>>536843 >the tsar was a loving dad >he made his daughters sleep in beds that his soldiers slept in >he made them respect the commoners >members of the royal family were active in helping the poor and setting up charities helping the poor and injured war veterans >the first tsar to relinquish absolute power and the first to abdicate >muh evil tyrant kill him and his entire family
Grand Duchess Elizabeth gave away her vast fortune to charity and retired to a nunnery after the murder of her husband (she also forgave his murderer, a socialist revolutionary, and asked for his pardon).
The reds dragged her from her nunnery. They threw her down a mineshaft, along with several others of the Romanov dynasty, and when the fall failed to kill them threw grenades and flammable materials down after them.
This didn't kill her immediately though. She spent her final hours (or days; it's hard to say how long they survived) bandaging the wounds of the other victims before dying from her injuries.
>The Cheka beat all the prisoners before throwing their victims into this pit, Elisabeth being the first. Hand grenades were then hurled down the shaft, but only one victim, Fyodor Remez, died as a result of the grenades.
>According to the personal account of Vasily Ryabov, one of the killers, Elisabeth and the others survived the initial fall into the mine, prompting Ryabov to toss in a grenade after them. Following the explosion, he claimed to have heard Elisabeth and the others singing an Orthodox hymn from the bottom of the shaft. Unnerved, Ryabov threw down a second grenade, but the singing continued. Finally a large quantity of brushwood was shoved into the opening and set alight, upon which Ryabov posted a guard over the site and departed.
>>537036 a few captains panic and, without any orders from the royals, order their troops to open fire, and thus the whole royal family - children included - deserve to be murdered in the most brutal fashion possible.
Only severely brain damaged individuals would classify the Russian monarchy as 'caring'. If they weren't so fucking greedy the Communists would have never taken power. They had serfdom until the mid 19th century, unending misery and famines, what the hell were they expecting from the people except revolt?
>>537118 Well, I certainly wasn't defending the communists but you keep insisting that I am. I have no sympathy for either party, they were both murdering scum. Most revolutions are violent, that's just how it is, people die on both sides, one life isn't inherently more valuable than the other.
I was reffering go Nicholas II, not tge monarchy in general, there where Tsars that were much more cruel, but they didnt end up like Nicky, if Nicky was more like Nicholas I, brutal and uncompromising, he would have survived, its ironic ghat """"the people"""" killed the two tsars that were actually progressive by Russian standards, Aleksander the II and Nicky II, because good tsars make bad scape goats for the dirty reds.
>>537131 Fucking hell. Another retard that thinks I'm somehow defending Communists. Criticizing the Czar doesn't immediately mean one is a Communist. From a humanitarian stand point both systems were deplorable.
Oh and there were a lot more major famines during both periods, some of them weren't even due to political screw ups but due to environmental factors.
>>537153 >the people killed the two tsars that were actually progressive by Russian standards Sure, one put an end to serfdom and the other sort of tried to kickstart and industrial revolution and political reform. After a 300 year rule, it was too little too late.
>>537161 >An illiterate peasants life isnt worth at all compared to that of a monarch or any person in power And you'd have to be a deluded misanthropic fascist to think people are disposable just because they weren't born into the right family.
History is ever so many ironies piled one atop the other. Alexander II was killed by a bomb after designing, but not yet announcing, a series of reforms similar to what Nicholas II had to concede after the 1905 Revolution. One of the members of the cell that killed Alexander was the elder brother of he who became Vladimir Lenin. The brother was hanged; Lenin had Alexander's grandson and family killed. Irony on irony.
>>537281 The biggest irony in history must be the murder of Rapustin.
From a review of the memoirs of his assassin, Prince Felix Youssoupov:
" He confides in the reader, without seeming to understand what he is saying, that when Felix and friends killed him, Rasputin was actually working to end the war by using his influence to get the Tsar to sign a peace treaty with Germany. Had Rasputin lived to accomplish this, he would have saved the Romanov dynasty, prevented the Revolution and Civil War, and probably changed the disastrous course of Central and East European politics for the entire century. But no -- Prince Felix, bringing to the task an uncharacteristic diligence and cunning, managed to prevent all that.
While trying to get close to Rasputin, Youssoupoff has several long, drunken conversations with him, in which the mad monk sounds far less mad than his patrician killer. Rasputin's plan, as recounted by Felix, was to force Nikolai II off the throne, install Alexandra, and accept peace at virtually any price: "Rasputin stared at me intently; half closing his eyes, he said after a few moments of thought: 'This is what is going to happen, my dear fellow: enough of this war, enough bloodshed. It's time to end this slaughter. Isn't Germany our brother too? The Lord said: "Thou shalt love thine enemy as thine own brother." That's why this war must cease. He [Nikolai II] constantly opposes this; she [Alexandra] won't hear of it either. Someone is certainly giving them bad advice. But what does it matter? If I give an order, they'll have to do as I say. But it's still early in the day, everything isn't quite ready.'"
"This eminently sensible plan is the "ruin" which Prince Felix saw facing Russia. He never explains why. In fact, his justifications for the murder are puerile even by his own modest standards; he says that "To spare [Rasputin's] life only meant increasing the number of war victims and prolonging the country's misery." At this distance, it's difficult to see how an early peace, no matter how hasty or disadvantageous for Russia, could possibly have resulted in anything worse than what happened later, when the endless slaughter and feckless leadership of Nikolai II yielded Lenin and the Civil War.
For the Prince, the matter is simple -- a question of breeding, tailoring and bigotry. Rasputin is evil because he was "just an uncultured, cynical, avid, and unscrupulous peasant." If further proof of his evil is required, Felix offers Rasputin's wardrobe and grooming habits: "with his caftan, baggy breeches, and great top-boots he looked exactly what he was -- a peasant. He had a low, common face..."
Further proof is provided by the claim that Rasputin kept company with Jews and Germans, as Prince Felix ascertains by a bit of eavesdropping: "I could see [Rasputin]...surrounded by seven shady-looking men. Four of them were of a distinctly Jewish type, the other three were fair and curiously alike in appearance [i.e. Germans]....They looked like a group of conspirators."
And perhaps they were. But if they were in fact plotting to make an early peace, they were Russia's last hope -- no matter what their motives. And by exerting intelligent determination for the first and last time in his foolish life in the effort to kill Rasputin and keep Russia in the war, Prince Felix made a great contribution to the destruction of the world he loved. And the blathering idiot is too dim even to see it. "
>>536789 If you ask lefties they'll say that it was unfortunate but necessary so yes. I'd say that if given the opportunity they'd pull the trigger themselves but modern lefties think a gun will come to life and murder you if you look at it so they'd never be able to do it.
>>537310 Actually Felix was such a ridiculous character and illustrates the Russian aristocracy so well I can't resist quoting the mudslinging in full:
"Imagine Salnikov as a pre-Revolutionary aristocrat, and you'll have a good idea of Youssoupoff's character. Like many of the finest literary narrators of the early twentieth century, he was an exhibitionistic, androgynous brat whose early interests were terrorizing guests and servants. He describes with an indulgent chuckle the music teacher "...whose finger I bit so savagely that the poor woman was unable to play the piano for a year." Aiming higher, the little prince's next victim was Grand Duke Michael, who liked to watch Youssoupoff and his brother play tennis. With his uncanny instinct for doing the greatest harm possible, Youssoupoff hit a return which "...struck the Grand Duke in the eye with such violence that one of the greatest specialists in Moscow had to be called in to save the eye."
Little Felix grew up in one of the wealthiest families in Russia. His great-great-grandfather, Prince Nicolas Borissovitch, was a classic Russian aristocrat who used his thousands of Serfs as breed stock for concubines. Choosing only the best stock, the Prince outfitted an entire corps de ballet, which was trained to respond to his every gesture: "...when the whole ballet was on stage the Prince waved his cane and suddenly all the dancers appeared completely naked." No wonder ballet was so much more popular in those days.
Youssoupoff has a charming pride in the family's vampiric past, ending his account of great-great-grandfather's career with the boast that "his last intrigue was with a girl of eighteen. He was then eighty."
The family grew somewhat more discreet by Felix's time, but retained the habit of doing things on a grand scale. Prince Felix mentions in passing that "one of our estates in the Caucasus stretched for 125 miles along the Caspian Sea...." He fondly recalls travelling through Russia, from one vast estate to another, in the family's private railway car, and playing with a tray of precious stones on display in the parlor. Mealtimes presented difficulties on a typically vast scale: "One of my father's whims consisted in continually changing rooms. Almost every day we dined in a different room, and this complicated the table service to an uncommon degree. [My brother] Nicolas and I, who were often late, were sometimes obliged to run all over the house before discovering where dinner was being served."
When Youssoupoff alludes to his father's "whims," he's indulging in one of his rare understatements. Like most of the family, Youssoupoff Senior was insane -- cheerfully, unashamedly mad, as were most of the members of Russia's social elite. As epicted in these memoirs, pre-Revolutionary Russia's aristocratic and Royal society was one huge well-dressed lunatic asylum. Youssoupoff describes the rampant lunacy of family and friends with the same nostalgic savor he brings to his youthful sadism. His grandmother's assorted manias included "...breeding silkworms. The worms overran the house; they crawled all over the armchairs, and our guests would squash them when they sat down, and of course ruined their clothes."
Prince Felix's obsession with clothes fills the book. He attributes a diplomatic break between England and Russia to the fact that "King Edward, who had neglected to try on the Russian uniform in which he was to meet the Czar, discovered it was so tight he could not button it...so the King went to lunch...in a state of semi-suffocation and in a very bad temper."
The Prince's interest in dressing up soon becomes a passion for cross-dressing. An ordinary middle-class child might settle for prancing before the mirror in his mother's dresses. Felix has bigger plans; at the age of twelve, he and a cousin, "made up, adorned with jewelry and muffled in fur-lined velvet pelisses," troll the nightclubs of Petersburg, attracting the lustful glances of half the officer corps.
Soon the game has become a way of life: "by day I was a schoolboy and by night an elegant woman." This leads the Prince to spike the rumors which have always surrounded him: "I have often been accused of disliking women. Nothing could be further from the truth." His disavowal is somewhat less than convincing: "But I must admit that I have met very few among them who answered to my ideal of womanhood. Generally speaking, I have found among men the loyalty and disinterestedness which I think most women lack."
At this point in his development, Prince Felix hardly seems like a future assassin. He does all the things expected of a decadent young man with unlimited funds and status: tours the Continent, smokes opium in a Parisian den, enrolls at Oxford and generally whoops it up, in drag or mufti.
He betrays no interest in or knowledge of Russian politics or ideological disputes. When he mentions these topics at all, the results are painful, as when he tells us that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was first uncovered in the library of "one of our near neighbors, Countess Kleinmichel" -- implying, apparently, that anything discovered on the premises of so distinguished a lady must be authentic. "
When Felix attempts to describe the opening of the Duma in 1906, his obsession with sartorial and ignorance of ideological issues yields a description which is pure Salnikov -- if Salnikov had been transported back a century: "It was the first time that [the Winter Palace] had ever seen such a mixed crowd of queerly dressed people." Yes, that's the problem with democracy: it's far, far too demokratichnii. In hindsight, it's clear what caused all the horrors of the Russian Revolution: lack of adequate Face Kontrol at that first session of the Duma.
At times Felix sounds exactly like one of Saki's coyly witty aesthetes, as when he orders a black carpet, which "set a fashion in London -- it even became the cause of a divorce. An Englishwoman ordered one against her husband's wish. He considered it funereal: 'Either me or the carpet,' he said, which was rash, because she chose the carpet."
To the extent that the young Felix has any abstract interests, they lean toward the occult. While riding back to the estate one night, he and his brother see a phantom railway train; in London he sees a hazy cloud around those who are fated to die soon; and so on, at tedious length. These anecdotes are worthwhile only because they show how deeply Russia's elite was steeped in puerile superstition long before Rasputin showed up to exploit the market. The mystical nonsense which ended Nicolas and Alexandra's reign marked its beginning as well; Youssoupoff says that the Tsarina's disastrous influence was foretold when, at her coronation, "...one of her women pricked her finger on the clasp of the Imperial cloak, and that a drop of blood fell on the ermine." Before Petersburg had ever heard of Rasputin, ladies of the Royal family worshipped another charlatan, the French mystic Philippe. Youssoupoff, who has the typical aristocratic facility with family anecdote, describes how his father, encountering a Grand Duchess riding with Philippe, bowed, only to be ignored: "Meeting her by chance a few days later, he asked her why she had cut him. 'You couldn't have seen me,' said the Grand Duchess, 'for I was with Dr. Philippe, and when he wears a hat he is invisible and so are those who are with him.'" With Russia's future in the hands of this intellectual elite, one can hardly wonder that the twentieth century turned out so well for it.
>>537091 >if they weren't killed they would become rallying points for the Whites/royalists which would upset Bolshevik attempts to establish power >also nobility is an inherently evil concept >NO ONE'S LIVES MATTER MORE >t. American Bourgeois College Communist
>>537481 Because a monarch or any head of state has power, even if nicky was a bad tsar he is still better than a peasant, if you kill a peasant you wont change much, but kill a powerfull man and things will change, you put a peasant in power and you get retarded shit like communism.
>>536789 >Did they deserve the end they got? The real question is did we? The striking down of the Tsar and the Revolution had ramifications that are still being felt today, we can not say that we would be in the same position today had we not overtaken the Russian throne. The monarchy was in decline that's a given, but a violent Revolution done by the ones who did it and with the ideology they did it under. Perhaps had another group shifted the power or less violently overtaken the Tsar, perhaps we would be better off.
>>537103 It doesn't matter that the Romanovs died. It was Tsar Nicholas II's own damn fault for not seeing it coming and playing his cards correctly. The little girls hardly matter, either, considering the scale of destruction that preceded their deaths—it was little more than a flash in the pan.
What you are trying to do is justify it, though. You are every bit as much of a sentimental arguerer as he is. The Communist Revolution was not a proletariat movement for the betterment of the country. It was a coup d'etat, period. International finance funded if and brought Russia to its knees. Considering the gulags and forced starvations that followed, communism was far worse than the Tsars. The Tsars weren't good guys, but they were sure as hell no were near as maliciously intent on subjugating and destroying Russia as Marx, Trotsky, and Jacob Schiff were. I don't doubt there was a vengeful attitude due to the Pale of Settlement.
>Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge.
>>538247 When I go on /pol/ and ask why they don't like communism, I get a bunch of different answers typically including several people who don't. You claiming that they all believe the same thing is no different from people among their group who say so about you.
>>538469 How far does this line of reasoning go, in your opinion? Are beautiful women inherently more worthwhile than average ones? Should the punishment for rape or murder depend on the looks and influence of the victim?
>>538606 I don't see how. His argument is basically some people are better than others. On its face this is understandable, but when he says it is more immoral for one person to be killed than another, it makes me wonder. I don't see why you can't extrapolate that concept to a more mundane situation. What am I taking out of context in your view?
>>538474 >Send millions to die in an imperialist war >Send Do you have any idea how many volunteered to die for their country? How many millions of men willingly went of to battle? For Russia, for the motherland, for the Tsar.
But of course, a person like you could never understand patriotism, or self-sacrifice.
The universe literally does not care if these girls died. A little girl's going to watch her mother be killed tonight and a man's going to die on the way back from work, why do the deaths of a few resonate so hardly with some people.
As historians we do not look at historical events and say "should this or shouldn't this have happened", we say "this happened; why? What? Where? How?"
>>539552 >Not only that later in the war there were riots over it. precisely. later. As in, at the start of it all there was overwhelming support for the war. The people of Russia didn't object to the Tsar taking them into the war, they just objected to losing it.
>Thier participation in the Great War destroyed Russia and created the conditions that allowed Bolshevism to take root. Firstly, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Secondly, it still doesn't change the fact that the Tsar did not force his country into war.
>>539550 because some people aren't heartless, no one here is saying the death of these children is any more significant then the loss of any other noncombatant life, and frankly if you don't like the discussion, you don't need to come in here to contribute nothing except your scorn and opinion.
Literally the biggest cop out answer ever. Every time I hear this, it's used to justify some idiotic standpoint. Firstly, to be "heartless" is a complete matter of subjectivity. Secondly, don't use that self-righteous bullshit when attempting to cry over the deaths of someone who has existed for 100 years.
All these crocodile tears just mask your ulterior motives of attempting to attack another group of people who haven't existed for some time.
>>539594 only group I'm attacking are women and child killers, don't even mention commies, a lot of people have done it and its all bullshit, how do men fall so far that they think its okay to murder noncoms?
>>536789 Nicolas II was the only one who remotely deserved anything, because I am a soft heart I would have kept him imprisoned for life, maybe brainwash him into supporting communism and calling for the surrender of the white russians and other hostiles.
The others basically lived in their own little world. Imagine if someone from /jp/ had absolute power over a region and decided they wanted an idyllic family with a waifu. Their waifu would be raised to delight the neckbeard dictator and believe everything he wants is good, his children would be raised to impress their father and be good fedora tipping atheists. They would know virtually nothing about what was going on in the rest of the world.
>>536915 Because Alexei had political power--he was the heir to the throne and not just a possible rallying point but someone who could be put on the throne, so to speak. The daughters had no political power in Russia, therefore an execution could not be remotely justified.
>>539568 >precisely. later. As in, at the start of it all there was overwhelming support for the war. The people of Russia didn't object to the Tsar taking them into the war, they just objected to losing it.
The fact that this support faded so quickly
>Firstly, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Ignoring the lessons of of 1904 and making the decision to personally leave for the front to personally control the army (and leave the court in the hands of his wife and Rasputin) were horrid mistake that needed no hindsight.
>Tsar did not force his country into war. Actually he did, his decision to press on with mobilizing during the july crisis is what tipped Germany's hand and got them to declare war. Had he not done this there would have been no world war.
>>539635 >Actually he did, his decision to press on with mobilizing during the july crisis is what tipped Germany's hand and got them to declare war. Had he not done this there would have been no world war.
>Germany was only responding to Russia's mobilisation >Germany was only defending itself Oh, I get it, you're an idiot.
>disregarding the millions of other victims, most of whom weren't even nobles
Remember children, never let Jewish Marxists take you alive. Even if they win an election. When the time comes for your family to be shot on the decree of some subhuman filth who wears a kippah in secret, you be the one to fire first, even if you're certain to lose.
How I wish the United States and the British Empire would have fought at Germany's side to destroy the Soviet Union. At the very least, neutrality should have been declared. One thing I find particularly unforgivable is how George V refused asylum to the Romanov family because he was too concerned with his image according to the British public.
>>539725 yes, and if you had more than a superficial knowledge of those events you'd know that Germany was bent on war no matter what, especially with Russia. All that would have happened if Russia hadn't mobilised when she did was that Germany would have taken half the fortified points on the western frontier before reinforcements could be brought in.
>>539736 >One thing I find particularly unforgivable is how George V refused asylum to the Romanov family because he was too concerned with his image according to the British public So did he. He never really got over it.
Also, when you say 'he was concerned about his image', while technically true it doesn't really convey the fact that a lot of people in the British government at the time thought that there was a very real possibility of a revolution in Britain, which would only be exacerbated if the British monarch offered asylum to an autocratic tyrant.
>>539762 >yes, and if you had more than a superficial knowledge of those events you'd know that Germany was bent on war no matter what, especially with Russia. All that would have happened if Russia hadn't mobilised when she did was that Germany would have taken half the fortified points on the western frontier before reinforcements could be brought in.
Given German conduct in the previous crises there doesnt seem much to suggest this. Had Russia not began mobilizing it would have just been a case of either Austria taking over Serbia or Austria getting bogged down to the point that it would agree to the international mediation.
I didn't see Nicholas as a bad people like the rulers to come but he was never interested in being the leader of Russia, was a weak leader, economically destroyed the country and was stupid enough to have a crazy ass guy like Rasputin help advise and rule the country while he went away to help lead Russia in WWI. OF course the Bolsheviks were ruthless and showed it when they murdered the Romanov family, so no they didn't deserve it.
>>536877 Literally the only reason the Royal Family wasn't pushing to grant vast rights to the poor is because Alexander II (who abolished serfdom and gave the former serfs land of their own, carved out of the holdings of the aristocracy) was assassinated--by socialist revolutionaries--, when his grandson and furture Czar Nicholas was 13, on the day before he was give peasants state representation (he had already given them their own courts of law). So there was massive paranoia and clampdown.
Russia had the potential to be the first advanced state that skipped over modernism; once serfdom was abolished, the monarchy being opponents being the business class meant that they would be natural allies of the working class. Russian cosmism was actually showing that science and religion went hand-in-hand. The poor all loved the Czar, they thought of him as their father, and it was the Czar they went to when they felt mistreated. Bloody Sunday (the petitioners were lead by an Orthodox priest, by the way, an explicitly excluded revolutionaries from their ranks) was a massive tragedy, and had nothing to do with the Czar's orders at all (he wasn't even present, which the petitioners didn't know).
Basically, the mainstream socialists of Russia were always cancer, and they screwed over the workers more than anyone else. Dostoevsky, himself a socialist who did years in prison for his politics, knew this better than anyone.
>>541145 If a hammer swung by human muscles can smash one, a 7.62x54r certainly can. It can also easily penetrate the metal holding the diamonds, not to mention I don't think their faces were covered in diamonds.
>>540994 Not bullshit. They had sewn hundreds of diamonds and other jewels into their corsets, which acted as a barrier.
From the executioner Yurovsky's account:
>They shot the daughters but did not kill them. Then Yermakov resorted to a bayonet, but that did not work either. Finally they killed them by shooting them in the head. Only in the forest did I finally discover the reason why it had been so hard to kill the daughters and Alexandra Feodrovna. ....
>When we began to undress the bodies, we discovered something on the daughters and on Alexandra Feodrovna. I do not remember exactly what she had on, the same as on the daughters or simply things that had been sewed on. But the daughters had on bodices almost entirely of diamonds and [other] precious stones. Those were not only places for valuables but protective armor at the same time. That is why neither bullets nor bayonets got results.
>>541161 >not to mention I don't think their faces were covered in diamonds.
Which is why eventually had to be shot in the head to kill them.
>>542074 What do you expect senpai? To them anything is excusable if it suits the end goal of creating a slave society where everyone is equally miserable. Genocide? It was an accident. If they'd just listened and given up their property and rights, it wouldn't have happened. Brutal murder of children? They had to go because they could have been a problem later. Severe distortion of facts? It was for a good cause, so it's okay to lie. One need look no further than their idols Alinsky and Zinn to see that these principles are at the very foundation of their movement.
>>542097 Leftists are like Creationists. They are so divorced from reality by their bitterness and envious natures that they would reject the sun at noon if they thought it might inconvenience someone more successful than them.
>>536789 Yes. >>536832 Please just die. And before that, read something about the tsar's incompetence.
The Tsar took action to address the riots by wiring garrison commander General Khablov to deplete the crowds with rifle fire... Historian Ian Beckett suggests around 12,000 of the soldiers could be regarded as reliable, but even these proved reluctant to fire on the demonstrators, both out of fellow feeling and because the crowds included so many women. Police armed with machine guns were placed in the upper stories of buildings throughout the city, but mutiny soon broke out... The Tsar ordered the army to suppress the rioting by force, troops began to mutiny and join the protesters. http://www.un.org/en/events/womensday/history.shtml https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_Revolution#cite_ref-27
> Order soldiers to shoot protesting women with machine guns > Deserves nothing but violent death
>>543097 European Monarchies would have sought out anyone of Romanov blood in order to restore the family to power. The Bolsheviks knew this, and wouldn't allow the slightest bit of leverage against their new government. It's brutal, it's ugly, but it's also pure politics.
>>543149 Ah, so you think they stopped supporting the whites after the Romanov family was murdered?
>>543158 Bolsheviks killed way more people than the Romanovs ever did, and the famines under them were far more destructive.
Alexander II liberated the serfs, and even carved them up land of their own from the aristocracy's holdings (he also gave them their own courts of law and was on the eve of giving them state representation when he was assassinated by socialists). The Bolsheviks basically rolled back all those reforms, they took away the land from all the liberated serfs and made them serfs again.
>>543197 >you think they stopped supporting the whites after the Romanov family was murdered? No, and I think it's pretty disingenuous of you to say that.
It's simply far easier to reinstate an establish royal family than it is to create a new one, specifically one already friendly and agreeable to Western interests. The Bolsheviks final step in planting their flag was winning the war. And they did.
>>536789 >Do innocent children deserve to be shot to pieces
I'd hope nobody on this site would say yes, but knowing 4chan, there's probably somebody who thought that was the right choice. Try the father for his crimes in a court of law, and not a Kangaroo court. Leave the children out of it.
>Indifferent to the suffering of his subjects >Let a hobo bumblefuck make decisions for him >Thought fucking with Japan was a good idea >Thought fighting in the first world war was a good idea >Mishandled the popular insurrection that was working against him >Was an all-around fucktard who failed Russia and let the gommies, an even greater evil, take over
His family didn't deserve the fate they got, but I don't feel particularly bad for him.
>>543373 If we define competence as the ability to achieve your own goals, Stalin was the better autocrat.
People starved before and after. People got shot at before and after. But the communist government achieved more global projection than monarchist Russia ever did and Stalin held more control over the masses than the czar did.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.