In Serbian news channel they talked about it and glorified him about how he was ‘‘good tsar who did good things’’ etc etc. Didn’t this guy like commit genocide in Circassia and sold Alaska if I remember correctly? Can someone tell me more about him and why is he glorified?
I miss Leningrad so goddam much☭😭
‘‘good tsar who did good things’’
That line of family had seriously defected brains (not saying rest of them didn’t but this one was worst):
Nicholas I - nicknamed “Palkin” because he often ordered people to be beaten with clubs (“palka”) for his fun. Sadist and tyrant who was pretty universally hated.
Alexander II - “Lets enslave people to the capitalist class but also keep as much of serfdom as we can”
Alexander III - “Not a single step forward”
Nicholas II - nicknamed “Bloody” - incompetent, tyrannical and bloodthirsty. Even his family preferred to hang with Rasuptin than with him.
The fact that they use the sentence ‘‘good tsar who did good things’’ in 2022 while every one of them was a bigger piece of shit than the previous one is beyond me
Catherine the Great was also messed up If I recall correctly.
They were monarchs, every one of them was fucked up.
Earlier Romanovs were actually mostly at least competent in accumulating power, as evidenced by them setting up the absolute power levels that enabled the last four to act on their derangement with such freedom instead of Nicholas I being guillotined as he should be - while first one, Michael, who was elected to the throne because he was the most unassuming and least dangerous from great boyars.
What about Peter the Great? Everyone glorifies him for some reason, he suppressed the rebellions with such brutality like Ivan the Terrible and taxed peasants, and I’m sure he also did a lot more fucked up things than that.
By all probablity he was worse than Ivan since Ivan got his history written by historians serving his enemies, while Peter understood the meaning of propaganda and ensured he is remembered fondly.
He was a tyrant, but a competent one.
There are times when things are just done the way they are done and they can’t be done any other way. Sure, he taxed people and suppressed rebellion. Like all the other monarchies at the time. But unlike other monarchs he was also a competent individual who did things that depended on him extremely right. He literally paved the way for Russia to be a world power instead of being colonized by Europeans. He created powerful military, he created the fleet, he defeated local enemies and he restored order to the otherwise chaotic country. He created education, he promoted science. The list goes on and on. Of all the monarchs that were here he was the one fondly remembered throughout the history and the one soviet propaganda also treated positively.
Exactly right. We need to remember (as per basic dialectical materialism) that the level of social development can never be higher than the level of economic development. To have a full representative democracy, with universal suffrage and equal rights before the law, was simply not possible given a 17th-century level of production.
Over 1,200 people died and they didn’t stop the party.
Bourgeois + aristocratic decadence and dare I say degeneracy of the highest order.
Ah the performance was about Alexander II. This was Nicholas II. Still, the brainworms ran deep in all of the bastards.
Leningrad lies disgraced
He’s known for emancipating Russia’s serfs in 1861 and being a reformist. He did do both of those things you mentioned though.
