Military Review

Russian liberalism in the era of Alexander III

135

Reception of volost elders by Alexander III in the courtyard of the Petrovsky Palace. Painting by I. Repin (1885-1886).


Only freedom flew to the people,
Only a click is powerful of the people,
Only business belongs to the people,
And his path is great and great!
(K. Aksakov "Towards a Humanist")


History Russian liberalism. Today we continue our acquaintance with Russian liberalism during the thirteen-year reign of Alexander III. What era was it? It is usually called the time of counterreforms, when the Pobedonostsev extended the "owl's wings" over the country. But Witte is also remembered in an amicable way, as well as his peaceful foreign policy and the introduction of "peasant uniforms" in the army, because of which many of the high-born officers left it. And, of course, we will definitely consider what place liberalism (which became so popular in the past reign) occupied at that time in the history of our country.

Russian liberalism in the era of Alexander III
Alexander III in the uniform of the Lb.-Guards. Sapper battalion. Photo by N. Schilder.

Tell me who your teacher is and it will explain a lot then


First of all, one must imagine that the tragic death of his father, emperor-liberator Alexander II, naturally had a heavy effect on the new sovereign. And, perhaps, precisely because of such difficult experiences, he chose the conservative path of the country's development. And, as in the case of Alexander I, the educator K. Pobedonostsev, a man who at that time was deservedly called the main conservative of the empire, had a great influence on the formation of his views.

Well, having become the sovereign, Alexander III already on April 29, 1881 issued the Manifesto "On the inviolability of autocracy", which was just Pobedonostsev. One of his phrases is particularly noteworthy:

"With faith in the power and truth of Autocratic power, which We are called to establish and protect for the good of the people from any encroachment on it."

Well, for the phrase

“... and to entrust us with the sacred duty of the autocratic government

The text was immediately dubbed the "pineapple manifesto". Only very soon the entire Russian society became convinced that the time for jokes had just passed.


Chief Prosecutor of the Governing Synod KP Pobedonostsev.

Shouldn't the vertical of power be rigid ?!


Thus, all liberal ministers immediately had to resign. Censorship was tightened, liberal publications were closed down, and a stricter charter was introduced at universities. The terrorists in 1887 were taught a lesson in the execution of the participants in the attempted assassination, among whom was also executed Lenin's brother Alexander Ulyanov.

Further more: the tsar did not like the elective self-government of the zemstvo, and he replaced the elected zemstvo chiefs with those appointed from the nobles and landowners, which increased their loyalty, but certainly worsened the situation in the zemstvos. The magistrates' courts in the counties were canceled, and the competence of jury trials was severely curtailed. That is, the "vertical of power" under Alexander III became much tougher, and the opportunities for liberals to prove themselves in business, respectively, were less.

The russification of the outskirts of the empire was at the forefront, and the Baltic states got the hardest. So, instead of the German language, which was used there in many places since the time of Catherine, Russian was introduced. The German university in the city of Dorpat was transformed into Russian, and the city itself was also renamed Yuriev in 1893. The notorious Pale of Settlement for Jews became much stricter, and their admission to educational institutions was limited.

However, there was no particular oppression of non-Russian peoples in the empire. The same Chukchi and Nenets, as they were getting drunk before him, so they continued to get drunk. Buildings in the characteristic "Russian style" began to be built then everywhere. For example, in my Penza, he built the building of the "Meat Passage", where today there are numerous trade rows of industrial goods, and as a child I went there with my grandmother just to buy meat there. And many years passed before their specialization changed so significantly.


Alexander III and Empress Maria Feodorovna, con. 1870s. biennium Photo by S. Levitsky.

Peacemaker who knew the value of the world


Alexander III tried to maintain peaceful relations with the states surrounding Russia, although he said that she had no allies. He did not like the war, having visited it. And during his reign Russia did not fight with anyone. But the short-sighted rapprochement with France and penetration into Manchuria in the future led to war with Japan and the Triple Alliance.

Domestic industry developed very well under him, for which we should say thanks to his finance ministers (N. Kh. Bunge, I. A. Vyshnegradskii and S. Yu. Witte). As a result, the ruble became a convertible currency (albeit after his death). The country's economy began to rise and even the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway began - a project that was previously unthinkable and unprecedented. At the same time, it was he who gave the peasants real freedom, since he allowed the former serfs to take solid loans from banks, buy out land and equip their farms. By the way, he also gave civil liberties to the Old Believers, that is, he equated them in the position with all other subjects of the empire.

But the desire of Alexander III to freeze the reform process led to truly tragic consequences, both for the authorities and for the entire society. The fact is that the liberal intelligentsia, having lost faith in the possibility of finding a common language with the government, began to get closer to the revolutionaries more and more actively, which was the opposite consequence of the growing influence of the conservatives around the tsar.

But he was an educated man


There were truly incidents. Thus, the Moscow mayor B. N. Chicherin, during a meeting with the emperor, said:

“Old Russia was a serf, and all the materials of the building were passive instruments in the hands of the master; today's Russia is free, and free people are required to have their own initiative and initiative. Without public initiative, all the transformations of the past reign have no meaning. "

Well, the emperor listened to all this, after which he demanded his resignation ... But he further said also this:

"The current social democracy with its widespread organization, with its hatred of the upper classes, with its desire to destroy the entire existing social order, inevitably leads to dictatorship."

And after all, the emperor was an educated person, he knew the history of the Great French Revolution and how it ended there (before his eyes, a commune was suppressed in Paris). And I still did not understand the wisdom of these words.


Alexander III. 1885. Photo by S. Levitsky. (1819-1898)

The result of "underground" Russian liberalism


As a result, it turned out that the Russian liberals at the end of the XNUMXth century criticized the actions of the authorities much more often than cooperated with them. And, as a result, the liberals themselves did not call anyone to the barricades, but began to destroy the age-old foundations of the Russian state through the propaganda of their ideas. Such important provisions of liberalism as indispensable respect for the law and for private property, in this struggle began to recede into the background. The goal was to "defeat the enemy", that is, tsarism at any cost and with any allies.

It is clear that the Russian liberals themselves did not throw bombs at the tsar's carriages. Pharmacies (with the words “For the revolution!”) ​​Were not robbed, and when they were arrested after such a robbery they did not shoot the police from the Browning (by the way, such a case actually took place in Penza). But on the pages of the press, they almost approved of such actions. And in university lecture halls, in courtrooms, and even more so in private conversations, albeit with reservations, all this violence was justified.

They did not understand that after the revolutionary emancipation of the masses, no one would wash the floors in their mansions for them, they would not have either servants or cooks. We ourselves will have to heat the stoves and wash the clothes, and with our feet, and not in a cab, stomp on lectures in the "proletarian universities", give lectures to future "red directors". This is precisely the result of the "underground" existence of liberalism.

In Russia at the end of the XNUMXth century, the liberal movement simply did not want to soften the acuteness of all social and political contradictions in the country, but only added fuel to the fire of social conflict. Moreover, in the struggle between the revolution and the reaction, it took the side of the revolution. Well, we know very well how it all ended. Only a few of this "spiritual elite of society" went over to the side of the victorious workers and peasants in Russia. Someone the winners simply finished off in the basement, someone died of hunger, and the majority fled abroad, or they were taken there by the "professorship".


Russian President Vladimir Putin at the opening ceremony of the monument to Alexander III in 2017. Crimea, Livadia Palace Park. Press service of the President of the Russian Federation.

And here is what Klyuchevsky once said about this


However, much in this case also depended on the personality of the Russian monarch himself (the role of personality in history has not been canceled), about which, perhaps, no one spoke better than the historian Klyuchevsky. And he spoke about him like this:

“... this heavy-handed tsar did not want the evil of his empire and did not want to play with it simply because he did not understand its position, and indeed did not like complex mental combinations, which are required by a political game no less than a card game. The shrewd lackeys of the autocratic court easily noticed this and with even less difficulty managed to convince the complacent master that all evil stems from the premature liberalism of the reforms of a noble but too trusting parent, that Russia is not yet ripe for freedom and it is too early to let her into the water, because she I haven't learned to swim yet. All this seemed very convincing, and it was decided to crush the underground sedition, replacing the rural judges of the peace with benefactor fathers, zemstvo bosses, and elected professors appointed directly from the front minister of public education. The logic of the St. Petersburg chanceries was revealed naked, as in a bathhouse. Public discontent was supported by the incompleteness of the reforms or the dishonest, feigned implementation of them. It was decided to bribe the reforms and in good faith, openly admit it. The government directly mocked society, told it: you demanded new reforms - old ones will be taken away from you; you were indignant at the dishonest distortion of the reforms bestowed - here is the conscientious execution of the highest distorted reforms. "

And this is exactly how it was during the reign of Emperor Alexander III. And then Nicholas II came to power. And so he just had to reap the fruits of all the past "imperfections" and unresolved problems of previous reigns, for which he was not ready at all.
Author:
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aerodrome
    Aerodrome 4 December 2020 03: 45
    +4
    Only a click is powerful of the people,
    Only business belongs to the people,
    on this, Aksakov should have been silent.
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 4 December 2020 09: 00
      +4
      Censorship was tightened, liberal publications were shut down, and stricter regulations were introduced at universities


      This is probably the most important thing. Can you give examples of "tightening censorship"? Who have their mouths shut?
      1. kalibr
        4 December 2020 09: 56
        +3
        Quote: Bar1
        Who have their mouths shut?

        How many Slavophiles did not seek their own printed edition, they were not allowed to create ...
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 4 December 2020 10: 31
          0
          Quote: kalibr
          How many Slavophiles did not seek their own printed edition, they were not allowed to create ...

          I was looking at Pyzhikov: there he said the paradoxical thing that the Slavophiles, in spite of their divergence of views with the Slavophobes, were nevertheless criticized by such a prominent art historian as Vladmir Vasilyevich Stasov.



          Stasov argued that the Slavophiles did not consider the whole history as it is, but only noted the highlighted episodes, which in principle differed little from the Westernizers. Tartaria.
          Although, for example, the Slavophil Hilferding (a good surname) published such a work on the similarity of the Russian and Sanskrit languages.
          1. kalibr
            4 December 2020 10: 39
            +13
            If you remove the stupid Tartary from your comment, then everything is exactly so. And no one denies the similarity between Sanskrit and Russian. They all belong to the Indo-European language family. For example, in the textbook for universities LEXICOLOGY OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE L.G. Babenko says so directly:
            East Slavic vocabulary (the period of the Indo-European language). - the property of the linguistic community of the ancestors of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.
            1. not main
              not main 5 December 2020 00: 03
              0
              Quote: kalibr
              East Slavic vocabulary (the period of the Indo-European language). - the property of the linguistic community of the ancestors of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.

              An interesting version! But nothing more than a "version"! I wonder why you limited yourself only to the USSR (albeit the former)?
              1. kalibr
                5 December 2020 06: 50
                0
                Because I am not an expert in lexicology. I opened a textbook at random, and there it was ... I rewrote it ...
      2. Vladimir Volk
        Vladimir Volk 8 December 2020 17: 26
        0
        To everyone except Katkov
  2. Catfish
    Catfish 4 December 2020 04: 53
    +10
    Good morning friends! hi

    But they remember in an amicable way ... the introduction of the "peasant uniform" in the army, because of which many officers from the nobility left it.


    More about this, if possible. Because I hear such a definition as "peasant uniform" for the first time and I would like more information about the army of that time.



    So what was the "peasantness" of this form?
    1. kalibr
      4 December 2020 06: 13
      +12
      Before that, the Russian uniform was of a tailcoat cut and with buttons. Now the cut of "kosovorotki" and hooks, that is, completely copied the Russian folk caftan and its fasteners, became. The peasant soldiers liked it, the noble officers did not! Well, tuck the pants into the boots ... fi.
    2. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 4 December 2020 08: 26
      +9
      Is it that the form of the Life Guards rifle battalion was generally called a izvozchitskaya :))
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 4 December 2020 09: 36
        +5
        Did you mean this form?



        Tsarevich Alexander Alexandrovich in the form of the Life Guards Rifle Battalion of the Imperial Family. 1865 Photographer I. Nostitz. In this photo, the Tsarevich is 20 years old.
        1. Senior seaman
          Senior seaman 4 December 2020 10: 47
          +6
          Yeah. And red tunics :)
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 4 December 2020 11: 19
            +5
            Crimson shirts!
            1. Senior seaman
              Senior seaman 4 December 2020 12: 15
              +7
              Well, at least not revolutionary bloomers :)))
    3. Pane Kohanku
      Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 09
      +5
      More about this, if possible. Because I hear such a definition as "peasant uniform" for the first time and I would like more information about the army of that time.

      So, Uncle Kostya! drinks About the form. Our "master of all Russia" (I do not want to write with a capital letter) loves tease to his own film "The Barber of Siberia", where he showed the desired form, and himself beloved - in the role of the emperor, that very Alexander III. So, the form is shown there very well. hi
      And it included a black uniform, black wide trousers and a white tunic. On the head in winter - a lamb's cap without "ears" - a kind of "Kubanka" ... As you understand, the ears were very cold in real conditions ... No.
      And here's how she looked:

      Do you know who this is? This is a talented artisan Vasily Degtyarev. soldier
      He was just lucky in something that he, as a very rugged person, was taken to serve in the Officer Shooting School in Oranienbaum. what Have you read my article about Petershtadt? So the school you were looking for was located near the location of the amusing fortress of Peter III. yes
      The question is that Degtyarev immediately took under your beard Colonel Nikolai Filatov is the head of the Rifle Range of this school. He also assigned the master to the gunsmith Fedorov - to help. request But here, in parallel, Degtyarev already managed to make his experiments with carbines and machine guns. yes By the way, at the same place and at the same time, in the Officers' School, the esaul Tokarev also worked ... hi
      So, it turns out, three gunsmiths came together ...
      WHO gave them protection? What would happen to our army if there was only one dreamer administrator? soldier
      This man was first the head of the Rifle Range, and then the head of the Officer Rifle School itself - Nikolai Mikhailovich Filatov. He died in the USSR in honor and respect! soldier Honor and glory to him, beard general! good

      And the form of Alexander III ... The Russo-Japanese War was met with it ... it turned out, forgive me, poorly, despite the heroism ... No. Because try to fight in white tunics, my friends! negative but then from the degenerate tsar, who with his merry relatives-friends, lost two wars, an entire empire and millions of victims, they made a passion-bearer! angry I have no words.....
      1. Astra wild2
        Astra wild2 5 December 2020 14: 55
        +3
        Nikolay, good afternoon. I remembered the site late yesterday, and today I reread yesterday's.
        I heard about the Officer Shooting School, about Degtyarev, his RP-27, in the unit there was a dispute, which is better: RP - "company" or PC. I saw TT, but did not hold it in my hands, outwardly I did not like it. Here "dad" praised him.
        Had no idea they were working together
        1. Pane Kohanku
          Pane Kohanku 5 December 2020 21: 37
          0
          I saw TT, but did not hold it in my hands, outwardly I did not like it. Here "dad" praised him.

          Vera, TT was also unusual for me. The handle is smooth, almost at a right angle, narrow .. Against its background, the usual PM with a chubby handle looked more comfortable. request
          The question is that TT is the weapon with which our commanders went through the entire war. Have you won? Yes! So, honor and glory to this pistol! soldier
      2. Catfish
        Catfish 5 December 2020 16: 13
        +1
        So talk after that about the "role of the individual in history." request So Stalin was fundamentally wrong when he said that "there are no irreplaceable people."
        1. Pane Kohanku
          Pane Kohanku 5 December 2020 21: 34
          +2
          So Stalin was fundamentally wrong when he said that "there are no irreplaceable people."

          No. I speak from my own experience. Each talented employee is individual and must be appreciated. hi
          So talk after that about the "role of the individual in history."

          Our rapid-fire weapon (working!) Began to be invented by three people - Fedorov, Degtyarev, Tokarev. Everything is closely related to the Officer Rifle School. General Filatov's beard peeked out from behind their backs. He gave the greatest patronage to this, and tried to create better conditions for inventors. Did you get a good sample? Filatov tested it at the Gun Range. Then the sample was transferred for revision and mass production to Sestroretsk - there, at the factories, the conditions were better ... hi
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 5 December 2020 22: 01
            +1
            There was also a talented peasant son Yakov Roschepey and his self-loading rifle arr. 1907 year.


            Unfortunately, war, revolution, etc. prevented the adoption of his rifle. He worked for Fedorov.
            1. Pane Kohanku
              Pane Kohanku 7 December 2020 09: 23
              +2
              Unfortunately, war, revolution, etc. prevented the adoption of his rifle. He worked for Fedorov.

              Not really. Roschepey did self-loading from the "three-line". Which in itself was a dead end option. But it was still an important stage in the beginning of the design of our rapid-fire weapon.
              So, he worked not only with Fedorov. Initially, himself, and when he received a more or less decent sample, Nikolai Mikhailovich Filatov already looked at him! And then - Fedorov.
              1. Catfish
                Catfish 7 December 2020 09: 35
                +1
                In addition to reworking Mosinka, he also had an original development for the Japanese cartridge (obviously the influence of Fedorov), but because of the cartridge it did not go.
                1. Pane Kohanku
                  Pane Kohanku 7 December 2020 09: 56
                  +1
                  In addition to reworking Mosinka, he also had an original development for the Japanese cartridge (obviously the influence of Fedorov), but because of the cartridge it did not go.

                  No, Uncle Kostya, Yakov Ustinovich did not design anything for the Japanese patron. drinks Pre-war copies of his rifles went under the "three-line". Its last development was created in 1928, but ... not for a standard rifle cartridge, but for the same caliber, but without a rim! Therefore, it was recognized as inexpedient ... I quote from: Mavrodin, "Russian rifle", 1984, p. 102.
                  1. Catfish
                    Catfish 7 December 2020 10: 09
                    +1
                    Yes, you're right, it was made under an experimental cartridge, and the GAU issued an order to design new samples only for the standard 1908.
                    1. Pane Kohanku
                      Pane Kohanku 7 December 2020 10: 11
                      +2
                      Yes, you're right, it was made under an experimental cartridge, and the GAU issued an order to design new samples only for the standard 1908.

                      We tried to save money and speed up. request Whether the decision is correct, no - I cannot say. But Rogovtsev's patron (with the necessary changes and additions) is still in use, and is clearly not asking for retirement! soldier
                      1. Catfish
                        Catfish 7 December 2020 10: 18
                        +1
                        Yeah, he gave a lot of trouble to all the designers, because of this damn rim. The whole world has long switched to a flangeless cartridge, and Russia, as always, is lagging behind ... After all, how many excellent developments have been shelved precisely because of this cursed flange.
      3. Doctor
        Doctor 5 December 2020 20: 19
        +2
        The question is that Degtyarev was immediately taken under his beard by Colonel Nikolai Filatov, the head of the Rifle Range of this school.

        Competent commentary, few people remember Nikolai Filatov, one of the founders of the Russian school of gunsmiths. Hero of Labor, by the way.

        UPDATE.
        The son of Nikolai Filatov, Antonin Nikolayevich Filatov, is one of the founders of Russian transfusiology, the science of transfusion of blood and its components. Academician of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences. He was closely engaged in fractionation of blood, he was the first in the country to transfuse plasma.

        1. Pane Kohanku
          Pane Kohanku 5 December 2020 21: 18
          +1
          Competent commentary, few people remember Nikolai Filatov

          Yuri, I bow from the bottom of my heart to those who know and remember! drinks With respect, Nicholai.
          The son of Nikolai Filatov, Antonin Nikolayevich Filatov, is one of the founders of Russian transfusiology, the science of transfusion of blood and its components. Academician of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences. He was closely engaged in fractionation of blood, he was the first in the country to transfuse plasma.

          The old bearded general really left the country not only his merits, but also his gene pool. good In the town of Lomonosov (formerly Oranienbaum), commemorative plaques were installed on the house where the general and his son lived. Filmed by my bride at my request, August 29, 2020. drinks

          one of the founders of the Russian school of gunsmiths

          Rather like that. Nikolai Mikhailovich "stood behind their backs." He noticed the talented, and ensured their activity - "took it under the beard"! soldier
          Hero of Labor, by the way.

          It's more difficult here. Yuri, I devoted a lot of my attention to Filatov, so I will say the following. drinks
          In Internet articles, this idea wanders, from article to article - they say, he received the title of "Hero of Labor". I couldn't find any links to the document! request
          So I think "the devil is in the details." Look at this photo from Wikipedia - Filatov.

          What's on his chest? wink
          This is the Order of the Red Banner of Labor of the RSFSR. And there is an inscription on it - "Hero of Labor". soldier

          Further my thoughts. hi A certain journalist, making the first article about Filatov, equated the inscription on this order with the title of Hero of Labor. From there, it went for a walk in the media, from article to article. what
          But that doesn't change absolutely anything! stop Nikolay Mikhailovich:
          1. was the first in the country who created a normal shooting theory (his last instruction came out in 1944, already long after his death!),
          2. shoveled all the armored cars entering service with the army during the First World War,
          3. proposed weapons that lasted more than 25 years on domestic armored vehicles - the 76,2-mm "short cannon", gave his full patronage to the introduction of automatic weapons in the army (and its designers!),
          4. he himself developed at least two types of armored cars.
          4. and during the time of the Soviets - commanded the courses "Shot". All those who studied there, then broke the back of the hitherto "invincible" Wehrmacht! angry
          The old general did everything he could ... But few remember him .... Thank you for your comment! drinks
          If you are interested - this is about Oranienbaum of the time of Peter III:
          https://topwar.ru/158768-petershtadt-broshennaja-igrushka-petra-iii.html
          1. Doctor
            Doctor 5 December 2020 22: 42
            +1
            Further my thoughts. hi A certain journalist, making the first article about Filatov, equated the inscription on this order with the title of Hero of Labor. From there, it went for a walk in the media, from article to article. what

            As I understand it, "Hero of Labor" is a TITLE established in 1927.
            At first there was no special sign, but later (from 1938) it turned into a Hero of Socialist Labor with the presentation of a star.

            Filatov received the title, along with other decisions of the Central Executive Committee of January 2, 1928 (on the eve of the first five-year plan).
            Together with the more famous gunsmith Fedorov, by the way!


            - The first Hero of Labor by the decision of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR on January 2, 1928 was a worker of the Vladimir textile factory "Paris Commune" N.A.Bushuev, who gave the enterprise 50 years of working life;
            - VM Fedorov - model designer of the Borisoglebsk car-repair plant - for numerous rationalization proposals and 40 years of work experience;
            - P. Kh. Starovatov (1873-1957) - teacher (Vilyuisk) - for his success in teaching;
            - M. Kh. Kurbangaleev (1873-1941) - teacher (Tatar ASSR) - for compiling more than 50 textbooks in the Tatar language ...
            - MF Rosenberg (1861-1928) - engineer of the Design Bureau of the Artillery Committee "for many years and useful activity in the construction of the country's Armed Forces";
            - V.G. Fedorov (1874-1966) - lieutenant general of the engineering and technical service, designer of the world's first machine gun and director of the first Soviet plant that produced these weapons;
            - N.M. Filatov (1870-1935) - lieutenant general of the tsarist army, scientist in the field of shooting from small arms;
            - N.P. Tsitovich - major general of the tsarist army, military engineer-technologist, senior teacher of the VTA RKKA them. F.E. Dzerzhinsky.


            Therefore, I completely agree! drinks
            But that doesn't change absolutely anything! stop
            1. Pane Kohanku
              Pane Kohanku 7 December 2020 09: 25
              +1
              Together with the more famous gunsmith Fedorov, by the way!

              Please give me a link to the document - where did you get this from. yes I need! wink Thank you heartfelt! drinks
  3. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 4 December 2020 04: 57
    +6
    Thanks Vyacheslav Olegovich!
    If I honestly do not believe in the correction of criminals who have committed intentional grave and especially grave crimes against life and health. Only fear for their own lives can stop them.
    "An eye for an eye".
    All the good days!
  4. Korsar4
    Korsar4 4 December 2020 07: 18
    +5
    The figure of Pobedonostsev is not so unambiguous. As far as I understand, he was Leo Tolstoy's prototype for Karenin.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 4 December 2020 07: 34
      +7
      His wife, too, threw herself under the train?
      1. Korsar4
        Korsar4 4 December 2020 07: 59
        +7
        No. The wife was much younger. And my husband was well treated.
        They say that she even picked up dresses "for Anna Karenina."
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 4 December 2020 08: 09
          +6
          It's funny, she apparently had a rich imagination. And she didn't like going to train stations?
          1. Korsar4
            Korsar4 4 December 2020 08: 13
            +7
            I like the stations myself. You look in Vladivostok - as if you never left your native Yaroslavl in Moscow.
            1. Catfish
              Catfish 4 December 2020 09: 23
              +5
              Love for railway stations, it is different for everyone, I doubt that at the sight of a steam locomotive you will have an irresistible desire to jump on the rails.
              Well, for me it was always the "muse of distant wanderings", as Ilf and Petrov described "the duties of a passenger" there. smile
              1. Korsar4
                Korsar4 4 December 2020 09: 52
                +6
                No. The Darwin Prize is not one worth fighting for.
                Not all the children are on their feet yet.
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish 4 December 2020 10: 00
                  +5
                  And I'm not conceited either.
        2. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 4 December 2020 21: 00
          +3
          Good evening everyone. I got lost and only now remembered about the site.
          "I even picked up dresses for:" Anna Karenina ", if she put on a dress like Karenina's does not mean that she is also Karenina. After the release of the novel, from the press, Anna Karenina instantly became popular and therefore Mrs Pobedonostseva imitated her
          1. Korsar4
            Korsar4 4 December 2020 21: 05
            +3
            On the contrary, many found Karenin's features in Pobedonostsev. And Catherine thus "teased".
      2. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 16
        +2
        His wife, too, threw herself under the train?

        under an armored train. When the estate was burned by the revolutionary masses in half with the sailors. Joke. tongue drinks
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 5 December 2020 16: 16
          +1
          Yes, they kicked her off, it didn't work out to suicide. laughing
  5. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 4 December 2020 07: 54
    +12
    Only a few of this "spiritual elite of society" went over to the side of the victorious workers and peasants in Russia. Someone the winners simply finished off in the basement, someone died of hunger, and the majority fled abroad, or they were taken there by the "professorship".

    Generally not a "professorial ship", but a "philosophical" one. The country only became healthier from this. That is, talkers went, including Ilyin, an admirer of Nazism. And of the 45 Russian academicians who were in 1917, 38 remained in the country, including the head of the Academy of Sciences A.P. Karpinsky, Nobel laureate I.P. Pavlov, shipbuilder A.N. Krylov, mineralogist A.I. Fersman, mathematician V.A. Steklov and others. In they were the elite.
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 4 December 2020 08: 42
      +5
      Fersman became an academician in 1919
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 4 December 2020 09: 11
        +8
        Thanks for the clarification. This does not change the general meaning of the comment. Compared to the post-Soviet era, one is amazed at the deeds of the "bloody Bolsheviks" - in 1918, the State Optical Institute (GOI) was founded in May, TsAGI in December, and one of the sailors who stormed the Winter Palace (I.F.Petrov) became the founder and the first rector of MIPT.
    2. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 4 December 2020 10: 50
      +7
      Quote: Aviator_
      Generally not a "professorial ship", but a "philosophical" one.

      Scientists, the Bolsheviks, just gave out "the academic ration, which existed in 1919-1923 as a regular monthly natural free allowance for scientists from the Soviet government, was also issued to representatives of literature and art: writers, poets, artists and artists."
      His diet is also posted online, you won't die of hunger, at least hi
    3. Undecim
      Undecim 4 December 2020 14: 07
      +7
      And of the 45 Russian academicians who were in 1917, 38 remained in the country, including the head of the Academy of Sciences A.P. Karpinsky, Nobel laureate I.P. Pavlov, shipbuilder A.N. Krylov, mineralogist A.I. Fersman, mathematician V.A. Steklov and others. In they were the elite.
      You were in a hurry with conclusions. Not all were enrolled in the "elite". And those enrolled in the elite had a disturbing dream. Have you heard about the "case of academicians"?
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 4 December 2020 14: 48
        +8
        Well, there was also the "Case of the Industrial Party", where a lot of prominent engineers were slapped, who decided that the whole country owes them for being so smart. In particular, Professor Ramzin has earned himself the highest measure of social protection. But he was forgiven, taught at MEI for a long time. Tupolev was still that gentleman, at the end of the 20s he came out dry from the water, and in the late 30s he went to the sharaga, moreover, to work. At that time there was a strong demand for the money spent.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 4 December 2020 14: 59
          +5
          Don't juggle. We're talking about academics.
          If you want to talk about aviation - then the question. How do you explain the fact that, for example, the American aircraft industry in the pre-war years was head and shoulders above the Soviet, while in the United States there was not a single sharaga. It turns out that American aircraft designers were more conscientious and strengthened the defense capability of their American homeland with shock capitalist labor without methods of coercion, while the Soviet ones, "still a bar", needed such a progressive method of stimulating scientific and technical activity as "sharaga". Moreover, practically everything.
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 4 December 2020 15: 09
            +3
            How do you explain the fact that, for example, the American aircraft industry in the pre-war years was head and shoulders above the Soviet, while in the United States there was not a single sharaga.

            I once tried to publish my old work on the VO "America is the motherland of the beggars" about the creation of a 400-horsepower Liberty aircraft engine in six months, but the moderators found this article irrelevant. This work was written by me for "Duel" more than 20 years ago, take a look if you are interested. As for the American aircraft industry of the 30s - yes, given the level of American industry, this is obvious, in "Russia that we have lost" (according to Govorukhin) we had to resort to extreme measures, especially since their effectiveness is the USA (as the United States was then called) and demonstrated. That's how I explain - when they needed it, they used sharashki, and when we needed it, we did it.
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 4 December 2020 15: 35
              +9
              I am very familiar with both the operation and functions of the Aircraft Production Board and the history of the Liberty L-12 engine. This process has nothing in common with the Soviet sharaga and there is no need to compare these "measures".
              I, in fact, where I am leading. As soon as in some of the articles the topic of the USSR arises, as soon as under it a srach begins, in which the truth interests no one. One litigant side proves that everything was good there, the other that it was bad. And thanks to such "historians" as Samsonov, who today issued another "shchedever" about the USSR on the mountain, and thanks to attempts to pull an owl onto the globe, telling that America is the birthplace of sharags, soon no one will know the real history of this country (USSR) ...
              1. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 4 December 2020 17: 19
                +3
                This process has nothing in common with the Soviet sharaga, and there is no need to compare these "measures".

                thanks to attempts to pull an owl on the globe, telling that America is the birthplace of sharags,

                We are not considering Samson's opus. This is Shpakovsky's opus, and even we do not consider it here. Don't jump off. Are you interested in the truth yourself? Not very similar. Why not compare them? And how are these sharashki fundamentally different? Only by the fact that the USA had to be listed as the winners in WWII, and for our country there was a question about its existence with the steadily approaching WWII. Well, our "innocently repressed" behaved almost the same way, plaguing a heap of paper in mutual denunciations. Therefore, the only difference I see is that the Americans who got into their sharaga did not write denunciations.
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 4 December 2020 18: 08
                  +4
                  Are you interested in the truth yourself? Not very similar.
                  You just very clearly confirmed what I said above. Since I doubted the presence of sharashki in America, it means that the truth does not interest me, because they cannot not be there.
                  Therefore, we will declare a five-day stay of two designers in a hotel as a sharaga, and whoever does not believe, we will declare that a liberal and an enemy of truth.
                  How many sharashki were there in America, according to your information?
                2. kalibr
                  4 December 2020 21: 10
                  +4
                  Quote: Aviator_
                  Therefore, the only difference I see is that the Americans who got into their sharaga did not write denunciations.

                  But they were written by citizens of the world's first state of workers and peasants, the new historical community of people, the Soviet people, the bearer of all conceivable virtues, the builder of a new society. And there - people are wolves, the cult of money, individualism. And they didn’t write ... well, you bastards. And I have a question: was the American sharaga enclosed with barbed wire or not?
                  1. Aviator_
                    Aviator_ 4 December 2020 21: 23
                    0
                    But they were written by citizens of the world's first state of workers and peasants, the new historical community of people, the Soviet people, the bearer of all conceivable virtues, the builder of a new society.

                    The classic set of incantations of the professional propagandist of Marxism-Leninism. Vyacheslav, well, you can't substitute yourself like that. Is this Tupolev the "builder of a new society"? He is a builder your new plane, moreover, crushing all competitors, in particular, Ilyushin, whose TsKB-30 managed to receive funding only after showing it to Stalin at the May Day parade. Ultimately, the IL-4 came out of it, and fought the entire war.
                3. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 4 December 2020 21: 22
                  +2
                  Aviator, to you ++: "exhausting a bunch of paper in mutual denunciations" I have a difficult attitude to Stalin, it is rightly said about him: "there was a cult, but there was a personality" (I keep forgetting whose words these are), but if you justly understand, then some of the executed it is necessary to write on the conscience of those who, after 1956, venerated Stalin in everything.
                  Stalin had neither education nor time to delve into the denunciations of designers.
                  Only history has shown: he really did business, and who did stupidity. After all, "Lysenkoism" is nonsense. In fact, Lysenko had nothing to do with designers, but I just remember him as an example of anti-scientific
                  1. Korsar4
                    Korsar4 4 December 2020 22: 02
                    +1
                    I wouldn't be so categorical about Trofim Denisovich.
                    The theory of stages - entered the theory of biology.

                    The practical results were no less than those of N.I. Vavilov, for example.

                    The era does not come off. And many then worked more professionally than now.
                  2. Phil77
                    Phil77 4 December 2020 22: 56
                    +1
                    Vera: Are you familiar with the works of Academician Lysenko T.D.? I am not. Therefore, I will not undertake to discuss his person. Not by rank, and not by knowledge. hi
                  3. Phil77
                    Phil77 4 December 2020 22: 59
                    +1
                    Quote: Astra wild2
                    anti-scientific

                    Magazine * Ogonyok *? Korotich's time? Well, well. what
                    1. Korsar4
                      Korsar4 4 December 2020 23: 06
                      +1
                      But White Clothes is an interesting book. But the conclusions from this can be drawn in different directions.
                      1. Phil77
                        Phil77 5 December 2020 00: 52
                        +1
                        Hi Sergey, I read it, but ... a long time ago.
                      2. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 5 December 2020 07: 07
                        +1
                        There are good pages there. And a lot.

                        By the way, Leonov's “Russian Forest” - some wonderful pages for me. And some are ambiguous. "Thief", for example, liked it better.
                      3. Phil77
                        Phil77 5 December 2020 07: 18
                        +1
                        Quote: Korsar4
                        Leonova

                        Good morning! Somehow it happened that, to my shame, Leonid Leonov * passed * by me. Well, I need to get acquainted.
                        Thank you, Sergey, for the tip!
                      4. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 5 December 2020 07: 22
                        +1
                        Good morning, Seryozha!

                        The Lazy Reading List is Pyramid. But not in the forefront.

                        It is probably indicative that the famous breeder Kolesnikov named one of the varieties of lilacs in honor of Leonov. The lilac is beautiful.
              2. Astra wild2
                Astra wild2 5 December 2020 14: 28
                +2
                Quote: Phil77
                Quote: Astra wild2
                anti-scientific

                Magazine * Ogonyok *? Korotich's time? Well, well. what

                We were wrong - not "Ogonyok", but from school, in 10th we were told about "anti-scientific" and the party that "condemned and corrected mistakes."
                I was brought up to believe in the CPSU and trust in Soviet journalism.
                I suspect that you were taught that way.
                1. Phil77
                  Phil77 5 December 2020 15: 23
                  0
                  Quote: Astra wild2
                  I was brought up to believe in the CPSU and trust in Soviet journalism.
                  I suspect that you were taught that way.

                  Yes, it somehow passed by. You can probably say a lot about trust in journalism, but why? Who believes, who does not, everyone's private business. I am not going to campaign either.
                2. Phil77
                  Phil77 5 December 2020 15: 31
                  0
                  Quote: Astra wild2
                  , and from school, in 10th we were told about "anti-scientific" and the party that "condemned and corrected mistakes.

                  Well, now you can listen to the opinion of professionals, no? And it, as Sergei correctly noted, is ambiguous.
                  Quote: Astra wild2
                  CPSU

                  Oh, again you about the sad. laughing
            2. Phil77
              Phil77 5 December 2020 07: 32
              +1
              Quote: Astra wild2
              there was a cult, but there was a personality "(I keep forgetting whose words these are),

              M. A. Sholokhov According to some sources. hi
    4. Astra wild2
      Astra wild2 4 December 2020 21: 05
      +2
      Viktor Nikolaevich, the question is rather snide
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 4 December 2020 21: 30
        +4
        There is no malice in my question. The man wrote the article "America is the homeland of the beauties." What do you think, is it possible to write such an article without knowing the number, at least approximate, of the conditions of stay and without references to more or less worthy sources? And what is the value of such a scripture?
  6. kalibr
    4 December 2020 15: 46
    +3
    Quote: Aviator_
    who decided that the whole country owes them for being so smart.

    And who made the right decision, by the way! And why did they give academicians one hectare of land for a summer residence? Well, and other blessings ... To appease so that ... Like, our workers 'and peasants' government appreciates you. Why did the associate professors, teachers of the history of the CPSU, have admission to the special clinic of the OK and RK KPSS? All for the same thing - for the loyalty of the native party. And the hard workers and the usual clinic were enough. There were many of them.
  • Aviator_
    Aviator_ 4 December 2020 15: 01
    +4
    I was in no hurry with conclusions. The "elite" were those who honestly worked for the good of the country. Graftio, (academician since 1932), Rozhdestvensky D.S. (academician since 1929). We can continue further.
  • Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 4 December 2020 08: 20
    +5
    Domestic industry developed very well under him, for which we should say thanks to his finance ministers (N. Kh. Bunge, I. A. Vyshnegradskii and S. Yu. Witte).

    But in this article it is completely different
    Restrictions on education for members of various ethnic and social groups directly impacted the economic development of the country. Instead of creating comprehensive conditions for improving the literacy of the population, obtaining secondary and higher education, especially in the technical areas in demand, the authorities artificially conserved the outdated social order, prevented vertical social mobility, and tried to keep peasants and bourgeois in a lowered social position and prevent them promotion to any significant position. It is clear that the ruling elite feared for their position, sought to maintain the maximum of their privileges, while not possessing political foresight and the ability to predict further developments. Thirty years later, she lost everything.
    https://topwar.ru/151658-cirkuljar-o-kuharkinyh-detjah-pravda-i-vymysel.html

    A controversial figure, this Alexander III in general hi
    1. kalibr
      4 December 2020 08: 47
      +4
      But here we are talking about different things ...
    2. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 4 December 2020 11: 03
      +12
      Any historical figure is controversial.
      But if we talk about the economic policy of the Peacemaker, the main definition will be - protectionism. And he played his part.
      the policy of protectionism played an important role in the sharp acceleration of industrial growth in Russia at the end of the 10th century. In just 1887 years (1897-13), industrial production in the country doubled. For 1887 years - from 1900 to 5 - the production of pig iron in Russia increased almost 5 times, steel - also almost 4 times, oil - 3,5 times, coal - 2 times, sugar - 1890 times ... The construction of railways proceeded at an unprecedented pace. At the end of the 5s. annually, about XNUMX thousand kilometers of railway tracks were put into operation.
  • Olgovich
    Olgovich 4 December 2020 08: 28
    +2
    But the short-sighted rapprochement with France and penetration into Manchuria in the future led to a war with Japan and the Triple Alliance.

    If Russia had not "penetrated" for a thousand years to the South, North, West and East (while having dozens of wars with various Japan and tees), it would have remained within the "Golden Ring".

    The foresight of rapprochement with France - with the aim of stopping the inevitable aggression of Germany - is proved by the cardinal difference between the situations of 1914 and 1941

    .
    And so he just had to reap the fruits of all the past "imperfections" and unresolved problems of previous reigns

    I wonder if there has ever been at least one country in the world with incomplete work done and all problems solved? belay
    1. kalibr
      4 December 2020 08: 40
      +10
      Quote: Olgovich
      I wonder if there has ever been at least one country in the world with incomplete work done and all problems solved?

      No, of course, but only Nikolai was not the figure to successfully cope with them.
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 4 December 2020 18: 39
        +1
        Vyacheslav Olegovich, thanks for the material!
        You, for an hour, do not remind which of the offspring of Alexander lll could cope with such a problem?
        1. kalibr
          4 December 2020 18: 43
          +3
          Anton, I wrote that I am a very narrow specialist. On each chosen topic, I first read literature and quite a lot, then I write. I started reading about this in July, even at the dacha. And now it was embodied in several texts. Step to the left, to the right - and there is just zero. I don't even know how many children he had ...
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 4 December 2020 18: 56
            +2
            Vyacheslav Olegovich, excuse me, please! But, polemic, this is such a "corrupt girl of world imperialism" that I have no choice. Either love her, or continue to play joking. Which aspect of mine do you like best?
            1. kalibr
              4 December 2020 18: 59
              +3
              Anton, I don't quite understand what you mean, your comments are interesting to read. They see intelligence and culture. It's nice to communicate with such a person. Something I don't quite understand, but that's okay. Somewhere you me, but that's okay too.
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 4 December 2020 19: 10
                +5
                I meant that I often disagree with you in assessing our common Soviet past, but this does not negate my respect for you, your work and your achievements.
                1. kalibr
                  4 December 2020 19: 22
                  +2
                  Anton! What does it matter. For example, I am amazed by your knowledge of poetry and literature. And then I have my own life experience, you have yours. Here it is necessary, in my opinion, to recall Kipling's "Ballad of the West and the East". "What a tribe, homeland, clan, when one is strong and face to face against the other." And there are always differences and always will be.
  • KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 4 December 2020 08: 52
    +9
    For some reason Pobedonostsev reminded Suslov ... And the emperor's wife was a beauty. He was a good emperor, sorry he reigned a little. And the liberals? Well, the liberals, they always line the road to a bad place with good intentions, they throw ideas into the furnace, they think about Russia, they root for the people, and then Russia and the people spit blood.
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 4 December 2020 09: 01
      +10
      For some reason, Pobedonostsev Suslov recalled ...
      Suslov was called so - "Pobedonostsev of the Soviet Union".
  • bober1982
    bober1982 4 December 2020 09: 37
    +2
    Alexander III could not destroy the liberal infection, he just drove them underground. Already in his reign, Russia was a kind of powder keg. And, only the strong will of the tsar restrained the catastrophe, after his death, this very barrel jerked.
  • Senior seaman
    Senior seaman 4 December 2020 10: 54
    +7
    In general, rapprochement with France was an absolutely correct decision, albeit somewhat belated. And the fact that Alexander Alexandrovich was able to decide on this step, throwing into the furnace a mossy and long-standing alliance with Germany and Austria characterizes him as a person capable of making reasonable decisions.
    We like to shed crocodile tears about the "dominance of French capital", but traditionally they forget that this very capital helped to slip out of the much closer stranglehold of German capital. Sobsno, even a united Germany as such did not exist, and the North German Union viewed Russia as nothing more than its raw material appendage and sales market.
  • BAI
    BAI 4 December 2020 11: 25
    +4
    no one will wash the floors in their mansions for them, they will not have either servants or cooks. We ourselves will have to heat the stoves and wash the linen, and with our feet, and not in a cab, stomp on lectures in "proletarian universities", give lectures to future "red directors". This is precisely the result of the "underground" existence of liberalism.

    Is it good or bad?
    1. Konstantin Shevchenko
      Konstantin Shevchenko 4 December 2020 12: 14
      0
      This is bad. I mean, not the end of liberalism, but impoverishment.
    2. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 4 December 2020 13: 54
      +6
      Is it good or bad?
      Neither one nor the other. For the quote given is not true.
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 4 December 2020 18: 27
        +3
        Hmmm ... Pluses threw in ... And for what?
        1. Korsar4
          Korsar4 4 December 2020 19: 36
          +4
          Maybe for charisma?
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 4 December 2020 19: 42
            +3
            Yes, I have a wide "charisma"!
            1. Korsar4
              Korsar4 4 December 2020 19: 45
              +4
              This is already a matter of individual preference.
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 4 December 2020 19: 50
                +3
                Exactly!
                "And what, comrade, with a lean hare,
                Do you think about the taste of "Rama"? "(S)
                1. Korsar4
                  Korsar4 4 December 2020 20: 57
                  +3
                  “All Icebergs, Weisbergs, Eisenbergs” (c).
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 4 December 2020 21: 16
                    +4
                    "Dr. Boone and Alperovich, Regelman, Gilgof, N. Lvovich, Gur-Arie, Simuni, Lechtser with Rohman, What is not a healer is a Jew, Shtilbans, Zuses and Paley, Rosenbaum, Shnol and Kogan with Hoffman." (FROM)
                    1. Korsar4
                      Korsar4 4 December 2020 21: 22
                      +3
                      “Two steps to the left,
                      Two steps to the right "(c).
                      1. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 4 December 2020 21: 29
                        +3
                        Change motion vectors ... And there will be tango!
                      2. Pane Kohanku
                        Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 34
                        +2
                        Change motion vectors ... And there will be tango!

                        Personally, you will have bachata ... wink
                      3. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 4 December 2020 21: 48
                        +2
                        "Hopak is not in vogue these days" (c).
      2. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 19
        +4
        Hmmm ... Pluses threw in ... And for what?

        I threw one, despite the fact that you are a bastard, and dazibao is crying about your hairy ass. angry But you are my friend, and I love you without any homosexuality. tongue Is that okay for you, Golden Knight? drinks
        1. Korsar4
          Korsar4 4 December 2020 21: 23
          +3
          And a saucer of milk is also supposed to creep.
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 30
            +2
            And a saucer of milk is also supposed to creep.

            Sergei, this one quite moves on foot laughing For those who are crawling at their feet, I don’t pour, because they already feel good and enough, because they don’t stand on their feet. wink And to him - please! drinks
            1. Korsar4
              Korsar4 4 December 2020 21: 52
              +3
              "I don't walk at all, I crawl!" (from).
        2. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 4 December 2020 21: 34
          +2
          No, it won't. Nobody, behind the bustle, asked: what was it "joking" with the author (so dear to him), disagree?
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku 4 December 2020 21: 37
            +1
            Nobody, behind the bustle, asked: what was it "joking" with the author (so dear to him), disagree?

            Sorry, should we judge you for your own opinion? request I even do not understand ... Is this punishable? drinks
        3. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 4 December 2020 21: 44
          +2
          despite the fact that you are a bastard
          I warned you three years ago.
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku 5 December 2020 20: 45
            +1
            I warned you three years ago.

            and until recently, for some reason, I hoped for the best ... tongue
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 5 December 2020 20: 51
              +2
              Another time I will come in a suit, with a tie, I will drink mineral water and talk about a comparative analysis of the works of Kusturitsi and Pavic. I will probably live up to your hopes ...
  • EVDmitri
    EVDmitri 4 December 2020 11: 33
    0
    Already the liberals' insults against Alexander Alexandrovich, and especially the fact that he was missed in the list of Russian rulers demonstrated by the Yeltsin Center, indicate that Emperor Alexander III was one of the most outstanding sovereigns in the history of our country!
    Any person should understand this, even if he does not know history well.
    Alas, there are spots on the Sun too ... The Emperor allowed a rapprochement with France, which subsequently cost the Empire dearly. Most likely, the alliance with the Gauls is a consequence of Alexander Alexandrovich's love for his Danish wife, who fiercely hated the Prussians. I could not resist women's tears ...
    1. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 4 December 2020 12: 27
      +1
      Quote: EVDmitri
      and especially the fact that he was missed in the list of Russian rulers shown by the Yeltsin Center,

      Cho, you really missed it? Yes nuna ... funny. check.
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 4 December 2020 13: 44
      +7
      Quote: EVDmitri
      Already the liberals' insults against Alexander Alexandrovich, and especially the fact that he was missed in the list of Russian rulers demonstrated by the Yeltsin Center, indicate that Emperor Alexander III was one of the most outstanding sovereigns in the history of our country!

      Okay so ...
      I have not been to the Yeltsin Center, but now I will know what is our main criterion for determining the greatness of a historical figure ... wassat
      Quote: EVDmitri
      Any person should understand this, even if he does not know history well.

      And if it's good? Those who know history poorly - it is understandable, they understand what they are told and how they will be told. And what about those who know the story better and their opinions differ from yours? To whom and what do they owe?
      So I, for example, read your comment and realized that I should consider Alexander III a great sovereign only on the basis that he is not mentioned in the Yeltsin Center, and it is should and nothing else. Although I personally, possessing a much larger amount of information about this ruler than his absence in the pantheon of this center, I consider him to be very mediocre and even mediocre. It was he who directed Russia along a path that could not end in anything but a bloody bacchanalia of three wars and three revolutions in twenty years.
      With his stupid policy, he turned a patriotic intelligentsia into a revolutionary one. If during the reign of his father radical political ideas in a decent society were considered marginal and rejected, then thanks to his efforts they became popular and in demand, and gained many supporters.
      Preserving and even multiplying the breeding ground for the development of social democratic ideas, he punitively drove these ideas under the plinth, "teaching" the revolutionaries methods of underground work and conspiracy, turning them from complacent talkers and disinterested romantics like Grinevitsky into cunning, toothy and cohesive predators, welded together by their own perfectly developed IDEA. It was he who gave them weapons and taught them how to use these weapons.
      His father, noticing rats in his kitchen, began to move furniture (rats ran, of course!) And carry out total deratization, the same one pushed the furniture back and began to run around the kitchen with a gun, shooting at those who leaned out. As a result, the rats bred, fed, grew fangs, learned to hide, and act in an organized manner. So it is not surprising that at the first opportunity they simultaneously crawled out of all the holes, took the gun from the owner, and ate him himself.
      Alexander, of course, also had bright ideas, such as a peasant land bank, but this is rather an exception than a rule.
      It seems that in 1881, after the refined intellectual Alexander II with his "bingerle" by mutual agreement, a drunken sergeant-major came to power and began unsuccessfully to try to rip off everyone in a knee-elbow position. I emphasize - unsuccessfully.
      1. EVDmitri
        EVDmitri 4 December 2020 14: 20
        -1
        Understanding and counting are, you see, still different categories, no? One small change in quotation leads to the wrong conclusions.
        The refined intellectual of Alexander II (was he really such a refined intellectual?) Was blown up, to his great regret, by the very liberals whom he so lovingly nurtured during his reign. Is this not a lesson for the heir? And why did they blow it up?
        1. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master 4 December 2020 17: 09
          +3
          Quote: EVDmitri
          Understanding and counting are, you see, still different categories, no?

          No.
          If I understand that some concepts are identical, I consider them identical.
          Quote: EVDmitri
          One small change in quotation leads to the wrong conclusions.

          "Understand" that someone is one
          Quote: EVDmitri
          of the most prominent sovereigns in the history of our country
          or consider someone the same in my opinion, the same thing. Or do you admit a construction when you can "understand" but not "count"? Personally, such a split personality is alien to me.
          Quote: EVDmitri
          liberals, whom he so lovingly nurtured into his rule

          Even if we consider the Narodnaya Volya liberals (for example), to reproach Alexander II for the fact that he "raised" them, in my opinion, is beyond the brink of primitivism. Alexander's liberal reforms were aimed at de-radicalizing the intelligentsia and successfully coped with their task.
          I hope you do not consider the word "intelligentsia" abusive and offensive and realize that it is this stratum of society that determines the direction of development of this society as a whole. Officers in the army, and civil servants, scientists, public and religious figures, artists, writers, poets - all these come from the intelligentsia.
          So, feeling that this very intelligentsia during the reign of Nicholas I began to massively lean towards ideas about the need for immediate revolutionary transformations in Russia, Alexander II carried out reforms, thanks to which the most prudent part of the intelligentsia again turned to face the state, thereby significantly reducing the social voltage. The radicals, of course, remained the implacable enemies of the authorities, but that is why they are radicals.
          With his counter-reforms, Alexander III again exacerbated all the contradictions that his father had smoothed out, plus, with his active repressions, he forced the revolutionaries to go underground, i.e. completely get out of legal public life, and hence from the control of the state. Moreover, their number has increased sharply again. And this allowed them, in their confined space, without outside influence, to finally form and hone their radical revolutionary ideas, to put them under a theoretical basis (it was Marxism) and, thanks to pressure from law enforcement agencies, to develop effective tactics of confronting the authorities, to create a structured, flexible and a controlled organization, to which the authorities in twenty years had nothing but brute force (the army and the Cossacks), could not oppose, and after another ten years it (power) was deprived of this force.
          Here he is your "one of the most" that has done.
          Well, now tell me what do you think Alexander III did to consider him an outstanding ruler? Well, besides the fact that he was not included in the "list of the Yeltsin Center." smile
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 4 December 2020 18: 17
            +4
            I would also add the extreme neglect of the penitentiary system, in which the community opposed to the authorities could gain experience of underground activities from criminals.
            1. Trilobite Master
              Trilobite Master 4 December 2020 19: 25
              +5
              It seems to me that, all other things being equal, the more effective the law enforcement system, the fewer prohibitions it contains, but the stricter the punishment for violating them. Now I don’t want to touch upon the principle of inevitability, and the inadmissibility of replacing one punishment with another, they are mandatory in any system.
              With regard to the topic of discussion, it may look like this: you cannot punish meetings, political slogans, criticism of the authorities, in short, for a talking shop. But as soon as the talking shop comes to calls for extrajudicial violence or, even more so, to actions in this direction - the reaction should be as fast and tough as possible, up to the death penalty.
              Remember the movie "Say a Word About Poor Hussar"?

              It is for the conclusions that you need to punish, and the rest is harmless.
              In the Russian Empire, everything was strictly the opposite. They could be equally punished for criticizing the authorities, organizing meetings, trade unions, and for preparing an attempt on the life of the mayor or calling for the overthrow of the government. And for the Jewish pogroms they could not be punished at all.
              And to what clever head did it come to the idea that the political ones should be expelled? The political ones, those who "draw conclusions" should be kept alone in complete isolation.
              But I have few complaints about the penitentiary system itself. The need to keep together political and criminals was due to the imperfection of the judicial system.
              Having a large number of carriers of forbidden ideas due to an ill-conceived policy of counter-reforms and an essentially flawed system of punishments, we automatically receive a large number of sentences under political articles. What to do with the convicts? And their number increases from year to year, and the size of the prisons is still the same.
              A young free-thinker, who, in a good way, would kick his ass with rods and let go, gets into shipment, where a seasoned wolf, savvy and theoretically prepared, convinced, able to persuade and know, falls into his company with five or six of the same "fiery fighters" your goal. As a result, we have at the exit plus one or two no longer young free-thinkers, but beaten and grated convinced revolutionaries who have already suffered from power.
              According to the mind, these young free-thinkers should not be imprisoned at all, and the seasoned wolf should be kept alone, and if possible, it would be better to hang at all.
              But there were too many of them. The penitentiary system was simply overloaded, and therefore turned into a forge of revolutionary cadres.
              1. kalibr
                4 December 2020 21: 04
                +5
                I completely agree with everything that you have written, Mikhail. For only one membership in the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the RSDLP, the death penalty, failure to report - 10 years of hard labor (for a report 3 years without taxes!) And nothing would have happened! But then we did not understand what we understand. And not even we, but YOU, and many still do not understand ...
                1. Trilobite Master
                  Trilobite Master 4 December 2020 21: 49
                  +2
                  For membership, I would not have executed, especially since it was not the RSDLP or even the Socialist-Revolutionaries who destroyed the Empire. Criminal punishment, especially the death penalty, should be imposed for specific cases - actions that infringe on the foundations of the state system or calls for such actions. Moreover, these appeals should not be figurative, like "call Russia to the ax!", But specific - the murder of an official, expropriation, an attack on a prison with the aim of freeing a criminal, etc. But here it is to react extremely harshly - to huddle everyone: both performers, and instigators, and accomplices, and non-carriers, and here it’s not skimp on terms, then it will be more expensive. Well, as it goes, someone can be killed in prison, although it is better, of course, without such tricks.
            2. kalibr
              4 December 2020 19: 25
              +3
              Oh yeah! My daughter had an article about what RI was in this regard - based on documents from that time. Continuous darkness. % of the criminal experience of the population went off scale!
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 4 December 2020 19: 40
                +3
                And has something changed over the next 50-60 years? No! The Soviet government continued to delightfully follow the same rake, romanticizing crime through the intelligentsia. As a result, the "holy nineties" happened.
                1. kalibr
                  4 December 2020 19: 59
                  +3
                  Yes exactly. And we generally have a tradition of stepping on garden tools ... By the way, that article was called: "A country where nothing changes!"
  • kalibr
    4 December 2020 15: 30
    +5
    Quote: EVDmitri
    blew up, to his great regret, the same liberals

    Is it?
  • samarin1969
    samarin1969 4 December 2020 20: 32
    0
    Vasily Osipovich and the respected Mr. Shpakovsky had and still have reasons to smear Alexander III. But, objectively, this is one of the best rulers of Russia, along with Ivan the Terrible and Nikolai Pavlovich.
    1. kalibr
      4 December 2020 20: 59
      +4
      Quote: samarin1969
      respected Mr. Shpakovsky, there were and are reasons to denigrate Alexander III

      Well, you, Constantine, give ... to denigrate Alexander the third ... reasons. Lord! Where did you see the blackening?
      1. samarin1969
        samarin1969 4 December 2020 21: 35
        +2
        Quote: kalibr
        Quote: samarin1969
        respected Mr. Shpakovsky, there were and are reasons to denigrate Alexander III

        Well, you, Constantine, give ... to denigrate Alexander the third ... reasons. Lord! Where did you see the blackening?


        Not for me, of course, to argue with you. But Klyuchevsky's quote and the "imperfections" cause me to disagree.
        Alexander III left the country with an advanced fleet, an unrivaled rate of industrial and transport development, strangled by revolutionaries, and a remarkable financial and tax system.
        Even the democrat Witte is more objective in his assessments of the Tsar than the liberal historian Klyuchevsky. The tragedy of 1917, which we will disentangle until now, is not Alexander III's "imperfections", but Nikolai Alexandrovich's "rest of nature".
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 4 December 2020 21: 02
      +4
      Quote: samarin1969
      Vasily Osipovich and the respected Mr. Shpakovsky had and still have reasons to smear Alexander III.

      Not to denigrate, but to criticize for the mistakes made.
      Quote: samarin1969
      objectively, this is one of the best rulers of Russia, along with Ivan the Terrible and Nikolai Pavlovich.

      About Ivan the Terrible a separate conversation. But I am extremely interested in what gives you grounds to put Nicholas I and Alexander III on a par with him?
      Two surprisingly mediocre rulers, who together pushed the Russian Empire to its bloody end. Only Nicholas II tried more than them for this.
      1. samarin1969
        samarin1969 4 December 2020 21: 52
        0
        Quote: Trilobite Master
        Quote: samarin1969
        Vasily Osipovich and the respected Mr. Shpakovsky had and still have reasons to smear Alexander III.

        Not to denigrate, but to criticize for the mistakes made.
        Quote: samarin1969
        objectively, this is one of the best rulers of Russia, along with Ivan the Terrible and Nikolai Pavlovich.

        About Ivan the Terrible a separate conversation. But I am extremely interested in what gives you grounds to put Nicholas I and Alexander III on a par with him?
        Two surprisingly mediocre rulers, who together pushed the Russian Empire to its bloody end. Only Nicholas II tried more than them for this.


        This is a matter of values, dear Trilobite. I always read your facts and comments very carefully .... But! ... You can cite the facts of the development of artillery, the financial system, transport, industry, the development of culture, the introduction of steam engines, the expansion of borders, the effectiveness of wars, a reasonable decision on the fate of the "revolutionaries". .. In this, the active monarchs Nicholas and Alexander, more successful than Westernizers Alexander Pavlovich and Peter Alekseevich. The abundance of effective reforms unites Alexander and Nikolai. Under them, Russia, objectively, became stronger, and this is the most important thing!
        1. kalibr
          4 December 2020 21: 55
          +1
          Quote: samarin1969
          Under them, Russia, objectively, became stronger, and this is the most important thing!

          And serious ailments were driven inside. Big guy outside, but already sick with AIDS
          1. samarin1969
            samarin1969 4 December 2020 22: 11
            -1
            Quote: kalibr
            Quote: samarin1969
            Under them, Russia, objectively, became stronger, and this is the most important thing!

            And serious ailments were driven inside. Big guy outside, but already sick with AIDS

            And what was "AIDS"? ... The economy, resources, culture, army in the Russian empire were at the level in the top ten countries. All this rest is a speculative theory of "progress". With the "fisherwoman" Alexander III, Russia would have brought the First World War to victory.
        2. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master 5 December 2020 12: 29
          +2
          Quote: samarin1969
          Development facts can be cited

          Can. And then compare them with the same facts in the ill-fated Europe. And it turns out that in all these issues Russia was lagging behind, since everything that you are talking about in Europe began earlier and developed more intensively. If the pace of development of Europe is considered average, then it turns out that during the reign of these monarchs, Russia developed at a rate below average, and the rate of development invariably fell by the end of the reign.
          Conclusion? Plain. Russia developed during the reign of these monarchs. But it developed not "as a result", but "in spite of", increasing the lag behind the leading European countries.
          Well, about the "effectiveness of wars" ... Amused a little ...
          Alexander III did not fight, which is why he was nicknamed the Peacemaker. Well, Nikolai managed to fight, yes ...
          With the semi-savage mountaineers and Asians, it was even more or less going on, plus the suppression of the Polish, Hungarian and Kazakh uprisings, but how a more serious enemy got caught, from the highest, so to speak, European league, it turned out that we had neither rifles nor steamships, railways not enough and everything else, including the brains of dignitaries, is also in deep deficit. Two years of such a war and there is no Black Sea Fleet, no international authority, nothing. Twenty years later, we raked the consequences of this effective war ...
          If you put aside your "anti-liberal" fuse and look at the results of the rule of these monarchs as they are, you will see that they were pulling on the legacy of their predecessors for some time, but both eventually led the country into stagnation, increasing the already significant lag from European leaders.
          That's all I wanted to say. hi
  • Arthur 85
    Arthur 85 5 December 2020 18: 15
    0
    Um, in general, his main problem is that he died early. Live to 90 years - and the balance between France and Germany would be found and the liberals finally restrained. For, as the experience of the modern West shows, the progressive public is not like weak kings. And when they speak on equal terms, it is also not pleasant.
  • Elturisto
    Elturisto 21 January 2021 13: 30
    0
    The author serves the interests of the modern Russian government, in fact, Germanophilia. That is why the "fallacy" of the alliance with France, and false patriotism and the same false struggle against liberalism.