesome sector USSR has been claiming . . . in accordance with treaties [said Secret Message No. 913], but we interpret it to be Manchukuoan territory, evident even from maps published by Soviet side. Russian actions are patently illegal, but, considering that area does not exert major or immediate influence on operations [Japan] is intending and that China Incident is in full swing, we are not going to conduct counterattack measures immediately. This army is thinking of reasoning with Soviets and requesting pullback, directly on spot. . . . In case Russians do not accede in long run, we have intention to drive Soviet soldiers out of area east of Khasan firmly by use of force."  The message concluded with a request that the Tokyo authorities lodge a formal protest with the USSR, on behalf of Manchukuo and Japan, and guide matters so that the Russians would withdraw quickly. Dominant in Japanese high command thinking in 1938 was the China theater; the Changkufeng episode constituted a mere digression. A sequence of Japanese tactical victories had preceded the summer: Tsingtao fell in January; the Yellow River was reached in March; a "reformed government of the Republic of China" was installed at Nanking several weeks later; Amoy fell in early May; Suchow fell on the 20th. With these gains, northern and central fronts could be linked by the Japanese. Yet Chinese resistance persisted, and while public statements anticipated imminent Chinese dissension, private admissions acknowledged that the partial effects of Suchow's fall were ominous: control might pass from Chiang Kai-shek to the Communists, Chinese defiance might intensify, and Soviet involvement could ensue. A Hankow drive appeared desirable to symbolize the conclusion of the military phase of hostilities. The Japanese and their adversaries were in accord regarding the importance of the summer and autumn campaigns. Even after Suchow's fall, the government discouraged public insinuations that enemy resistance was collapsing; when Chiang addressed the nation on the first anniversary of hostilities, Premier Konoe prophetically proclaimed, "The war has just begun." Colonel Inada Masazum served as the Army General Staff's principal figure for the Changkufeng affair, occupying the position of chief of the 2nd Operations Section within the Operations Bureau in March 1938. A distinguished graduate of the Military Academy, Inada completed the War College program and held a combination of line, instructional, and staff assignments at the War College, the Army General Staff, and the War Ministry. He was recognized as a sharp, highly capable, and driveful personality, though some regarded him as enigmatic. Following the capture of Suchow, Imperial General Headquarters on 18 June ordered field forces to undertake operational preparations for a drive to seize the Wuhan complex. Inada favored a decisive move aimed at achieving a rapid political settlement. He acknowledged that Soviet intervention in 1938, during Japan's involvement in China, would have been critical. Although Japanese forces could still defeat the Chinese, an overextended Japanese Army might be fatally compromised against the Russians. Soviet assistance to China was already pronouncedly unwelcome. The Soviets were reported to possess roughly 20 rifle divisions, four to five cavalry divisions, 1,500 tanks, and 1,560 aircraft, including 300 bombers with a range of approximately 3,000 kilometers, enabling reach from Vladivostok to Tokyo. Soviet manpower in Siberia was likely near 370,000. In response, Japanese central authorities stressed a no-trouble policy toward the USSR while seeking to "wall off" the border and bolster the Kwantung Army as quickly as possible. Nevertheless, the envisaged correction of the strategic imbalance could not occur before 1943, given shortages in ammunition, manpower, and materiel across existing theaters in China. By the end of 1937 Japan had committed 16 of its 24 divisions to China, bringing the standing force to roughly 700,000. Army General Staff planners reallocated three ground divisions, intended for a northern contingency, from north to central China, even as the Kwantung Army operated from a less favorable posture. Attitudes toward the northern problem varied within senior military circles. While concern persisted, it was not universal. As campaigns in China widened, planning at the high command level deteriorated, propagating confusion and anxiety to field armies in China. The Japanese Navy suspected that the Army general staff was invoking the USSR as a pretext for broader strategic aims—namely, to provoke a more consequential confrontation with the USSR while the Navy contended with its own strategic rivalries with the Army, centered on the United States and Britain. Army leaders, however, denied aggressive intent against the USSR at that time. The Hankow plan encountered substantial internal opposition at high levels. Private assessments among army planners suggested that a two-front war would be premature given operational readiness and troop strength. Not only were new War Ministry officials cautious, but many high-ranking Army general staff officers and court circles shared doubts.  Aggressive tendencies, influenced by subordinates and the Kwantung Army, were evident in Inada, who repeatedly pressed Tada Shun, the deputy army chief of staff, to endorse the Wuhan drive as both necessary and feasible, arguing that the USSR would gain from Japan's weakening without incurring substantial losses. Inada contended that Stalin was rational and that time favored the USSR in the Far East, where industrial buildup and military modernization were ongoing. He argued that the Soviet purges impeded opportunistic ventures with Japan. He posited that Nazi Germany posed a growing threat on the western front, and thus the USSR should be avoided by both Japan, due to China and Russia, due to Germany. While most of the army remained engaged in China, Tada did not initially share Inada's views; only after inspecting the Manchurian borders in April 1938 did he finally align with Inada's broader vision, which encompassed both northern and Chinese considerations. During this period, Inada studied daily intelligence from the Kwantung Army, and after Lyushkov's defection in June, reports suggested the Soviets were following their sector commander's recommendations. Russian troops appeared at Changkufeng, seemingly prepared to dig in. Inada recollects his reaction: "That's nice, my chance has come." I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. The simmering Soviet–Japanese border clashes centered on Changkufeng Hill near Lake Khanka, set within a broader history of contested frontiers dating to Qing and Tsarist treaties. Japan, prioritizing China, considered Changkufeng peripheral but ready to confront Soviet encroachment; Moscow aimed to consolidate border gains, with high-level war planning overlaying regional skirmishes. Conflict loomed over Manchuria.

Esto es HistoCast. No es Esparta pero casi. Vamos a las planicies del Este de Europa para tratar la productividad de sus tierras a lo largo del tiempo junto a Pablo Marina Losada y @goyix_salduero.Secciones Historia: - Rusia de antes de la I Guerra Mundial - 11:43 - Gobierno bolchevique - 2:01:14 - El Holodomor - 2:15:00 - Vavilov - 2:41:08 - Lysenko - 2:53:19 - Eliminación de rivales - 3:49:49 - Hambruna de 1946 - 4:13:27 - Plan de Transformación de la Naturaleza - 4:44:39 - Caída de Lysenko - 5:51:00 - Impacto en otros países - 6:06:11 - Bibliografía - 6:38:57

Few people outside Kazakhstan know of the famine that destroyed nomadic life in the 1930s, and left more than a third of the population dead or displaced to China and far beyond. The famine, called Asharshylyk in Kazakh, was one of the most deadly man-made famines of the 20th Century; even more so, proportionately, than the much better known Holodomor in Ukraine during the same period. It resulted from the coming of Soviet power, the violent suppression of nomadism and forced settlement into disastrous collective farms. During the Soviet years, no one mentioned the Asharshylyk in public and its history was not at schools or universities. Rose Kudabayeva's grandparents didn't breathe a word to her about the Asharshylyk although they lived through the worst of it, losing several of their children. Now she travels through Kazakhstan trying to fill out the story, meeting archivists, writers, musicians, camel farmers and of course her own relatives.

62 MinutesPG-13Thomas777 is a revisionist historian and a fiction writer.Thomas joins Pete to continue a series examing the work of Viktor Suvorov (Vladimir Rezin) and Joachim Hoffmann who sought to prove in their books, "Icebreaker," and "Stalin's War of Extermination," that Stalin orchestrated the beginning of World War 2.Thomas' SubstackRadio Free Chicago - T777 and J BurdenThomas777 MerchandiseThomas' Buy Me a CoffeeThomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 1"Thomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 2"Thomas on TwitterThomas' CashApp - $7homas777Pete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

durée : 00:58:42 - Les Grandes Traversées - par : Marie Chartron - Début mars 1953, un huis clos dans une datcha à l'ouest de Moscou : Joseph Staline se meurt. Nikita Khrouchtchev, qui a secrètement enregistré ses souvenirs sur bande pendant plusieurs années, se remémore ces événements. Et sa voix nous accompagne. - réalisation : Diphy Mariani

On Friday's Mark Levin Show, why do individuals like Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes have any following, given their vile hatred toward Jews, Christians, and Americans? Given their promotion of Hitler, Stalin; their disrespect for the Greatest Generation that won World War II; their support for Hamas and Islamists against Israel. The problem is that ​not ​enough ​of ​our ​fellow ​citizens ​are ​educated ​about ​these ​two ​people ​and ​others – so Mark exposes them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

To listen to the full version of this conversation, subscribe to Inside Call me Back: https://inside.arkmedia.orgLearn more about opening a JCF charitable fund today for flexible and strategic giving at jcfny.orgGift a subscription of Inside Call me Back: http://inside.arkmedia.org/giftsJonah Goldberg in the LA Times: latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-10-28/donald-trump-dictatorJonah Goldberg's The Remnant podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-remnant-with-jonah-goldberg/id1291144720Jonah Goldberg's Suicide of the West: https://www.amazon.com/Suicide-West-Tribalism-Nationalism-Destroying/dp/1101904933Zineb Riboua at The Free Press on the right's misconceptions about Mamdani: https://www.thefp.com/p/what-the-right-gets-wrong-about-zohranSubscribe to Amit Segal's newsletter ‘It's Noon in Israel': https://arkmedia.org/amitsegal/Watch Call me Back on YouTube: youtube.com/@CallMeBackPodcastCheck out Ark Media's other podcasts: For Heaven's Sake: https://lnk.to/rfGlrA‘What's Your Number?': https://lnk.to/rfGlrAFor sponsorship inquiries, please contact: callmeback@arkmedia.orgTo contact us, sign up for updates, and access transcripts, visit: https://arkmedia.org/Ark Media on Instagram: https://instagram.com/arkmediaorgDan on X: https://x.com/dansenorDan on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dansenorTo order Dan Senor & Saul Singer's book, The Genius of Israel: https://tinyurl.com/bdeyjsdnToday's Episode: This is a sneak peek into Friday's members-only INSIDE Call me Back episode with Jonah Goldberg. The episode explored the growing pressure on Jews coming from both ends of the American political spectrum, and due to the importance of this conversation we decided to unlock a part of it for our listeners.This past Tuesday, democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani won the race for mayor of New York City, home to the largest number of Jews outside Israel. Mamdani is a 34-year old self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist and staunch anti-Zionist. His election has caused many Jewish New Yorkers to fear for the future of communal life in their city. Meanwhile, over recent months, we have witnessed a disturbing rise in unabashed antisemitism on the Right. Just last week, Tucker Carlson interviewed far-right influencer Nick Fuentes, who has been open about his support for both Hitler and Stalin. To discuss the precarious situation of diaspora Jews as they're squeezed between the far left and the far right, Dan was joined by Jonah Goldberg. Jonah is the editor in chief and co-founder of The Dispatch and author of multiple books on political history and conservative ideas, including Suicide of the West and Liberal Fascism. He's also the host of the indispensable podcast, The Remnant.CREDITS:ILAN BENATAR - Producer & EditorADAAM JAMES LEVIN-AREDDY - Executive ProducerMARTIN HUERGO - Sound EditorMARIANGELES BURGOS - Additional EditingMAYA RACKOFF - Operations DirectorGABE SILVERSTEIN - ResearchYUVAL SEMO - Music Composer

A very unusual episode, where returning guest-panelist Safine Hakamaki (Née Ashirova) co-hosts an interview with Henry of the esteemed Svetlana Grivorevna Ter-Minasova.  In this episode, Henry and Safie discuss the life of Professor Ter-Minasova, from her early childhood during WWII up through the present, where she continues to work as the Founding President of the Faculty of Foreign Languages and Area Studies at Moscow State University!  During this oral-autobiography, we learn why she credits Joseph Stalin with saving her life, what it was like growing up during WWII and the immediate aftermath, and her career as the "Mother" of Soviet (and subsequently Russian) foreign language education.  We're sure you'll enjoy! Svetlana Grigorevna Ter-Minasova is the founder and President of the Faculty of Foreign Languages and Area Studies at Lomonosov Moscow State University, and retains a position as Professor Emeritus at the university.  She has been Chairperson of the Foreign Languages Teaching Council (part of the Ministry of Education) since 1987.  Among many other credits, she also has been the Founding President of both National Association of Applied Linguistics and National Association of Teachers of English.  Her book "Notes by a Soviet Dinosaur",  came out in 2015, and has been excerpted in East-West Review. Safie Hakamaki is a Russian linguist and foreign language educator.  You can follow her telegram channel @amusing_musings. Help support the show by signing up to our patreon, where you also will get bonus content: https://www.patreon.com/guerrillahistory 

Découvrez la suite du récit consacré à Léon Trotski, intellectuel et figure des révolutions russes, raconté par l'historienne Virginie Girod.Au moment où Lénine, à la tête de l'URSS, meurt en 1924, Trotski est malade et se repose loin de Moscou. Staline profite de l'absence de son rival pour s'imposer comme successeur légitime de Lénine. Son but : évincer ses opposants politiques.En 1929, Léon Trotski est expulsé des territoires soviétiques. Il erre alors à travers l'Europe et continue à écrire et diffuser ses idées. Il plaide pour une révolution communiste mondiale, quand Staline veut se concentrer sur l'avenir de la Russie. Finalement, Trotski trouve refuge au Mexique en 1936, aidé par le peintre communiste Diego Rivera.Alors que la Seconde Guerre mondiale plane sur le monde, Staline est de moins en moins populaire auprès de ses troupes. Il craint une révolte contre lui, menée par Trotski. Mais Staline a des moyens. Le 20 août 1940, Jacques Mornard, un prétendu journaliste belge, assassine Trotski à son domicile mexicain dans le cadre de l'opération Canard : une opération secrète russe visant à tuer Trotski. (rediffusion)Au Cœur de l'Histoire est un podcast Europe 1. - Ecriture et présentation : Virginie Girod - Production : Camille Bichler (avec Florine Silvant)- Direction artistique : Adèle Humbert et Julien Tharaud - Réalisation : Clément Ibrahim - Musique originale : Julien Tharaud - Musiques additionnelles : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis - Visuel : Sidonie ManginHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

On Wednesday's Mark Levin Show, Tuesday's election results were no surprise because the Democrats immigration strategy to change the demographics and citizenry, without assimilation, has worked. NYC will decline, the question is by how much and Virginia is now part of the federal government. If the election was about affordability why did NJ vote to increase their property taxes and energy bills? Also,  America is at a critical juncture, threatened by Marxist Islamists on the extreme left and the extreme right. These evil forces collude to dismantle the greatest nation ever, embodying freedom, diversity, tolerance, just law, and decentralized power, inherited through ancestral sacrifices. They embrace tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, Qatar's leaders, Iran, and Putin, aiming to impose ideologies, religions, or third-world status. We need to reject and deplatform enablers in media, think tanks, and organizations profiting from hate, Marxism, Islamism, antisemitism, or anti-Christianity via market forces. Later, neither the law nor the Constitution prohibits a President from imposing tariffs, which can serve purposes like rebuilding industries, countering foreign tariffs, or ensuring national security. Congress holds the power of the purse and could pass statutes to limit presidential tariff authority, but it has not done so, making judicial intervention unnecessary and a potential separation of powers issue. The Court should refrain from involvement, as any limits would come from congressional action or voter disapproval.  Afterward, Dinesh D'Souza calls in to explain the danger of Tucker Carlson, who is driving a wedge between Christians and Jews, America and Israel, and the pillars of Western civilization, which harms Trump, MAGA, and the Republican Party by inviting bigotries like anti-Semitism. Finally, Eli Sharabi, a former Hamas hostage from Kibbutz Berry, calls in to share his story of what happened of October 7th and beyond in his new book, Hostage. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0063489791/ During his 14-month captivity in tunnels, he lost over 60 pounds and bonded closely with fellow hostages, sharing daily conversations about their childhoods, families, friends, and hobbies to survive. They developed strategies for dealing with captors and analyzed them constantly. Throughout, they maintained unwavering hope and faith, believing it was only a matter of time before Israel, through the IDF, secret services, and leadership, would secure their release. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Écoutez l'histoire consacrée à Léon Trotski, intellectuel et figure des révolutions russes de 1917, racontée par l'historienne Virginie Girod dans un récit inédit en deux parties. Lev Davidovitch Bronstein, alias Léon Trotski, fréquente des cercles révolutionnaires dès son adolescence, à la fin du XIXe siècle. La Russie est alors un pays gouverné par le tsar Nicolas II, où les pénuries se mêlent à la misère. Sauf pour l'élite, établie à Saint-Pétersbourg. Léon Trotski, inspiré par l'œuvre de Karl Marx, rêve d'un monde communiste. À 23 ans, alors que le jeune homme parcourt l'Europe, il fait la rencontre de Lénine, à Londres. Les deux hommes se rapprochent. Quelques années plus tard, la Première Guerre mondiale éclate et en 1917, les Russes se révoltent face au tsar. Portés par Lénine, les bolcheviques s'imposent au pouvoir. Trotski, de son côté, sillonne le pays pour enrôler la population dans le mouvement révolutionnaire, quitte à user de la force. Entre Staline et lui, une concurrence s'installe pour succéder à Lénine. Et pour arriver à ses fins, Staline n'hésite pas à tendre un piège à Trotski.Au Cœur de l'Histoire est un podcast Europe 1. - Ecriture et présentation : Virginie Girod - Production : Camille Bichler (avec Florine Silvant)- Direction artistique : Adèle Humbert et Julien Tharaud - Réalisation : Clément Ibrahim - Musique originale : Julien Tharaud - Musiques additionnelles : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis - Visuel : Sidonie ManginHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Today's episode is the first of two exploring the origins, conduct and legacy of the Moscow Show Trials that Stalin staged from 1936-38. David talks to historian of Russia Edward Acton about what motivated these grotesque spectacles, how the defendants were chosen, how their confessions were extracted, why the rhetoric was so violent and who was fooled by what they saw and heard. Plus: how did the trials of these few lead to the murders of so many? Available tomorrow on PPF+: our second episode on the Moscow Show Trials in which David and Edward discuss the 1938 trial of Nikolai Bukharin, the most celebrated defendant of them all, whose case inspired some of the world's great political literature.  To get this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening sign up to PPF+ today https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus Next time in Politics on Trial: De Gaulle vs Pétain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Last time we spoke about the fall of Wuhan. In a country frayed by war, the Yangtze became a pulsing artery, carrying both hunger and hope. Chiang Kai-shek faced a brutal choice: defend Wuhan to the last man, or flood the rivers to buy time. He chose both, setting sullen floodwaters loose along the Yellow River to slow the invaders, a temporary mercy that spared some lives while ripping many from their homes. On the river's banks, a plethora of Chinese forces struggled to unite. The NRA, fractured into rival zones, clung to lines with stubborn grit as Japanese forces poured through Anqing, Jiujiang, and beyond, turning the Yangtze into a deadly corridor. Madang's fortifications withstood bombardment and gas, yet the price was paid in troops and civilians drowned or displaced. Commanders like Xue Yue wrestled stubbornly for every foothold, every bend in the river. The Battle of Wanjialing became a symbol: a desperate, months-long pincer where Chinese divisions finally tightened their cordon and halted the enemy's flow. By autumn, the Japanese pressed onward to seize Tianjiazhen and cut supply lines, while Guangzhou fell to a ruthless blockade. The Fall of Wuhan loomed inevitable, yet the story remained one of fierce endurance against overwhelming odds.   #174 The Changsha Fire Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. In the summer of 1938, amid the upheaval surrounding Chiang Kai-shek, one of his most important alliances came to an end. On June 22, all German advisers to the Nationalist government were summoned back; any who refused would be deemed guilty of high treason. Since World War I, a peculiar bond had tied the German Weimar Republic and China: two fledgling states, both weak and only partially sovereign. Under the Versailles Treaty of 1919, Germany had lost extraterritorial rights on Chinese soil, which paradoxically allowed Berlin to engage with China as an equal partner rather than a traditional colonizer. This made German interests more welcome in business and politics than those of other Western powers. Chiang's military reorganization depended on German officers such as von Seeckt and von Falkenhausen, and Hitler's rise in 1933 had not immediately severed the connection between the two countries. Chiang did not share Nazi ideology with Germany, but he viewed Berlin as a potential ally and pressed to persuade it to side with China rather than Japan as China's principal East Asian, anti-Communist partner. In June 1937, H. H. Kung led a delegation to Berlin, met Hitler, and argued for an alliance with China. Yet the outbreak of war and the Nationalists' retreat to Wuhan convinced Hitler's government to align with Japan, resulting in the recall of all German advisers. Chiang responded with a speech praising von Falkenhausen, insisting that "our friend's enemy is our enemy too," and lauding the German Army's loyalty and ethics as a model for the Chinese forces. He added, "After we have won the War of Resistance, I believe you'll want to come back to the Far East and advise our country again." Von Falkenhausen would later become the governor of Nazi-occupied Belgium, then be lauded after the war for secretly saving many Jewish lives. As the Germans departed, the roof of the train transporting them bore a prominent German flag with a swastika, a prudent precaution given Wuhan's vulnerability to air bombardment. The Japanese were tightening their grip on the city, even as Chinese forces, numbering around 800,000, made a stubborn stand. The Yellow River floods blocked northern access, so the Japanese chose to advance via the Yangtze, aided by roughly nine divisions and the might of the Imperial Navy. The Chinese fought bravely, but their defenses could not withstand the superior technology of the Japanese fleet. The only substantial external aid came from Soviet pilots flying aircraft bought from the USSR as part of Stalin's effort to keep China in the war; between 1938 and 1940, some 2,000 pilots offered their services. From June 24 to 27, Japanese bombers relentlessly pounded the Madang fortress along the Yangtze until it fell. A month later, on July 26, Chinese defenders abandoned Jiujiang, southeast of Wuhan, and its civilian population endured a wave of atrocities at the hands of the invaders. News of Jiujiang's fate stiffened resolve. Chiang delivered a pointed address to his troops on July 31, arguing that Wuhan's defense was essential and that losing the city would split the country into hostile halves, complicating logistics and movement. He warned that Wuhan's defense would also be a spiritual test: "the place has deep revolutionary ties," and public sympathy for China's plight was growing as Japanese atrocities became known. Yet Chiang worried about the behavior of Chinese soldiers. He condemned looting as a suicidal act that would destroy the citizens' trust in the military. Commanders, he warned, must stay at their posts; the memory of the Madang debacle underscored the consequences of cowardice. Unlike Shanghai, Wuhan had shelters, but he cautioned against retreating into them and leaving soldiers exposed. Officers who failed in loyalty could expect no support in return. This pep talk, combined with the belief that the army was making a last stand, may have slowed the Japanese advance along the Yangtze in August. Under General Xue Yue, about 100,000 Chinese troops pushed back the invaders at Huangmei. At Tianjiazhen, thousands fought until the end of September, with poison gas finally forcing Japanese victory. Yet even then, Chinese generals struggled to coordinate. In Xinyang, Li Zongren's Guangxi troops were exhausted; they expected relief from Hu Zongnan's forces, but Hu instead withdrew, allowing Japan to capture the city without a fight. The fall of Xinyang enabled Japanese control of the Ping-Han railway, signaling Wuhan's doom. Chiang again spoke to Wuhan's defenders, balancing encouragement with a grim realism about possible loss. Although Wuhan's international connections were substantial, foreign aid would be unlikely. If evacuation became necessary, the army should have a clear plan, including designated routes. He recalled the disastrous December retreat from Nanjing, where "foreigners and Chinese alike turned it into an empty city." Troops had been tired and outnumbered; Chiang defended the decision to defend Nanjing, insisting the army had sacrificed itself for the capital and Sun Yat-sen's tomb. Were the army to retreat again, he warned, it would be the greatest shame in five thousand years of Chinese history. The loss of Madang was another humiliation. By defending Wuhan, he argued, China could avenge its fallen comrades and cleanse its conscience; otherwise, it could not honor its martyrs. Mao Zedong, observing the situation from his far-off base at Yan'an, agreed strongly that Chiang should not defend Wuhan to the death. He warned in mid-October that if Wuhan could not be defended, the war's trajectory would shift, potentially strengthening the Nationalists–Communists cooperation, deepening popular mobilization, and expanding guerrilla warfare. The defense of Wuhan, Mao argued, should drain the enemy and buy time to advance the broader struggle, not become a doomed stalemate. In a protracted war, some strongholds might be abandoned temporarily to sustain the longer fight. The Japanese Army captured Wuchang and Hankou on 26 October and captured Hanyang on the 27th, which concluded the campaign in Wuhan. The battle had lasted four and a half months and ended with the Nationalist army's voluntary withdrawal. In the battle itself, the Japanese army captured Wuhan's three towns and held the heartland of China, achieving a tactical victory. Yet strategically, Japan failed to meet its objectives. Imperial Headquarters believed that "capturing Hankou and Guangzhou would allow them to dominate China." Consequently, the Imperial Conference planned the Battle of Wuhan to seize Wuhan quickly and compel the Chinese government to surrender. It also decreed that "national forces should be concentrated to achieve the war objectives within a year and end the war against China." According to Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Seiya Matsuno, Hirohito authorized the use of chemical weapons against China by specific orders known as rinsanmei. During the Battle of Wuhan, Prince Kan'in Kotohito transmitted the emperor's orders to deploy toxic gas 375 times between August and October 1938. Another memorandum uncovered by Yoshimi indicates that Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni authorized the use of poison gas against the Chinese on 16 August 1938. A League of Nations resolution adopted on 14 May condemned the Imperial Japanese Army's use of toxic gas. Japan's heavy use of chemical weapons against China was driven by manpower shortages and China's lack of poison gas stockpiles to retaliate. Poison gas was employed at Hankou in the Battle of Wuhan to break Chinese resistance after conventional assaults had failed. Rana Mitter notes that, under General Xue Yue, approximately 100,000 Chinese troops halted Japanese advances at Huangmei, and at the fortress of Tianjiazhen, thousands fought until the end of September, with Japanese victory secured only through the use of poison gas. Chinese generals also struggled with coordination at Xinyang; Li Zongren's Guangxi troops were exhausted, and Hu Zongnan's forces, believed to be coming to relieve them, instead withdrew. Japan subsequently used poison gas against Chinese Muslim forces at the Battle of Wuyuan and the Battle of West Suiyuan. However, the Chinese government did not surrender with the loss of Wuhan and Guangzhou, nor did Japan's invasion end with Wuhan and Guangzhou's capture. After Wuhan fell, the government issued a reaffirmation: "Temporary changes of advance and retreat will not shake our resolve to resist the Japanese invasion," and "the gain or loss of any city will not affect the overall situation of the war." It pledged to "fight with even greater sorrow, greater perseverance, greater steadfastness, greater diligence, and greater courage," dedicating itself to a long, comprehensive war of resistance. In the Japanese-occupied rear areas, large armed anti-Japanese forces grew, and substantial tracts of territory were recovered. As the Japanese army themselves acknowledged, "the restoration of public security in the occupied areas was actually limited to a few kilometers on both sides of the main transportation lines." Thus, the Battle of Wuhan did not merely inflict a further strategic defeat on Japan; it also marked a turning point in Japan's strategic posture, from offense to defense. Due to the Nationalist Army's resolute resistance, Japan mobilized its largest force to date for the attack, about 250,000 personnel, who were replenished four to five times over the battle, for a total of roughly 300,000. The invaders held clear advantages in land, sea, and air power and fought for four and a half months. Yet they failed to annihilate the Nationalist main force, nor did they break the will to resist or the army's combat effectiveness. Instead, the campaign dealt a severe blow to the Japanese Army's vitality. Japanese-cited casualties totaled 4,506 dead and 17,380 wounded for the 11th Army; the 2nd Army suffered 2,300 killed in action, 7,600 wounded, and 900 died of disease. Including casualties across the navy and the air force, the overall toll was about 35,500. By contrast, the Nationalist Government Military Commission's General Staff Department, drawing on unit-level reports, calculated Japanese casualties at 256,000. The discrepancy between Japanese and Nationalist tallies illustrates the inflationary tendencies of each side's reporting. Following Wuhan, a weakened Japanese force confronted an extended front. Unable to mount large-scale strategic offensives, unlike Shanghai, Xuzhou, or Wuhan itself, the Japanese to a greater extent adopted a defensive posture. This transition shifted China's War of Resistance from a strategic defensive phase into a strategic stalemate, while the invaders found themselves caught in a protracted war—a development they most disliked. Consequently, Japan's invasion strategy pivoted: away from primary frontal offensives toward a greater reliance on political inducements with secondary military action, and toward diverting forces to "security" operations behind enemy lines rather than pushing decisive frontal campaigns. Japan, an island nation with limited strategic resources, depended heavily on imports. By the time of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, Japan's gold reserves,including reserves for issuing banknotes, amounted to only about 1.35 billion yen. In effect, Japan's currency reserves constrained the scale of the war from the outset. The country launched its aggression while seeking an early solution to the conflict. To sustain its war of aggression against China, the total value of military supplies imported from overseas in 1937 reached approximately 960 million yen. By June of the following year, for the Battle of Wuhan, even rifles used in training were recalled to outfit the expanding army. The sustained increase in troops also strained domestic labor, food, and energy supplies. By 1939, after Wuhan, Japan's military expenditure had climbed to about 6.156 billion yen, far exceeding national reserves. This stark reality exposed Japan's economic fragility and its inability to guarantee a steady supply of military materiel, increasing pressure on the leadership at the Central Command. The Chief of Staff and the Minister of War lamented the mismatch between outward strength and underlying weakness: "Outwardly strong but weak is a reflection of our country today, and this will not last long." In sum, the Wuhan campaign coincided with a decline in the organization, equipment, and combat effectiveness of the Japanese army compared with before the battle. This erosion of capability helped drive Japan to alter its political and military strategy, shifting toward a method of inflicting pressure on China and attempting to "use China to control China", that is, fighting in ways designed to sustain the broader war effort. Tragically a major element of Chiang Kai-shek's retreat strategy was the age-old "scorched earth" policy. In fact, China originated the phrase and the practice. Shanghai escaped the last-minute torching because of foreigners whose property rights were protected. But in Nanjing, the burning and destruction began with increasing zeal. What could not be moved inland, such as remaining rice stocks, oil in tanks, and other facilities, was to be blown up or devastated. Civilians were told to follow the army inland, to rebuild later behind the natural barrier of Sichuan terrain. Many urban residents complied, but the peasantry did not embrace the plan. The scorched-earth policy served as powerful propaganda for the occupying Japanese army and, even more so, for the Reds. Yet they could hardly have foreseen the propaganda that Changsha would soon supply them. In June, the Changsha Evacuation Guidance Office was established to coordinate land and water evacuation routes. By the end of October, Wuhan's three towns had fallen, and on November 10 the Japanese army captured Yueyang, turning Changsha into the next primary invasion target. Beginning on October 9, Japanese aircraft intensified from sporadic raids on Changsha to large-scale bombing. On October 27, the Changsha Municipal Government urgently evacuated all residents, exempting only able-bodied men, the elderly, the weak, women, and children. The baojia system was mobilized to go door-to-door, enforcing compliance. On November 7, Chiang Kai-shek convened a military meeting at Rongyuan Garden to review the war plan and finalize a "scorched earth war of resistance." Xu Quan, Chief of Staff of the Security Command, drafted the detailed implementation plan. On November 10, Shi Guoji, Chief of Staff of the Security Command, presided over a joint meeting of Changsha's party, government, military, police, and civilian organizations to devise a strategy. The Changsha Destruction Command was immediately established, bringing together district commanders and several arson squads. The command actively prepared arson equipment and stacked flammable materials along major traffic arteries. Chiang decided that the city of Changsha was vulnerable and either gave the impression or the direct order, honestly really depends on the source your reading, to burn the city to the ground to prevent it falling to the enemy. At 9:00 AM on November 12, Chiang Kai-shek telegraphed Zhang Zhizhong: "One hour to arrive, Chairman Zhang, Changsha, confidential. If Changsha falls, the entire city must be burned. Please make thorough preparations in advance and do not delay." And here it seems a game of broken telephone sort of resulted in one of the worst fire disasters of all time. If your asking pro Chiang sources, the message was clearly, put up a defense, once thats fallen, burn the city down before the Japanese enter. Obviously this was to account for getting civilians out safely and so forth. If you read lets call it more modern CPP aligned sources, its the opposite. Chiang intentionally ordering the city to burn down as fast as possible, but in through my research, I think it was a colossal miscommunication. Regardless Zhongzheng Wen, Minister of the Interior, echoed the message. Simultaneously, Lin Wei, Deputy Director of Chiang Kai-shek's Secretariat, instructed Zhang Zhizhong by long-distance telephone: "If Changsha falls, the entire city must be burned." Zhang summoned Feng Ti, Commander of the Provincial Capital Garrison, and Xu Quan, Director of the Provincial Security Bureau, to outline arson procedures. He designated the Garrison Command to shoulder the preparations, with the Security Bureau assisting. At 4:00 PM, Zhang appointed Xu Kun, Commander of the Second Garrison Regiment, as chief commander of the arson operation, with Wang Weining, Captain of the Social Training Corps, and Xu Quan, Chief of Staff of the Garrison Command, as deputies. At 6:00 PM, the Garrison Command held an emergency meeting ordering all government agencies and organizations in the city to be ready for evacuation at any moment. By around 10:15 PM, all urban police posts had withdrawn. Around 2:00 AM (November 13), a false report circulated that "Japanese troops have reached Xinhe" . Firefighters stationed at various locations rushed out with kerosene-fueled devices, burning everything in sight, shops and houses alike. In an instant, Changsha became a sea of flames. The blaze raged for 72 hours. The Hunan Province Anti-Japanese War Loss Statistics, compiled by the Hunan Provincial Government Statistics Office of the Kuomintang, report that the fire inflicted economic losses of more than 1 billion yuan, a sum equivalent to about 1.7 trillion yuan after the victory in the war. This figure represented roughly 43% of Changsha's total economic value at the time. Regarding casualties, contemporary sources provide varying figures. A Xinhua Daily report from November 20, 1938 noted that authorities mobilized manpower to bury more than 600 bodies, though the total number of burned remains could not be precisely counted. A Central News Agency reporter on November 19 stated that in the Xiangyuan fire, more than 2,000 residents could not escape, and most of the bodies had already been buried. There are further claims that in the Changsha Fire, more than 20,000 residents were burned to death. In terms of displacement, Changsha's population before the fire was about 300,000, and by November 12, 90% had been evacuated. After the fire, authorities registered 124,000 victims, including 815 orphans sheltered in Lito and Maosgang.  Building damage constituted the other major dimension of the catastrophe, with the greatest losses occurring to residential houses, shops, schools, factories, government offices, banks, hospitals, newspaper offices, warehouses, and cultural and entertainment venues, as well as numerous historic buildings such as palaces, temples, private gardens, and the former residences of notable figures; among these, residential and commercial structures suffered the most, followed by factories and schools. Inspector Gao Yihan, who conducted a post-fire investigation, observed that the prosperous areas within Changsha's ring road, including Nanzheng Street and Bajiaoting, were almost completely destroyed, and in other major markets only a handful of shops remained, leading to an overall estimate that surviving or stalemated houses were likely less than 20%. Housing and street data from the early post-liberation period reveal that Changsha had more than 1,100 streets and alleys; of these, more than 690 were completely burned and more than 330 had fewer than five surviving houses, accounting for about 29%, with nearly 90% of the city's streets severely damaged. More than 440 streets were not completely destroyed, but among these, over 190 had only one or two houses remaining and over 130 had only three or four houses remaining; about 60 streets, roughly 6% had 30 to 40 surviving houses, around 30 streets, 3% had 11 to 20 houses, 10 streets, 1% had 21 to 30 houses, and three streets ) had more than 30 houses remaining. Housing statistics from 1952 show that 2,538 houses survived the fire, about 6.57% of the city's total housing stock, with private houses totaling 305,800 square meters and public houses 537,900 square meters. By 1956, the surviving area of both private and public housing totaled 843,700 square meters, roughly 12.3% of the city's total housing area at that time. Alongside these losses, all equipment, materials, funds, goods, books, archives, antiques, and cultural relics that had not been moved were also destroyed.  At the time of the Changsha Fire, Zhou Enlai, then Deputy Minister of the Political Department of the Nationalist Government's Military Commission, was in Changsha alongside Ye Jianying, Guo Moruo, and others. On November 12, 1938, Zhou Enlai attended a meeting held by Changsha cultural groups at Changsha Normal School to commemorate Sun Yat-sen's 72nd birthday. Guo Moruo later recalled that Zhou Enlai and Ye Jianying were awakened by the blaze that night; they each carried a suitcase and evacuated to Xiangtan, with Zhou reportedly displaying considerable indignation at the sudden, unprovoked fire. On the 16th, Zhou Enlai rushed back to Changsha and, together with Chen Cheng, Zhang Zhizhong, and others, inspected the disaster. He mobilized personnel from three departments, with Tian Han and Guo Moruo at the forefront, to form the Changsha Fire Aftermath Task Force, which began debris clearance, care for the injured, and the establishment of soup kitchens. A few days later, on the 22nd, the Hunan Provincial Government established the Changsha Fire Temporary Relief Committee to coordinate relief efforts.  On the night of November 16, 1938, Chiang Kai-shek arrived in Changsha and, the next day, ascended Tianxin Pavilion. Sha Wei, head of the Cultural Relics Section of the Changsha Tianxin Pavilion Park Management Office, and a long-time researcher of the pavilion, explained that documentation indicates Chiang Kai-shek, upon seeing the city largely reduced to scorched earth with little left intact, grew visibly angry. After descending from Tianxin Pavilion, Chiang immediately ordered the arrest of Changsha Garrison Commander Feng Ti, Changsha Police Chief Wen Chongfu, and Commander of the Second Garrison Regiment Xu Kun, and arranged a military trial with a two-day deadline. The interrogation began at 7:00 a.m. on November 18. Liang Xiaojin records that Xu Kun and Wen Chongfu insisted their actions followed orders from the Security Command, while Feng Ti admitted negligence and violations of procedure, calling his acts unforgivable. The trial found Feng Ti to be the principal offender, with Wen Chongfu and Xu Kun as accomplices, and sentenced all three to prison terms of varying lengths. The verdict was sent to Chiang Kai-shek for approval, who was deeply dissatisfied and personally annotated the drafts: he asserted that Feng Ti, as the city's security head, was negligent and must be shot immediately; Wen Chongfu, as police chief, disobeyed orders and fled, and must be shot immediately; Xu Kun, for neglect of duty, must be shot immediately. The court then altered the arson charge in the verdict to "insulting his duty and harming the people" in line with Chiang's instructions. Chiang Kai-shek, citing "failure to supervise personnel and precautions," dismissed Zhang from his post, though he remained in office to oversee aftermath operations. Zhang Zhizhong later recalled Chiang Kai-shek's response after addressing the Changsha fire: a pointed admission that the fundamental cause lay not with a single individual but with the collective leadership's mistakes, and that the error must be acknowledged as a collective failure. All eyes now shifted to the new center of resistance, Chongqing, the temporary capital. Chiang's "Free China" no longer meant the whole country; it now encompassed Sichuan, Hunan, and Henan, but not Jiangsu or Zhejiang. The eastern provinces were effectively lost, along with China's major customs revenues, the country's most fertile regions, and its most advanced infrastructure. The center of political gravity moved far to the west, into a country the Nationalists had never controlled, where everything was unfamiliar and unpredictable, from topography and dialects to diets. On the map, it might have seemed that Chiang still ruled much of China, but vast swaths of the north and northwest were sparsely populated; most of China's population lay in the east and south, where Nationalist control was either gone or held only precariously. The combined pressures of events and returning travelers were gradually shifting American attitudes toward the Japanese incident. Europe remained largely indifferent, with Hitler absorbing most attention, but the United States began to worry about developments in the Pacific. Roosevelt initiated a January 1939 appeal to raise a million dollars for Chinese civilians in distress, and the response quickly materialized. While the Chinese did not expect direct intervention, they hoped to deter further American economic cooperation with Japan and to halt Japan's purchases of scrap iron, oil, gasoline, shipping, and, above all, weapons from the United States. Public opinion in America was sufficiently stirred to sustain a campaign against silk stockings, a symbolic gesture of boycott that achieved limited effect; Japan nonetheless continued to procure strategic materials. Within this chorus, the left remained a persistent but often discordant ally to the Nationalists. The Institute of Pacific Relations, sympathetic to communist aims, urged America to act, pressuring policymakers and sounding alarms about China. Yet the party line remained firmly pro-Chiang Kai-shek: the Japanese advance seemed too rapid and threatening to the Reds' interests. Most oil and iron debates stalled; American businessmen resented British trade ties with Japan, and Britain refused to join any mutual cutoff, arguing that the Western powers were not at war with Japan. What occurred in China was still commonly referred to in Western diplomatic circles as "the Incident." Wang Jingwei's would make his final defection, yes in a long ass history of defections. Mr Wang Jingwei had been very busy traveling to Guangzhou, then Northwest to speak with Feng Yuxiang, many telegrams went back and forth. He returned to the Nationalist government showing his face to foreign presses and so forth. While other prominent rivals of Chiang, Li Zongren, Bai Chongxi, and others, rallied when they perceived Japan as a real threat; all did so except Wang Jingwei. Wang, who had long believed himself the natural heir to Sun Yat-sen and who had repeatedly sought to ascend to power, seemed willing to cooperate with Japan if it served his own aims. I will just say it, Wang Jingwei was a rat. He had always been a rat, never changed. Opinions on Chiang Kai-Shek vary, but I think almost everyone can agree Wang Jingwei was one of the worst characters of this time period. Now Wang Jingwei could not distinguish between allies and enemies and was prepared to accept help from whomever offered it, believing he could outmaneuver Tokyo when necessary. Friends in Shanghai and abroad whispered that it was not too late to influence events, arguing that the broader struggle was not merely China versus Japan but a clash between principled leaders and a tyrannical, self-serving clique, Western imperialism's apologists who needed Chiang removed. For a time Wang drifted within the Kuomintang, moving between Nanjing, Wuhan, Changsha, and Chongqing, maintaining discreet lines of communication with his confidants. The Japanese faced a governance problem typical of conquerors who possess conquered territory: how to rule effectively while continuing the war. They imagined Asia under Japanese-led leadership, an East Asia united by a shared Co-Prosperity Sphere but divided by traditional borders. To sustain this vision, they sought local leaders who could cooperate. The search yielded few viable options; would-be collaborators were soon assassinated, proved incompetent, or proved corrupt. The Japanese concluded it would require more time and education. In the end, Wang Jingwei emerged as a preferred figure. Chongqing, meanwhile, seemed surprised by Wang's ascent. He had moved west to Chengde, then to Kunming, attempted, and failed to win over Yunnan's warlords, and eventually proceeded to Hanoi in Indochina, arriving in Hong Kong by year's end. He sent Chiang Kai-shek a telegram suggesting acceptance of Konoe's terms for peace, which Chungking rejected. In time, Wang would establish his own Kuomintang faction in Shanghai, combining rigorous administration with pervasive secret-police activity characteristic of occupied regimes. By 1940, he would be formally installed as "Chairman of China." But that is a story for another episode.  In the north, the Japanese and the CCP were locked in an uneasy stalemate. Mao's army could make it impossible for the Japanese to hold deep countryside far from the railway lines that enabled mass troop movement into China's interior. Yet the Communists could not defeat the occupiers. In the dark days of October 1938—fifteen months after the war began—one constant remained. Observers (Chinese businessmen, British diplomats, Japanese generals) repeatedly predicted that each new disaster would signal the end of Chinese resistance and force a swift surrender, or at least a negotiated settlement in which the government would accept harsher terms from Tokyo. But even after defenders were expelled from Shanghai, Nanjing, and Wuhan, despite the terrifying might Japan had brought to bear on Chinese resistance, and despite the invader's manpower, technology, and resources, China continued to fight. Yet it fought alone. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. In a land shredded by war, Wuhan burned under brutal sieges, then Changsha followed, a cruel blaze born of orders and miscommunications. Leaders wrestled with retreat, scorched-earth vows, and moral debts as Japanese force and Chinese resilience clashed for months. Mao urged strategy over martyrdom, Wang Jingwei's scheming shadow loomed, and Chongqing rose as the westward beacon. Yet China endured, a stubborn flame refusing to surrender to the coming storm. The war stretched on, unfinished and unyielding.