Nearly all revolutions are born of blood. Although the actual storming of the Winter Palace, and the events on October 17th were relatively bloodless. It was the events after the revolution as the new communist leadership settled into power that were the bloodiest, and then you have the Russian civil war.
Comparing it to the American revolution in terms of bloodshed, well, there is no comparison. Although the American civil war was bloody, it was not on the level of the Russian one, not at all, both sides lost more men in the Russian civil war than the entire strength of both sides in the American.
The causes behind it though, well...aren't all revolutions born of a desire for freedom? For the Russians it was freedom from the 'tyrrany' of the Tsar, for the Americans it was freedom to rule from the 'tyrrany' of the United Kingdom.
If you tote up the casualties of both nations post revolution, through the American territorial expansion, war of 1812, Mexican wars, Spanish wars, Indian wars, Civil war. Then I'd wager that it would be bloodier than the French, but still not quite as bloody as the Russian revolutions.
Certainly, if you want a bloody revolution, Tribesman knows what he's talking about...during the English Civil War, Ireland lost nearly half its entire population.
|