Why do you call them White Russians? That suggests a niceness they didn't have.
Lenin was the key figure in those early days -and he was very much in the rise. The impact of the western interventions was to seriously delay the revolution - and that gave Lenin time to become ill and to die.
At the time of western intervention, Stalin was a very minor figure. And Lenin was a very ill one. However, by 1924, Stalin had risen - and Lenin died.
I didn't say that the west deliberately chose that outcome. If they had, then a source would be required. Of course, the west didn't want Stalin, either. But the death of Lenin changed the whole direction of the revolution.
There are lots of things in history for which you won't find any source.
The idea of checking for sources sounds good - except that the sources can be very.....absent.
In the case of Russia, it was one of the most brutal and savage nations in history, ruled by a savage aristocracy.. But in world War 1, it was a good guy on our side.
The British empire, for example, was perhaps the most vicious, cruel, and murderous in world history. It killed over 400,000,000 people, millions by starvation. It enslaved even more. One of the most brutal of its killers was Winston Churchill a man who made Hitler look like a saint. I've never seen a source for that. ( Churchill deliberately starved millions to deah in India - though the food was available. In the 1920s, in a war of British greed, he ordered the RAF to bomb ONLY completely defenceless villages and towns in the middle east.
George Washington? He didn't give a damn for democracy. He was a big time landowner. He rebelled against Britain because it would not consent to his desire to slaughter native tribes then outside the U.S. and to steal their land. He was very much a man of the British upper class of his time. Like them, he had contempt for the poor, and frequently denied them the vote. You won't find a whole lot of sources on that.
World Wars one and two were really the same war. The cause of World War One, on both sides, was the desire of European capitalists to dominate each other. That's why, at the end of the war, the surrender terms did not punish anybody.
But the British and French broke those terms and force Germany into a profound poverty so it could not compete with British and French capitalists. That is what led to the rise of Hitler.
At first,, the British and French tolerated Hitler because they saw him as a barrier against Russia. Very late, they saw the threat of Hitler's Germany as an economic competitor. That - NOT his treatment of the Jews - is why Britain and France declared war. (Indeed, all of the allies were as bad as the Germans in their treatment of Jews. That includes Canada.)
And the U.S. in World War Two? Why the long wait?
That was because most Americans didn't want a war. But American capitalists did. They saw their chance to nab the British Empire in Asia, and to seize British oil fields in the middle east. They lost the eastern empire, but did better in the middle east.
Then there was the big, big story that to this day has never made the news.
In the 1950s, The U.S. using an army of hired thugs from all over the world (an army led, from a distance by George Bush Sr.) murdered at least 200,000 Guatemalans. It specialized in killing priests, nuns, missionaries. One of those missionaires was a Canadian whose body was brought to Montreal about 1990, then buried in his home churchyard in New Brunswick.
That 'war' was never reported in our news media. I learned about it only by tracking the Montreal doctor who had dealt with his body. When the body was sent to New Brunswick, the New Brunswick government, to this day, has never admitted it or reported it.
The only evidence I know of it today is a film by the NFB.
The idea of checking sources sounds good. But you never learn much that way.
