In 1894, Alexander III was succeeded by his son, Nicholas II, who was committed to retaining the autocracy that his father had left him. Nicholas II proved ineffective as a ruler, and in the end his dynasty was overthrown by revolution.[45]
The Industrial Revolution began to show significant influence in Russia, but the country remained rural and poor. Economic conditions steadily improved after 1890, thanks to new crops such as sugar beets, and new access to railway transportation. Total grain production increased, as well as exports, even with rising domestic demand from population growth.
As a result, there was a slow improvement in the living standards of Russian peasants in the Empire’s last two decades before 1914. Recent research into the physical stature of Army recruits shows they were bigger and stronger. There were regional variations, with more poverty in the heavily populated central black earth region; and there were temporary downturns in 1891–93 and 1905–1908.[46]
On the political right, the reactionary elements of the aristocracy strongly favored the large landholders, who, however, were slowly selling their land to the peasants through the Peasants’ Land Bank. The Octobrist party was a conservative force, with a base of landowners and businessmen. They accepted land reform but insisted that property owners be fully paid. They favored far-reaching reforms, and hoped the landlord class would fade away, while agreeing they should be paid for their land. Liberal elements among industrial capitalists and nobility, who believed in peaceful social reform and a constitutional monarchy, formed the Constitutional Democratic Party or Kadets.[47]
On the left, the Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs) and the Marxist Social Democrats wanted to expropriate the land, without payment, but debated whether to distribute the land among the peasants (the Narodnik solution), or to put it into collective local ownership.[48] The Socialist Revolutionaries also differed from the Social Democrats in that the SRs believed a revolution must rely on urban workers, not the peasantry.[49]
In 1903, at the 2nd Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party,
in London, the party split into two wings: the gradualist Mensheviks and the more radical Bolsheviks. The Mensheviks believed that the Russian working class was insufficiently developed and that socialism could be achieved only after a period of bourgeois democratic rule. They thus tended to ally themselves with the forces of bourgeois liberalism. The Bolsheviks, under Vladimir Lenin, supported the idea of forming a small elite of professional revolutionists, subject to strong party discipline, to act as the vanguard of the proletariat, in order to seize power by force.[50]
Russian soldiers in combat against Japanese at Mukden (inside China),
during the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905).
Defeat in the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905) was a major blow to the
tsarist regime and further increased the potential for unrest.
In January 1905, an incident known as “Bloody Sunday” occurred when Father Georgy Gapon led an enormous crowd to the Winter Palace in Saint Petersburg to present a petition to the tsar. When the procession reached the palace, soldiers opened fire on the crowd, killing hundreds. The Russian masses were so furious over the massacre that a general strike was declared, which demanded a democratic republic.
This marked the beginning of the Revolution of 1905. Soviets (councils of workers) appeared in most cities to direct revolutionary activity. Russia was paralyzed, and the government was desperate.[51]
In October 1905, Nicholas reluctantly issued the October Manifesto, which conceded the creation of a national Duma (legislature) to be called without delay. The right to vote was extended and no law was to become final without confirmation by the Duma. The moderate groups were satisfied, but the socialists rejected the concessions as insufficient and tried to organise new strikes. By the end of 1905, there was disunity among the reformers, and the tsar’s position was strengthened for the time being.
From its initial creation until the 1905 Revolution, the Russian Empire was controlled by its tsar/emperor as an absolute monarch, under a system of tsarist autocracy. After the Revolution of 1905, Russia developed a new type of government, which became difficult to categorize.
In the Almanach de Gotha for 1910, Russia was described as “a constitutional monarchy under an autocratic Tsar“. This contradiction in terms demonstrated the difficulty of precisely defining the system, transitional and sui generis, established in the Russian Empire after October 1905. Before this date, the fundamental laws of Russia described the power of the emperor as “autocratic and unlimited“. After October 1905, while the imperial style was still “Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias”, the fundamental laws were changed by removing the word unlimited.
While the emperor retained many of his old prerogatives, including an absolute veto over all legislation, he equally agreed to the establishment of an elected parliament, without whose consent no laws were to be enacted in Russia. Not that the regime in Russia had become in any true sense constitutional, far less parliamentary. But the “unlimited autocracy” had given way to a “self-limited autocracy”. Whether this autocracy was to be permanently limited by the new changes, or only at the continuing discretion of the autocrat, became a subject of heated controversy between conflicting parties in the state.
Provisionally, then, the Russian governmental system may perhaps be best defined as “a limited monarchy under an autocratic emperor”. Conservatism was the ideology of most of the Russian leadership, albeit with some reformist activities from time to time. The structure of conservative thought was based upon anti-rationalism of the intellectuals, religiosity rooted in the Russian Orthodox Church, traditionalism rooted in the landed estates worked by serfs, and militarism rooted in the army officer corps.[57]
Regarding irrationality, Russia avoided the full force of the European Enlightenment, which gave priority to rationalism, preferring the romanticism of an idealized nation state that reflected the beliefs, values, and behavior of the distinctive people.[58] The distinctly liberal notion of “progress” was replaced by a conservative notion of modernization based on the incorporation of modern technology to serve the established system.
The promise of modernization in the service of autocracy frightened the socialist intellectual Alexander Herzen, who warned of a Russia governed by “Genghis Khan with a telegraph”.[59] Imperial Council.
Main article: State Council of Imperial Russia
This painting from circa 1847 depicts the building on Palace Square opposite the Winter Palace, which was the headquarters of the Army General Staff. Today, it houses the headquarters of the Western Military District/Joint Strategic Command West.
The Catherine Palace, located at Tsarskoe Selo, was the summer residence of the imperial family. It is named after Empress Catherine I, who reigned from 1725 to 1727. (Watercolor painting from the 19th century.)
Under Russia’s revised Fundamental Law of 20 February 1906, the Council of the Empire was associated with the Duma as a legislative Upper House; from this time the legislative power was exercised normally by the Emperor only in concert with the two chambers.[60]
The Council of the Empire, or Imperial Council, as reconstituted for this purpose, consisted of 196 members, of whom 98 were nominated by the emperor, while 98 were elective.
The ministers, also nominated, were ex officio members.
Of the elected members, 3 were returned by the “black” clergy (the monks),
3 by the “white” clergy (secular), 18 by the corporations of nobles, 6 by the academy of sciences and the universities, 6 by the chambers of commerce,
6 by the industrial councils, 34 by local governmental zemstvos, 16 by local governments having no zemstvos, and 6 by Poland.
As a legislative body the powers of the Council were coordinated with those
of the Duma; in practice, however, it has seldom if ever initiated legislation.
State Duma and the electoral system.
Main article: State Duma of the Russian Empire
The Duma of the Empire or Imperial Duma (Gosudarstvennaya Duma), which formed the lower house of the Russian parliament, consisted (since the ukaz of 2 June 1907) of 442 members, elected by an exceedingly complicated process. The membership was manipulated as to secure an overwhelming majority of the wealthy (especially the landed classes) and also for the representatives of the Russian peoples at the expense of the subject nations. Each province of the Empire, except Central Asia, returned a certain number of members; added to which were those returned by several large cities.
The members of the Duma were chosen by electoral colleges and these, in their turn, were elected by assemblies of the three classes: landed proprietors, citizens, and peasants.
In these assemblies the wealthiest proprietors sat in person while the lesser proprietors were represented by delegates. The urban population was divided into two categories according to taxable wealth and elected delegates directly
to the college of the governorates.
The peasants were represented by delegates selected by the regional subdivisions called volosts. Workmen were treated in a special manner, with every industrial concern employing fifty hands electing one or more delegates to the electoral college.
In the college itself, the voting for the Duma was by secret ballot and a simple majority carried the day. Since the majority consisted of conservative elements (the landowners and urban delegates), the progressives had little chance of representation at all, save for the curious provision that one member at least in each government was to be chosen from each of the five classes represented in the college. That the Duma had any radical elements was mainly due to the peculiar franchise enjoyed by the seven largest towns — Saint Petersburg, Moscow, Kyiv, Odessa, Riga, and the Polish cities of Warsaw and Łódź.
These elected their delegates to the Duma directly, and though their votes were divided (on the basis of taxable property) in such a way as to give the advantage to wealth, each returned the same number of delegates.
“Socialism is Totalitarianism wrapped in a veneer of compassion & empathy.“
Communism is its ultimate goal but always ends as a Dictatorship. Now they have climate, pandemics, diversity and racism to add to their list of issues and controls. In time. We as Americans will be viewed as weak for “letting this happen” to us. I don’t agree. Allow your opponent to overextend themselves,
do too much, push too far. When he is overextended – then your response.
It is a waiting game and we must have patience. The time will come.
Great preparation is needed with this patience strategy, and the unexpected can occur. Look at Russia, 1905-1917.
World War 1 was a “black swan” that aided the Communist takeover there.
It was the Tsarist government that became overextended and was exploited. Those who believe a reenactment of 1776 will save the day need to consider a few things. They now can use a DEW weapon and vaporize your gun stash from home, and you for that matter.
They also can use 5G Microwave weapons to take you out remotely.
Next-level thinking is needed. They’ve played the slow game up until now!!
Get informed , get involved at the local level and push back!
.
We have to fight fire with fire. If we don’t, we all lose..If we reach these points then a new 1776 will truly begin & I darn well know
what I’ll be on… the Patriot winning side…….. L & L & R
As U can
we’RE headed 2, the communist manifesto ! Tomato, Tamoto; The Accelerated Incoming Radiant Light is expansive in nature.
It WILL and IS ripping the Matrix apart at the seams.
A quote commonly attributed to American socialist Norman Mattoon Thomas, that America would eventually and unknowingly adopt socialism “under the name of ‘liberalism,’” is often cited in U.S. political debates. It gained renewed currency beginning in late 2008, in conjunction with the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama (whom political opponents labeled a “socialist”) and his subsequent efforts in mid-2009 to enact health care reform in the U.S. (characterized by critics as “socialized medicine”):
A connection between the putative Norman Thomas quote and universal health care was established much earlier, however: in 1961, Ronald Reagan — then still an actor who had not yet embarked upon a political career — cited the words attributed to Thomas during a talk he gave on the perils of socialized medicine: Ronald Reagan speaks out on Socialized Medicine – Audio – YouTube
1. Panicking minds lose the ability to receive advanced intel.
2. Being coherent is to be clean & free of all the poisons they shove on us.
Stop breathing in, eating, drinking, and smothering your bodies and homes with their brain dumbing synthetic toxins:
The STAR SEEDS Freedom Blueprint.
The deep state ~satanists~ control all facets of government, that includes the courts. Peaceful protests pose no threats to~them~. Why stop ~their~agenda? ~they~need to be removed physically, by force. The only way to stop what is happening is through 2nd amendment remedies! GBY.
……..MANDATE AFTER MANDATE……. LOSS OF FREEDOM AFTER FREEDOM NOT A CHOICE IT’s AN ULTIMATUM EYES WIDE OPEN FOLKS?
United we shall stand.
Even though not perfect, the #UnitedStates is the greatest country ever birthed. Look around the rest of the World right now. Many “Americans” may hate their own, but they have that right, IN THIS COUNTRY. Cry babies, I say! Home of the brave & free. I honestly think the populist are patriots. I just think the negativity outweighs the positivity, as far as patriotism goes, from the media’s front.
Media is run by the marxists of the country who have all of the money, this is why. But again, that’s what is being portrayed. This is why social media is such a problem for the apparatus. American populism is not left-wing. Social media exposes this and blows the manufactured consensus and consent that traditional mediums were able to easily fabricate.
•.,¸¸,.•´¯ Do Not Comply ¯•.,¸¸,.•´It stops when we all stand and say NO more!
A Short History Of How Anthony Fauci
Has Kept Failing Up Since 1984!!!
