Saturday, October 31, 2009
Watson,Agreeing with Alex,BUT....
Ok. I do agree with Alex when he says that it was dumb for the Czar to up and leave when he was basically needed the most. Moore says that the reactions of the Russians were: "my leader did WHAT?! left his wife in charge and im starving to death" and causing anger and disrupt in the country, also the people could have a feeling of "I'm starving right now and he just left?" causing even more controversy of the purpose of his actions. I totally agree. These actions showed that he indeed made stupid decisions prooving that it was a collapse from within. However, I'm sorry but I have to challenge this statement. This evidence can go either ways because maybe he felt he needed to leave and that his wife would possibily help the situation, especially since he was doing anything else. Everybody looks at it like, the czar just up and left and then left his wife in charge. Would it been better if he left a man in charge?? I'm just saying maybe he had a mind set that she could do a better job at helping the situation. Maybe he thought it would be good for the country. His decision to leave someone else in charge may have been a better decision than just continuing what he was doing. But maybe he should have left a a man in charge. Would that have been better you guys? Something to think about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would just like to say something off of Toya's response. During that time period, women were most likely not educated as much as the men were. I'm not trying to be sexist or anything, I'm a girl too, but I think that Alex was referring to her inexperience as well. Nicholas was clearly not making the right decisions, so was this decision to leave his wife in charge any better? What gave her the credentials to rule a country? I guess you could say the same for Nicholas. Inherited rule was clearly losing its strength.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all that is said about maybe it wasn't the best idea for a woman to be put in charge, but I think Nicholas II left her in charge because she was his wife and she would let him know of everything that was happening, where as if he placed another person, even his closest friend, there would be a better chance of them betraying him than his own wife. I think that while it was probably left in her hands with the best intentions, it was not well thought out. Even the Bible says in 1 Timothy 2:10-12, 10Women who claim to love God should do helpful things for others, 11and they should learn by being quiet and paying attention. 12They should be silent and not be allowed to teach or to tell man what to do. Women where placed on the earth to help and be beside man not to rule them, thus it was wrong for Nicholas’ wife to even be in a leadership position over men who are more able than her.
ReplyDeleteAnother key thing about his wife was that she was of German decent and at that time of Russia coming out of WWI, Germans were not on the top of the citizen’s lists.
Overall, Nicholas II leaving his wife in charge was not the best idea, and was just another mistake made by Nicholas II in order to cause a collapse from within.
WHICH is a bad choice by nicholas which is where my whole post was going and of coursea i wasnt talking about the fact that shes a woman like jeannine said but instead her lack of experience so what her husband ran that country for a while granted he did it horribly what makes her think of gee my tturn to give it a try and latoya my analogy's would be like lets say mrs. distasio lefft last year and instead of getting awesome mrs. Cox we got Coach Carroll (please no one tell him about this) but anyways he wouldnt have a clue and wed be like um WHAT ?! this is all i meant by that analogy
ReplyDeleteOk Alex and Jeanine...you guys make a lot of sense and I understand what you guys mean...I was just asking a question. And Lexie, I really agree with what you were saying. That was exactly what I was trying to get across....but i guess i couldn't find the words!!!
ReplyDelete