Military Review

The last Emperor

245
18 May 1868 of the Year (6 May Old Style), 150 years ago, Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov was born - the last emperor of the Russian Empire, Nikolai II. The outcome of the reign of the last monarch was sad, and his fate and the fate of his closest relatives were tragic. In many ways, such a finale was the result of the nature of the character of the last Russian emperor, his inability to be at the head of a great power at such a difficult time.


Many contemporaries remember Nicholas II as a soft, well-mannered and intelligent person who, meanwhile, lacked political will, determination, and perhaps even a banal interest in the country's political problems. Famous statesman Sergei Witte gave the last Russian Tsar a rather unpleasant characteristic for a man. He wrote that “sovereign Nicholas II has a female character. Someone made the remark that only on the game of nature, shortly before birth, he was provided with attributes that distinguish man from woman. ”

The last Emperor


Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov was born in the family of 23-year-old Tsarevich Alexander Alexandrovich Romanov (future emperor Alexander III) and his spouse of 21-year-old Maria Feodorovna - nee Maria Sofia Frederica Dagmar, daughter of Prince Christian Glucksburg, the future king of Denmark. As was the case for the crown prince, Nikolai received his home education, combining the programs of the state and economic departments of the law faculty of the university and the Academy of the General Staff. The lectures of the most famous Russian professors read the lectures of Nicholas II, but they did not have the right to ask the Tsarevich and check his knowledge, therefore a real assessment of the real knowledge of Nikolai Romanov was not possible. 6 (18) On May 1884, sixteen-year-old Nikolai took the oath in the Great Church of the Winter Palace. By this time, his father Alexander had been at the head of the Russian Empire for three years.

Back in 1889, Nicholas met 17-year-old Alice - Princess of Hesse-Darmstadt, daughter of the Grand Duke of Hesse and Rhenish Ludwig IV and Duchess Alice, daughter of the British Queen Victoria. The princess immediately attracted the attention of the heir to the Russian imperial throne.

As befits the heir to the throne, Nikolai received the experience of military service in his youth. He served in the Preobrazhensky Regiment, a squadron commander in the Life Guards Hussars, and in the 1892 year, in the 24 years of age, he was promoted to colonel. To get an idea of ​​his modern world, Nikolai Alexandrovich made an impressive journey to various countries, visiting Austria-Hungary, Greece, Egypt, India, Japan and China, and then, arriving in Vladivostok, driving across Russia to the capital. During the trip, the first dramatic incident occurred - 29 on April (11 in May) 1891 was attempted on the crown Prince in the city of Otsu. Nicholas was attacked by one of the policemen who stood in the cordon - Tsuda Sanzo, who managed to put Nicholas on the head with two saber. The blows came casually, and Nikolai rushed to run. The attacker was detained, and a few months later he died in prison.

20 October (1 November) 1894, Emperor Alexander III died in his palace in Livadia as a result of a serious illness at 50. It is possible that if it were not for the premature death of Alexander III, the Russian история at the beginning of the twentieth century would have been different. Alexander III was a strong politician, had clear, right-wing conservative beliefs and was able to control the situation in the country. His eldest son Nikolay did not inherit his fatherly qualities. Contemporaries recalled that Nikolai Romanov did not want to rule the state at all. He was much more interested in his own life, his own family, issues of recreation and entertainment, rather than state administration. It is known that the Empress Maria Feodorovna saw the sovereign of Russia her younger son Mikhail Alexandrovich, who, it seemed, was more adapted to government activities. But Nikolai was the eldest son and heir of Alexander III. He did not renounce the throne in favor of his younger brother.

One and a half hours after the death of Alexander III, Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov in the Livadia Holy Cross Church swore allegiance to the throne. The next day, Alice, who became Alexandra Feodorovna, adopted Orthodoxy to his bride. 14 (26) November 1894, Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov and Alexandra Fyodorovna got married in the Great Church of the Winter Palace. The marriage of Nicholas and Alexandra took place less than a month after the death of Alexander III, which could not help but leave an imprint on the general atmosphere in the royal family and in society. On the other hand, this circumstance leaves purely “human” questions - couldn’t the new sovereign could tolerate a marriage and conclude it at least several months after the death of his father? But Nikolai and Alexandra chose what they chose. Contemporaries recalled that their honeymoon took place in the atmosphere of requiem and mourning visits.

The coronation of the last Russian emperor was darkened by tragedy. It took place on 14 (26) on May 1896, in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. In honor of the coronation of 18 (30) on May 1896, folk festivities were scheduled on the Khodynka field in Moscow. On the field, temporary stalls were set up for free distribution of 30 000 beer buckets, 10 000 honey buckets and 400 000 gift bags with royal gifts. Already by 5 hours of the morning 18 May on Khodynsky field gathered up to half a million people, attracted by the news of the distribution of gifts. Rumors began to spread among the gathered crowd that bartenders handing out gifts from the stalls only to their friends, after which people rushed to the stalls. Fearing that the crowd would simply demolish the stalls, the bartenders began to throw paper bags with gifts directly into the crowd, which further increased the crush.

The police who provided order to 1800 could not cope with a half-million crowd. A terrible crush began, ending in tragedy. 1379 people died, even more 1300 people received injuries of varying severity. Nicholas II directly punished those responsible. The chief master of Moscow, Colonel Alexander Vlasovsky and his deputy, were removed from their posts, and the minister of the court, Count Illarion Vorontsov-Dashkov, who was in charge of organizing the celebrations, was sent to the Caucasus. Nevertheless, the society connected the crush on the Khodynka field and the death of more than a thousand people with the person of Emperor Nicholas II. Superstitious people said that such tragic events during the coronation of the new emperor did not bode well for Russia. And, as we see, they were not mistaken. The epoch of Nicholas II opened with tragedy on the Khodynka field, and ended with a much larger tragedy on a nationwide scale.



The reign of Nicholas II had years of maximum revitalization, flourishing and triumph of the Russian revolutionary movement. Economic problems, an unsuccessful war with Japan, and, most importantly, the stubborn unwillingness of the Russian elite to accept the modern rules of the game contributed to the destabilization of the political situation in the country. The form of government of the country to the beginning of the twentieth century was hopelessly outdated, but the emperor did not go to the abolition of class division, the abolition of the privileges of the nobility. As a result, more and more broad strata of Russian society, including not only and not so much workers and peasants, as intellectuals, officers, merchants, and a significant part of the bureaucracy, turned against the monarchy, and especially the sovereign Nicholas II.

The dark page in the history of Nikolaev Russia was the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, the defeat of which became one of the direct causes of the revolution of 1905-1907. and a serious factor in the country's disappointment in its monarch. The war with Japan exposed all the ulcers of the government system of the Russian Empire, including colossal corruption and embezzlement, the inability of officials - both military and civilian - to effectively manage the areas entrusted to them. While the soldiers and officers of the Russian army and fleet died in battles with the Japanese, the country's elite led an idle existence. The state did not take any real steps to reduce the scale of exploitation of the working class, to improve the situation of the peasantry, and to increase the level of education and medical services for the population. A huge part of the Russian people remained illiterate, one could only dream of medical care in the villages and workers' settlements. For example, at the beginning of the 30th century, there was only one doctor for the entire XNUMX thousandth Temernik (the working outskirts of Rostov-on-Don).

9 January 1905, another tragedy occurred. The troops opened fire on a peaceful demonstration, moving under the direction of priest George Gapon to the Winter Palace. Many demonstrators came to her with their wives and children. No one could have imagined that their own Russian troops would open fire on peaceful people. Nicholas II personally did not order the execution of the demonstrators, but agreed with the measures proposed by the government. As a result, 130 people died, another 229 people were injured. 9 January 1905 was nicknamed "Bloody Sunday" by the people, and Nicholas II himself was called Nicholas the Bloody.

The emperor wrote in his diary: “A hard day! Serious unrest occurred in St. Petersburg due to the workers' desire to reach the Winter Palace. The troops were supposed to shoot in different places of the city, there were many dead and wounded. Lord, how painful and hard! " These words were the main reaction of the monarch to the tragedy. To calm the people, to understand the situation, to make any changes in the system of governance, the sovereign did not consider it necessary. Only large-scale revolutionary actions that began throughout the country pushed him to the adoption of the Manifesto, and army and navy servicemen were increasingly being drawn into it.

However, the final point in the fate of both Nicholas II and the Russian Empire was put by the First World War. 1 August 1914, Germany declared war on the Russian Empire. 23 August 1915, due to the fact that the situation on the fronts was rapidly deteriorating, and the Supreme Commander Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich could not cope with his duties, Nikolai II himself assumed the duties of the Supreme Commander. It should be noted that by this time his authority in the army was significantly undermined. At the front, anti-government sentiment increased.



The situation was aggravated by the fact that the war seriously changed the composition of the officer corps. Officers distinguished soldiers, representatives of the civil intelligentsia, among whom revolutionary moods were already strong, were rapidly promoted to officers. The officer corps was no longer the unequivocal support and hope of the Russian monarchy. According to some researchers, opposition sentiments to the 1915 year were struck by various sectors of Russian society, penetrated its very top, including the immediate environment of the emperor himself. Not all of the representatives of the Russian elite were at that time against the monarchy as such. Most of them counted only on the abdication of the unpopular Nicholas II among the people. It was planned that his son Alexei would become the new emperor, and Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich would become the regent. 23 February The 1917 strike began in Petrograd, which in three days took on an all-Russian character.

2 March 1917, Emperor Nicholas II decided to abdicate the throne in favor of his son Alexei under the regency of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich. But the Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich refused the role of regent, which surprised his brother a lot. “Misha denied it. His manifesto ends with a four-quarter for the elections through the 6 months of the Constituent Assembly. God knows who advised him to sign such disgusting! ”- Nikolai Romanov wrote in his diary. He handed a telegram to General Alekseev in Petrograd, in which he gave consent to the accession to the throne of his son Alexei. But General Alekseev did not send a telegram. The monarchy in Russia ceased to exist.



Personal qualities of Nicholas II did not allow him to even pick up a decent environment. The emperor had no reliable comrades-in-arms, as evidenced by the speed of his overthrow. Even the highest strata of the Russian aristocracy, the generals, and large entrepreneurs did not speak out in defense of Nikolay. The February 1917 revolution of the year was supported by most of Russian society, and Nicholas II himself abdicated the throne, without making any attempts to preserve the absolute power, which he possessed for more than twenty years. A year after the abdication, Nikolai Romanov, his wife Alexandra, all the children and several closest servants were shot in Yekaterinburg. Thus ended the life of the last Russian emperor, whose identity is still the subject of fierce debate at the national level.
Author:
245 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cat
    Cat 17 May 2018 05: 37
    +20
    I don’t know how-kama, but I liked the article by Ilya for his balanced and sober approach to the personality and affairs of Nicholas II.
    Thank you! hi
    1. igordok
      igordok 17 May 2018 05: 42
      +8
      Quote: Kotischa
      I don’t know how-kama, but I liked Ilya’s article ...

      I agree. Short and capacious.
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 17 May 2018 06: 58
      +14
      Quote: Kotischa
      I don’t know how-kama, but I’m an article by Ilya liked his balanced and sober approach to personality and cases Nicholas II.
      Thank you!

      Surprisingly: the article is a set of nagging, mossy blank stamps and agitation. About affairs, it is not said, practically, ANYTHING at all.
      HOW you can write an article about politics and the leader of the state and not write about what exactly the Russian Emperor organized FIRST WORLD meeting of all nations of the world to solve the known problems of relations between peoples (1899, 1907, The Hague)?
      It was there, for the first time in history, that it was stated that an attack on a country was a crime: before that it was considered ... the LEGAL way of mutual relations between states.
      There were adopted the rules of war and declaration of war, the prohibition of chemical weapons, the rules on prisoners of war, wounded, etc., etc.
      The provisions of the adopted Hague Conventions, which were approved by the Emperor, were practically repeated word for word in today's UN Charter. So, no matter how disgusting to some, today the world, in many respects, lives according to HIS rules, and it is his business, not his foreign tourist’s life.
      And this is not my opinion: in the Preamble of the Hague Conventions, ALL countries expressed special thanks and gratitude to the Russian Emperor for organizing the first meeting of the assembly of peoples and putting forward these principles.

      Portrait of Nicholas in The Hague, in the Peace Palace, he is already more than a hundred years.
      and the First Costitition in Russia, and the first elections of the people, and democracy, and the best judicial system in the world, and the freedom of the press, parties, sovereign (all this was destroyed later)? NOTHING about this by the author ........

      Despite all the respect for the author, this time the article failed ...
      1. Monarchist
        Monarchist 17 May 2018 07: 54
        +11
        Olgovich, many comrades have no idea what exactly Nicholas 2 was the initiator of the Gaga agreements, and therefore offer you: tell us about this, what preceded and how this event took place. Something tells me that the Russian diplomat had to work hard
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 17 May 2018 09: 08
          +7
          Quote: Monarchist
          Tell us about it, what preceded and how this event took place. Something tells me that the Russian diplomat had to work hard

          There was already a detailed article on VO about this, which caused a very heated discussion: https://topwar.ru/103703-natalya-pervyy-shag-k-vs
          eobschemu-miru-i-razoruzheniyu-zasluga-rossii.htm
          l.
          Of course, a very large team of Russian lawyers, law professors and scholars worked on the documents and put the foundations of international law in the form of documents.
          The role of the Emperor was that he formulated the idea itself, approved the developed principles and organized a meeting.

          And I’ll add about the period of the reign of Nicholas:

          under the Emperor (22 years) the population of Russia increased by 50%-This never happened before him and never-after.
          -Many people know about the resettlement of peasants to Siberia, but few know that Siberian virgin lands were raised: smartly, prudently, neatly at minimal cost, the lands were plowed, which are not much less than with the notorious awkward "development of virgin land" that caused harm almost more than the benefits and demanded overstrain of the force-means of the whole country.
          Siberia at the beginning of the century, total in a few years became the largest producer of butter and bread.
          Emperor actually introduced universal primary education, with it were built around 100 000 schools, it was he who achieved that the school was at a distance of 3 km from the students. Foreign tourists did not bring schools and teachers from Switzerland: they were already in Russia. By the way, the number of schools and students 1914 level Mr. advice restored only ... to 1927 year!
          -Higher education was not only the best in the world (along with the USA and Germany), it was also much more democraticthan in England, where only the upper classes trained. Higher female education-best in the world. Russian scientists of that period are some of the best in the world. They educated the conquerors of atom and space and created science. Their names can be listed indefinitely: Vernadsky, Ioffe, Khlopin, Mysovsky, etc.
          And other and other.
          The Emperor, of course, had errors: state criminals didn’t need resorts. send to Shushensky, where they were getting fat and healthy, and to other places. Yes, and ice axes and then there were
          1. apro
            apro 17 May 2018 09: 25
            +6
            Olgovich. Could you characterize these as you say foreign tourists. In what class were they. Financial status. Citizenship. Religion. Ethnicity. Educational level. On what basis did you go abroad.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 17 May 2018 09: 42
              +3
              Quote: apro
              Olgovich. Could you characterize these as you say foreign tourists. In what class were they. Financial status. Citizenship. Religion. Ethnicity. Educational level. On what basis did you go abroad.

              Open the first composition of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Belarus-and go!
              Incidentally, he was ALL executed by Stalin. yes
              1. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 17 May 2018 09: 49
                +6
                Quote: Olgovich
                Incidentally, he was ALL executed by Stalin.

                You're lying, after all. Not all.
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 17 May 2018 11: 36
                  +4
                  Quote: Mordvin 3
                  You're lying, after all. Not all.

                  The first composition of the Politburo: A. Bubnov, G. E. Zinoviev, L. B. Kamenev, V. I. Lenin, G. Ya. Sokolnikov, I. V. Stalin, V. I. Lenin Trotsky L. D.
                  ALL to Stalin destroyed. (Lenin managed before that).

                  Now, please: Eat your hat lol
                  1. Mordvin 3
                    Mordvin 3 17 May 2018 12: 07
                    +4
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Eat your hat

                    Pop it yourself.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    The first composition of the Politburo: A. Bubnov, G. E. Zinoviev, L. B. Kamenev, V. I. Lenin, G. Ya. Sokolnikov, I. V. Stalin, V. I. Lenin Trotsky L. D.

                    This composition was created under the Provisional Government, to lead the uprising, and constantly the Politburo began to act after the resolution of the 8th Congress. So where is the first composition, and where is the second - a moot point.
              2. apro
                apro 17 May 2018 09: 52
                +8
                I understand Olgovich. You are a person with an encyclopedic mindset and know how to set the vector you need.
                For example, why did the Russian nobility rush into the revolution so much? Why did the class always oppose Russian ampirators. support of the throne? don’t you find it strange? not peasants not workers ...
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 17 May 2018 11: 50
                  +3
                  Quote: apro
                  I understand Olgovich. You are a person with an encyclopedic mindset and know how to set the vector you need.

                  Dear Oleg, I am absolutely the same as you
                  Quote: apro
                  why the class has always opposed Russian ampirators. support of the throne? don’t you find it strange? not peasants not workers ..

                  An elementary struggle for power, replete all over the world with numerous conspiracies, uprisings and even direct killings of relatives and members of their families.
                  1. apro
                    apro 17 May 2018 16: 53
                    +4
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    An elementary struggle for power, replete all over the world with numerous conspiracies, uprisings and even direct killings of relatives and members of their families.

                    And not the deterioration of the economic situation of the estate as a result of the reforms of Alexander 2? After a series of guards revolutions, the legitimacy of subsequent ampirators was constantly falling.
                2. Weyland
                  Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 46
                  +1
                  Quote: apro
                  did the Russian nobility rush into the revolution in such a way? why did the class always oppose the Russian emirators. support of the throne? don't you find it strange? not peasants not workers

                  I would say, not the nobility, but the propertied classes, primarily industrialists. Isn't it because a democratic bourgeois state laws are written under them, because Deputies are buying up in the bud! But under the tsar (in the sense of an autocratic or at least dualistic monarchy), such lawlessness is impossible - the tsar is more difficult to buy, he, unlike the deputy, is ruled for life, and the normal monarch has the idea "after us even a flood!" he doesn’t take root - he should pass the throne to his son, and not to the uncle-president-uncle, whose fate he spit on!
                  1. naidas
                    naidas 18 May 2018 01: 58
                    0
                    Quote: Weyland
                    to transfer the throne to the son

                    Well, yes, Ivan4 transmitted, Peter1 transmitted.
                    Spain for 10 years of such programs in the late 18th-early 19th century (for 10 years) from a prosperous country has become miserable and impoverished.
                    Yes, and corruption, autocracy is not a hindrance, the experience of Russia in the early 20th century.
          2. Hantengri
            Hantengri 17 May 2018 10: 09
            +11
            Quote: Olgovich
            The emperor (22 years old) the population of Russia grew by 50% - this has never happened before him and never after.

            Urya !!! Urya !!! What a success !!! laughing The reasons for this "wonderful" growth, as well as its "wonderful" consequences, have you ever been interested in, Olgovich? Ah, yes, I forgot - you are only interested in “FACTS” (s) selectively, and the analysis of causes and effects is not included in the set of utilities of your inter-OS operating system, by definition. lol
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. Hantengri
                Hantengri 17 May 2018 20: 13
                +3
                Quote: Olgovich
                lover of mate and mr!

                Do not flatter yourself, Olgovich - I do not like you! laughing
          3. Hantengri
            Hantengri 17 May 2018 10: 24
            +10
            Quote: Olgovich
            By the way, the number of schools and students at the level of 1914, the councils restored only ... by 1927!

            Those. as much as 4 to 5 years after the end of the war! What a nightmare! What a deep inefficiency! To drive such managers to hell with a dog!lol Yes, Olgovich, logic is not your hobby, as was said! laughing
            1. The comment was deleted.
          4. naidas
            naidas 18 May 2018 02: 29
            +1
            Quote: Olgovich
            under the Emperor (22 years), the population of Russia grew by 50% - this has never happened before him and never after.

            Well, why wasn’t it — under Aleksey Mikhailovich with the annexation of Ukraine and other lands, even more than 60% (after all, you take into account the population growth under Nikolai of the annexed lands).
        2. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE 18 May 2018 07: 11
          +1
          Of course, how could Polonsky about the feminine character of Russian tsars
      2. zoolu350
        zoolu350 17 May 2018 09: 20
        +20
        You listen to your marvelous bakery crystal choir named after Nicholas No. 2 and you are surprised. There was a “mighty and prosperous” Republic of Ingushetia in your sore mind that everyone feared (including Japan, which only got out of feudalism by the end of the 19th century), milk rivers and jelly banks flowed there, nobles crunched with rolls, peysans walked in silk footcloths without exception, there were general elections, industry, education, science and medicine were some of the best in the world. But here, from Mars, for no reason, millions of Bolsheviks flew in and destroyed everything. Insanity grows stronger.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 17 May 2018 09: 50
          +5
          Quote: zoolu350
          You listen to your marvelous bakery crystal choir named after Nicholas No. 2 and you are surprised. There was a “mighty and prosperous” Republic of Ingushetia in your sore mind that everyone feared (including Japan, which only got out of feudalism by the end of the 19th century), milk rivers and jelly banks flowed there, nobles crunched with rolls, peysans walked in silk footcloths without exception, there were general elections, industry, education, science and medicine were some of the best in the world.

          Against the background of the successor starvation more than ten million people, cannibalism and carcass (which has never been in Russia before), wild dictatorship, lack of freedom: speech, parties, elections, conscience, it looks like that. And what is wrong? request
      3. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 17 May 2018 11: 51
        +11
        Quote: Olgovich
        Despite all the respect for the author, this time the article failed ...

        ... and Nikolai also knew how to chop wood and shoot crows.
        The author highlighted the most important events during the reign of Nicholas II and it was not his fault that all these events speak of the complete lack of talent of Nicholas as ruler. Some contemporaries rightly said about the reign of Nicholas - Khodinka began, Khodynka and will end. Prophetic words, one might say.
        It is sad that in such a difficult era (on the other hand, which epoch is simple?) At the helm of such a great state as the Russian Empire was, it turned out to be such a nothingness, the ceiling of which is to work as a nurse in a mental hospital for high-ranking persons, and that is only because of the magnificent general education.
        1. albert
          albert 17 May 2018 21: 23
          +1
          Quote: Trilobite Master
          and raven shoot.

          And cats too. Some kind of zhivodera. angry
      4. Alber
        Alber 17 May 2018 12: 22
        +2
        Quote: Olgovich
        Despite all the respect for the author, this time the article failed ...


        Especially the "half-million crowd on Khodynka ..."
        Where are they located there?
      5. Warrior-80
        Warrior-80 17 May 2018 15: 21
        +2
        Stran was the initiator of the prohibition of chemical weapons, although he actively used it in World War I, though after the Germans used it
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 17 May 2018 16: 25
          +2
          Quote: Warrior-80
          true after application by the Germans

          What else was left to do? Since the enemy is fighting in this way, then you need to answer.
    3. Lieutenant Teterin
      Lieutenant Teterin 17 May 2018 08: 33
      +7
      Your will, but there is no balanced approach in the article from the word at all. Just one set of old mammoth tusk like propaganda stamps.
      lacked political will, determination, and perhaps a banal interest in the political problems of the country. A rather unpleasant characteristic for a man was given to the last Russian Tsar by the famous statesman Sergei Witte. He wrote that “Emperor Nicholas II has a female character. Someone made a remark that only by the game of nature, shortly before birth, he was equipped with attributes that distinguish a man from a woman. ”

      Count Witte is known as an ambitious and vindictive person. His memoirs are generally written in the style of: "everything is insignificant, and, I alone — D'Artagnan on horseback." In addition, Witte hated the Emperor for his resignation — the count even the restrained Nicholas II managed to end up getting his intrigues against his colleagues.
      And about the personal courage and unbending will of Nicholas II speaks not only of his repeated visits to the front, but also the assumption of command of the army in 1915. To take as a beginning a catastrophe army, realizing that in case of failure all the dogs will be hanged on you — this is not an ordinary event. For such an act, one must have considerable will and courage.
      The state did not take any real steps to reduce the scale of exploitation of the working class, to improve the situation of the peasantry, and to increase the level of education and medical services for the population. The vast majority of Russian people remained illiterate

      Russophobian nonsense. It was the Imperial government that pushed the law on workers' insurance in case of illness in 1912, and the whole reign of Nicholas II was carried out to increase the level of education of citizens. https://nikital2014.livejournal.com/34027.html
      The same situation is with medicine. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.tsargrad.tv/artic
      les / reforma-zdravoohranenija-imperatora-nikolaja-
      ii_68168

      Nicholas II personally did not order the execution of the demonstrators, but agreed with the measures proposed by the government. As a result, 130 people died, another 229 people were injured. The people called it “Bloody Sunday” on January 9, 1905, and Nicholas II himself — Nikolai Bloody.

      Firstly, these names were distributed by left-wing revolutionary publications, and at least illiterate to equate a bunch of renegade terrorists with the whole people.
      Secondly, the author, apparently out of political convictions, was bashfully silent that the actions of the troops were provoked by revolutionary bandits, who began to shoot at soldiers under cover of the crowd. Show me the commander who, looking at the shelling of his people, will not order to shoot in response.
      The personal qualities of Nicholas II did not even allow him to pick up a decent environment. The emperor did not have reliable companions,

      I would advise the author to read Ivan Solonevich's The Great Fake of February. It is well shown there that the problem was not in the personality of the Emperor, but in the remnant of the old aristocracy of Russia. To people who are losing influence, the Emperor, pursuing a policy of replacing the old aristocracy with new people brought up in the spirit of reform of the 70s and 90s of the 19th century, was a serious obstacle. That is why there was such a serious opposition against him.
      Nicholas II abdicated the throne without making any attempt to maintain absolute power,

      Nonsense. The emperor sent the great princes fronting the capital, replaced the governor general of St. Petersburg, ordered the loyal troops to be pulled to the rebellious capital, and finally went personally to investigate what was happening. Finding himself in a situation of information blockade when they laid him on the table like a carbon copy the same telegrams about the threat of destruction of the rear, he made a reasonable choice on the basis of the data known to him — to give power in exchange for maintaining the ability to protect the country from an external enemy.
      So the article is written extremely superficially and cannot be considered in the least.
      1. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 17 May 2018 10: 20
        +10
        Russophobian nonsense. It was the Imperial government that pushed the sickness insurance law in 1912

        Frunze in his “Selected Works” has articles from newspapers of the time, and there you can read the revelations of the working people directly at enterprises. Including about honey. insurance. And the way the employer transferred this insurance to the workers themselves, which they were incredibly happy with, as the "net" salary became lower, and as in the case of illness or injury, they did not receive any insurance, but they had to pay for the "do-it-yourself". And the word across to the employer because of such "insurance" is to the street, and the strike - so the Cossacks with the whips already from the very authorities that benefited with this "insurance".

        So well-intentioned, but the road you know where. Well, no one would go for the Reds, if everything would be so cool, as you describe. How do people refuse to understand this? Yes, it is possible due to manipulations to close the lid on the "boiler". But the boiler is already boiling.
    4. Hole puncher
      Hole puncher 17 May 2018 08: 52
      +8
      Quote: Kotischa
      I liked the article by Ilya

      Nikolay2 killed cats in the thousands, he directly arranged cotogenocide, you should hate him fiercely and mark all his images ...
      1. Cat
        Cat 17 May 2018 11: 41
        +7
        Quote: Puncher

        Nikolay2 killed cats in the thousands, he directly arranged cotogenocide, you should hate him fiercely and mark all his images ...

        Great offer. As an option, ask Olegovich to visit and “mark” Nikolai’s portrait in a “jump”, or even better, sneak into the museum at night and “spoil” his bust ......... good
        I think this is not for me, we cultural cats with glasses walk, and rumor says that bespectacled people are not vindictive, they do not forget evil !!!
    5. Bar1
      Bar1 17 May 2018 11: 10
      +1
      generally procrastinate the known facts, crush the water in a stupa. But walk on the other side of Nikolai2. For example, the creation of currency Trusts and Fresov in America is more interesting. Why was this done? What are the implications for the world of this decision?

      https://topwar.ru/98779-o-carskom-zolote-rossii-v
      -ssha.html

      Of all these stories with the sale of Alaska and the rest of the American lands, then the creation of this monetary fund for Russian gold, the sending of fleets to America to support European predators, it is possible to say that the creation of the United States was the Romanovs' project. The economist Katasonov asked a question that hung in the air. How much money was purchased for equipment for Soviet industry? Indeed, during the years of industrialization, about 8.5 thousand enterprises were built and equipped, and -1.5 tons of gold = 13.5 thousand total was spent on each plant. tons of gold. Where did the devastated Soviet country get so much gold from? This is not possible to explain to any Torgsins.
      But it is already clear that it was the Americans who were the first to create the industry of the USSR. Apparently, with the Fed’s money, our industry was created.
      The same can be said about Germany, Germany was revived with American money.
      And then the two countries clashed in a terrible war in which America won and they still win.
      So much for nikolashka, who now believes that he and his family were kicked in Yekaterinburg?
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 17 May 2018 11: 36
        +3
        they forgot about Temko, which characterizes Nikolashka a little. He had a brother, George, who died of consumption, but there is a fact that Nikolai pushed his brother into the hold of the ship and he died later. evil spirits that these two dunce Nikolai and His brother loved one Jewish woman, Matilda Kshesinskaya, but the recent film “Matilda” doesn’t say anything about his brother or his brother. This is our story.
        1. Opera
          Opera 17 May 2018 12: 32
          +3
          It makes no sense to add something to what Olgovich wrote!) You, Andrei, got ahead of me!) However, as almost always! On my own, perhaps this is what I want to say - the truth is always simple, the ornate lie is complex and multivariate! From this multivariance, liars often happen with liars! Lied and forgot! When it came time to lie again, I forgot the details of the previous lies and invented new ones, and the new ones are in clear contradiction with the old ... So it turns out Nicholas II is both soft and bloody and loving and decent to the tips of the nails and it seems like he was not particularly interested in politics real reformer too! About this and Olgovich already said and Poruchik Teterin, and much more can be said! According to the article, it turns out that no one was a king and there is no way to call him! Well ... a citizen is probably kind and it turns out, no matter how distant ... Random in general. So I just have a question for those who are distant and thinking - well, if everything faded and dull, then why does the personality of the last Russian Tsar cause some lively hatred, but for others he is a saint ?! Why, after so many years, have not so much heated debate subsided ?! Why do some at the mere mention of the name of the Russian Tsar the Passion-bearer simply begin to rave ?! You cannot say otherwise. The answer is simple - the Tsar by his own life set an example of piety and Christian philanthropy! And his death is truly covered in the Bible halo!
          The author writes in his article about the unpleasant characteristic of Witte ... Well, this is personal. Who cares, see for yourself. But I still give a few facts about the last Russian Tsar, which perhaps you did not know. Nicholas had the military rank of colonel and from persistent offers welcome yourself at least the rank of general refused. He made pedestrian crossings, sometimes several tens of kilometers. Kayaking and playing Russian hockey. The modesty of the king is known. Until recently, he wore costumes that were sewn for marriage. The number of prisoners in the prisons of the Russian Empire was much smaller than at any time from 1917 to this day! Father left Nicholas 4 rubles of personal funds in the accounts - all spent on charity. By the way, the author forgot to mention what really huge help the families of the victims on Khodynka allocated Nicholas from personal funds. Well, about the peaceful demonstration of 000, which the revolutionaries simply set to open fire on the troops from the crowd and the roofs, the author described generally at the level of the story of one reverent freethinking institute of the other! So, unfortunately, the whole content of the article as a whole looks like.
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 17 May 2018 14: 15
            +4
            Quote: Oper
            So, I just have a question for those who are distant and thinking - well, if everything faded and dull, then why does the personality of the last Russian tsar simply cause lively hatred for some, but for others he is a saint ?!

            Hello Igor!
            And they respect and hate him, I think, for the same thing.
            Under Nicholas, Russia possessed the most precious and unique wealth: fast-growing, full of strength and energy of the Russian people. This is the basis and confidence in the future of the state. Worthy of respect.
            Those who came next, in just one generation, reduced this wealth to the Russian Cross.

            So they hate him for what happened to him, but NOT received at them.
            1. Opera
              Opera 17 May 2018 15: 31
              +7
              Andrei, loyal Leninists have never set such a goal for themselves! If you recall many, many of their statements about the Russian people, the meaning of them speaking in modern language came down to the fact that the Great Russians (read chauvinists) just have to answer to the "oppressed peoples!" On the national outskirts, and bet! In the future, Russians were with the Belarusians and a little Ukrainians, if we talk about the same long-suffering Donbass (more correctly the whole of New Russia). These were the donor regions in the USSR. All the rest had their own national apartments and lived unmatchedly better than the metropolis! So, the Russian cross is a completely natural phenomenon.
              What strikes me is another - the truly inadequate reaction of many people under the name of Nicholas II. Many modern comrades, in principle, have little that they who know about the life and affairs of the tsar and the royal family immediately begin to speak with cliches and slogans, either derogatoryly, or even go overtly to insults! And the point here is not even that someone in the 90s of German porn has looked around outrageously! I think this is the point. In the USSR, if you recall, the goal was to create a new type - Soviet man! Now, if you do not take central and western Ukraine, then Soviet people were made primarily from the Slavs! Everyone else had very significant ideological indulgences and much more attention was paid to national characteristics and religion. In the Caucasus, there is still a very respectful expression - the White Tsar spread to Nicholas II. The Lord did not allow this to happen, but something the Communists did ... An example of this is many other discussions on this topic! Well, my other explanation is of course devilry! The enemy of mankind is on the alert! I can’t explain it to anyone else!
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 17 May 2018 16: 29
                +3
                Quote: Oper
                Many modern comrades, in principle, have little that they who know about the life and affairs of the tsar and the royal family immediately begin to speak with cliches and slogans, either derogatoryly, or even go overtly to insults!

                It is even stranger when they hang the tsar, including the current problems.
                1. naidas
                  naidas 18 May 2018 02: 46
                  0
                  Even stranger when the long dead comes to life. (Do not be told by night)
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 18 May 2018 05: 42
                    +2
                    Quote: naidas
                    when the long dead comes to life

                    In almost all countries, wealth and status are inherited. Well, elected deputies / presidents / ministers are talking heads.
              2. Olgovich
                Olgovich 18 May 2018 12: 25
                +2
                Quote: Oper
                Andrei, loyal Leninists have never set such a goal for themselves!

                But they declared something very widely. So wide that many people today believe in this sacredly.
            2. Bar1
              Bar1 17 May 2018 16: 42
              +6
              Quote: Olgovich
              Under Nicholas, Russia possessed the most precious and unique wealth: a fast-growing, full of strength and energy Russian people. This is the basis and confidence in the future of the state. Worthy of respect.


              this is a lie. In Russia, Nikolai2 people are undernourished and there is such a fact that when calling a recruit to the army it was necessary to feed the guy first, because he could not serve.
              1. Olgovich
                Olgovich 18 May 2018 12: 28
                +2
                Quote: Bar1
                this is a lie. In Russia, Nikolai2 people are undernourished and there is such a fact that when calling a recruit to the army it was necessary to feed the guy first, because he could not serve.

                This is a lie: people in RI ate much better than in the USSR right up to 1950: see the Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of the USSR 1955.
                1. Bar1
                  Bar1 18 May 2018 13: 24
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Quote: Bar1
                  this is a lie. In Russia, Nikolai2 people are undernourished and there is such a fact that when calling a recruit to the army it was necessary to feed the guy first, because he could not serve.

                  This is a lie: people in RI ate much better than in the USSR right up to 1950: see the Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of the USSR 1955.

                  let's link to it.

                  for example, what Leo Tolstoy wrote.
                  In all these villages, although there is no mixture of bread, as was the case in 1891, they do not give bread, although clean. Welding - millet, cabbage, potatoes, even most, have no. Food consists of grass cabbage soup, whitened if there is a cow, and unbleached if there is none, and only bread. In all these villages, the majority sold and mortgaged everything that could be sold and mortgaged.
                  From Guschina, I went to the village of Gnevyshevo, from which peasants came two days ago asking for help. This village consists, like Gubarevka, of 10 courtyards. For ten yards are four horses and four cows; almost no sheep; all houses are so old and bad that they barely stand. All are poor, and all beg to help them. “If only the guys have rested a little bit,” say the women. “Otherwise, they ask for folders (bread), but there’s nothing to give, so they will not fall asleep without having dinner” ...

                  https://topwar.ru/23913-kak-zhilos-krestyanam-v-c
                  arskoy-rossii-analitika-i-fakty.html

                  I believe Tolstoy, so someone is lying, probably your CSB.
                  1. Olgovich
                    Olgovich 18 May 2018 13: 34
                    +1
                    Quote: Bar1
                    let's link to it.

                    belay
                    And this is what it was
                    see Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of the USSR 1955
                    .?
                    Quote: Bar1
                    In all these villages, although there is no mixture of bread, as was the case in 1891, they do not give bread, although clean. Welding - millet, cabbage, potatoes, even most, have no. Food consists of grass cabbage soup, whitened if there is a cow, and unbleached if there is none, and only bread. In all these villages, most have sold and mortgaged everything that can be sold and mortgaged

                    Yes Yes....

                    From the special message of the SPO OPTU about the difficulties
                    in the districts of the JCC as of March 5, 1933

                    Deputy before OGPU t. Berry, deputy. before OGPU t. Prokofiev, deputy. before OGPU t. Agranov, beg. SPO OGPU to t. Molchanov, regional committee of the CPSU (b) t. Sheboldaev, regional executive committee to t. Larin.
                    We report the following facts of food difficulties.

                    Yeisk district. Art. Staro-Shcherbinovskaya. Despite the assistance provided by food, mortality is not declining. Mostly people die, who have been eating various garbage for a long time, carrion meat, dogs, cats, rats, etc. The mortality rates for individual collective farms for January and February are as follows. Collective farm No. 2: 77 people died in total, of which: collective farmers — 59, individual farmers — 12, kulaks — 6; 17 families completely died out on the collective farm. Collective farm No. 3: 66 people died in total, of which: collective farmers - 49, individual farmers - 10, kulaks - 7.

                    Every day, a significant number of corpses are thrown into the cemetery by the population, which are cleaned by teams specially created on collective farms. The following facts of carcass were noted ...


                    Novo-Aleksandrovsky district. Art. Sengileevskaya - as a result of systematic malnutrition in January, 117 people died across the village. Art. Filimonovskaya - for the same reason, 19 people died. Art. Kamennobrodskaya - on the basis of a hunger strike, the collective farmer Golovinsky, who has a family of 6 people, was killed. This collective farm has 380 yards. According to primary data, 120 families swelled up due to malnutrition.
                    Starominsky district. Art. Novo-Derevyankovskaya.

                    The facts of eating horses fell, the meat of dogs and other surrogates do not stop. The corpses of the dead are often buried in cellars, stables, or in houses for several days. On February 24, a child died in the family of poor Gorbik, and the corpse was buried in the stable. The next day, Gorbik himself and two children, who are also buried in the stable, died.

                    What is Tolstoy ....
                    1. Bar1
                      Bar1 18 May 2018 13: 37
                      0
                      Am I going to watch the whole report? Find a quote and show.

                      Quote: Olgovich
                      From the special message of the SPO OPTU about the difficulties
                      in the districts of the JCC as of March 5, 1933

                      Why are you showing this? Have you forgotten what you were talking about? About that in RI everything was good.
                      1. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 18 May 2018 13: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: Bar1
                        Am I going to watch the whole report? Find quote and show

                        belay
                        "She herself!" (C) There are tables
                        Quote: Bar1
                        Why are you showing this? Have you forgotten what you were talking about? About that in RI everything was good.

                        WHERE is it written that all is well? Bring.
                        Not everything is good, but there were no more than ten million people starving to death, like cannibalism and carnivore have never been.
                        Remember this.
                  2. Gopnik
                    Gopnik 18 May 2018 13: 52
                    +1
                    Quote: Bar1
                    let's link to it


                    Olgovich, in my memory, has already given a link several times, and still, after some time, the next link requester

                    Quote: Bar1
                    for example, what Leo Tolstoy wrote


                    To begin with, what was described before the accession of Nicholas
                    1. Bar1
                      Bar1 18 May 2018 14: 06
                      +1
                      Quote: Gopnik
                      Olgovich, in my memory, has already given a link several times, and still, after some time, the next link requester

                      Well, since your memory works, let’s you link.

                      Quote: Gopnik
                      To begin with, what was described before the accession of Nicholas


                      1913 was the largest crop in the history of pre-revolutionary Russia, but hunger was all the same. He was especially cruel in Yakutia and the surrounding territories, where he never stopped from 1911. Local and central authorities were practically not interested in helping the hungry. A number of villages have died out completely. [6]
                      Are there any scientific statistics from those years? Yes, there are, they were summed up and they even openly wrote about hunger in encyclopedias.
                      “After the famine of 1891, covering a huge region in the provinces of 29, the lower Volga region constantly suffers from hunger: during the 20th century. Samara province starved 8 times, Saratov 9. Over the past thirty years, the largest hunger strikes relate to 1880 (Lower Volga region, part of the near-lake and Novorossiysk provinces) and to 1885 (New Russia and part of the non-Chernozem provinces from Kaluga to Pskov); then, following the 1891 famine, the 1892 famine began in the central and southeastern provinces, the hunger strikes of 1897 and 98. approximately in the same area; in the XX century. 1901 famine in 17 provinces of the center, south and east, 1905 hunger strike (22 provinces, including four non-chernozem, Pskov, Novgorod, Vitebsk, Kostroma) opening a whole series of hunger strikes: 1906, 1907, 1908 and XNXX . (mainly eastern, central provinces, Novorossiya) ”[1911]


                      Do you only read the first two lines? Here from the same article.
                      1. Gopnik
                        Gopnik 18 May 2018 14: 15
                        +1
                        Quote: Bar1
                        Well, since your memory works, let’s you link.


                        you forgot the magic word

                        Quote: Bar1
                        Do you only read the first two lines? Here from the same article.


                        Exactly - nothing even close comparable to Tsar Famine by the former DO of Nicholas, and described by Tolstoy and even more so is not even close to the horror that took place in the USSR in the 20-40
                      2. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 19 May 2018 08: 45
                        +1
                        Quote: Bar1
                        Well, since your memory is working, come on you link

                        I don’t understand: in Google it’s hard to type “Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of 1955”? I typed and here is the result: http://istmat.info/node/18419
                        Quote: Bar1
                        nn and southeastern provinces, the hunger strike of 1897 and 98 years. approximately in the same area; in the XX century famine of 1901 in 17 provinces of the center, south and east, hunger strike of 1905 (22 provinces, including

                        You don’t understand that there were hunger years, but there were NOT DEATH from him, cannibalism and corpse-eating, as was the case under the new government later. What's not clear?
          2. Glory1974
            Glory1974 17 May 2018 21: 19
            +2
            By the way, the author forgot to mention what really huge help the families of the victims on Khodynka allocated Nicholas from personal funds.

            provided. But immediately after Khodynka I went to the ball at the embassy.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 17 May 2018 21: 26
              +2
              Quote: glory1974
              went to the ball at the embassy

              This is called politics. In fact, he simply complied with the necessary minimum of the diplomatic protocol and left.
              1. Glory1974
                Glory1974 17 May 2018 21: 34
                +2
                he simply complied with the necessary minimum diplomatic protocol and left

                I understand. But this is what characterizes him. For this, his people did not love. Remember, Primakov did not give a damn about etiquette, turned the plane around and flew back. Also a message to the world.
                And Nikolai 2 unfortunately did not do the like. And if you read the diaries, so in general the hair stands on end. Two lines about how he received the general, and a half-sheet description of the murder of crows or cats.
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 17 May 2018 21: 59
                  +2
                  Quote: glory1974
                  Remember, Primakov, he didn’t give a damn about etiquette, turned the plane around and flew back

                  Then the situation was a little different - the United States began to bomb Serbia and it was also a spit on Russia. And what did France have to do with what happened? Nothing.
                  Quote: glory1974
                  And if you read the diaries, so in general the hair stands on end. Two lines about how he received the general, and a half-sheet description of the murder of crows or cats.

                  And what was he supposed to write there? Record the text of all documents signed by him? This is a personal diary that was not intended to be published, in contrast to the various memoirs that European politicians wrote, but solely to recall years after the same hunt.
                  1. Glory1974
                    Glory1974 18 May 2018 19: 08
                    +1
                    And what did France have to do with what happened?

                    It's not about France, but about Nicholas 2. France owes nothing to anyone. But the tsar had to send a messenger and say that he couldn’t be in connection with this and that. In a famous movie, the director showed it that way. Moreover, the king in the movies knelt down and prayed for the innocently killed. This is a director’s fiction, which reflects what the people expected from the king.
                    And what was he supposed to write there?

                    What are we talking about. Let him write what he wants. A man writes in the diary what excites him. The general’s report on the deaths of thousands of soldiers did not excite him. He writes about this. But the process of killing two ravens was awarded a much more detailed description.
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 18 May 2018 20: 24
                      0
                      Quote: glory1974
                      But the king had to send a messenger and say that it could not be in connection with this and that

                      There is evidence that he did so, but then he was persuaded.
                      Quote: glory1974
                      A man writes in a diary what worries him. The general’s report on the deaths of thousands of soldiers did not excite him.

                      And why should he write in the diary about the report, which is in the corresponding archive?
          3. naidas
            naidas 18 May 2018 02: 44
            0
            Separate a person with his weaknesses (they will be forgiven and forgotten, even after the prescription of years) and the symbol based on which the Kornilovites were going to hang workers, (while others in Pskov hung on lanterns, they boiled them alive in the Don, they put to death in Siberia).
        2. Weyland
          Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 49
          +2
          Quote: Bar1
          So now nobody writes about this except Pikul

          Yes, we’ve found the source laughing : Pikul am pathological liar!
          1. Bar1
            Bar1 17 May 2018 18: 58
            +1
            Quote: Weyland
            Quote: Bar1
            So now nobody writes about this except Pikul

            Yes, we’ve found the source laughing : Pikul am pathological liar!

            Pikul could not invent such a fact.
            1. Weyland
              Weyland 19 May 2018 12: 35
              0
              Quote: Bar1
              Pikul could not invent such a fact.

              You cannot invent a fact - he invented a fake! And he was not so dumb as you think!
        3. Opera
          Opera 18 May 2018 09: 14
          +2
          God, the film is Pikul ... Of course, you have sources ... Tell me, Brother1, but you’re Nicholas 2, canonized by the Orthodox Church of the Holy Tsar the Passion-bearer, you call Nikolashka ... Have you ever thought? Maybe this is disrespect for the Russian Orthodox Church, believing people and faith?
    6. yehat
      yehat 18 May 2018 00: 30
      +1
      The article is full of critical inaccuracies and cliches, myths.
      for example, Nicholas No. 2 is not the last emperor of RI.
      He handed over his post to Michael, and Michael denied. He was the last.
      Or for some reason I did not find a word that Nikolay # 2 was in England and was personally acquainted with his relative, the king of Great Britain. There is their joint photo.
  2. Shadow shooter
    Shadow shooter 17 May 2018 06: 38
    +4
    Looks like Medvedev with a mustache wink
    1. motorized rifle
      motorized rifle 17 May 2018 10: 55
      +2
      Quote: Shadow shooter
      Looks like Medvedev with a mustache wink

      and with a beard
  3. sevtrash
    sevtrash 17 May 2018 06: 44
    +5
    It is unlikely that the characteristics of one person determined the future of Russia, even if it is the personality of the tsar. The monarchy in general, its features in Russia, features of political and economic development, way of life are only a small part of the necessary system analysis.
  4. Dart2027
    Dart2027 17 May 2018 07: 28
    +3
    and Nicholas II abdicated the throne, making no attempt to maintain the absolute power that he had over twenty years

    At the same time, the author forgot to mention that he did this after being actually arrested, and all his attempts to restore order were sabotaged by conspirator generals.
  5. bober1982
    bober1982 17 May 2018 07: 31
    +5
    I didn’t read the article to the end; I quit reading it, an ordinary campaign.
    The author in the article made annoying oversights ........ priest George Gapon, the author reports, it should be like this ........ pop gapon, then the author writes ........ shooting of civilians, means the events of Bloody Sunday, it should be like this ........ fire to kill rebels, armed militants and provocateurs.
  6. eugraphus
    eugraphus 17 May 2018 07: 33
    +1
    Nicholas 2 is a holy man, but he inherited an empire inherited from the past. And this is a fact !!!
    1. andrewkor
      andrewkor 17 May 2018 07: 47
      +8
      Tsar, father, profiled Mother Russia - a fact !!!
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 17 May 2018 08: 04
        +3
        Quote: andrewkor
        Tsar, father, profiled Mother Russia - a fact !!!

        It is more correct to say, in the words of Vasily Vasilievich Rozanov .....Russia faded in two days
        The reason for this cataclysm, in my opinion, was not in the last Russian tsar.
      2. naidas
        naidas 18 May 2018 02: 50
        0
        the tsar’s father, Matilda Kshesinskaya, is not to blame, she’s not here to mother Russia.
    2. Hole puncher
      Hole puncher 17 May 2018 08: 19
      +3
      Quote: eugraphus
      Nicholas 2 - a holy man

      And what is holiness?
  7. Monarchist
    Monarchist 17 May 2018 07: 43
    +4
    Quote: Kotischa
    I don’t know how-kama, but I liked the article by Ilya for his balanced and sober approach to the personality and affairs of Nicholas II.
    Thank you! hi

    I press your paw: the author tried to describe the emperor impartially, and annoyed when the author twitches gives a biased description
  8. Monarchist
    Monarchist 17 May 2018 08: 12
    +5
    I thought and think that the tragedy of Nicholas in his COMPLETENESS, and not in the "female character", take Catherine2, she had plenty of fun and tyranny, the era itself was favorable, but had WILL and UM, take the "iron lady" Thatcher or Indira Gandhi, and more Benadzir Bhuto all these women had a WILL, and Nicholas 2 was an ADMINISTRATOR. Everyone knows that the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law are badly "friendly", and there are also national differences: the Danes did not experience "Love" for the Germans. And Nikolai turned into a toy with his mother and lamb, and if we add that each has his own favorites, then Mia’s mother.
    1. Lieutenant Teterin
      Lieutenant Teterin 17 May 2018 08: 38
      +3
      Dear Monarchist, I allow myself to disagree with you. Nikolai Alexandrovich was a tactful man, extremely polite in communication, he loved and respected his wife very much, but at the same time did not allow her to influence himself and his decisions. Pierre Gilliard (teacher of the tsar’s children) spent a long time with the tsar’s family and never recalls in his memoirs that the Emperor was in state affairs dependent on his wife or mother.
      1. Captain45
        Captain45 17 May 2018 10: 13
        +3
        Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
        Nikolai Alexandrovich was a tactful person, extremely polite in communication, he very much loved and respected his wife,

        So tactful that he didn’t notice how his beloved wife had an illiterate horse-thief, almost before his eyes. "You are a cuckold, Bonacieux!" (c) A king is good, if he cannot restore order in the family, then he cannot rule the state. It was not for nothing that General Dragomirov said: "He can sit on the throne, but there can be no reign."
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 17 May 2018 10: 42
          +3
          Quote: Captain45
          No wonder General Dragomirov said

          The general was a great wit, a favorite of the liberal public, he loved wine, women, was the author of a stupid memo to the officer, he was harassed by the glory of Suvorov ....bullet fool, bayonet well done
          The result of the Russo-Japanese war was on his conscience, he had to fool around less.
          1. Captain45
            Captain45 17 May 2018 12: 36
            +4
            Quote: bober1982
            The result of the Russo-Japanese war was on his conscience, he had to fool around less.

            And what does the governor general of the Kiev province Dragomirov have to do with the Russo-Japanese war what Moreover, by the time she started in 1904, he was already retired due to illness request Moreover, according to the testimony of the head of the Kiev ZhU, Colonel Spiridovich, Dragomirov reacted extremely negatively to the appointment of Kuropatkin to the post of commander in chief in Manchuria. hi
            1. bober1982
              bober1982 17 May 2018 12: 56
              +2
              Quote: Captain45
              And what does the governor general of the Kiev province Dragomirov have to do with the Russo-Japanese war

              Dragomirov was, first and foremost, a major and chief military theorist, he headed the Academy of the General Staff, the author of such a monumental work as Tactics Tutorial, was an opponent of quick-fire weapons, and other things. What was the main military theorist, such and the Russian army was on the eve of the Russo-Japanese War - inept and backward.
              At the post of the Kiev governor-general, Mikhail Ivanovich, was a character in numerous jokes.
              And to you my respect.
              1. Cat
                Cat 17 May 2018 18: 47
                +2
                Quote: bober1982
                Quote: Captain45
                And what does the governor general of the Kiev province Dragomirov have to do with the Russo-Japanese war

                Dragomirov was, first and foremost, a major and chief military theorist, he headed the Academy of the General Staff, the author of such a monumental work as Tactics Tutorial, was an opponent of quick-fire weapons, and other things. What was the main military theorist, such and the Russian army was on the eve of the Russo-Japanese War - inept and backward.
                At the post of the Kiev governor-general, Mikhail Ivanovich, was a character in numerous jokes.
                And to you my respect.

                First of all, Dragomirov was a theorist, by the way, an offensive war.
                Now name at least one offensive strategic operation of the Russian war with Japan !?
                hi
        2. Trapperxnumx
          Trapperxnumx 17 May 2018 11: 22
          +2
          Quote: Captain45
          So tactful that he didn’t notice how his beloved wife had an illiterate horse-thief, almost before his eyes

          What nonsense ... What utter nonsense ....
          1. Captain45
            Captain45 17 May 2018 12: 41
            +3
            Quote: Trapper7
            What nonsense ... What utter nonsense ....

            And that Grigory Efimovich Rasputin was not in the history of the Russian state? Was Rasputin in his youthful years a horse-thief? Was Rasputin not close to the royal family and was not a member of the sleeping quarters of the tsar and the tsarina? Didn’t call Alice mom, and Nikolai the dad? Well say no. And as for the assessment of the phenomenon of Rasputin and rasputinism in history, so now, even here on the site, everyone evaluates the story as he likes and sometimes gives out .... So my opinion was that the queen had it as he wanted, and the tsar was chewing near the snot
            1. Trapperxnumx
              Trapperxnumx 17 May 2018 13: 08
              +3
              Quote: Captain45
              Quote: Trapper7
              What nonsense ... What utter nonsense ....

              And that Grigory Efimovich Rasputin was not in the history of the Russian state? Was Rasputin in his youthful years a horse-thief? Was Rasputin not close to the royal family and was not a member of the sleeping quarters of the tsar and the tsarina? Didn’t call Alice mom, and Nikolai the dad? Well say no. And as for the assessment of the phenomenon of Rasputin and rasputinism in history, so now, even here on the site, everyone evaluates the story as he likes and sometimes gives out .... So my opinion was that the queen had it as he wanted, and the tsar was chewing near the snot

              Pikul, he is such a Pikul ... a direct eyewitness ... all his historical novels can be called historical only in quotation marks. About a hundred years later, all that liberoid-bulk nonsense can also begin to write about Putin, and people like you will shout "yes, yes, that’s exactly how it was."
              1. Captain45
                Captain45 17 May 2018 13: 29
                +3
                Quote: Trapper7
                Pikul he is such a Pikul ... straight eyewitness.

                And where does Pikul? Was it about G.E. Rasputin or was he not in history? If not, then who did Prince Yusupov and Purishkevich kill and why? Or were they also not in Russian history? A specific question - was Rasputin or not? Was he close to the royal family or not? Do you understand the questions? Then answer without involving Pikul and others.
                1. Trapperxnumx
                  Trapperxnumx 17 May 2018 15: 39
                  +3
                  Rasputin was in history. Will this answer suit you?
                  Now the question is for you - where and by what is documented his "love affair" with the empress? And Pikul here despite the fact that it was he who in his novel just described all these silly tales of the then liberoids
                2. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 17 May 2018 16: 38
                  +3
                  Quote: Captain45
                  If not, then who did Prince Yusupov and Purishkevich kill and for what?

                  And this is just the question. Bot-doctor of the family of Nicholas II Botkin did not like Rasputin, but according to his daughter, he said:
                  "If there had not been Rasputin, then the opponents of the Royal Family and the preparations for the revolution would have created him with their conversations from [maid of honor] Vyrubova, if not Vyrubova, from me, from whom you want."
                3. Weyland
                  Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 58
                  +2
                  Quote: Captain45
                  If not, then who did Prince Yusupov and Purishkevich kill and for what?

                  You forgot the main thing in this murder - the SIS agent (and the homosexual lover Yusupov) Oswald Theodor Rainer, whom these accomplices tried to cover up. For what they killed - it’s known: Rasputin campaigned the Tsar for a separate peace with the Germans, which the Naglosaks am it was - like a sickle in the genitals!
        3. Olgovich
          Olgovich 17 May 2018 12: 00
          +2
          Quote: Captain45
          So tactful that he didn’t notice how his beloved wife had an illiterate horse-thief, almost before his eyes. "You are a cuckold, Bonacieux!" (c) A king is good, if he cannot restore order in a family,

          What a dull nonsense. ...
          negative One can only dream of such a family:
          And about their mutual love to erect monuments, which was done in St. Petersburg:
        4. Weyland
          Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 56
          +2
          Quote: Captain45
          So tactful that he didn’t notice how his beloved wife had an illiterate horse-thief, almost before his eyes.

          Did you hold a candle - or Pikul? am Believe him, so Vyrubova was the mistress of Nikolai and Rasputin at the same time. Only after her arrest in February 1917, gentlemen, the revolutionaries took care of Vyrubova’s medical examination (purely to humiliate - at that time only prostitutes were subjected to forced physical examination) - who discovered that she was a virgin! tongue
          1. Captain45
            Captain45 17 May 2018 20: 08
            +2
            Quote: Weyland
            Did you hold a candle - or Pikul? am To believe him, so Vyrubova was at the same time the mistress of Nikolai and Rasputin. Only after her arrest in February of the 1917 gentlemen, the revolutionaries took care of Vyrubova’s medical examination (purely to humiliate - at that time only prostitutes were subjected to forced medical examination) - who discovered that she was a virgin! tongue

            Gentlemen, the monarchists, what did you attach to me with Pikul? Did I mention his works anywhere in my comments? Rather, it’s you who are his admirers and fans, how well you know his work. No, dear opponents, I said above that here on the site everyone interprets history to the best of their knowledge and needs. So, Rasputin was close, very close to the royal family. And this is an undeniable fact. And since he was fully consistent with his family name and his dissolute lifestyle contains reports of external surveillance of the security department, it is logical to assume that he could not resist the temptation to fuck the queen herself. Moreover, many of his contemporaries note his hypnotic effect, especially on women, he didn’t have to persuade him with the hysterical queen. And for Vyrubova, that she is a virgin, it is possible that she preferred unnatural methods of intercourse, and therefore she was whole. And I draw such conclusions on the basis of a very long work in the Ugric Mountains, where I have seen such tricks and freaks of human nature, which is no longer surprising. Well, try to refute me, just do not refer to Pikul.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 17 May 2018 21: 29
              +2
              Quote: Captain45
              And I draw such conclusions on the basis of a very long work in the Ugric Mountains, where I have seen such tricks and freaks of human nature, which is no longer surprising. Well try to refute me

              If you worked in the URGO, you should know that you can think of anything, but without proof all this is empty talk. With evidence of how?
            2. Weyland
              Weyland 18 May 2018 21: 36
              0
              Quote: Captain45
              And for Vyrubova, that she is a virgin, it is possible that she preferred unnatural ways of intercourse, and therefore she was whole

              And did it in a wheelchair? Do you actually know that she was a helpless disabled person?
              1. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 18 May 2018 22: 16
                0
                Quote: Weyland
                Do you actually know that she was a helpless disabled person?

                From the 15th year only.
              2. Captain45
                Captain45 18 May 2018 22: 35
                0
                Quote: Weyland
                And did it in a wheelchair? Do you actually know that she was a helpless disabled person?

                Yeah, and the mouth is sewn with a harsh thread lol
          2. albert
            albert 17 May 2018 21: 30
            0
            Quote: Weyland
            the revolutionaries took care of Vyrubova’s medical examination (purely to humiliate - at that time only prostitutes were subjected to forced medical examination) - who discovered that she was a virgin! tongue

            There is such a thing - hymenoplasty, that is, restoration of virginity. Have not you heard? lol
            1. Weyland
              Weyland 18 May 2018 21: 39
              0
              I heard. And they knew how to do it back in the days of Cervantes. Only now the young husband doesn’t consider the genius, but works “by touch” laughing , and during a physical examination with a mirror the fact of hymenoplasty is established at a time! tongue
          3. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 17 May 2018 21: 40
            +1
            Quote: Weyland
            Only after her arrest in February 1917, gentlemen, the revolutionaries took care of Vyrubova’s medical examination (purely to humiliate - at that time only prostitutes were subjected to forced physical examination) - who discovered that she was a virgin!

            Here is nonsense. They found out that Vyrubova was a virgin in the 15th year after she had a catastrophe in the railway station, and rumors immediately spread that she was a lesbian (she slept in the same bed with the emperor on a yacht). And Vyrubov was sent temporarily from Russia in August 17th.
          4. Hantengri
            Hantengri 17 May 2018 22: 06
            +1
            Quote: Weyland
            Only after her arrest in February 1917, gentlemen, the revolutionaries took care of Vyrubova’s medical examination (purely to humiliate - at that time only prostitutes were subjected to forced medical examination) - which he discovered that she is a virgin!

            1917 - 1884 = 33-year-old virgin !!! wassat Ahhhh! How scary to live! laughing
            And with her husband, she, apparently, only played in the "goodies"! laughing
            In 1907, Anna Taneyeva married a naval officer Alexander Vyrubov (1880, p.) In Tsarskoye Selo, but the marriage was short-lived and the next year broke up. (Wikipedia)
            Do you really believe that a 27-year-old man and a 23-year-old lady, having married, loved each other purely platonically? lol
            1. Weyland
              Weyland 18 May 2018 21: 41
              +1
              Quote: HanTengri
              And with her husband, she, apparently, only played in the "goodies"!

              And do you know why they got divorced? That's kk time because of his masculine abilities! laughing The church even now divorces with great difficulty - but for such cases it still gives permission!
              1. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 18 May 2018 22: 14
                +1
                Quote: Weyland
                That's kk time because of his masculine abilities!

                Or maybe just the opposite? wink A divorce was given to her after her husband was placed in a mental hospital. It is strange that the sadist and pervert Vyrubov (according to Anna), and even impotent (your words), found his wife in 1910, and made two children. laughing
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 17 May 2018 11: 59
      +3
      Dear Monarchist! Let me shake your hand, in my opinion you are the most adequate and objective monarchist on this lost resource (I would even say it is the only one). All such monarchists would be, I'd become a monarchist myself. I’ve been watching your comments for a long time. hi
      1. Cat
        Cat 17 May 2018 18: 59
        +3
        The monarchist must be cherished and cherished, since such a Kamrad is worth a dime !!!
    3. Weyland
      Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 52
      +3
      Quote: Monarchist
      Nicholas 2 was an henpecked.

      Rave! It would be much better if he was a henpecked - the martyr empress insisted that he, according to wartime laws, arrest and shoot the main Duma scum for guilty homeland - Guchkov, Milyukov and Rodzianko am ! I would obey her - you look, and there would be no revolution!
    4. yehat
      yehat 18 May 2018 00: 36
      +3
      Nikolai was not henpecked. No need to carry too much. And he had a will -
      this is emphasized by many who have personally communicated with him.
      He just could not and did not want to understand that government is serious.
      After all, he essentially eliminated himself from resolving current affairs, he simply lived on his own, using not the small privileges of the royal family. And the country, with a bunch of problems left to chance, eventually went downhill.
      Here's how to sign an ill-conceived decree on the freedom of peasants from serfdom
      and just dump a couple of months in Finland to relax with your family?
  9. Hole puncher
    Hole puncher 17 May 2018 08: 15
    +3
    May 8th. Sunday.
    The day stood cold and gray.
    At 11 o’clock. We went to the dinner and had breakfast with everyone. Received the maritime report.
    Walked with Dmitry for the last time. Killed the cat. After tea he received Prince Khilkov,
    cat. just returned from a trip to the Far East. Goodbye after dinner
    with Ella and the children and escorted them to the station. Returning home, engaged.

    And the eyes are so kind, kind ...
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 17 May 2018 08: 31
      +6
      Millions of dead cats (for fun) - like the true face of the Russian monarchy!
      Liberal comrades rule, feline coven is arranged.
  10. eugraphus
    eugraphus 17 May 2018 08: 44
    0
    Quote: Puncher
    Quote: eugraphus
    Nicholas 2 - a holy man

    And what is holiness?

    Canonized by the church.
    1. Hole puncher
      Hole puncher 17 May 2018 08: 49
      +3
      Like a martyr, not a saint ...
      1. eugraphus
        eugraphus 17 May 2018 09: 09
        +3
        Eugene, dial the query - "canonization of Nicholas 2" and it is reported that he is recognized by the church as a holy martyr. For me, he is a high-ranking official, unable to cope with his duties, leading to great upheaval and the collapse of the Russian Empire.
    2. zoolu350
      zoolu350 17 May 2018 09: 05
      +4
      The Russian Orthodox Church, by order of the oligarchy of the Russian Federation and Vlasov, canonizes what exactly is this character (Nikolai # 2) holy?
  11. baudolino
    baudolino 17 May 2018 09: 35
    +8
    The main disadvantage of the autocracy is its dependence on the personal qualities of the autocrat. How many crowned dynasties from active and smart founders rolled down to indifferent and untalented descendants. Everything is quite objective. But the victims accompanying the departure of these descendants remain on their conscience.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  12. antiexpert
    antiexpert 17 May 2018 09: 53
    +2
    The personal qualities of Nicholas II did not even allow him to pick up a decent environment. The emperor did not have reliable associates, as evidenced by the speed of his overthrow.
    absolute unsuitability for management activities. I wonder who was involved in his training and education? Was it specially prepared for this?
  13. antiexpert
    antiexpert 17 May 2018 09: 55
    +3
    Quote: zoolu350
    The Russian Orthodox Church, by order of the oligarchy of the Russian Federation and Vlasov, canonizes what exactly is this character (Nikolai # 2) holy?
    Obviously, Watson: he completely completed the task that was assigned to him by the world behind the scenes. But Paul the First, although he received a martyr and vile death, went against the world behind the scenes - because he does not want to canonize his ROC)))
  14. Curious
    Curious 17 May 2018 10: 06
    +6
    Somehow the "History" section goes farther and farther away from history itself. The authors of the site no longer consider it necessary even to "time days" to bother writing a more or less decent article, offering the reader a "historical sketch", which is a win-win option in terms of receiving clicks. Moreover, if the author limited himself only to the first sentence and did not write everything else, nothing would have changed. Further events would still follow the script described by Philip Wiley: “Whenever people with opposing doctrines met among themselves, there was a strong disgust on each side, each side was convinced that the other was mired in error, paganism, unbelief and "barbarism, and indeed consists of breaking in robbers. After which the holy war invariably began."
    Moreover, there are full-fledged “combat units” on both sides that could reasonably discuss such a non-trivial historical event as the collapse of the Russian Empire and the role of its last emperor in this event is negligible. Most representatives of the “troubled” parties fit into Jack London’s characterization: “They argued about trifles like children, and their arguments were extremely naive. Actually, they did not even give any arguments, but limited themselves to unsubstantiated statements or denials. The ability or inability of the newborn they tried to prove the seal to swim simply by expressing their opinion with a belligerent air and accompanying it with attacks against the nationality, common sense or past of their opponent ... Intellectually, they would and children, albeit in the guise of adult men. "
    But on the other hand, the holivar regularly performs its main function - “collecting signatures”. And history as such, historical memory and so on, which they sometimes like to insert into articles like "about Kolya from Urengoy", are of no interest to anyone.
    By the way, on some resources there is a ban on particularly “holistic” topics that inevitably result in flaming, that is, in simple terms - srach.
  15. Andrey591
    Andrey591 17 May 2018 10: 22
    +5
    He is a deserter! He plunged the country into World War II, appropriated the post of Supreme, and then left everything and everyone! Subject to the military court. Sentence, execution!
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 17 May 2018 12: 37
      +3
      But they were afraid to arrange an open trial over him, and they cowardly killed him, along with their children and fellow servants.
  16. Jerk
    Jerk 17 May 2018 10: 31
    +7
    And THAT is also able to canonize and managed on the Russian land. Head of state. He did everything to eliminate this state. It is enough to recall that the Germans were strategic allies of the Republic of Ingushetia, for example, the only ones from the West who did not support the Japanese in 1905 with loans and training the Japanese army, as well as those not previously noted in the Triple Crimean War. But Zhinka suffered from Germanophobia - which means spitting on the country!
    He is a martyr, Christmas trees. The country was drowned in blood, "holy", and more than once.
    1. Weyland
      Weyland 17 May 2018 17: 01
      +2
      Quote: Jerk
      But Zhinka suffered from Germanophobia - which means spitting on the country!

      Are you out of your mind? wassat What was her nationality?
      1. Jerk
        Jerk 17 May 2018 18: 23
        +1
        Yes, that state is a princess.
        "After various disputes and military arrangements, Hesse-Darmstadt was forced to yield to the demands of Prussia. He participated in the Franco-Prussian war in 1870. And in 1871, Hesse-Darmstadt became part of the united German Empire."
        Do you need to continue? Who should I ask, is he in his mind?
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 18 May 2018 21: 44
          0
          Quote: Jerk
          Do you need to continue?

          I know very well about the "hot love" of the Hessian House for the Hohenzollerns - but it follows from this that it was prussofobkoy - but not at all germanofobkoy!
      2. albert
        albert 17 May 2018 21: 32
        +1
        Quote: Weyland
        Are you out of your mind? wassat She actually was who by nationality?

        German: Yes, in Nikolashka Russian blood was quite a bit - a little.
  17. Gopnik
    Gopnik 17 May 2018 12: 35
    +4
    Good ruler. Russia has never developed as much as with him. Compare the indicators of 1894 and 1913 (or 1916) - dramatic growth in all areas - education, science, industry, communications, etc., etc.
    There was no famine under him. Before him was King Hunger, immediately after him twice hunger with million (!!!!) deaths.
    Under him, Russia went communications to the Arctic Ocean - having built the Murmansk railway and founded the last city of the Empire - Romanov-on-Murman.
    Under him, Russia came out with communications to the Pacific Ocean - having built the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Chinese Eastern Railway.
    It is a pity that he did not cope with the Russophobic traitors, and Russia after him was thrown back in its development.
  18. svp67
    svp67 17 May 2018 12: 57
    +10
    May 18, 1868 (May 6 according to the old style), 150 years ago, Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov was born
    Deputy Poklonskaya has a holiday tomorrow ...
    1. Captain45
      Captain45 17 May 2018 14: 18
      +9
      Quote: svp67
      Deputy Poklonskaya has a holiday tomorrow ...

      Again, something pacifies laughing
  19. stafford41
    stafford41 17 May 2018 13: 05
    +3
    Mikhail’s refusal to be regent is something new in the history of the abdication of Nicholas II.

    The generally accepted version (voiced in the Manifesto on the abdication of 02.03.1917/XNUMX/XNUMX) sounds like this. Shulgin and Guchkov arrived in Pskov with the text of the manifesto on the abdication in favor of Alexei under Regent Mikhail. This text was telegraphed by Nikolai and the Duma, all that remained was to sign it. But here Nikolai asks the Duma thinkers: "Will Alex live with him?" To which he receives a negative answer with the comment that Alexey will live in the family of Mikhail. Nicholas did not agree to this at all and stated that he would change the manifesto and, instead of renouncing in favor of Alexei, would immediately renounce in favor of Mikhail. Guchkov and Shulgin were taken aback and did not argue and demand that the tsar observe the previous agreements. Why did the manifesto become a renunciation in favor of Mikhail, and Nikolay also denied Alexei in his favor, which, as you know, is not entirely legal. For according to the laws of the Russian Empire, one cannot renounce another person. Alex had to abdicate himself.
    1. Nehist
      Nehist 17 May 2018 19: 26
      0
      So, according to the law of the Republic of Ingushetia, Mikhail decided on the right to the throne after his wedding with Natalia Sheremetyevskaya. So a priori Nikolai could not deny in his favor
  20. 82т11
    82т11 17 May 2018 14: 28
    +3
    No matter how the lovers of Nicholas 2 argue, the fact that he did not keep the country remains.
    And what was he guided by there not by the desire to dirty his hands in blood, weak character or something else, 10 million dead in civilian life is no longer important.
  21. VLR
    VLR 17 May 2018 14: 33
    +6
    N.V. Velyaminov, the doctor in charge of Alexander III: “I observed with special interest in Livadia the heir and the role he played in the family. I must say that I was already surprised by his youth, which was inappropriate to his age. Count Vorontsov told me that the heir who was 26 years old is actually a boy 14 years old; if it was exaggerated, not by much ... In general, I had the impression that the heir for the future autocrat kept himself too passive, not in anything showing my personality, and, I will not hide it, it frightened me for our will the ear. "
    S. Yu. Witte: “The king is not capable of doing business honestly, but everything tends to walk in a roundabout way ... Since his majesty doesn’t have the skills of either Metternich or Talleyrand, tricks usually lead him to one result: to a puddle the best case is slop, at worst - to a pool of blood or to a pool that is stained with blood. "
    Marc Ferro, modern historian, France: "Nicholas II was raised as a prince, but not taught what the king should be able to do."
    G. Rasputin: “The tsarina is a painfully wise ruler, I can do everything with her, I’ll go to everything, and he (Nicholas II) is a man of God. Well, how can he be the Sovereign? with flowers, but to engage in the garden, and not to rule the kingdom ... "
    G. Rasputin - F. Yusupov: “It’s hard for him (Nicholas II to manage the state), so we help with God's blessing ... I tell you: they (the royal family) would have disappeared without me at all. I’m just with them: if not -My doing, now knock his fist on the table and leave, and they run after me, begging begin to beg ... ".
    Maximilian Voloshin: “The bloody week in St. Petersburg was neither a revolution nor a day of revolution. The incident is much more important. The motto of the Russian government" Autocracy, Orthodoxy and Narodnost "was crushed in dust. The government rejected Orthodoxy because it gave the order to shoot icons "The government declared itself hostile to the people because it gave the order to shoot at the people who sought protection from the king. These days were only a mystical prologue to the great tragedy of the people that had not yet begun." "A strange and almost unbelievable thing: the crowd was shot, but it remained completely calm. After the salvo, it will eject and then return, pick up the dead and wounded and stand up again before the soldiers, as if with reproach, but calm and unarmed. When the Cossacks attacked , only some “intellectuals” fled; the workers and peasants stopped, bowed their heads low and waited calmly for the Cossacks, who were cutting them with bare necks. It was not a revolution, but a purely Russian national, phenomenon: “rebellion on my knees.” The same thing happened and behind the Narva Gate where the procession was fired with the peasants in front, the crowd with banners, icons, portraits of the emperor and the priests did not run ahead at the sight of the targeted blew, but fell to their knees with the hymn "God Save the Tsar." People said: Last days they came ... The king gave the order to shoot at the icons. "People, like holy martyrs, are proud of their wounds." "At the same time, the soldiers were treated without anger, but with irony. Newspaper sellers, selling official gazettes, shouted: "The brilliant victory of the Russians on Nevsky!"
    And here is what O. Mandelstam wrote in those days: “The children's cap, mitten, women's scarf, thrown on St. Petersburg snow that day, remained a reminder that the king should die, that the king would die.”
    Leo Tolstoy: "The Tsar is considered to be a sacred person, but you have to be a fool, or an evil person, or a lunatic, in order to accomplish what Nikolai is doing."
    Empress Alexandra Fyodorovna - Nicholas II: "In the Duma, all fools; in the Stavka completely; in the Synod there are only animals; ministers are bastards. Our diplomats must be hung. Disperse all ... I ask you, friend, do it as soon as possible. You should be afraid." We are not a constitutional state, thank God.
    In another letter: "Be firm, show a powerful hand, this is what the Russians need. It is strange, but such is the Slavic nature ...".
    1. Opera
      Opera 17 May 2018 16: 07
      +5
      And now for the sake of honesty, I ask you to post positive and often enthusiastic comments about Nicholas II and his family of people completely uninterested! I understand that there will be a lot of them, it’s laborious but honestly! I’ll even help you by giving some names - A. background Tirpits, II. Tkhorzhevsky, President of the French Republic Emil Loubet, Baroness Buchsgevden, Minister of Foreign Affairs 1906-1910 A.P. Izvolsky, General A.A. Mosolov, the son of Stolypin Arkady Petrovich, in recollection of his father, regarding the alleged influence of Rasputin, be sure to quote the conclusion of the interim government commission on this issue, the holy righteous John of Kronstadt, P.S. Lopukhin in 1939 about the White Tsar, etc. etc. Start with this for now. Lopukhina quote I will help you further! Go ahead. You can immediately see you are an honest person, not a biased chartwriter!
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 17 May 2018 16: 40
        +2
        Centuries will pass, night shadows
        The dawn will disperse
        And we will kneel
        To the feet of the sovereign king
        Russia will forget its sorrows
        Bloody feuds are times.



















        and t
      2. VLR
        VLR 17 May 2018 20: 18
        +2
        If you are interested in other quotes, you can see my work "Nikolay 2, Personality and Epoch", which took 2 a place in the competition of the magazine "History" on the basis of 2000-2001, the year:
        http://his.1september.ru/article.php?ID=200101801
        There are many of them (quotes).
      3. naidas
        naidas 18 May 2018 03: 16
        0
        Quote: Oper
        And now for the sake of honesty, I ask you to post positive and often enthusiastic comments

        As it recalls the positive and enthusiastic comments about the current ruler.
    2. Weyland
      Weyland 17 May 2018 17: 03
      +2
      Quote: VlR
      G. Rasputin - F. Yusupov: “It is difficult for him (Nicholas II to rule the state), here we are helping with God's blessing ... I tell you: they (the royal family) would have disappeared without me at all. I’m simply with them: if not “They do my thing, now I will knock my fist on the table and leave, and they will run after me, beg to beg ...”

      To go nuts! The killer’s testimony against his victim began to be considered awesomely reliable? wassat

      Quote: VlR
      And here is what O. Mandelstam wrote in those days: “The children's cap, mitten, women's scarf, thrown on St. Petersburg snow that day, remained a reminder that the king should die, that the king would die.”

      And he lived on happily ever after. Only 30 years later, too, wrote something:

      Like a horseshoe, gives a decree by decree -
      Someone in the groin, someone in the forehead, someone in the eyebrow, someone in the eye.
      Whatever his execution is raspberry
      And a wide chest of Ossetians.

      I thought I thought that he would get off just as easily as with the "bloody" king. But he didn’t get off ...
      1. Captain45
        Captain45 17 May 2018 20: 35
        +1
        Quote: Weyland
        To go nuts! The killer’s testimony against his victim began to be considered awesomely reliable? wassat

        To go nuts! So who killed whom? request
        Quote: Weyland
        G. Rasputin - F. Yusupov: “It is difficult for him (Nicholas II to rule the state), here we are helping with God's blessing ... I tell you: they (the royal family) would have disappeared without me at all. I’m simply with them: if not “They do my thing, now I will knock my fist on the table and leave, and they will run after me, beg to beg ...”
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 18 May 2018 21: 34
          +1
          Quote: Captain45
          So who killed whom?

          Yusupov - Rasputin, essno. I mean, what Rasputin allegedly told Yusupov is known only from the words of Yusupov!
  22. NF68
    NF68 17 May 2018 16: 15
    +2
    Interesting article.

    What was the last Russian emperor in life, his fate and the fate of the whole empire turned out to be the same.
  23. Weyland
    Weyland 17 May 2018 16: 40
    +3
    It seems that the article was written half a century ago! The author is a former lecturer of the CPSU district committee?
  24. Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 17 May 2018 17: 21
    +3
    Quote: Olgovich
    under the Emperor (22 years), the population of Russia grew by 50% - this has never happened before him and never after.

    It is believed that the population of Russia grew from 127-128 million in 1897 to 177-178 million by 1917. 50 from 127 is still slightly less than 50%.
    1. naidas
      naidas 18 May 2018 03: 22
      +1
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      still slightly less than 50%.

      take the population of the annexed territories (in 1858-33,7 mln. to 105,4 mln. in 1914)
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 18 May 2018 06: 30
        +1
        If taken away - what happens? That the population grew solely due to the joining territories, and not due to an increase in the birth rate / decrease in mortality?
        And who was added in 1914?
      2. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 18 May 2018 08: 42
        +1
        And what does 1858 have to do with Nicholas II?
        1. naidas
          naidas 18 May 2018 11: 10
          0
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          And what does 1858 have to do with Nicholas II?

          The statistics did not constantly show up, but in the years 1858,1897,1914, therefore, you have to have something to have.
          Visual table: https: //via-midgard.com/news/rost-naselen
          iya-rossijskoj-imperii.htm
          The Asia-Khiva Khanate, the Bukhara Emirate, Turkmenistan, Sakhalin, and the Ussuri Territory are attached.
          In 1914 annexed - Eastern Galicia, Bukovina, Uryankhay Territory, Franz Josef Land, Land of Emperor Nicholas II, Novosibirsk Islands.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 18 May 2018 14: 57
            +1
            Still, it is unclear if we are talking about the reign of the last Romanov, and what about earlier events? The conquest of Siberia by Ermak or the annexation of East Prussia in 1758 is also written down on his account?
            The Uryankhai Territory with its 73 thousand inhabitants, presumably, significantly affected the growth of the empire's population. There is no question about the population of Franz Josef Land and the Novosibirsk Islands ...
            But Galicia and Bukovina were also annexed to Russia? Wow, who would have thought. But the loss in 1905 of half Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, and in 1915 - Poland, parts of the Baltic states and western Belarus with a very high - by Russian standards, population density statistics?
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 18 May 2018 18: 06
              0
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              and in 1915 - Poland, parts of the Baltic states and western Belarus with a very high - by Russian standards, population density was included in the statistics

              In fact, they were not lost. There was a war and the army retreated, and this is a little different.
              1. Sugar Honeyovich
                Sugar Honeyovich 19 May 2018 06: 26
                0
                Right. As well as Austrian Galicia was occupied during the war.
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 18 May 2018 12: 50
      +1
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      It is estimated that Russia's population has grown from 127-128 million in 1897 from 177-178 million by 1917, 50 from 127 are still somewhat less than 50%.

      The emperor ascended the throne - not in 1897, and in 1894. And in 1917 it was 180 million.
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 18 May 2018 14: 46
        0
        Correctly. Only the census was in 1897. And how many was in 1917 no one knows for sure - the figures of 177, 178, 180 million are calculated.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 19 May 2018 09: 02
          0
          Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
          Correctly. Only the census was in 1897. And how many was in 1917 no one knows for sure - the figures of 177, 178, 180 million are calculated.

          That's right, only people were born from 1894 to 1897, too, and also in the millions.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 19 May 2018 10: 35
            0
            Here they are (except for those who died) and entered those 127-128 million.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 19 May 2018 16: 43
              0
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              Here they are (except for those who died) and entered those 127-128 million.

              In 125 million 1897
              And in 1894, in the year of accession to the Throne, there were approximately .120 million.
              In the 17th 180 million. Profit 50%. For 22 years.
              1. Sugar Honeyovich
                Sugar Honeyovich 20 May 2018 14: 21
                0
                In 1897 -125, 127, 128,129 million
                In 1917 - 175, 177,178, 180 million
                So, how much?
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 21 May 2018 05: 16
                  0
                  Repeat :? belay
                  125 million 1897
                  And in 1894, in the year of accession to the Throne, there were approximately .120 million.
                  In the 17th 180 million. Profit 50%. For 22 years.
                  1. Sugar Honeyovich
                    Sugar Honeyovich 21 May 2018 06: 54
                    0
                    No need to repeat. Better indicate the source for 1917.
  25. Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 17 May 2018 17: 27
    +3
    Quote: Olgovich
    it was not at the resorts that state criminals needed. send to Shushensky, where they grew fat and healthy, and to other places

    Nor should the peasants be locked up to the floor (or even to the full!), Especially after the decree abolishing corporal punishment, crippling them, forcing them to kneel for hours on the snow or simply kill the first ones "without asking for the name".
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 17 May 2018 18: 40
      +4
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      or just kill the first ones "without asking the last name"

      You know, I here several times asked story buffs about Nikolai Krovavy to give examples of how people were shot for nothing, but for some reason no one could say anything concrete.
      1. albert
        albert 17 May 2018 21: 36
        +2
        Will the Stolypin military courts suit you?
        Quote: Dart2027
        You know, I here several times asked story buffs about Nikolai Krovavy to give examples of how people were shot for nothing, but for some reason no one could say anything concrete.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 17 May 2018 22: 03
          +3
          Quote: albert
          Will the Stolypin military courts suit you?

          This is when they hung those who staged an armed uprising, killed police officers, officials and just random people, staged acts of sabotage at railway stations, etc.? And what was to be done with them - stroking the head?
          Quote: Dart2027
          You know, I here several times asked story buffs about "Nikolai the Bloody" to give examples of how people were shot for no reason

          I understand that now I do not learn anything new?
      2. naidas
        naidas 18 May 2018 03: 27
        +4
        Quote: Dart2027
        how people were shot for nothing

        Well, about the Lensky shooting, probably also nothing new, these creatures wanted to eat and live normally, and not work 16 hours. So these are the ones to do.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 18 May 2018 06: 17
          +1
          Quote: naidas
          Well, about the Lensky shooting, probably also nothing new, these creatures wanted to eat and live normally, and not work 16 hours

          Well, firstly, 16 hours is if the worker himself decided to additionally look for nuggets after the end of the working day, and the working day from 11,5 to 8 hours. Secondly, this story is always covered on the one hand, it is just not known what opponents would say, the same captain Treschenkov, who gave the order to shoot, given the recent events of 1905 and the sweet habit of all kinds of revolutionaries to substitute the people they assembled for retaliatory actions power structures. And thirdly, the same Bolsheviks, having come to power, concluded an agreement with the same company for the extraction of gold at the same mines.
          1. naidas
            naidas 18 May 2018 11: 22
            0
            Quote: Dart2027
            Secondly, this story is always covered on the one hand.

            And the opinion of the commission (public, created by the State Duma) investigating the discontent of workers:
            Commissioner A. Tyuschevsky wrote: "Comrades, we have nothing to do here, we only have one thing left: to advise the workers to set fire to these rotten, stinky buildings and to escape from this hell wherever they look."
            Quote: Dart2027
            if the worker himself decided

            And the workers themselves decided to eat rotten meat and live in rotten huts? -The very first in the list of requirements.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 18 May 2018 18: 15
              0
              Quote: naidas
              Member of the Commission A. Tyuschevsky

              Are you talking about Kerensky’s commission? The very one who headed the Provisional Government and completely destroyed RI with his "brilliant" ideas? For example, by order No. 1?
              Quote: naidas
              And the workers themselves decided

              Actually, it was about the working day.
              As for rotten meat, it strongly resembles the story of the battleship Potemkin. Bad food, spontaneous performance and ... There is only one point - before the riot, 50 sailors who were not willing to participate in the battleship were written off. Is the picture getting a little different?
              1. naidas
                naidas 18 May 2018 20: 45
                0
                So you and the king refer to the Bolsheviks: both commissions agreed in conclusions:
                The causes and circumstances of the events of April 4 (17), 1912 were investigated by a government commission headed by former Minister of Justice S. S. Manukhin and a commission headed by the leader of the Duma faction of the Trudoviks A.F. Kerensky, created by groups of liberals and socialists of the State Duma. Both commissions recognized the working conditions in the mines as incompatible with human dignity, and the use of weapons was not provoked by the actions of workers who pursued exclusively economic goals. The main responsibility for what happened was vested in the company’s leadership, local authorities and personally on captain Treschenkov, who was dismissed from service in the gendarme corps, demoted to rank and file, and enlisted on foot in the militia of the St. Petersburg province. On June 7 (20), 1913, an official government report on the Lena execution was published.
      3. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 18 May 2018 07: 20
        +1
        It depends on what is meant by the words “for no reason at all”. Shooting for insulting the PORTRAIT of the emperor - is this "for what"?
        Shooting a peasant crowd (no difference in gender and age) for refusing to extradite the instigators / participants in the pogrom of the lordly estate - "for what"? And if the participants were all (and it usually happened)?
        Or the shooting of the first "riots" that occurred on the spot without revealing guilt and establishing an identity ("nameless")?
        In some places, some people still say that "there is no punishment without fault" and "there would be a person, but there would be an article." But if so, we can say that they never punished anyone "for no reason at all."
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 18 May 2018 18: 18
          +1
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Shooting for insulting the PORTRAIT of the emperor - is this "for what"?

          What was shot?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          And if the participants were all (and it usually happened)?

          And that pogrom and murder is not a crime?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Or the shooting of the first "riots"

          And how do you imagine this clarification? The crowd rushing at the soldiers, shields, helmets and other equipment of modern riot police they do not have, so what should they do?
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 19 May 2018 03: 56
            0
            1.No. Not shot. They hung. They were shot for something else - for example, for slapping the governor-general and for insulting the warden in prison.
            2. Of course, a crime. Applying a petition personally to the king under the then laws is also a crime. And earlier, a complaint about the stiffness of the landowner was also considered a crime.
            3. When the crowd rushing - this is one thing. But when the crowd stands without hats and is silent, and they shoot for it FOR THIS, that’s different. And I’m talking about the third - when the real "rebels" have already disappeared, and at the scene, random people are grabbed and shot, who have no sleep or spirit.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 19 May 2018 07: 05
              +1
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              for example, for slapping the governor-general and for insulting a warden in prison

              That is, they still didn’t hang on portraits? Already good.
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              Of course a crime

              Then what are you unhappy with? By petition, do you mean KV? But is it that the crowd of people tried to break into the residence of the head of state, which was also a repository of a huge amount of values? What would you do yourself at the place of protection - joyfully let them inside?
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              But when the crowd stands without hats and is silent, and they shoot at it FOR THIS, it’s different

              Is it worth it? For some reason, in most cases, the demonstrations even if they were dispersed, then without firing, and the question arises - why would they start to shoot in some cases?
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              when the real "rioters" have already disappeared, and random people are grabbed and shot at the scene

              That's what I had in mind
              Quote: Dart2027
              the nice habit of all kinds of revolutionaries to substitute the people they assembled for the response of the power structures
              When the police deal with street riots, it detains everyone who is in the crowd for further proceedings - this is natural, since the street is not up to it. But what about those who gather this crowd and disappear?
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              previously a complaint about the stiffness of the landowner was also considered a crime.

              Until 1797. After no longer.
              1. Sugar Honeyovich
                Sugar Honeyovich 19 May 2018 08: 54
                +1
                [quote = Dart2027] That is, still did not hang on portraits? Already good. [/ Quote]
                They hung it up.

                [quote = Dart2027] Then what are you dissatisfied with? [/ quote]
                That’s what I’m dissatisfied with. That the criminal regime considered a crime to be considered a virtue.

                [quote = Dart2027] Is it worth it? [/ quote]
                Worth it. It is worth it. Silently.

                [/ quote] When the police deal with street riots, it detains everyone who is in the crowd for further proceedings - this is natural.

                When delays directly during the riots for the proceedings - this is natural. And when she shoots without trial, without even asking for the name and detainees not at the time, but after the riots - this is very unnatural.

                [quote = Until 1797. After no longer. [/ Quote]
                No matter what year. The main thing - there was a time when it was called a crime. And after 1797 it was hardly easier for the peasants.
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 19 May 2018 11: 00
                  +1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  They hung it up.
                  For example?
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  That’s what I’m dissatisfied with. That the criminal regime considered a crime to be considered a virtue.
                  So killing is a virtue? Somewhere I already heard it ... And for sure, this is the favorite song of all kinds of Daesh and others like them.
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  And when she shoots without trial, without even asking for the name and detainees not at the time, but after the riots - this is very unnatural.
                  For example?
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  No matter what year. The main thing - there was a time when it was called a crime.
                  In this case, the USSR, as the heir to RI, is responsible for serfdom.
                  1. Olgovich
                    Olgovich 19 May 2018 16: 46
                    +1
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    They hung it up.
                    For example?
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    That’s what I’m dissatisfied with. That the criminal regime considered a crime to be considered a virtue.
                    So killing is a virtue? Somewhere I already heard it ... And for sure, this is the favorite song of all kinds of Daesh and others like them.
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    And when she shoots without trial, without even asking for the name and detainees not at the time, but after the riots - this is very unnatural.
                    For example?
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    No matter what year. The main thing - there was a time when it was called a crime.
                    In this case, the USSR, as the heir to RI, is responsible for serfdom.

                    The comrade has NO facts. Some cliches and common words.
                    The dispute is meaningless, IMHO
                  2. Sugar Honeyovich
                    Sugar Honeyovich 20 May 2018 15: 59
                    0
                    1. Vladislav Guzinsky and Yves. Khoynatsky.
                    2. Not murder, but the struggle for the right of all people to be born equal and free. As a minimum program: The first groups of "arrested" robbers to the question of the authorities: "What did you want?" They answered: "We wanted and want to eat."
                    3. “This is a typical order of the Minister of Internal Affairs P. Durny to the Kiev Governor-General. "... to immediately destroy, by force of arms of the rebels, and in case of resistance, to burn their homes ... The arrests now do not reach the goal: it is impossible to judge hundreds and thousands of people." These instructions were fully consistent with the order of the Tambov vice governor to the police command: “arrest less, shoot more ...” The governor-generals in the Yekaterinoslav and Kursk provinces acted even more decisively, resorting to shelling of the rebellious population. The first of them sent a warning to the volosts: "Those villages and villages whose inhabitants allow themselves any kind of violence against private economies and lands will be fired by artillery fire, which will cause destruction of houses and fires." A warning was also sent in the Kursk province that in such cases "all the dwellings of such a society and all its property will ... be destroyed." (Danilov VP. Peasant Revolution in Russia 1902-1922gg.

                    ““ ... General Scheidemann ... demands: “Pass Presnya, exterminating everyone, not arresting anyone”;
                    “Esaul Grabbe during a punitive raid in the Baltic states ordered his subordinates; “To shoot people met in the forest. Burn houses. ” (M.Kasvinov, “Twenty-Three Steps Down.”
                    As an option, I recommend the story of ND Teleshov “The Beginning of the End.” Location: Lyubertsy Station.
                    4. Yeah. And Italy - for slavery in the Roman Empire. And the inhabitants of Benelux should be held accountable to Spain for the fact that for the fifth century they have been evading the LEGAL sentence of all of them to death. Who dares to say that they were sentenced "for no reason at all"?
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 20 May 2018 16: 20
                      0
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      Not murders, but the struggle for the right of all people to be born equal and free.
                      Yeah. All terrorists shout about it. That's just after watching what they are doing, you start to doubt it very much. And in any case, those who took up arms are no longer the innocent victims of arbitrariness.
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      Here is a typical order of the Minister of Internal Affairs P. Durny to the Kiev Governor General
                      So who was shot at - those who took up arms themselves? And what was to be done with them?
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      Yeah. And Italy - for slavery in the Roman Empire
                      Why not? Is this Italy? Nicholas II was not responsible for what happened before he was born.
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      ND Teleshov "The Beginning of the End"
                      Art? You know, in the 90s the whole country was overwhelmed with various kinds of stories about how scary it was to live in the USSR, and for every taste and choice.
                      1. Sugar Honeyovich
                        Sugar Honeyovich 20 May 2018 17: 15
                        +1
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        you start to doubt it very much.

                        What to doubt? That people should be born equal and free?

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        in any case, those who took up arms are no longer innocent victims of arbitrariness.

                        Well, what a conversation! In the so-called Many law enforcement agencies practice the principle: who resisted the assailant is no longer an innocent victim of a crime.

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        So who was shot at - those who took up arms themselves?

                        They shot at ALL who were considered a rebel. And such was considered anyone who dared to demand for themselves some rights on an equal basis with others. Whether they had a weapon or not was of no fundamental importance.

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Nicholas II was not responsible for what happened before he was born

                        Of course. Nobody puts him in charge.

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        in the 90s, the whole country was overwhelmed with various kinds of stories about how scary it was to live in the USSR

                        And it was (and indeed is) accepted to pass it off as reality.
  26. Bouncer
    Bouncer 17 May 2018 18: 54
    +20
    I do not welcome this material, and in my opinion the article is weak. The collection of platitudes and a tub of slops. Is something new said? No.
    Witte allegedly wrote (when, where?): “Sovereign Nicholas II has a female character. Someone made a remark that only by the game of nature, shortly before birth, he was equipped with attributes that distinguish a man from a woman. ” And who said something? Just stuffing.
    Or: "While the soldiers and officers of the Russian army and navy died in battles with the Japanese, the country's elite led an idle existence." Did the Japanese emperor with the elite load the bags or stay awake at night?
    The most important thing - it is not said about the growth rate of Russia, the fertility boom, and the fact that our country was one of the six leading powers in terms of economic indicators (interesting, but now where is it included - at the level of Paraguay or Zimbabwe?). Well, he is our Supreme Commander-in-Chief, took responsibility at a difficult moment, did a lot and tried hard.
    There were mistakes who do not have them. But there was a lot of good. So it is necessary to teach youth. This is our story.
  27. Tomato
    Tomato 17 May 2018 20: 51
    +5
    Dear author of this libel. I have already forwarded this material to Poklonskaya. Do not go anywhere. They will come soon for you.
    You still have time to establish the myrrh-streaming icon of the Sovereign of our Great Martyr and passion-bearer of the innocently murdered Nicholas 2, this can be counted as a mitigating circumstance (insignificantly) of this monstrous crime.
    1. Hantengri
      Hantengri 17 May 2018 22: 35
      +3
      Quote: Tomatoes
      Dear author of this libel. I have already forwarded this material to Poklonskaya. Do not go anywhere. They will come soon for you.

      Correctly. So him, bastard !!!
      I am a terrorist! I am Ivan Tomato!
      Stop fussing, our trump card is terror!

      Tra-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta!
      Tra-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta! (with)
      laughing
  28. stafford41
    stafford41 17 May 2018 22: 06
    +1
    Quote: Nehist
    So, according to the law of the Republic of Ingushetia, Mikhail decided on the right to the throne after his wedding with Natalia Sheremetyevskaya.

    After Mikhail returned to Russia, his reconciliation with Nikolai and participation in the First World War, Nikolai canceled all his previous decrees in relation to him. And the morganonic marriage was again possible for members of the imperial family, and specifically, Michael was again placed on the throne. In fact, these decrees were a little incorrect from the point of view of the laws of the Russian Empire and created serious uncertainty in matters of succession to the throne. Mikhail in 1904 was declared regent with a minor heir, and when he was expelled from the line to the throne in 1912, deprived of the right to regency, Nikolai did not appoint a new regent (or several regents), and by law he was obliged to do this, because the heir not yet come of age.
  29. Catfish
    Catfish 18 May 2018 01: 51
    +2
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: Sahar Medovich
    or just kill the first ones "without asking the last name"

    You know, I here several times asked story buffs about Nikolai Krovavy to give examples of how people were shot for nothing, but for some reason no one could say anything concrete.


    January XNUMXth. Lensky shooting. Was there that they shot peaceful people "for what and about what"?
    1. naidas
      naidas 18 May 2018 03: 35
      +2
      during the executions in 1897 in Dombrow; in 1899 in Riga; in 1901 at the Obukhov plant in St. Petersburg; in 1902 in Rostov; in 1902 at the Tikhoretskaya station; in 1903 in Zlatoust; in 1903 in Kiev; in 1903 - in Yekaterinburg, in 1904 - in Baku; in 1905 - in Riga; in 1905 - in Lodz ...
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 18 May 2018 06: 22
        +2
        Quote: naidas
        during executions in

        It’s just about the speeches, during which the same workers tried to use force against the police, that is, there were still reasons for the shooting.
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 18 May 2018 06: 23
      +1
      Quote: Sea Cat
      January XNUMXth. Lensky shooting.

      Answered above.
  30. sdv68
    sdv68 18 May 2018 12: 27
    +2
    We ask Balmont.


    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 18 May 2018 13: 03
      +2
      Quote: sdv68
      We ask Balmont.


      Is this the one who barely escaped with his family from Bolshevik paradise and was happy with it?
      balmont:
      We left Russia to be able to try at least something in Europe shout about the Dying Mother»
      yes
      1. albert
        albert 18 May 2018 19: 33
        +1
        Quote: Olgovich
        Is this the one who barely escaped with his family from Bolshevik paradise and was happy with it?

        He was actually an enemy of the Bolsheviks and a monarchist (not to be confused with members of your sect), and therefore he always opposed the Soviet Government.
    2. Gopnik
      Gopnik 18 May 2018 13: 15
      +1
      It would be nice to ask him not in 1906, but, for example, in 1940.
    3. Dart2027
      Dart2027 18 May 2018 18: 20
      +1
      The evolutionist Shnurovsky - the revolutionary Balmont:
      How furiously you cursed the yoke!
      How fiercely you longed for royal blood!
      How pathetically you called for a storm!
      How earnestly you waited for the volgotny novi!

      And as a result, you cursed - the country:
      Helped her to wash her own blood
      Helped the Empire go to the bottom
      And did not even think to obey.

      You escaped to cozy Europe
      From the horrors you cry
      Thy people, yes, I’ve dished the porridge,
      But - after all, what a monstrous price ...

      Once again, demons are now drawing us into the abyss.
      Your poem came in handy for them.
      So that every moan of all the martyrs of the Troubles
      Aspen stake stuck in your coffin !!!
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 19 May 2018 09: 05
        +1
        Quote: Dart2027
        The evolutionist Shnurovsky - the revolutionary Balmont:
        How furiously you cursed the yoke!

        Thank you, dear Dart for publishing: I tried a lot to find this poem, once read briefly. but unsuccessfully.
        Now it is! hi
  31. Bar1
    Bar1 18 May 2018 13: 44
    +1
    Olgovich,
    you are just a talker.
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 18 May 2018 13: 53
      +1
      Olgovich operates with facts, each of which has repeatedly confirmed.
      And here you are, dei no chatterbox
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 18 May 2018 13: 55
        +1
        Quote: Gopnik
        Olgovich operates with facts, each of which has repeatedly confirmed.
        And here you are, dei no chatterbox

        Well, why doesn’t he show the link?
      2. albert
        albert 18 May 2018 19: 35
        +2
        Quote: Gopnik
        Olgovich operates with facts, each of which has repeatedly confirmed.

        Turned inside out. He's an ordinary paid troll.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 19 May 2018 09: 11
          +1
          Quote: albert
          Turned inside out.

          Turn them back. Will there be enough twisting? No. yes
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 19 May 2018 09: 06
      +1
      Quote: Bar1
      Olgovich,
      you are just a talker.

      Fee ....
      negative Let's "goodbye" then.
  32. Bar1
    Bar1 18 May 2018 15: 02
    +1
    Gopnik,
    you are the same talker as your protege.
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 18 May 2018 15: 25
      +1
      The chatterbox is you. Chatterbox and hamlo.
  33. vlaveryan
    vlaveryan 18 May 2018 17: 21
    0
    What? There is nothing to comment on! The author of the article is a worthy successor of the “Soviet agitation prop” from the time of the agitation of Poor Demyan and a certain “writer” Kasvinov. The article confirms the Russophobic slander and traditions of the US State Department, which still prevail in the minds of many "Russians". But questions remain for Military Review: why was this article published for the sake of it?
    1. Hantengri
      Hantengri 20 May 2018 19: 22
      +1
      Quote: vlaveryan
      But questions remain for Military Review: why was this article published for the sake of it?

      Traffic, Vladimir, His Majesty Traffic (Google to help you), "bringing gifts"! And nothing more. Capitalism, however, which you, apparently, are very fond of. laughing
  34. Catfish
    Catfish 18 May 2018 21: 57
    +1
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: Sea Cat
    January XNUMXth. Lensky shooting.

    Answered above.


    January XNUMXth too? The demonstration was absolutely peaceful, with icons and portraits of the king. The police did not participate there at all. Army men shot. So "above" you did not answer. stop
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 19 May 2018 07: 08
      0
      Quote: Sea Cat
      The demonstration was absolutely peaceful, with icons and portraits of the king

      Quote: Dart2027
      Secondly, this story is always covered on the one hand, it’s just not known what opponents would say, the same captain Treschenkov, who gave the order to shoot, given the recent events of 1905 and the sweet habit of all kinds of revolutionaries to substitute the people they assembled for retaliatory actions power structures

      Quote: Dart2027
      As for rotten meat, it strongly resembles the story of the battleship Potemkin. Bad food, spontaneous performance and ... There is only one point - before the riot, 50 sailors who were not willing to participate in the battleship were written off. Is the picture getting a little different?
  35. Bar1
    Bar1 19 May 2018 08: 59
    0
    Olgovich,
    I don’t understand: in Google it’s hard to type “Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of 1955”? I typed and here is the result: http://istmat.info/node/18419

    and where does the report say that people ate better in RI?

    You don’t understand that there were hunger years, but there were NOT DEATH from him, cannibalism and corpse-eating, as was the case under the new government later. What's not clear?


    You said that in RI they ate much better than in the USSR before 50g, but in the report of the Central Statistical Bureau it is clear that this is not so, that now you are getting out? In short, the facts that people in the Republic of Ingushetia were starving and it was constantly systematically, i.e. it was such a policy of tsarism.
  36. Catfish
    Catfish 19 May 2018 23: 40
    +1
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: Sea Cat
    The demonstration was absolutely peaceful, with icons and portraits of the king

    Quote: Dart2027
    Secondly, this story is always covered on the one hand, it’s just not known what opponents would say, the same captain Treschenkov, who gave the order to shoot, given the recent events of 1905 and the sweet habit of all kinds of revolutionaries to substitute the people they assembled for retaliatory actions power structures

    Quote: Dart2027
    As for rotten meat, it strongly resembles the story of the battleship Potemkin. Bad food, spontaneous performance and ... There is only one point - before the riot, 50 sailors who were not willing to participate in the battleship were written off. Is the picture getting a little different?


    Do you think you answered? I asked a specific question about a specific event, and in response a continuous verbiage with a pull-up of the "arguments". negative
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 20 May 2018 08: 25
      0
      Quote: Sea Cat
      I asked a specific question for a specific event.

      And I gave a specific answer. People never go out unless they are withdrawn, and in order to withdraw it is easier they try to create an excuse themselves.
      Coverage of the incident went exclusively from one side, including the Duma commission. But the Minister of Internal Affairs Makarov assured that the workers were far from peaceful and tried to attack the soldiers with pickaxes, armatures, etc.
  37. Dart2027
    Dart2027 20 May 2018 17: 45
    0
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    What to doubt? That people should be born equal and free?
    That's what they really fight for.
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    Well, what a conversation! In the so-called Many law enforcement agencies practice the principle: who resisted the assailant is no longer an innocent victim of a crime.
    That is, in essence, there is nothing to object and there were no massacres of random people?
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    They shot at ALL who were considered a rebel. And such was considered anyone who dared to demand for themselves some rights on an equal basis with others. Whether they had a weapon or not was of no fundamental importance.
    Truth? Then why, when it comes to the use of weapons, for some reason it always turns out that those who were shot were not dandelions at all?
    1. Sugar Honeyovich
      Sugar Honeyovich 20 May 2018 18: 13
      0
      1. It’s not in vain that they say: “Subject everything to doubt” and “Judge not by words, but by deeds”.
      2. You essentially did not answer anything to my question: what is meant by the words "for nothing at all?".
      Quote: Dart2027
      for some reason it always turns out that those who were shot were not at all dandelions
      - so straightforward and ALWAYS?
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 20 May 2018 21: 31
        +1
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        “Question everything” and “Judge not by words but by deeds”

        Cases, we can already observe on the pages of history.
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        so straightforward and ALWAYS

        Almost always.
        1. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich 21 May 2018 06: 59
          0
          1. That's it.
          2. Almost always, but not always.
          So after all, what is “for nothing, for nothing”? And then the second question - should the peasants of Russia be considered terrorists who "shout about it" and "actually" do something completely different?
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 21 May 2018 20: 08
            0
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            So after all, what is “for nothing, for nothing”?

            This is when we arrived in a village where no one kills anyone, doesn’t ruin anything, doesn’t threaten anyone, doesn’t violate anything, and they shot everyone.
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            should peasants of Russia be considered terrorists

            Which specifically? Those who are dispossessed?
            1. Sugar Honeyovich
              Sugar Honeyovich 22 May 2018 08: 52
              0
              Quote: Dart2027
              This is when we arrived in a village where no one kills anyone, doesn’t ruin anything, doesn’t threaten anyone, doesn’t violate anything, and they shot everyone.

              If ONLY so, without deviations from the rule - then yes, it is possible that such cases did not exist. That no one kills anyone - in the villages it was often, especially at first, nothing ruins anything - at first the peasants broke only the locks on the barns’s barns (if they couldn’t open it with a key) to pick up the grain, but that DOES NOT BREAK anything ... Almost without exception the peasants believed that land owned by the landowners should belong to them. Such an opinion was a flagrant violation of then applicable law. So the cases that no one violates anything in the village were most likely not at all.
              And it is believed when they shot ALL? And if not all, but just a volley into the crowd, and then who will be so lucky? Or they didn’t shoot someone, but simply flogged for “impudent” words, and that he died of this is to blame?

              Quote: Dart2027
              Those who are dispossessed?

              At least some. Let those whom they dispossessed. Since they lordly manor houses smashed no worse than others - others
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 22 May 2018 19: 38
                0
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                And if not for everyone, but just a volley into the crowd, and then someone will be lucky

                The troops did not start firing without any reason. And if a person in his right mind and solid memory has pushed himself to the place where dismantling with the use of firearms is about to begin, then this is his problem.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                So the cases that no one violates anything in the village were most likely not at all.

                But not all soldiers were called in.
                1. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich 23 May 2018 05: 02
                  0
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  The troops did not start firing without any reason

                  Of course. At first they demanded to extradite instigators-instigators and, in general, those who "first started". And since the crowd is silent, this was the basis for firing at it. And, since they drove by force, then this was really a problem for EVERY person. The presence or absence of a sound mind and solid memory did not matter.

                  Quote: Dart2027
                  Far from everyone called soldiers

                  Yes. Since a soldier wouldn’t be enough for everything.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 23 May 2018 06: 02
                    0
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    Of course. At first they demanded to extradite instigators-instigators and, in general, those who "first started". And since the crowd is silent, this was the basis for firing at it.

                    Or maybe the reason is when the crowd, which is ordered to disperse itself, will climb into the fray?
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    Since a soldier wouldn’t be enough for everything.

                    Or since it was simply not necessary.
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    And, because they drove by force, then this was really a problem for EVERY person.

                    That is, instead of dispersing the crowd, restoring order, why did they actually call them, they also drive it themselves? Here they had nothing to do.
                    1. Sugar Honeyovich
                      Sugar Honeyovich 23 May 2018 08: 16
                      0
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Or maybe the reason is when the crowd, which is ordered to disperse itself, will climb into the fray?

                      And that too. Only this happened hardly often.
                      Quote: Dart2027


                      Here they had nothing to do.

                      There was something to do. Punish "robbers", "rebels", "destroyers", ALREADY DISSOLVED to houses that could be in several villages. Especially when the escaped landowner, or — especially — the landowner squeals hysterically: "Hang, hang everyone!" and threatens to indulge the rebels for pandering to the governor, or even to someone higher.
                      And since EVERYONE is usually to blame - there is mutual responsibility in the community, it is necessary to break away on someone. It will be possible to identify the instigators - well, but not succeed - they shoot at random. If everyone is to blame, they will punish anyone.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 23 May 2018 19: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Sahar Medovich
                        It will be possible to identify the instigators - well, but not succeed - they shoot at random.

                        And often did this?
  38. Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 24 May 2018 14: 00
    0
    Dart2027,
    Who counted?
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 24 May 2018 19: 21
      0
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      Who counted?

      That is, we return to where we started.
      Quote: Dart2027
      You know, I here several times asked story buffs about Nikolai Krovavy to give examples of how people were shot for nothing, but for some reason no one could say anything concrete.
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 25 May 2018 03: 50
        0
        We come back, we come back: depending on what we mean by the words "for no reason at all". We need clarity in terminology and definitions.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 25 May 2018 19: 26
          0
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          We need clarity in terminology and definitions.

          Quote: Dart2027
          This is when we arrived in a village where no one kills anyone, doesn’t ruin anything, doesn’t threaten anyone, doesn’t violate anything, and they shot everyone.

          Specific examples will be? Or
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Who counted?
          that is, nothing definite.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 26 May 2018 15: 16
            0
            Repetition - the mother of learning?
            Quote: Dart2027
            This is when we arrived in a village where no one kills anyone, doesn’t ruin anything, doesn’t threaten anyone, doesn’t violate anything, and they shot everyone.


            If ONLY so, without deviations from the rule - then yes, it is possible that such cases did not exist. That no one kills anyone - in the villages it was often, especially at first, nothing ruins anything - at first the peasants broke only the locks on the barns’s barns (if they couldn’t open it with a key) to pick up the grain, but that DOES NOT BREAK anything ... Almost without exception the peasants believed that land owned by the landowners should belong to them. Such an opinion was a flagrant violation of then applicable law. So the cases that no one violates anything in the village were most likely not at all.
            And it is believed when they shot ALL? And if not all, but just a volley into the crowd, and then who will be so lucky? Or they didn’t shoot someone, but simply flogged for “impudent” words, and that he died of this is to blame?
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 26 May 2018 15: 51
              0
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              And if not all, but just a volley into the crowd, and then who will be so lucky?

              Examples of how they shot at the crowd unnecessarily?
              1. Sugar Honeyovich
                Sugar Honeyovich 26 May 2018 18: 01
                0
                Without the need? What will we consider a necessity? It?:
                "In the Tambov province, for example, punishers, upon arrival in the village, gathered adult male people for a gathering and offered to extradite inciteers, leaders and participants in the riots, to return the property of the landowner economies. Failure to comply with these requirements often entailed a volley in the crowd." (Danilov).
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 26 May 2018 20: 14
                  0
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  upon their arrival in the village, the punishers gathered the adult male population for a gathering and offered to extradite the instigators, leaders and participants in the riots, and to return the property of the landlord economies. Failure to comply with these requirements often entailed a volley in the crowd

                  According to the "Regulation of the Council of Ministers of 19.8.1906 on military field courts" emergency military-judicial bodies were created to expedite legal proceedings in cases of military and civilians accused of robbery, murder, robbery, attacks on military, police and officials and in other serious crimes, in cases where there is no need for an additional investigation beyond the evidence of the crime. The bill on the military field courts was developed at the direction of Emperor Nicholas II by the chief military prosecutor V.P. Pavlov, with the participation of I.G.Scheglovitov. The immediate reason for the adoption of the bill in accordance with international law in accordance with 87 of Art. The main laws were the attempt on the Chairman of the Council of Ministers P.A. Stolypin on 12.8.1906, in which his daughter and son were injured, as well as 27 were killed and 32 people were injured. The military courts were introduced in areas declared martial law or emergency protection. For 1906-07 were introduced in 82 provinces of 87, transferred to martial law or emergency protection. Stolypin himself considered the introduction of military courts as an exceptional measure, not permissible as a permanent factor in the fight against revolution. Speaking in the Duma on 13.3.1907 on the issue of male legislation implemented in accordance with 87 art. The main laws (including the decree on the introduction of military courts), he called the military courts a brutal measure of "necessary defense", and said that the state is obliged, when in danger, to adopt exceptional laws "to protect itself from collapse." The government did not submit the law on military courts for consideration by the 2nd State Duma, and it automatically lost force on 20.4.1907/1907/1909. The consideration of cases of grave crimes was referred to the military district courts, in which the procedural rules of production were observed. From 4232 to 1824, the Military District Courts handed down 1909 death sentences, of which 1910 were carried out. After 129, the number of executed by the military district sentences was reduced to 1911 in 58, and to 1906 in 1912. In addition to emergency measures to suppress the revolution, the repressive apparatus of civil proceedings was also used. In 35-10, 1911 thousand people went through cases of state crimes in civil courts, of which 8117 thousand were acquitted. The sentences handed down included accusations of belonging to illegal societies, revolutionary propaganda and possession of illegal literature, participation in political demonstrations, and insulting his imperial majesty. “Crimes against the management order” (in 1911, 233 people were convicted of them), crimes and misconduct of the press (1905 people were convicted of them in 1912) were assigned to special categories. Of the political convicts in 7,5-1906. 1908 thousand were sentenced to hard labor. In 1908-10 an administrative reference was widely used as a punishment measure. In 060, 1909 people were sent to the administrative link, and in 1991 - XNUMX people.
                  Moreover, which is specific, specific figures are given here, specific judicial authorities are indicated.
                  Where exactly and how many times "In the Tambov province, for example ..."?
                  1. Sugar Honeyovich
                    Sugar Honeyovich 27 May 2018 11: 04
                    0
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    Where exactly and how many times "In the Tambov province, for example.

                    Ask Danilov this.

                    And as for specific figures - they are given where specific officials should have been accountable for the work done. The same military field courts. And just punitive detachments from soldiers or Cossacks could simply report on restoring order, and how many were killed - injured, flawed with death or without arrest, could report, could not report.
                    How many victims and where recorded before 19.08.2006/XNUMX/XNUMX?
                    1. Dart2027
                      Dart2027 27 May 2018 13: 05
                      0
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      Ask Danilov this.

                      That is, there is nothing.
                      Quote: Sahar Medovich
                      they are given where specific officials were to report on the work done. The same military field courts. And just punitive detachments of soldiers or Cossacks could

                      That is, again, nothing concrete, some rumors without any evidence. By the way, those same UPUs were just from the military. And why should they be introduced, if it was possible without them, huh? In general, as I wrote
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      You know, I here several times asked story buffs about Nikolai Krovavy to give examples of how people were shot for nothing, but for some reason no one could say anything concrete.

                      Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                      How many victims and where recorded before 19.08.2006/XNUMX/XNUMX?

                      Victims of what?
                      1. Sugar Honeyovich
                        Sugar Honeyovich 27 May 2018 17: 24
                        0
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        That is, there is nothing.

                        Have you already asked him?

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Victims of what?

                        Punitive stocks, what else.

                        We are talking like a blind man with a deaf-mute. I already gave a specific answer, you "did not see" it?
                        I’ll try on the other hand: “for no reason” people were shot, in fact, wherever it came to shooting. So it was in St. Petersburg 09.01.1905, so it was in with. Bogoroditsky Maloarkhangelsky county of Oryol province.

                        And where it didn’t reach the shooting, the peasants for no reason at all massively flogged, robbed, arrested. So it was in the village of Lada, Saransk district, Penza province.
  39. Dart2027
    Dart2027 27 May 2018 18: 25
    0
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    Have you already asked him?
    I ask you - will there be links to something documented?
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    Punitive stocks, what else.
    2006 year? Actually, Nicholas II died in the last century.
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    We are talking like a blind man with a deaf-mute. I already gave a specific answer, you "did not see" it?
    Stories about some not documented executions anywhere, somewhere, someone? This is from the same opera as 60 million about which Solzhenitsyn wrote.
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    I’ll try on the other hand: “for no reason” people were shot, in fact, wherever it came to shooting. So it was in St. Petersburg 09.01.1905
    Please tell me, if a crowd of several thousand people provoked by provocateurs would burst into the residence of the head of state, which is also a repository of a huge amount of material values, and you were the head of the palace’s security, what would you do? I remind you that riot police, who are trained and equipped to stop the crowd in such cases, then, in principle, did not exist. And let's say those who attacked police officers with weapons, grabbed trains, etc. - it is too essentially everywhere?
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    And where it didn’t reach the shooting, the peasants for no reason at all massively flogged, robbed, arrested. So it was in the village of Lada, Saransk district, Penza province.
    Which of course, no one has documented either.
    1. Sugar Honeyovich
      Sugar Honeyovich 28 May 2018 04: 20
      0
      Quote: Dart2027
      I ask you - will there be links to something documented?

      I made a link to an article by a historian. If you are interested in where he got the information from - a question for him.
      Quote: Dart2027
      2006 year? Actually, Nicholas II died in the last century.

      1906. Technical error, I apologize.


      Quote: Dart2027
      You were the head of the palace guard

      Actually, the chief guard of the palace did not play the main role there. The troops (not the police - the gendarmes) were pulled in advance not only from all over Petersburg and its environs, but also from the Baltic states. The soldiers had more ammunition than usual. A standard hung above the palace - a sign of the king’s presence in the palace. That is, the execution of civilians was planned in advance, regardless of their behavior. Yes - a provocation! Only someone close to the emperor organized it.

      Quote: Dart2027
      Which of course, no one has documented either.


      You play the terms very deftly, avoiding clarifying them. What is "never documented"? Do you need a detailed report, who is where and in what quantity? And a roll-call list? You can rejoice - most likely there are no such documents and never have been. And if it was, then it has long been lost. But about the village of Lada - this is documented.

      Repeat:
      "Quote: Dart2027
      This is when we arrived in a village where no one kills anyone, doesn’t ruin anything, doesn’t threaten anyone, doesn’t violate anything, and they shot everyone.
      If ONLY so, without deviations from the rule - then yes, it is possible that such cases did not exist. That no one kills anyone - in the villages it was often, especially at first, nothing ruins anything - at first the peasants broke only the locks on the barns’s barns (if they couldn’t open it with a key) to pick up the grain, but that DOES NOT BREAK anything ... Almost without exception the peasants believed that land owned by the landowners should belong to them. Such an opinion was a flagrant violation of then applicable law. So the cases that no one violates anything in the village were most likely not at all.
      And it is believed when they shot ALL? And if not all, but just a volley into the crowd, and then who will be so lucky? Or they didn’t shoot someone, but simply flogged for “impudent” words, and that he died of this is to blame?

      By the way, guided by your logic, there are people who claim that in 1937 they didn’t shoot anyone and didn’t put them “for no reason”. Also, about the crimes of the Nazis, some write that this is not documented by the Germans, that is, it has not been proved, and there is no faith in Soviet documents, because it was necessary for propaganda.
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 28 May 2018 06: 16
        0
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        I made a link to an article by a historian. If you are interested in where he got the information from - a question for him.
        Yes, I didn’t find any links there.
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        That is, the execution of civilians was planned in advance, regardless of their behavior. Yes - a provocation! Only someone close to the emperor organized it.
        And yet, what would you do?
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        What is "never documented"? Do you need a detailed report, who is where and in what quantity?
        I presented the data on CHD. Specific numbers.
        Quote: Sahar Medovich
        By the way, guided by your logic, there are people who claim that in 1937 they didn’t shoot anyone and didn’t put them “for no reason”
        Let's just say that not everyone was guilty, but most yes.
        1. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich 28 May 2018 07: 47
          0
          [quote = Dart2027] Yes, I didn’t find any links there. [/ quote]
          But it's not my fault, is it? [Quote = Dart2027]

          What documented V.G. Korolenko will suit you?
          “Some woman poked a long stick into the face of the horse of the detachment chief, Colonel Borodin. She was shot dead by the Cossack officer K * ”- can this be called“ for no reason ”?.

          And this:
          “... on the night of the 22nd, the so-called“ instigators ”were arrested without hindrance.
          Nevertheless, on the 22nd, at the order of Filonov, the Cossacks drove indiscriminately into the square in front of the volost involved and not involved in the events of the inhabitants. Here Filonov knelt the thousandth crowd in the snow. The crowd dutifully stood up, which in itself gives vivid evidence of the absence of any rebellion. Nevertheless, Filonov kept her in this position according to the most moderate indications (Cossack Yesaul and police) for at least three hours, which in itself constitutes a torture. ”

          Maybe this:
          “In the village of Krivaya Ruda, in which there was no longer any unrest, Filonov carried out a pogrom, showing that the military detachment had apparently been placed at the disposal of a man who was obsessed with some painful attacks of incomprehensible cruelty ...
          ... Arriving in the evening, he first demanded that the foreman come to him, tore off the sign from him, beat him in the face with a stick, then set about the clerks whom he dragged by the beards from one end of the room to the other. In the midst of cold and darkness, a gathering of two hundred or three hundred people was quickly driven away, who did not understand anything and were not involved in any strikes ...
          Going out onto the porch, Filonov shouted: “Hats off, on your knees, bastards! Give the guilty! ” The crowd was not even told who was guilty, what was guilty, and who should be extradited. ...
          A fur coat was removed from a sick old man ... they started beating while he fell to the ground. After that, he was locked up in a prison and started the crowd in turn. “They didn’t choose, but simply beaten in order, who was closer on his knees.”
          Then, under the influence of horror ... People ran in a mess. Cossack Yesaul shouted: "Cut!" “Nobody had time to come to their senses - everything was mixed up. Everyone saw before him only death. A moonless night, albeit a starry one, terrified the souls of superstitious, defenseless peasants ... They fled right under the checkers, trampling and crushing each other ... ”*
          * According to the correspondent, more than 40 people turned out to be mutilated and wounded (on the 22nd, medical assistance was provided). ”

          “... they ordered the Jews to separate from the Orthodox, put them on their knees separately and ordered the Cossacks to beat them all indiscriminately. ... explained this by saying that "the Jews are smart and that they are enemies of Russia." Cossacks walked among the kneeling crowd and whipped left and right men, teenagers, gray-haired old people. ”

          “... immediately after arriving in Ustivitsa, he pulled out a“ simple stick ”from somewhere and rushed to beat people standing at the entrance to the board with it. He screamed to be served "this woman" with whom he intends to crack down. It was about a teacher who, happily avoiding the brutal reprisals of a frenzied official, was not even involved in any inquiry ”

          What about this:

          “The Cossacks were not satisfied with the dispersion of the crowd and the release of the bailiff. They rushed after the runaways, caught up and killed them. This is not enough: they rushed to the town and began to hunt for residents who accidentally fell in the way.
          So, it was precisely near the house of Mr. Malinka that the watchman Otreshko was killed, peacefully sweeping snow near the owner's porch. *
          ... So Yevstafy Garkovenko "closed" hay for cattle from a stack in his yard, a mile away from the volost government. The Cossack took aim from the street, and the wounded Garkovenko fell before he could spot the villain. So, the old pharmacist Fabian Perevozsky was returning with his son from the post office. Near Orlov’s house they were overtaken by a Cossack killer who shot his son in front of his father. So Sergey Yves. Kovtun was killed six fathoms from his gate. So the woman, the wife of the peasant Makovetsky, was killed at the very gates. So the girl Kelepova shot both cheeks with a bullet *.
          ... eight people were killed at the volost government and in the immediate vicinity, while twelve fell in the streets, near their houses and in the backyards *.

          “And to think that all this was done after the“ instigators ”were arrested the day before, without the slightest resistance from any side”
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 28 May 2018 19: 55
            0
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            “Some woman poked a long stick into the face of the horse of the detachment chief, Colonel Borodin. She was shot dead by the Cossack officer K * ”- this can be called“ for no reason ”
            Let me see. Terrorists are rampant in the country (not peasants, namely professional killers), many of whom were women, and now some "lady" rushes to the detachment of soldiers and attacks the commander. The question is what should soldiers think? What is she out of her mind? What is her gun? What is her bomb ready?
            What she "thought" is a separate issue.
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            Nevertheless, on the 22nd, at the order of Filonov, the Cossacks drove indiscriminately into the square in front of the volost involved and not involved in the events of the inhabitants.
            Who committed the murder the day before? Yes, innocent victims, and, mind you, no one shot at them.
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            The Cossacks were not satisfied with the dispersion of the crowd and the release of the bailiff.

            And the fact that before that there was a murder we will not consider? And by the way, the same Korolenko mentions some Nikolai who came and brought the peasants to revolt and murder with his speeches, do not want to blame him for what happened?
            In general, violence by the authorities was only a response to violence.
            1. Sugar Honeyovich
              Sugar Honeyovich 29 May 2018 05: 17
              0
              Quote: Dart2027
              The question is what should soldiers think?

              In this case, the soldiers (Cossacks) clearly saw that it was peasants in front of them, not terrorists. They also knew very well what these peasants were demanding - they had previously announced this. Their demands were absolutely legal. And the Cossacks saw very well that the woman had only a stick in her hands, not a pistol or a bomb.

              Quote: Dart2027
              Who committed the murder the day before? Yeah, innocent victims

              Yes, that's right - innocent victims. In response to their legitimate demand, the authorities were the first to kill, they did not intentionally kill themselves in self-defense, but beat the chief of the killers, paying for it with their 20 lives. If the Cossacks killed only one of those who were in front of them and participated in the battle - this is one thing. But they, scattering in the village, killed MISCOWLY innocent. Terror in its purest form is to intimidate people. Not to mention the fact that the authorities conducted the same actions in neighboring villages, where there were no murders, riots and nothing illegal at all.

              [quote = about some Nicholas who arrived and, with his speeches, brought the peasants to revolt and murder, do not want to blame him for what happened? [/ quote]
              No I do not want to. For the apparent lack of corpus delicti in his actions. In his speeches “in front of the crowd,” “everything, however, was kept within certain limits, rather common for that time.” And here "with the arrest of Bezvikonny the mood of the crowd rose sharply." He, Nikolai, "pointed to examples when people managed to secure the release of administratively arrested people."
              Simply put, the peasants had previously asked to be released on bail before the trial of this Bezvikonny - they were refused. Moreover, the essence of the problem was not Bezvikon, who "was not particularly popular," but that "in the town of Sorochintsy, everything was relatively calm, and the unrest began with the introduction of enhanced security when rumors of the arrests appeared." Say - they arrested one, and others are arrested. And the "speaker" Nikolai only "took advantage of the national mood." He didn’t bring them to any riot and murder, but called for organizing (not organizing!) A kind of modern rally in support of the arrested person, indicating that in such cases the authorities release prisoners. As well as in our time, “under the influence of the public”, they are released under subscription, or even rehabilitated, convicts.

              Quote: Dart2027
              power violence was only a response to violence.

              Quite the opposite: peasant violence was only a response to the violence of the authorities. The peasants wanted a little - to live, not to die out, and at least treat themselves as people, not inanimate objects.
              As a result: the fact that under N. A. Romanov "for no reason at all" people were punished until death was proved completely and completely.
              1. YELLOWSTONE
                YELLOWSTONE 29 May 2018 05: 40
                0
                tell us more about an innocent provocateur who didn’t bring anything to anything
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                in self-defense they didn’t kill intentionally, but beat the chief of the killers,

                who died of it himself yes
                sweetly you get haponit
                1. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich 29 May 2018 08: 23
                  0
                  Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                  who died of it himself

                  Of course. Locked or frozen peasants, too, were dying themselves; they were clearly not included in the UPU statistics.
                  And what’s sweet with you?
                  1. YELLOWSTONE
                    YELLOWSTONE 29 May 2018 11: 29
                    +1
                    in the summer in this place? statistics such that your bombers killed several tens of thousands of the best representatives of Russia, for which Stolypin’s tie got only 2 thousand, and only then, as the red terrorists went around after the revolution, those few who were immediately left alive on different stages were forced to work knee-deep in icy water and instead of a whip there was a lugger or a mauser, look diabetes do not pick up
                    1. Sugar Honeyovich
                      Sugar Honeyovich 29 May 2018 13: 58
                      0
                      If December is a summer month, i.e. if Russia is Australia or Argentina, then in the summer.
                      Do not wait.
                      1. YELLOWSTONE
                        YELLOWSTONE 29 May 2018 14: 02
                        0
                        and who died in this place in full view of hypothermia? except for the already dead dead police chief who simply "died himself"? maybe it was just as it should be in the Pale of Settlement and somewhere there the famous "disinfectant" Trotsky was born? yes
              2. Dart2027
                Dart2027 29 May 2018 19: 37
                0
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                In this case, the soldiers (Cossacks) clearly saw that it was peasants in front of them, not terrorists.
                And the terrorist says on his forehead that he is a terrorist? They saw the fact of the attack on the officer and acted as expected.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                Yes, that's right - innocent victims. In response to their legitimate demand, the authorities were the first to kill, they did not intentionally kill in self-defense, but beat the chief of the killers
                Self defense? Good self defense.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                No I do not want to. For the apparent lack of corpus delicti in his actions. In his speeches “in front of the crowd”, “everything, however, kept within certain limits, rather common for that time”
                Are you talking about a time when openly called for the overthrow of power by armed means and rampant terror? There was an article about how the "ex" was carried out, that is, the robbery and "heroes" of the revolutionaries bombed 20 random passers-by.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                Quite the opposite: peasant violence was only a response to the violence of the authorities.
                Moreover, even the author of this letter did not think of such a thing, he only reproached the authorities for the measures that were too cool, in his opinion.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                As a result:
                the fact that under N. A. Romanov "for no reason at all" people were not punished, proved completely and completely.

                And note, I did not even focus on the fact that you again could not bring any documentary sources, except for a letter from some human rights activist.
                1. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich 30 May 2018 04: 23
                  0
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  And the terrorist says on his forehead that he is a terrorist?

                  Quote: Dart2027
                  Self defense? Good self defense.

                  It’s interesting if on a certain day Yevsyukov was disarmed by one of the random passers-by (and best of all taken by the hostages), how would your similar excuses look like “there is a rampant terrorism in the country”, that those whom he shot “at it’s not written on the forehead that they are not terrorists, ”and he, Evsyukov, could well have thought that one of them had a gun in his pocket, and the women had a grenade in his purse? And if he would have been injured when he was detained? They would also say “good self-defense”, and that our police - the police never killed anyone “for no reason”?

                  Quote: Dart2027
                  Are you talking about a time when openly called for the overthrow of power by armed means and rampant terror?

                  I'm talking about a specific episode in a particular place at a particular time.

                  Quote: Dart2027
                  Moreover, even the author of this letter did not think of such a thing.

                  Yes, really strange. It seems to be well-known facts ...

                  Quote: Dart2027
                  You again could not bring any documentary sources, except for the letter of some human rights activist.

                  Well, yes, the articles of historians are not an argument for you, the letter of a contemporary, bearing the character of an OFFICIAL document, is not a document. Convenient position, of course. At one time, representatives of the church also said: “I will not look at the telescope!” But only with this position will you be an eternal loser, if not a laughing stock.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 30 May 2018 19: 53
                    0
                    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                    I'm talking about a specific episode in a particular place at a particular time.
                    When did he provoke people fooled by his speeches into a crime?
                    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                    Well, yes, the articles of historians are not an argument for you, the letter of a contemporary, which is in the nature of an OFFICIAL document, is not a document
                    News for you, but in RI there was such a thing as a court and everything connected with it, even when it was a military field, as well as reporting on everything related to criminal cases. There is an official document, but there is a letter and these are different things, especially since
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    even the author of this letter did not think of such a thing; he only reproached the authorities for the measures that were too cool, in his opinion
                    what you prefer not to notice.
                    Quote: Sahar Medovich
                    It’s interesting if on a certain day Yevsyukov was disarmed by one of the casual passers-by (and best of all taken by the hostages), how would your similar excuses look like “there is a rampant terrorism in the country”
                    Did a random passerby disarm? Cool, you don’t know what to think of in order to get away from the fact that it wasn’t the authorities who started the massacre and ignoring any facts that the revolutionaries should blame? Convenient position, of course. At one time, representatives of the church also said: “I will not look at the telescope!” But only with this position will you be an eternal loser, if not a laughing stock.
                    1. Sugar Honeyovich
                      Sugar Honeyovich 31 May 2018 18: 25
                      0
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      When did he provoke people fooled by his speeches into a crime?

                      When he, without provoking anyone, supported people who were not fooled, but clearly aware of their actions, to commit not a crime, but the protection of his rights given by law. Another thing is that in the eyes of the authorities this was a crime ...

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      For you, the news, but in RI there was such a thing as a court

                      Do not judge others by yourself. If it’s news for you that there was such a thing as a court in RI, this does not mean that others hear about it for the first time. To let you know, in RI there was still such a thing as a Special Conference, which replaced the courts, as well as the practice of repression until death without any courts.
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      reporting on all criminal cases

                      There is reporting, which reflects only what concerns the courts and reflects other factors.

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      There is an official document, but there is a letter and these are two different things.

                      An official document and a letter are really different things. Just as in our time there are letters to the authorities that the detainee in the police department died from torture, and there is an official statement by the police that the detainee beat off his kidneys or raped himself with a bottle.

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      no longer know what to come up with
                      There is no need to invent me, unlike you, I just know what I'm saying. And I give quite appropriate analogies.

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      ignoring any facts


                      Not facts, but your hopeless attempts to justify the then power, the FIRST BEGINNING of the massacre. At first, you claimed that not a single fact was known that under Nicholas II they would execute “for no reason at all”. When it turned out that there were facts, you, unable to refute them, began to give miserable excuses such as "the situation was serious in the country." The seriousness of the situation can be explained by certain events (there are many examples both in our and in world history), but to explain does not mean to justify, and to say that “this was not” is simply unreasonable.
                      You have lost the argument - have the courage to admit it. Do not be the laughing stock.
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 31 May 2018 19: 44
                        0
                        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                        When he, without provoking anyone, supported people who were not fooled, but clearly aware of their actions, to commit not a crime, but the protection of his rights given by law. Another thing is that in the eyes of the authorities this was a crime ...
                        The attack on representatives of the state apparatus has always been a crime, as this “supporter” knew and escaped, leaving the people deceived by him to their fate. "Hero".
                        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                        To let you know, in RI there was still such a thing as a Special Conference, which replaced the courts, as well as the practice of repression until death without any courts.
                        That is, again, the evidence is so secret that no one knows about it. When the bloody revelry began, then in order to accelerate the establishment of order, UPUs were created. When the situation returned to normal they were canceled. There are quite specific figures for their work.
                        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                        An official document and a letter are really different things. Just as in our time there are letters to the authorities that the detainee in the police department died from torture, and there is an official statement by the police that the detainee beat off his kidneys or raped himself with a bottle.
                        And there were letters that 30 million innocents were tortured in the Gulag.
                        Just in case, I explain what I know about the existence of officially documented figures of all those sentenced to death for that period. But there were letters?
                        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                        There is no need to invent me, unlike you, I just know what I'm saying. And I give quite appropriate analogies.
                        When you talk about disarming soldiers, how about something innocent? It reminds me of something.
                        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                        Not facts, but your hopeless attempts to justify

                        All kinds of revolutionaries, the FIRST STARTERS of the massacre. At first you argued that not a single fact was known that under Nicholas II the people would be the first to attack government officials. When it turned out that there were facts, you, unable to refute them, began to give miserable excuses such as "the situation was serious in the country." The seriousness of the situation can be explained by certain events (there are many examples both in our and in world history), but to explain does not mean to justify, and to say that “this was not” is simply unreasonable.
                        You have lost the argument - have the courage to admit it. Do not be the laughing stock.
  40. Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 1 June 2018 04: 26
    0
    Dart2027,
    Quote: Dart2027
    At first you argued that not a single fact was known that under Nicholas II the people would be the first to attack government officials.

    Well, show me where I said this?

    Quote: Dart2027
    Attacking government officials has always been a crime

    The attack is yes. But the requirement to respect human rights is not. And ignoring this by the authorities is a crime on the part of the authorities. In this case, it was just that.

    Quote: Dart2027
    UPU were created. There are quite specific figures for their work.

    Yes there is. But I once asked you: how many victims and where was recorded until 19.08.1906 - before the creation of the UPU? You courageously declined to answer. Maybe there were none at all?

    Quote: Dart2027
    the evidence is so secret that no one knows about it.

    More precisely: no one knows now and only of those who do not want to know. And at that time very many knew ...

    Quote: Dart2027
    It reminds me of something.

    I can recall: if Evsyukov were disarmed by random people who were nearby, it would be a crime on their part: an attack on a representative of the state apparatus?

    You also did not dare to answer my question: should the peasants of Russia be considered terrorists who "shout about it" and "actually" do something completely different?

    In general, you as an inexperienced (i.e., lover))) demagogue look sorry. At first it was alleged that there was NO “executed for nothing” at all, then they issued: “if a person in his right mind and solid memory has pushed himself to the place where dismantling with the use of firearms is about to begin, then this is his problem.” That is, in this case, he is not an innocent victim? And if he didn’t stick, but to him, as in the examples given? Guilty of living in this village?
    You constantly blame the revolutionaries - provocateurs. Firstly, they could not always be to blame, because they were simply not enough for the whole of Russia, and secondly, their fault does not exclude the presence of victims "for nothing, about nothing," as such, right? Initially, our question was posed like this, isn't it?
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 1 June 2018 17: 49
      0
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      Well, show me where I said this?
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      Quite the contrary: peasant violence was only a response to the violence of the authorities
      Already do not remember what you wrote?
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      But I once asked you: how many victims and where was recorded until 19.08.1906 - before the creation of the UPU? You courageously declined to answer. Maybe there were none at all?
      Well, where is the evidence that was?
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      More precisely: no one knows now and only of those who do not want to know. And at that time very many knew ...
      That is, like WMD in Iraq. The evidence is secret.
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      I can recall: if Evsyukov were disarmed by random people who were nearby, it would be a crime on their part: an attack on a representative of the state apparatus?
      That is, you do not see the difference between a drunkard and security forces in a special operation? Well, I'm sorry, I didn’t think that such things should be explained.
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      In general, you as an inexperienced (i.e., lover))) demagogue look sorry. At first it was alleged that there was NO “executed for nothing” at all, then they issued: “if a person in his right mind and solid memory has pushed himself to the place where dismantling with the use of firearms is about to begin, then this is his problem.” That is, in this case, he is not an innocent victim?
      Of course not. When the shooting begins, you need to run and hide, unless of course you are not a participant in what is happening. In such cases, there are occasional victims or victims of one's own stupidity. And if someone had the mind to climb under the bullets out of curiosity, then this is precisely his problem.
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      In general, you as an inexperienced (i.e., lover))) demagogue look sorry.
      Because you have nothing to object to?
      Quote: Sahar Medovich
      Firstly, they could not always be to blame, because they were simply not enough for the whole of Russia, and secondly, their fault does not exclude the presence of victims "for nothing, about nothing," as such, right?
      That is, if a group of people commits a crime after listening to a visiting chatterbox, then they are not to blame? The fact that the peasants were foolishly led to beautiful words does not make them innocent.
      Quote: Dart2027
      And there were letters that 30 million innocents were tortured in the Gulag.
      Just in case, I explain that I am aware of the existence of an officially documented figure for all those sentenced to death for that period. But there were letters?
      So you did not answer.
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 3 June 2018 10: 01
        0
        Quote: Dart2027
        Already do not remember what you wrote?

        I remember everything that I wrote and that I did not write. I wrote that the violence of the peasants was only a response to the violence of the authorities and this is true. And "that it is not known a single fact that under Nicholas II the people were the first to attack the authorities," I did not write. Congratulations to you.

        Quote: Dart2027
        Well, where is the evidence that was?

        Numerous evidence above. If it’s not enough, I’ll give you more, since there is no lack of them.
        Quote: Dart2027
        Secret evidence

        The evidence is clear. Except for those, of course, who "see nothing, hear nothing."

        Quote: Dart2027
        don't you see the difference between a drunkard and security forces in a special operation?

        First of all, Yevsyukov was a representative of the authorities, all the more so of the power agencies, and only then - drunk. Moreover, for such crimes, such as he does not have to be drunk at all, as is evident from the example of the same Filonov. So - a rare case! - here you told the truth - there really can be no difference between a drunken rowdy in uniform and security forces during special operations.
        But I asked another question: if Evsyukov were disarmed by random people who were nearby, it would be a crime on their part: an attack on a representative of the state apparatus? Yes or no? And if so, what should they do? I understand that you have nothing to say, but I’m always interested to watch how the opponent gets out like a loser by the board.

        Quote: Dart2027
        When shooting starts, you need to run and hide

        Where to run? From your own home somewhere? To attract attention?

        Quote: Dart2027
        In such cases, there are occasional casualties.

        So, at that time there were still casualties? Well, already progress! My works were not in vain! Not everything is lost yet, there is hope!

        Quote: Dart2027
        Because you have nothing to object to?

        Yes, precisely because you have nothing to object to. Cheap demagoguery does not count.

        Quote: Dart2027
        if a group of people commits a crime after listening to a visiting chatterbox

        IF commits a crime! And if he doesn’t? Does crime commit power? Speaking of the talker: a case has been recorded when a person came to TREAT the peasants from arson and robbery. According to the ORDER of the ADMINISTRATION, he was mutilated, which is why after seven days of torment and death. Is he a victim of something - chance, "his own stupidity" or ...?
        Quote: Dart2027
        So you did not answer.

        Well, I answer: yes, there were letters. But the answer from you to my question does not follow from this.
        And again: the then Russian peasantry was a terrorist or not?
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 3 June 2018 14: 45
          0
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          I wrote that the violence of the peasants was only a response to the violence of the authorities and this is true. And "that it is not known a single fact that under Nicholas II the people were the first to attack the authorities" I did not write
          Have you tried to read yourself? The peasants were the first to attack the authorities, but violence began power.
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Numerous evidence above.
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Well, I answer: yes, there were letters. But the answer from you to my question does not follow from this.
          So you agree that the Soviet government killed 30 million innocent people? Then what are you campaigning for?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          But I asked another question: if Evsyukov were disarmed by random people who were nearby, it would be a crime on their part: an attack on a representative of the state apparatus?
          That is, the difference between the employee at execution and the rowdy is still unknown to you? I understand that you have nothing to say, but I’m always interested to watch how the opponent gets out like a loser by the board.
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          So, at that time there were still casualties?
          There were accidental casualties when the Soviet army liberated our country from German occupation. Or do you believe that all the shells and bombs fell only on the Germans?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          IF commits a crime! And if he doesn’t? Does crime commit power?
          That is, they did not attack anyone and did not capture anyone?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          a case was recorded when a man came to TREAT the peasants from arson and robbery. According to the ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION, he was mutilated, which is why after seven days of torment and death
          What kind of person, by whose order, where did he die, who registered?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Yes, precisely because you have nothing to object to. Cheap demagoguery does not count.
          Yes, precisely because you have nothing to object to. Cheap demagoguery does not count.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 3 June 2018 16: 44
            0
            Quote: Dart2027
            There were accidental casualties when the Soviet army liberated our country from German occupation.

            That is, shells and bombs, in your opinion, are tantamount to aiming fire from rifles, chopping helpless teenagers with checkers, and killing people who were appointed guilty by typing to death?
            One way or another, I pulled out the answer to your main question, despite the stubborn resistance - under the tsar, innocent people were punished, including death. Q.E.D. Facts - a stubborn thing, but you can’t hide the truth!
            This concludes the discussion. One-zero in mine.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 3 June 2018 18: 57
              0
              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              That is, shells and bombs, in your opinion, are tantamount to aiming fire from rifles, chopping helpless teenagers with checkers, and killing people who were appointed guilty by typing to death?

              Proof of. There is official evidence of military courts and the use of force to restore order.
              Well, what to do nowadays have already had enough to look at the innocent victims of the bloody regime



              Quote: Sahar Medovich
              One way or another, I pulled out the answer to your main question, despite the stubborn resistance - under the tsar, innocent people were punished, including death. Q.E.D. Facts - a stubborn thing, but you can’t hide the truth!

              Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
              This concludes the discussion. One-zero in mine.

              That is, the fact that random victims is an inevitable consequence of the database in the village is too complicated for you? And are you so tired of inventing that you don’t know what to say?
  41. Fitratovich
    Fitratovich 28 July 2018 12: 50
    0
    Dimon looks like Nicholas, stick a beard on him. He’ll end badly if he doesn’t
  42. tacet
    tacet 1 August 2018 16: 21
    0
    The article is an abstract of a 11th grade student in high school.