Question

PEACE, LAND, BREAD.
"In 1917, Russia was a nation on the brink. Imagine you’re a starving worker in Petrograd or a soldier freezing in a trench during World War I. A man named

Vladimir LeninLinks to an external site. steps onto a stage and promises you these three things. He tells you the people—not the Tsar—will own the factories and the farms.

Question : If someone promised you a total end to your suffering, would you follow them into a revolution?

Answer 1

Short answer: I wouldn’t blindly follow someone who promises a “total end to your suffering.” I’d be sympathetic — when people are starving, freezing, or desperate, radical promises are irresistible — but I’d want to evaluate the person, the plan, and the likely costs before joining a revolution.

How to think about it (practical checklist)

- Understand the promise vs. the facts. “Peace, land, bread” is simple and powerful, but absolute guarantees are almost always impossible. Ask: what exactly do they mean by “peace” and “land”? On what timetable? Who pays for “bread”?

- Check the leader’s credibility and past behavior. Have they shown honesty, competence, restraint, respect for pluralism? Charisma alone is not evidence.

- Ask about means and safeguards. Is the plan democratic and transparent, or does it concentrate power in a small circle? Are there checks, free press, independent courts, and mechanisms for accountability?

- Consider the cost of change. Revolutions can bring rapid gains but also civil war, repression, famine, and long-term loss of rights (as in Russia after 1917). Weigh likely short-term relief against plausible long-term harms.

- Evaluate alternatives. Could reforms, strikes, strikes combined with political pressure, international aid, or other nonviolent paths realistically improve your life with lower risk?

- Look at the support base and contingency plans. Does the movement have broad grassroots backing? What happens if things go wrong? Is there an exit/transition plan?

- Keep moral limits. Refuse to participate in plans that require atrocities or the crushing of innocent people.

Historical context: Revolutions like Russia’s in 1917 show both why people join (urgent need, broken state) and the dangers: the new regime can become authoritarian and sometimes make suffering worse. Other examples (French, Chinese, Arab Spring) also show mixed results.

So would I follow? I’d be open to joining a movement that had: a realistic, evidence-based plan; broad, accountable participation; nonviolent or tightly justified means; and credible guarantees of rights and oversight. I would refuse to follow anyone making absolute, instantaneous promises without those safeguards.

If you want, give me a hypothetical leader or program and I’ll run through it with the checklist.