For Natural Science, one dominant explanation rules a certain field: for example, since Galileo’s experiment on the Pisa Tower had demonstrated that the descent time is independent from the mass of an object, no one would continue to use Aristotle’s view on free fall to explain the world. However, it is not the case for Humanities. One of my favorite characteristics about disciplines in the Humanities is that a ruling answer in a certain field does not exist. Even if someone proposed an extremely convincing and popular explanation, it could not be the only accepted explanation: there must be someone who continues to follow his former belief or brings up new objections, while objections are not the same. One uses Aristotle’s physics laws to …show more content…
State-censored History textbooks were my first source; they depict a blur image: social conflicts in the Russian Empire were acute and the World War worsened the situation—both the bourgeoisie and the proletariats wished to overthrow the Tsar. As a result, in March, 1917, after the bourgeois revolution, the Provisional Government was established. Because the Provisional Government continued the World War, the subsequent October Revolution, in which Lenin led the proletariats to fight for social justice and equality, established the first socialist country (Volume 1, Lesson 19, People's Education Press, …show more content…
Contrary to the History textbooks in China, which tells students the popularity of the Bolsheviks, Hobsbawm reveals that in countries that peasants constituted the majority of the population, peasants “practically guaranteed that socialists, let alone Bolshevik ones, would not win democratic general elections”; hence Lenin abandoned electoral