Military Review

Victory and defeat

34
Victory and defeat



How did the Patriotic War 1812 of the year led to the October Revolution

В stories There are frequent examples when a defeat in a war leads to reforms. It happens and vice versa - the won war gives the authorities reason to believe: since we won, it means that we have the most perfect state in the world and, therefore, no reforms are needed. The victory over Napoleon gave society hope for change, but at the same time made the ruling elite fight to ensure that there was no change. Under the sign of this contradiction, the entire nineteenth century will pass, and at the beginning of the twentieth century it will develop into destructive revolutions.

There is a people's war


The struggle with Napoleon was not easy for the country: it was conducted at the limit of human strength and economic opportunities. The demographic and economic results of World War 1812 of the year were regrettable. The Russian people paid for the victory of approximately 2 with millions of lives. Already in 1813, natural population growth stopped, and in the provinces where military operations were conducted, it began to decline rapidly: for example, the population of Smolensk province decreased by 57 thousand, and Tverskaya - by 12 thousand people. According to official data of that time, the treasury's expenses for the war amounted to 157,5 million rubles, the expenses of the population itself - about 200 million. It is believed that the total material losses of the Russian Empire amounted to at least 1 billion rubles. Many cities and villages were ravaged, about a third of the country's workers were mobilized. The war has exhausted the population's solvency, and already in 1815, in a number of provinces, payment of taxes ceased, which led to the devastation of the treasury.

After such a hard victory, the society was waiting for a change. If the eighteenth century and the early period of Alexander I's rule were characterized by a passive-optimistic mood of Russian society (Russia moves toward a better future under the just and wise rule of the monarch), then after the war, it was replaced by an active desire for reform. During the fighting abroad, officers and soldiers were able to compare the Russian reality with the everyday life of Europe and rendered a verdict against the Fatherland. The feeling of the power of Russia, its transformation into the European hegemon was characteristic of a wide circle of nobles - Pushkin expressed this feeling in his famous poem:

O ye who trembled Europe are strong tribes,

O predatory galls! and you have fallen in graves.

Oh fear! about terrible times!

... Ross in Paris! - where is the torch of vengeance?

Fall, Gaul, head.

But what do I see? Ross with a smile of reconciliation

Coming with olive gold.

However, society also felt a striking contrast that existed between the foreign policy successes of the empire and the scarcity of its internal life. Reaping the fruits of victory at the Congress of Vienna, Russia at the same time could not restore order at home: the standard of living of a huge mass of the population lagged behind the European, as did civil liberties. In the decade that followed the war, publicists published articles about "how we can equip Russia," they submitted to the emperor drafts and notes. The officers, who returned from France, became distributors of liberal ideas among nobles and townspeople, and not only in the capital, but also in the provinces. Literary and educational circles arose among the noble youth, where the young men talked about politics and the historical destinies of the country. In 1814, the first secret organization was set up, aimed at establishing a constitutional monarchy in Russia, the Order of Russian Knights, established by Mikhail Orlov and Matvey Dmitriev-Mamonov.


Portrait of MF Orlov by A.-F. Riesener. Photo: Wikipedia.org

The war years were marked by an unprecedented rise of patriotism, without which foreign invaders could hardly be defeated: half of the private funds spent on the war were voluntary donations. The war acquired a genuinely popular character, which was reflected in the formation of the militia and the appearance of partisan detachments. This rise of patriotism at the end of the war aroused in the nobles an interest in the past of the country, in which they began to look for answers to burning questions. Suffice it to mention that the first three thousandth edition of eight volumes of Nikolay Karamzin’s “History of the Russian State”, printed in 1818, was sold out in stores in three weeks.

Aware of public sentiment and being a staunch constitutionalist, Alexander I in 1818 ordered the Minister of Justice Nikolay Novosiltsev to prepare a draft constitution - a charter of the Russian Empire. The project provided for the transformation of the empire into a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral parliament - the State Sejm, whose lower house would be elected by the nobility assemblies. The constitution was supposed to secure basic civil liberties - freedom of speech, the press, the right to private property. However, the adoption of the first Russian constitution hampered the issue of serfdom - the most acute and complex of all those then facing the government.

Heavy chains will fall?


The exploits of simple peasants forced society to take a different look at the role of the oppressed class. It is believed that the Patriotic War was an important milestone in the transformation of the Russians into a nation. The officers who saw the heroism of their soldiers could no longer treat the serfs as property, and serfdom became perceived by the most enlightened part of society as an ugly and amoral phenomenon.

The peasant militiamen who had returned from the war looked differently at their masters. Serfdom now seemed to be an anachronism and it really was. An almost anecdotal case is known, when in 1830-s a cook of one of the Russian princes, having quarreled with his master during their life in Paris, went to the police station with a complaint against him. According to the French laws of that time, he could have sought asylum and, having remained in France, become a free man and a full-fledged citizen there. However, after some reflection, the cook decided that he would be unbearable to live far from his homeland, and went to ask the Prince for forgiveness in order to return to Russia in his former slavish position.

After the expulsion of Napoleon, many peasants were waiting for the abolition of serfdom as a reward for participating in the war. However, in reality, there was no relief of the fate of the serfs, but, on the contrary, regress in the development of their relations with their masters. The fact is that a significant part of the nobles, whose property was heavily damaged by the war, decided to "sit on the ground": to intensify the exploitation of the estates belonging to them. The nobles in the agricultural provinces transferred the peasants back to serfdom, which they themselves had replaced with a lighter dues before the war. In the industrial gubernias this was unprofitable, and the landlords tried to increase their incomes by increasing the size of the dues, which also affected the position of the peasants.


Reproduction of the drawing “Peasants-Partisans in the Patriotic War 1812 of the Year”. Author: I.Terebenev. Splint.

It is noteworthy that in society, even in its highest circles, the attitude towards the issue of serfdom was extremely confusing. For example, Alexander I initiated the publication in French of the course of political economy of Academician Storch, which the emperor readily read to the grand dukes, suggesting to them that any bonded labor was immoral and economically unprofitable. However, when this work was translated into Russian, it was immediately banned by censorship. And when the Kharkov professor Johann Shad published a course in Latin which expounded the same views, he was even sent out from Russia.

In general, the victory in the 1812 war of the year, one way or another, contributed to the disintegration of the serf system, but the process was long and difficult. Due to the fact that the abolition of serfdom, seriously discussed under Alexander I, was implemented only a decade later, Russia and by the beginning of the twentieth century could not cope with all the difficulties generated by this reform.

The Manifesto of Enlightened Conservatism


As you know, Alexander I confined himself to the liberation of the Baltic (Estland, Kurland and Livland) peasants. The decision to abolish serfdom throughout Russia was never made, and after the death of the emperor, it completely disappeared from the agenda. Both the position of the conservative-minded part of the nobility and the fear that the emancipation of the peasantry would lead to increased unrest in society prevented the abolition of the position. Waiting for nobles to abolish outdated sociopolitical institutions coexisted with fear of possible changes, because it was in the postwar decades that Europe experienced political upheavals that could not but cause the ruling elite of the empire and the broad circles of nobility to recur in Russia. A lot of frightened the new emperor Nicholas I by the Decembrists' speech, which forced him to strengthen the course towards the reaction, which marked the last years of Alexander's rule.

It is curious that the victory in the war, paradoxically, promoted the propaganda of the mindsets of conservative officials and publicists, who believed that Russia had won precisely because of the perfection of its institutions. Conservatives were looking for the origins of the power of the empire in a particular way of development of the country. Already under Nicholas I, the main features of this particular path will be formulated in the famous Uvarov manifesto: “Autocracy, Orthodoxy, Nationality”. The conservatives advised the government to put all the reforms on the brakes. Thus, Faddey Bulgarin, in a letter to the Third Division of His Own Imperial Majesty's Office in 1826, already after the Decembrist uprising, suggests skillfully turning public discussion into empty conversations unrelated to the current reforms: . Let them judge and rydyat, laugh and cry, quarrel and reconcile, without touching matters important. People will immediately find a subject for mental activity and will be calm. "

World War 1812 of the year became a certificate of maturity for the Russian nation: realizing its unity in the war, society dreamed about improving the position of the people, about liberal reforms. It can be said that the entire civil movement of the XIX century grew out of the social uplift that occurred during the Patriotic War. Alexander's disappointment in the course of the Nicholas era already grew into a deaf annoyance of government policy, from which it was within easy reach of the real, truly radical opposition — the revolutionary organizations of 1860 – 1870.

If you managed to solve the main problems, which were well recognized by the advanced part of society, Russia could still be a constitutional monarchy like the British. However, it turned out differently: due to the fact that these problems were not resolved and over the next hundred years, the cudgel of the people's war, which the Russian peasant bludgeoned Napoleon, would eventually hit the throne of the Romanovs themselves.
Author:
Originator:
http://rusplt.ru/society/pobeda-i-porajenie-19228.html
34 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. venaya
    venaya 17 October 2015 06: 01
    +8
    the first three-thousandth edition of eight volumes of “History of the Russian State” by Nikolai Karamzin, printed in 1818, was sold out in stores in three weeks.

    Here it is, the most successful work, into which it was possible to introduce the seeds of the first, not yet eradicated myths, which, by the way, are of French origin. I mean the myth of the "Tatar-Mongol yoke". The author of the article promotes his version of events, has the right, but I will try to disagree with him.
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 17 October 2015 06: 18
      +7
      Quote: venaya
      The author of the article promotes his version of events,

      History is the struggle of interpretations. This is clearly seen today in the events in the Middle East.
      A vivid example of the parallel reality in which the West lives.


      This is how the United States, hiding behind 51 UN articles on self-defense, bombing Syria and anyone else. Of those who can, naturally.
    2. Observer2014
      Observer2014 17 October 2015 07: 30
      25
      The history of our country was written to us literally from abroad. What yoke ?! When there is no Tatar blood in Russian, but Russian is present in Tatar, some strange yoke is obtained.
      Russia always winning the war left the defeated side more opportunities for prosperity than its own people. And it should be the other way around. That's when our rulers begin to appreciate the life and well-being of every Russian person. That's when we will not be afraid of any enemy. Life in our own country is necessary adjust so that our friends and foes burst with envy.
      They defeated the French and help them. And their people are many times better than Russians.
      The Germans in the war tore .After the war, the losers live better than the victors. Hey there in the Kremlin !!!! Himself not sick!
      You bring non-Russians to work in the country. And your own people are unemployed. Or it’s such a job that it’s even a shame to print salaries. At the same time, with a clever FACE, we are crucified on TV about how good you are and how we need working hands from abroad.
      And buy housing !!! What are you thinking about !!
      Show us which ......... came up with a housing shortage in Russia. How many families were destroyed, how many unborn children were killed by abortion. How many abominations, you released your people because of housing shortages. Now you’ll start, and the mortgage ? What a .... n mortgage with such prices and interest !!! You are fascinated by ours. They go to the army and the police and serve not only because of the apartment.
      1. Good me
        Good me 17 October 2015 09: 56
        +3
        Quote: Observer2014
        The Germans in the war tore .After the war, the losers live better than the victors. Hey there in the Kremlin !!!! Himself not sick!


        We are not used to living at the expense of the vanquished ...

        And after the war, still had to tear, restoring the economy destroyed by the war, to confront the United States and the anti-Soviet (anti-Russian) bloc that they had put together ...

        Would we live better if not for the USA? Although a rhetorical question, it has a UNIVERSAL answer.
        1. atalef
          atalef 17 October 2015 10: 11
          -8
          Quote: Good Me
          Would we live better if not for the USA? Although a rhetorical question, it has a UNIVERSAL answer.

          It's good that there is someone to blame wink
          1. Good me
            Good me 17 October 2015 10: 44
            +5
            Quote: atalef
            It's good that there is someone to blame


            But I do not distort history, like some people of a liberal nationality. Because I know who with whom, in one harness ...
            1. ava09
              ava09 17 October 2015 12: 09
              +4
              Quote: Good I
              Quote: atalef
              It's good that there is someone to blame


              But I do not distort history, like some people of a liberal nationality. Because I know who with whom, in one harness ...


              "Faces of a liberal nationality" - to the point !!!
              1. Mahmut
                Mahmut 17 October 2015 17: 28
                +1
                the standard of living of the vast mass of the population lagged behind the European, as did civil liberties.

                As for civil liberties - I agree. Although freedom is often ruinous. But why did the author decide that in Europe the standard of living of the population is higher than in Russia? Personally, I get confused.
              2. Mari33
                Mari33 17 October 2015 18: 33
                +1
                Quote: ava09
                "Faces of a liberal nationality" - to the point !!!


                A quote from the article: "The Patriotic War of 1812 became a certificate of maturity, society dreamed of improving the situation of the people, of liberal reforms."
                The society of people of liberal nationality managed to improve the situation of the Russian people from 1917 to 1937, then again came the daydreaming.
                A new improvement process began in 1991.
      2. jktu66
        jktu66 17 October 2015 13: 38
        0
        That's when our rulers begin to appreciate the life and well-being of every Russian person. That's when we will not be afraid of any enemy. Life in our own country needs to be set up so that our friends and foes burst with envy.
        If you suddenly become our ruler, I will cry with you, from tenderness smile
      3. captain
        captain 17 October 2015 13: 40
        +3
        I dare to disagree with the author about: "... The officers who returned from France became the disseminators of liberal ideas among the noblemen and bourgeoisie, and not only in the capital, but also in the provinces. Literary and educational circles arose among the noble youth, where young men talked about politics and about the historical fate of the country. In 1814, the first secret organization arose, aimed at establishing a constitutional monarchy in Russia - the Order of the Russian Knights, established by Mikhail Orlov and Matvey Dmitriev-Mamonov. " If these young nobles took care of the peasants, they would give them freedom. But this was not observed in our state, especially among the Decembrists. There were isolated cases, but isolated and mostly not members of the circles. The article is not about anything, such reasoning can also attract Khan Baty, as the liberator of the Russian peasantry from the landowners.
      4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 17 October 2015 23: 28
        0
        Quote: Observer2014
        The history of our country was written to us literally from abroad. What yoke ?! When there is no Tatar blood in Russian, but Russian is present in Tatar, some strange yoke is obtained.

        Such a yoke is normal. We are defeated in battle, but the territories are not captured, taxed and approved the appointment of the princes. What does Tatar blood have to do with it? Or, to be precise, Mongolian?
        Quote: Observer2014
        They defeated the French and help them. And their people are many times better than Russians lived

        Where else is this from? Their people are just as fluff with hunger in the hungry years as ours. PR Napoleone workers in France actually became serfs.
  2. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 17 October 2015 07: 15
    +4
    could

    Russia could do a lot if historical events took a different path. Therefore, she could, could not judge uselessly. We must proceed from today's reality. And thanks to the author for the historical article.
    1. jktu66
      jktu66 17 October 2015 13: 29
      +2
      And thanks to the author for the historical article.
      And in what place, excuse me, is a historical article ??? The classics, for example, K. Marx had to be studied in order to correctly state the essence of the described historical processes following the results of the Patriotic War and the defeat of Napoleonic France. At that time, well, Russia did not have a strong bourgeoisie and spokesmen for its interests, but the feudal landowners became extremely strong and placed their interests above all else, hence the military settlements and the strengthening of the enslavement of the peasantry. As soon as the bourgeoisie of strength was gathered and needed by the workers in large quantities, then serfdom was abolished. And the rest is noodles on the ears.
  3. lopvlad
    lopvlad 17 October 2015 08: 02
    0
    Having the power to solve the basic problems that were well recognized by the advanced part of society, Russia could still be a constitutional monarchy like the British

    any empire has development cycles. The development cycle in the form of a monarchy for Russia expired after the First World War and we were lucky that the Russian Empire did not collapse to the ground but was transformed into a new empire with the name of the USSR.
    As for Britain, it ceased to be an empire after the loss of India on August 15, 1947. So the British empire ceased to exist in the middle of the 20th century and what now?
    Now there is the country of Great Britain led by a monarch. There is no British Constitution as a single document, and therefore in Britain there is an ordinary monarchy.
    Today in Europe there is only one empire and this empire is Russia.
    1. Good me
      Good me 17 October 2015 11: 02
      +1
      Quote: lopvlad
      Today in Europe there is only one empire and this empire is Russia.


      A dubious statement, in view of the absence of a number of signs of an empire. Anyway...

      But a certain overseas state, a lover of labeling an "evil empire", has such signs on its face ...

      And having EYES, EARS, MOUTH, in addition to BRAINS, will say what exactly it was, and is EMPIRE OF EVIL.
  4. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 17 October 2015 09: 03
    0
    The second (after the Northern War) major EU attack on Russia.

    And now Russia is accused of aggression, while systematically, from century to century, it was the enlightened Caucasians who came to “civilize” (that is, colonize) Russia.

    By and large, if Russia were indeed a bloodthirsty aggressive dark empire, there would have been no Europe for a long time - there would have been provinces of Russia. According to the just right of the war of liberation, so that all Napoleons and Hitlers do not breed again.
  5. alicante11
    alicante11 17 October 2015 10: 15
    +2
    The problem (or happiness) of Russia in the 19 century is that it did not develop capitalist relations. The reasons for this, it seems, are not visible. In Russia, after the abolition of serfdom, there was a huge amount of labor. The elite had huge fortunes by the standards of Europe. The country possessed all the necessary minerals for industrialization. And even the experience of successful industrialists, like the Stroganovs, who actually mastered the Urals and Siberia. All the prerequisites of a capitalist miracle, before which the successes of Great Britain, the USA and Germany would fade, did not lead to this miracle. What is the problem? There are several problems. There are objective and subjective.
    Objective problems include these.
    The small time that was allotted to Russia for capitalist industrialization. Indeed, the process of developing capitalist relations in Great Britain or France took 50-100 more years. But the United States or Germany developed their capitalism in comparable time, and the Germans, perhaps even faster. I’m not talking about the Japanese, but not because Japan still couldn’t reach the power of the Great Power and the very first test of the total war during WWII was a disaster for this Asian upstart.
    The long distances and size of the country, which led to high transport costs and the need to maintain huge and expensive armed forces. But it was not in the best situation from a military point of view that Germany was the same, which, with the best army in the world, managed to create a fleet that could compete with the Grand Fleet and powerful industry. And the very same Britain was forced to maintain a huge fleet and colonial troops in order to keep her scattered colonies, which did not prevent her from being the leader of the capitalist race.
    1. atalef
      atalef 17 October 2015 10: 56
      0
      Quote: alicante11
      The problem (or happiness) of Russia in the 19th century is that it did not develop capitalist relations.

      So is it a problem or happiness?
      Quote: alicante11
      In Russia, after the abolition of serfdom, there was a huge amount of labor. The elite had huge fortunes by the standards of Europe

      Controversial statement.
      Quote: alicante11
      The small time that was allotted to Russia for capitalist industrialization.

      Actually, they don’t set aside time, the transition to a capitalist system of relations in the economy is a historical process, and only the power of the country in which it takes place can stop it and stop it.
      Frankly, serfdom and elite resistance to technological progress (namely technical progress led to capitalization) did not allow Russia to begin this process simultaneously with European countries.
      Quote: alicante11
      Indeed, the development of capitalist relations in the UK or France took 50-100 years more

      This only says one thing: their production relations were ready for this process much earlier than Russia
      Quote: alicante11
      I’m not talking about the Japanese, but not because Japan still couldn’t reach the power of the Great Power and the very first test of the total war during WWII was a disaster for this Asian upstart.

      I love to argue with you,
      Have you forgotten how Japan defeated Russia in the war?
      Japan was before the Second World War - the strongest state, with advanced equipment and technologies. Not afraid to challenge the States and successfully fighting with them for 5 years.
      Having enslaved China, Korea. all of Southeast Asia.
      Japan was, is and will be the greatest power
      Quote: alicante11
      managed to create a fleet that could compete with the Grand Fleet

      The German fleet could not compete, it challenged and, in general, lost pretty quickly (I'm talking about the surface), the submarines were still battered, but in general the British with the amers coped with them
      1. Good me
        Good me 17 October 2015 11: 12
        +3
        Quote: atalef
        Japan was before the Second World War - the strongest state, with advanced equipment and technologies. Not afraid to challenge the States and successfully fighting with them for 5 years.


        Unafraid? Or forced to start a war, at a not most favorable moment for itself, due to the fact that the United States, "cutting off" the supply of critically needed raw materials to the empire, called into question both imperial ambitions and the very possibility of Japan's existence?

        This is not an attempt to whitewash the aggressor. It is clear that the samurai, even those "guys", from the same cohort with the Nazis, and even with a specific Asian-island mentality, with a claim, if not for world domination, then at least in the APR ...

        But the United States, too, hoopoes of the rarest dressing ...
      2. alicante11
        alicante11 17 October 2015 12: 40
        +1
        So is it a problem or happiness?


        It depends. For me happiness. For lovers of "French bun crunch" - a problem.

        Controversial statement.


        Argue.

        Actually, they don’t set aside time, the transition to a capitalist system of relations in the economy is a historical process, and only the power of the country in which it takes place can stop it and stop it.


        Historically, Russia did not have enough time to create a developed capitalist society. So will it be better formulated?

        Frankly, serfdom and elite resistance to technological progress (namely technical progress led to capitalization) did not allow Russia to begin this process simultaneously with European countries.


        And this is another question. As I said, the Germans and the Japanese managed even faster.

        This only says one thing: their production relations were ready for this process much earlier than Russia


        Naturally, why is this said?

        I love to argue with you,
        Have you forgotten how Japan defeated Russia in the war?


        Yes, you do not argue, a maximum of one post and then silence.
        I have not forgotten the defeat of Russia by Japan. But you did not notice my words about TOTAL war. That the war with China, that the RYAV, that WWI for Japan were not total wars. But in WWII, the war turned out to be total. Americans did not stop after defeats and there was no one to "put in a word" for "poor samurai". And immediately the northern fur-bearing animal came to the Japanese.

        Japan was before the Second World War - the strongest state, with advanced equipment and technologies. Not afraid to challenge the States and successfully fighting with them for 5 years.


        What are you? Japan already in the mid-end of the 1942 year began to receive from amers lyuli in the Solomon Islands and New Guinea. And as soon as the Americans deployed their industry at full power, the Japanese defense simply fell apart. Let's compare the amount of AB that the Americans released during the war - more than 30 and the Japanese - Taiho. One of eight planned. Those. even in plans, the Japanese were more than three times weaker than the United States. About technology - okay you. Americans baked Liberty like hot pancakes, so Doenitz did not have time to heat them, and the Japanese tried to build wooden and sailing ships to make up for losses in tonnage. Remember also the superiority of amers. Of course, you can remind me of the enormous Yamato. Well, this monster came from the fact that the Japanese lagged behind the Europeans in terms of armor and artillery.

        Japan was, is and will be the greatest power


        So far, as part of the USA as a colony.

        The German fleet could not compete, it challenged and, in general, lost pretty quickly (I'm talking about the surface), the submarines were still battered, but in general the British with the amers coped with them


        Who else at the indicated time could afford Jutland?
      3. Asadullah
        Asadullah 17 October 2015 13: 31
        +1
        Japan was, is and will be the greatest power


        As a power, I doubt it. For it is rather the next US state, tied by various treaties, according to the results of the Second World War, without the right to review. As soon as the Japanese government begins obscure movements, a delegation from ABA immediately leaves for Tokyo, organizing weekly seminars there, with a bunch of papers dating back 46-48 years. So, while the US power, Japan will not be a power.

        Another question is that this is a great nation, for the achievements of Japan are entirely the merit of the national characteristics of the people. Will it survive in the future? The question is, since Japanese youth are very Americanized today. For the world, it would be a great loss to dissolve the Japanese nation.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. Weyland
        Weyland 17 October 2015 18: 40
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        You did not forget how Japan defeated Russia in the war.


        If it were not for your fellow tribesmen who had muddied the 1905th revolution, we would have given the Japanese a few months later. By the end of the war, they had almost no resources left, and after the war, in addition to half of Sakhalin, they received an awesome economic crisis!
  6. alicante11
    alicante11 17 October 2015 10: 15
    0
    As you can see, objective difficulties, although they contributed, but were not insurmountable for other countries. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the subjective features of Russia, which impede the country's capitalist development.
    In Russia, most of the capital was in the hands of the old elite — representatives of the tsar’s house — grand dukes and their close financiers. And the class of large bankers was absent in principle. It was not for nothing that Empress Catherine, when in financial difficulties, turned to foreign money-lenders, and not to domestic bankers, as the monarchs of England, France or Prussia did. This old elite sat on Russian riches like a dog in the manger, preferring to invest them not in the country's economy, but in entertainment in Europe. While the economically active part of the elite — merchants, industrialists, not only did not have sufficient funds to develop their enterprises. Everything was even worse. As soon as some lucky merchant merchant got involved with his business a little higher than the average bar, officials, relatives and survivors flocked to him like a raven, surrounding the old elite. They began to demand warm little places and big salaries. And, given that they did not bring benefits, any enterprise became unprofitable. It was impossible to defend against vultures with patronage.
    And the second thing. The Russian people are God-bearers. No matter how negative I feel about the church, this name is the whole essence of the Russian people. A sense of justice and compassion for one's neighbor is characteristic of a Russian person. Well, it is not possible, with such a "burden" as conscience, to succeed in the world of business, where everyone is trying to devour a neighbor as a competitor. Because of this, the heights of business and civil service are being reached by people who are deprived of this burden and who are too few in Russia to grow a full-fledged and high-quality "middle class" that is the backbone of capitalism, which makes the capitalist economy competitive and efficient. Without it, capitalism becomes monopoly and extremely ineffective. This is what happened very quickly in Russia, both in the 19th century and in post-Soviet times. And what is happening now in the West.

    Thus, capitalism in Russia did not take root solely because it does not suit our people. And therefore, now we are as fast as then when we arrive at an economic and domestic political impasse. Despite even the foreign policy successes.
    1. atalef
      atalef 17 October 2015 11: 11
      -2
      Quote: alicante11
      A class of large bankers was absent in principle

      so bankers - is it bad or good?
      Quote: alicante11
      This old elite sat on Russian riches like a dog in the manger, preferring to invest them not in the country's economy, but in entertainment in Europe.

      300 years have passed, little has changed
      Quote: alicante11
      As soon as some lucky merchant merchant got involved with his business a little higher than the average bar, officials, relatives and neighbors who flocked to him like a raven, surrounded the old elite

      sad
      Quote: alicante11
      And, given that they did not bring benefits, any enterprise became unprofitable. It was impossible to defend against vultures with patronage

      Actually, you write fairy tales, but to read is exciting, it is interesting what your opus will lead to, in general, not supported by anything. besides your personal feelings?
      Quote: alicante11
      And the second one. Russian people - people of God

      Well, right, to spirituality and righteousness
      Quote: alicante11
      Well, it is not possible, with such a "burden" as conscience, to succeed in the world of business, where everyone is trying to devour a neighbor as a competitor

      You know, I noticed how poor and unsuccessful is necessarily spiritual and conscientious. That is, all rich or wealthy people are necessarily unscrupulous and unspiritual?
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 17 October 2015 12: 19
        0
        so bankers - is it bad or good?


        For the development of capitalist relations - good, but for people - bad.

        300 years have passed, little has changed


        Well, not 300, but 200, but I agree otherwise. After the 91 year, everything returned to normal.

        You know, I noticed how poor and unsuccessful is necessarily spiritual and conscientious. That is, all rich or wealthy people are necessarily unscrupulous and unspiritual?


        Based on the theory of probability, such mammoths may exist, but I have not met with them. Although I had to communicate closely with quite a large number while I was in business. Asking for help and accepting it, and answering the reciprocal request "what are you loading up with your problems" is the norm. I'm not even talking about the banal throwing, setting up and using the administrative resource in the competition.
        By the way, the issue of success is not a simple one. I can compare two people. One of which is a modest dean of the faculty of STR at the University and is considered a very respected and successful person. At the same time, a much more affluent person who has several companies serves as an errand for steeper businessmen in a construction association and no one can call him respected and successful.
      2. Asadullah
        Asadullah 17 October 2015 13: 37
        0
        so bankers - is it bad or good?


        We must proceed from the shareholders, the share of one shareholder should not exceed 2%. 5% is very bad for the bank, 20% is on the verge. 51% is no longer a bank, but an instrument of influence. In Russia, banks are a tragedy of the people.
    2. atalef
      atalef 17 October 2015 11: 11
      0
      Quote: alicante11
      which is the pillar of capitalism, which makes the capitalist economy competitive and efficient.

      You somehow contradict yourself in the field i.e. the capitalist economy is competitive and efficient.
      those. there the elites gave the opportunity to develop the middle class (so they were less possessive and more spiritual?)
      somehow it does not fit - there are money-givers, here are god-bearers
      It worked, it’s not here - the logical chain is not visible
      Quote: alicante11
      From it, capitalism becomes monopolistic and extremely inefficient. This is what happened very quickly in Russia, that in the 19th century, that in the post-Soviet time. And what is happening now in the West.

      I say, it does not fit
      Quote: alicante11
      Thus, capitalism in Russia did not take root solely because it does not suit our people

      and what fits?
      Quote: alicante11
      And therefore, now we are as fast as then when we arrive at an economic and domestic political impasse. Despite even the foreign policy successes.

      what
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 17 October 2015 12: 22
        0
        You somehow contradict yourself in the field i.e. the capitalist economy is competitive and efficient.


        I do not contradict. Any economy is efficient and competitive while it is operating normally. But the capitalist economy is always slipping into a monopolistic one, which is no longer effective.

        those. there the elites gave the opportunity to develop the middle class (so they were less possessive and more spiritual?)


        The development of the "middle class" has nothing to do with money-grubbing. The middle class is simply necessary for money-grubbers as a service and protection from those whom they rob.

        and what fits?


        Communism, socialism, at worst, a patriarchal monarchy.
      2. Asadullah
        Asadullah 17 October 2015 13: 45
        0
        those. there the elites gave the opportunity to develop the middle class (so they were less possessive and more spiritual?)


        Elites cannot "give" or "not give", they simply have no interest in anything. The middle class is developing in this place. As for spirituality, um, a person with huge capital, pissing in a golden pot, without any reservations, is a moral freak.
  7. sogdianec
    sogdianec 17 October 2015 10: 37
    0
    The article is good, but doubts creep in in the thesis: "How the Patriotic War of 1812 led to the October Revolution." There is no difference between the events of more than a hundred years and there is no direct connection between Napoleon's attack and the October Revolution.
    Events such as the war with Japan, the incomplete reforms of Stolypin and his assassination, the development of social democratic parties and propaganda among the working class, the softness of laws against fighters against the autocracy, the decrease in the support of the monarchy by part of the nobility, and the great losses of officers in 1914 and more affected it. 1915, corruption, weakness of the monarch, mistakes in foreign policy, in the Balkans and many more factors. All this led to the October Revolution.
  8. traveler
    traveler 17 October 2015 10: 53
    0
    if yes if only ...
    Russia's foreign policy successes traditionally have no positive effect on domestic life. this is already an axiom.
    Russian authorities, and not only authorities, have always been ostentatious, pounding show-offs in front of foreigners, however expensive it may be, at the same time, there is complete ruin and squalor at home.
    therefore, they generously forgave the vanquished, wrote off debts, etc.
  9. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 17 October 2015 13: 08
    +2
    Into nonsense nonsense.
    The author knows exactly what and how high society, middle society, lower society and the peasantry thought about.
    in the years 1814-1815. And until 1825.
    And the men didn’t know.
    .
    Well now Bolotnaya was than December 1825.
    Whom did they send to? Which mines? To Davos and Nice ....
    the same.
    ...
    Let the Franks rejoice that came from us - BISTRO.
    sufficient cultural penetration.
    1. Asadullah
      Asadullah 17 October 2015 13: 50
      +1
      The author knows for sure


      And don’t talk. He had not yet considered the role of the Oprichnina, in the constancy of the wintering of polar geese ....
  10. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 17 October 2015 15: 26
    0
    Indecision became a detonator ...
  11. samarin1969
    samarin1969 17 October 2015 15: 30
    0
    The article is relevant. The Decembrists did not bring anything good to the Russian people. The vile enslavement of the Russian people reached its peak in the "Age of Golden Catherine". Alexander Pavlovich is an ungrateful Anglophile bastard and a vile son. The abolition of serfdom did not resolve the issue of allotting land to the peasants, but only led to an increase in drunkenness. Nikolai Pavlovich and Alexander III - Great statesmen - to whom the present, like Lavrov to Gromyko ...
  12. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz 17 October 2015 17: 50
    +1
    With the same success, it can be argued that the cause of the 17th revolution was the abolition of St. George’s Day by Catherine, the stratification of society and the lack of real prospects for achieving prosperity and protection of property and their rights for the bulk of the population was the main reason for the revolution, and the weakness and shortsightedness of Nicholas 2 was its catalyst, the defeat of Napoleon just gave a respite to the elite of that time and they took advantage of this reprieve but sluggishly and not to the full extent.
  13. ig0r135
    ig0r135 18 October 2015 11: 22
    0
    Interestingly, many write about history, incline it in every way, research, argue about the influence of this or that people, countries, states and, interestingly, they do not write at all and do not mention such a people as Jews, as if they do not exist at all and they neither they do not influence which, although they live in almost all countries, they have their own organizations, clubs, banks, synagogues, so-called Jewish houses. That is, they quietly occupied almost all countries, here you have globalization, the WTO, the World Bank and other delights of Jewish business. Control of everything and everyone, here it is "world order". Therefore, I can state with confidence that 90% of the story is falsified.
  14. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 19 October 2015 21: 01
    0
    We, comrades, who should be most concerned about 40-60, if not about the Fatherland now, at this very difficult time! There is a turning point, there is a chance.
    As deputy Yevgeny Fedorov says, one must stop lying. To start with this.