Okay, well, I guess it wasn't really intentional, but whatevs.
Tsar Nicholas was too arrogant to truly rule a country, methinks. The entire Romanov family was living in some fantasy where they were loved by everyone, even though people were literally screeching for the end of their rule. Proof, you say? In a letter to the tsar after one of many riots, the tsarina writes "They all worship you and only want bread. (1)" It happens that I speak a little Russian myself, and "Down with the Tsar" and "FEED US!" sound nothing alike, making me wonder why the tsarina would say such a thing. (Other letters in source one back this claim up, but to be frank my eyeballs are on fire so I'll forgo typing them.) The fact that the Romanov family was either a.) too wrapped up in being awesomesauce to realize their waning popularity or b.) truly stupid (which I doubt, my research shows all the royal family had access to the best tutors available.) caused the trouble back home to increase, when they had all the opportunities to nip it in the bud. Or maybe the Tsar was truly trying to ignore it, hoping it would go away eventually, (like when you have a spoiled child that pitches a fit- if you don't give them attention, eventually they quit) but this still only illustrates more of his incompetence as a leader. Sort of like Marie Antoinette and Louis, you know? Louis was a smart guy, but he didn't know how to rule a country. (People also hated his wife, too. Oh, and they also had a revolution in their country because they were arrogant and failcakes at ruling. Hmmm...I SEE PARALLELS. ^_^) Oh, and, I think this can be said with their whole marriage- the tsarina needed some help with that whole honesty thing with her husband. He probably wouldn't have listened, but a, "Hey dear, just thought you ought to know the people here want your head to roll." may have changed things and opened his eyes a little instead of "THEY WORSHIP YOU, OH MIGHTY TSAR."
Just throwing this out here before I move on to my next topic, but royal European families (Romanovs included) had a tendency to interbreed. So maybe that was the real cause of the Revolution. Anything is possible.
But, I guess I have to be fair and say this much: though the Tsar did jump into the game late, he did try to get the people back on his side. He had a lot on his plate (in public and private- there were rumors his wife was hooking up with the Rasputin creeper.) and those who he considered advisers really didn't want him to succeed. So it seems like he continued following their half-baked advice...half-heartedly. I think he realized how deep a hole he was in, and tried (like he had at the beginning of his troubles) to ignore it and hope it got better by not making any drastic changes in policy. But by this time it was too late, because he had given his people enough time to really look at the things the royal family (and the exceedingly wealthy) had been getting away with on the backs of the workers. Even a few empty promises, like the ones made by the provisional government after his abdication, would have let him hold onto his throne for at least long enough to get true reform accomplished- not the sort of wishywashy junk he had been allowing. I think the Tsar really forgot his people and found some undeserved arrogance in the fact that his family had been in control for so long, and it made him feel sort of invincible. But, the people only allowed the Romanov dynasty to rule, and Nicholas made mistakes that let the people realize their own power in allowing them to do so.
Wow, I really abused parentheses in this. Forgive me, Mr. Koon. =/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In my opinion the Duma was an "empty promise" that you thought would have bought him time enough to save his Dynasty. He told the people that he would create this cabinet to be his advisors and help him provide for the people. The Duma was a prop that the Czar thought would win the people over but obviously it did not. Making up empty promises was what he had been doing his entire reign along with ordering his soldiers to fire into crowds of protestors. The fate of the Czar was sealed with or without "empty promises" and even if he had made them he would not have been able to create real change anyway. He knew of the country's internal problems, and hoped the war would distract the people from them. He had done nothing before the war to change things when the people weren't pressuring him and he would only have done less when they were. The motherland didn't kill itself, Nicholas II did.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you. I believe the Czar was fully aware of the wants of his people, he was just too wrapped up in his own power, so addressing the needs of his people was very low on his to-do list. As Rob said, the creation of the Duma is an example that the Czar did know what the people wanted, which was a small governing group that represented their thoughts(2 Belk notes). The problem was that the Czar didn't consider what the Duma said; his main purpose in creating it was to simply keep citizens quiet (2 Belk notes). The decisions he made were therefore not based on his feelings of being "invincable" as you said, but doesn't it seem that they were rather based on the Czar's selfish wants to increase his power? The Czar didn't forget his people, he knew exactly what he was doing as he had skewed motives for every political decision he made. I also don't think more "empty promises" would have kept him on the throne any longer because at this point the people could catch on to what he was doing, and they were sick of being lied to. Doesn't it seem like the Czar's intentional lies are what made Russia ripe for a Revolution and a new government at this point? I agree with Rob, the Czar killed his own country, and his own credibility.
ReplyDeleteI'm interested by the point Kayla made about the Tsarina lying. I agree that she could have brought the problems of Russia and its people to her husband's attention during his absence, IF she knew about them. The Tsar might have been too self-absorbed and engrossed in his Dynasty to care about the people, but on the flip side, maybe the Tsarina was, too. When the Tsar took over the military in WWI, the Tsarina was left in charge of the country. She most likely had never had that kind of power before, and didn't know what to do with it. She decided to do nothing with it, since most Russians already hated her for her German ancestry, and she didn't want to do anything to upset them further. The Tsarina instead let Rasputin do all the dirty work, which he seemed eager to do anyway. So, she really didn't know much about what was going on in Russia either, except for the fact that the people were hungry. To answer your question of "why the Tsarina would say such a thing," I think it's because she knew no more than the Tsar did about the conditions of the people--she wasn't exactly lying to her husband about the discontent of the people, because she didn't know about it. Therefore, the Tsarina was just as responsible for the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty and the February Revolution as the Tsar was. Had she paid attention to royal matters during her husband's absence, as she was supposed to, then both of these events may have been avoided.
ReplyDelete-high five Sarah-
ReplyDeleteI can see where y'all are coming from, Rob and Morgan, and I really wish I hadn't turned in the Tsar's biography right before we started the unit so I could cite this properly, but shoot, I'll do it anyway.
Nicholas as a child was very insecure, and his sudden rise to the throne gave him an ego boost that he sort of got carried away with. But he also had sudden moments of extreme insecurity with his abilities that led to bad policy. (The fact that he had no one to keep him in check in these moments only amplified it.) The fact that he punctured his own ego with self doubt lead him to overcompensate, I think, to appear stronger to his people. To him, stronger meant more of a jerk. When he tried to listen to the 'human' side of himself, rather than the politician, it was too late.
I'ma find that book again to cite properly, promisee~
The thing about the Tsarina doesn't click with me, but I agree with the rest of what you've said, Kayla. It seems like a lot of people could have bulked up the mass that was Nicholas II's giant, Honda Civic-sized ego, but the czar kind of understood that he was screwing up. The fact that he created the Duma in the first place sort of underlines that for me. After all, it seems like the feminist movements came WAY, WAY after the February Revolution, no matter which country it was in. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that having a female say something like, "By the way, you suck at ruling," probably wouldn't have meant much to Nicholas II. Partially because she's female, partially because his ego had side curtain airbags.
ReplyDeleteAnyway. I agree with a lot of what you were saying, too. The empty-promise thing with the Duma seemed pretty accurate, to me; the fact that Czar Nicholas II kind of tossed off the president of the Duma's requests for change underlines this whole deal. Plus--and this might be nitpicky of me--the fact that Nicholas II was calling the president of the Duma names in a letter to someone else seems kind of thoughtless and catty. Despite the idea that a man's actions and the way he runs his country are separate, this seems like a pretty large indicator of a poor ruler. Name-calling is for, what? The fifth grade? If he's unwilling to make compromises and speak to someone with influence over the people, he's set for destruction no matter what the people throw in. So, yes. I agree with you there, Kayla. :]
Ahaha thanks. I guess I'm going too far into Russian/Romanov history without properly explaining myself, so let me clarify about the Tsarina- Alexandra and Nicholas were very much in love. They were about one of the happiest couples in royal history, as far as I'm concerned. That being said, Nicholas valued her opinion as more than a woman, but as a beloved person. In that marriage, I don't think the feminist movement mattered, teehee. In other royal families, maybe. But Nicholas and Alexandra were connected on a whole other level. I think he would have listened to her above anyone.
ReplyDelete(Admittedly, the Tsarina had a large ego too, especially when Rasputin came in the picture.)
'Twas what I meant- I think that's the way their marriage worked, all lovey dovey and such. have you seen the 'Last of the Tsars' video yet? That sort of help reiterate my thoughts on their marriage. It was actually pretty adorable. :)