Discussion:
Fascist dictatorship in Russia then and now – the Tsar and the Thug
(too old to reply)
hihgdm
2017-03-24 13:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Just after the 100th anniversary of the abdication of the Tsar, and the subsequent murder of him and his family, one ponders on how things have changed. Murder is always unpleasant but considering the situation of Russian plebs at the time, it was hardly surprising. The Tsar's only apparent lifeline – exile in the UK - was ruled out by King George V (or one of his advisors?), so the family’s fate was sealed. Arguably the imperial monarchy was a form of fascist dictatorship and here we are now, a hundred years later, with a....fascist dictatorship. So it appears that things haven’t really changed.

A new monarchy in Russia seems unlikely but it would have to be better than the status quo, provided that it was a constitutional monarchy, which also seems unlikely. I wonder which so-called upright and upstanding (ie not corrupt) Russian person would be up for the job. Pro-monarchy Russians would probably prefer a descendant of a former aristocratic family although the current most prominent pretender (George?) doesn't seem very inspiring.

And before you even mention it Comrade, another absolute monarchy in Russia would be disastrous.
Donald4564
2017-03-24 20:05:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hihgdm
Just after the 100th anniversary of the abdication of the Tsar, and the subsequent murder of him and his family, one ponders on how things have changed. Murder is always unpleasant but considering the situation of Russian plebs at the time, it was hardly surprising. The Tsar's only apparent lifeline – exile in the UK - was ruled out by King George V (or one of his advisors?), so the family’s fate was sealed. Arguably the imperial monarchy was a form of fascist dictatorship and here we are now, a hundred years later, with a....fascist dictatorship. So it appears that things haven’t really changed.
A new monarchy in Russia seems unlikely but it would have to be better than the status quo, provided that it was a constitutional monarchy, which also seems unlikely. I wonder which so-called upright and upstanding (ie not corrupt) Russian person would be up for the job. Pro-monarchy Russians would probably prefer a descendant of a former aristocratic family although the current most prominent pretender (George?) doesn't seem very inspiring.
And before you even mention it Comrade, another absolute monarchy in Russia would be disastrous.
In the book "Icon" the British Prince Michael assumes the daunting task. (This though was a work of fiction).

Russia to me seems a bit like Hungary in the 1920's and '30's - a Kingdom hankering after a King, yet not allowing one.

Regards
Donald BInks
w***@gmail.com
2017-03-24 20:37:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Donald4564
Post by hihgdm
Just after the 100th anniversary of the abdication of the Tsar, and the subsequent murder of him and his family, one ponders on how things have changed. Murder is always unpleasant but considering the situation of Russian plebs at the time, it was hardly surprising. The Tsar's only apparent lifeline – exile in the UK - was ruled out by King George V (or one of his advisors?), so the family’s fate was sealed. Arguably the imperial monarchy was a form of fascist dictatorship and here we are now, a hundred years later, with a....fascist dictatorship. So it appears that things haven’t really changed.
A new monarchy in Russia seems unlikely but it would have to be better than the status quo, provided that it was a constitutional monarchy, which also seems unlikely. I wonder which so-called upright and upstanding (ie not corrupt) Russian person would be up for the job. Pro-monarchy Russians would probably prefer a descendant of a former aristocratic family although the current most prominent pretender (George?) doesn't seem very inspiring.
And before you even mention it Comrade, another absolute monarchy in Russia would be disastrous.
In the book "Icon" the British Prince Michael assumes the daunting task. (This though was a work of fiction).
Russia to me seems a bit like Hungary in the 1920's and '30's - a Kingdom hankering after a King, yet not allowing one.
Regards
Donald BInks
Grand Duke Michael seems to have had a more realistic approach because he "...deferred acceptance of the throne until ratification by an elected assembly. He was never confirmed as Emperor and, following the [Russian Revolution of 1917], he was imprisoned and murdered...".

The book you mention raises an interesting prospect and reminds me of the allegation that the Duke of Windsor could be persuaded to become the puppet king of the UK in the event of a German win in WW2. This idea has been in the news again recently, alleging that it was Wallis who was all for it. There again, it could be fanciful. If it's true, there must be papers somewhere, perhaps in the official archives in the UK, to support it.

Hungary as a kingdom again is interesting, only because the prime minister is notoriously right wing and best friends with the Thug of Russia, the latter of whom would probably love to encourage Hungary out of the EU and NATO and back to the fold.
Loading...