Monarchy and Restoration; Rival Families and Claimants

[lexi4]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Certainly he did a lot of things wrong, though I think he is most similar to the last true King of France Louis XVI who inherited a land where the aristocracy were disenfranchised without the populace having the means or the social structures to govern themselves.

The Russian government was set up like the old French monarchial government to depend on the king or czar. There was no infrastructure underpinning the whole. When a country had a charismatic governor like Louis XIV, a small geographical area like France and pretty good economy and external political situation, then it could work but more often than not it didn't and even when Louis XIV made it work, he drove the country into debt so that his successors ending up paying for it. Louis XVI tried an assembly of the Estates Generales similar to the Duma but it ran away from him. The time of transition between the time the nobility loses its power and the common people gain their power and the infrastructure to support it is fraught with danger for the people and the state. The whole environment is insecure and can't easily be solved by a single policy.

In a nation the size of Russia, the problem was far worse than it ever was in France. The nation did not have a unifiying force. The czar tried to be but it was impossible to unite such disparate peoples.

For example, the Russians desperately needed the Port of Port Arthur on the Pacific to maintain its lands in the East; however the Russian Europeans had little interest for what happened in the East - it was too far away. Nicholas did see that danger correctly but he had little support, so they let it get away. The Russo-Japanese war was a failure but not because it was not worth fighting. It had no support in the European centric Russia.

I don't think Nicholas was capable of uniting. That was part of the problem. There were certainly tsars before him that were capable of this, but he seemed to lack the flexibility it take to accomplish this. I don't think he knew how.
The Russo-Japanese war was a failure because Russia could not sustain it. The military was poorly equipped, there were logistical problems and then there was the incompetence of the High Command. Figes writes that this war could have been avoided had it not been for Alexander Bezobrazov whose main interest was protecting his lumber assets in Korea. He was one of several who convinced Nicholas to reject Japan's offer of a compromise which could have avoided war. The atmosphere in Russia during the war was plagued with racism against the Asians.
Nicholas saw the war as a way to increase patriotism and hoped that the Russian people would rally around their tsar. It was about political capital and Nicholas hoped it would strengthen/restore the bond between the tsar and his people. It might have worked, had Russia won.

[Marengo]

The discussion about the role of Nicholas II in the Russo-Japanese War has been moved to this thread.

[AnastasiaEvidence]

I think Russia didn't need a monarchy because I am sure if they would have had president the government would have been better for the people. I think it's bad to call them peasants it's like they are some kind of servants. They are citizens.

[chancellor]

A full report on the tour of Her Imperial Highness Grand Duchess Maria of Russia, sorry a lot of this is in Russian but lots of Info in English, please note you will see the Russian Ambassador and first Secretary accepting the Order of St Anna from the HIH, notice the wall rememberance stone it refers to HIH as Imperial Highness, this is what the Russian Community believes despite all you knockers


http://russianwelfare.org.au/pdf/imperial.pdf

Chancellor

[SIDOROFF]

Vladimir III.

Originally Posted by BorisRom

The monk foreteller Avel (1757-1841) wrote, that the name of the new monarch will be the third name in a history of Russia. To this prophecy can correspond :
1. Nicholas III;
2. Michael III;
3. Alexey III, - cesarevitch Alexey was lost (whether was lost?) on July, 17, 1918 several minutes after violent death of Nicholas II.
If to consider Rurickovichs also, after prince Oleg and princess Olga:
4. Oleg IIIBoris

And this is amusing. Both of these were not even Monarchs:

Originally Posted by BorisRom

If to consider Rurickovichs also, after prince Oleg and princess Olga:
4. Oleg III

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by SIDOROFF

Vladimir III.
And this is amusing. Both of these were not even Monarchs:

Boris is refering to prophesy which, imo, colors a lot of the way Russia thinks.

[SIDOROFF]

Originally Posted by lexi4

The reality right now is that probably very few Russians are considering whether they need a democracy, monarchy or autocracy. They are merely trying to survive.

They are actually trying to buy as much expensive things and have as much expensive leisures as they can.

Originally Posted by Russophile

Boris is refering to prophesy which, imo, colors a lot of the way Russia thinks.

I understand. I just pointed out that it is really a new invention to count similar male and female names as one, and that Oleg and Olga were not Monarchs.

Originally Posted by Marengo

1. I think the restauration of a monarchy in Russia can be usefull, in a simular way as Juan-Carlos has been extremely usefull to Spain after the end of the Franco regime. So the monarch can monitor the process of transition to a democracy of the country. Especially now such an authority can be helpfull in Russia.

2. The only (european) monarchies that servived are the democratic monarchies. So that is the one I would wish for Russia to, albeit I think the monarch needs more powers then for example is Sweden, as the process of transforming Russia to a democracy has not ended yet and action from the highest authority in the country may be needed to protect the frail democracy.

"Democracy" is an absurd term. It is not possible in nature. Especially in Russia.

[sofajr]

[QUOTE=SIDOROFF;756378]They are actually trying to buy as much expensive things and have as much expensive leisures as they can.[/QUOT

actually there are some groups of Russian Federation citizens: Moscow, St. Peterburg and regins inhabitans. it looks like we live now on the exact time as people of Russia lived in 1917 - the pre-revolutin time. because there are very rich and very poor and nothing in between

so I think that if we get back to the monarchy again it'd change not too much in Russia.

[Al_bina]

sofajr,
You are quite right noting that there will be obscenely rich Russians and Russians existing in abject poverty and there will be a relatively thin well-to-do stratum. Russia is the country of extremes... Such situation is like sitting on a barrel of gunpowder ...

[serenissima]

I do not know what the majority of the people of Russia really feel about the restoration of Tsarism. Maybe, the idea of a monarchy has become too "foreign" to most people of Russia nowadays that many people never really think about it. It seems to be the same in France and many people in France seem to think the Count of Paris's pointless argument of his legitimacy over the kingship against Louis Alphonse etc rather laugherable since they truly love their republic.

[Al_bina]

At this point in time it is impossible to determine whether or not Russians would welcome restoration. Russians just want stability after years of uncertainty and do not wish to be subjected yet to another socio-economic experiment.

[SIDOROFF]

Originally Posted by serenissima

I do not know what the majority of the people of Russia really feel about the restoration of Tsarism. Maybe, the idea of a monarchy has become too "foreign" to most people of Russia nowadays that many people never really think about it.

The majority feels quite supportive of monarchy, but mostly in the face of Medvedev or Putin. Various Hohenzollern and Holstein-Gottorp pretenders are really viewed as foreign clowns.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by SIDOROFF

The majority feels quite supportive of monarchy, but mostly in the face of Medvedev or Putin. Various Hphenzollern and Holstein-Gottorp pretenders are really viewed as foreign clowns.

You mean they want Putin or the other guy as their tsar? I never imagined that!

[SIDOROFF]

They do not really want, they are not against it. But that is a well-known idea in Russia.

[sofajr]

well-known idea?
never heard about that. yes, russian like putin, meybe they will love the next president Medvedev, but mostly the like them as presidents, not the Tsars!!!

I suppose in the majority of population's minds there is no connection between putin and tsar!

I think the problem of restoration of the monarchy will not accur in Russia in nearest time because more than 85 years authority tried to make people to associate poor life of 90 % of population with tsarism.

[Russophile]

A president has a set time to rule. Not like a monarch who's life is to rule. So the bonding, if you will, between people and ruler is different than somebody who gets in, does whatever, good or bad job, doesn't matter, and gets out. The Monarch has to live there, in their country, as well. They don't just up and leave for a book tour or go live in England for a while. They are tied to the land, so to speak.
So does Russian NEED a Monarchy? Tough to say. They might need somebody who loves the land and country just as much as they do. To show them they would be willing to not ask the citizens to do something that they wouldn't themselves do.
What DOES Russia need?

[sofajr]

Russia, I think, needs a really intelligent and honest ruler, who will do everything to make the country prosperious.

[SIDOROFF]

Originally Posted by sofajr

well-known idea?
never heard about that.

Well, that does not make the idea less well-known

Originally Posted by sofajr

meybe they will love the next president Medvedev

They already love him, as was shown by the elections.

Originally Posted by sofajr

I think the problem of restoration of the monarchy will not accur in Russia in nearest time because more than 85 years authority tried to make people to associate poor life of 90 % of population with tsarism.

Actually, such propaganda lasted for only 74 years. And this is not a problem, because it does not depend on the opinion of the people.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by SIDOROFF

They already love him, as was shown by the elections.

Actually, such propaganda lasted for only 74 years. And this is not a problem, because it does not depend on the opinion of the people.

I'm trying to follow you but I'm a little confused. You say : "They already love him (Medvedev), as was shown by the elections." which means you believe people did actually give their opinion but then you affirm that it's not people's opinion if 90% associated poor life to tsarism during 74 years ... . So do you think people really gave their opinion on Medvedev ?

[SIDOROFF]

There is nothing confusing and I think you actually misunderstood mine and Sofajr's statements. Sofajr said not that 90% of the people associated poor life with tsarism, but that the authorities tried to associate THE POOR LIFE OF 90% OF THE POPULATION with tsarism. I said not that it is not the peoples opinion if 90% associated poor life with tsarism, but that IT IS NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO DECIDE ON THE RESTORATION OF THE MONARCHY. And concerning Medvedev, yes, the people expressed their opinion. But it is no much effort to make them have the same or even better opinion on anything in the World inside a couple of monthes.