/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

He was an inbred German, why would he even need to be smart? The whole point of being king is having others do the actual government for you, same reason to be an absentee business owner

it was probably the most gigachad thing he could do considering the circumstances and the vibes. just think of the amount of aura he’s farmed since then.

>>2823292
You mean looking like George V while performing like dogshit?

>>2823295
retardmaxxing is the meta rn bro

>>2823274
So what you're saying is that socialism was a plot by the aristos and capitalists.

probably because after the 1905 failes revolution they realized murdering all opposition was bad

>>2823326
how is that your takeway you illiterate faggot. suck a shotgun RIGHT NOW

>>2823274
He literally wanted to abolish the monarchy and become a bourgeois liberal democracy right before the october revolution commenced xd

>>2823444
>He literally wanted to abolish the monarchy and become a bourgeois liberal democracy right before the october revolution commenced xd
no retard, he abdicated after the february revolution and was put on house arrest by the provisional government. bourgeois liberal democracy arrived in february in the form of kerensky's provisional government

>>2823447
In the months between the February Revolution (March 1917) and the October Revolution (November 1917), Russia did indeed abolish the monarchy and became a republic in terms of formal state structure.

>>2823447
Yea you're right, I just learned history from my schizo jew hating russophile colleague who told me the tsar himself wanted to end the monarchy and give the people a democratic republic (damage control reforms)

>>2823454
I just thought it might have more truth to it than the internet that is washed up western propaganda, but yea it turns out no

>>2823448
Yes, and not because the tsar wanted it, which is exactly what the anon you are responding to is saying.
>>2823454
>>2823456
lol what

>>2823295
Constitutional monarchs really had everything figured out. They don't have to do shit apart from appear dignified and statesmanlike in public. Apart from that they just live in luxury off the public dime. All the actual work, blame, and controversy fall to the ministers and parliament. You'd have to actually be stupid to want to be a monarch with real power.

>>2823274
>led by an Orthodox priest
dont forget father gapon was an actual paid okhrana agent too lol

>>2824242
when people imagine monarchs they are under the delusion that since some were accomplished or in any way actually capable of competent statecraft, that most of them would be or should be, they think of napoleon, frederick the great, king james, etc, and not elizabeth II, queen willhemina, george V and the many other monarchs, they don't understand that the latter requires little responsibility, and gives a strong outlet, whereas the first is complicated and can wind up in a million different ways

Wasn't that priest a tsarist secret police double agent?
Okhrana double agents in the revolutionary movement of the time is a crazy rabbit hole ngl

>>2824242
Gracefag in shambles

>>2824242
I always thought the same, but about Church of England, and the like, priests.

>>2824427
>Okhrana double agents in the revolutionary movement of the time is a crazy rabbit hole ngl
yeah its insane stuff. the head of the SR combat org was a paid okhrana spy who killed the Tsars uncle and a few members of the ministry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevno_Azef

>>2824578
They still have to keep their parishes running though. They have to organize services, write and deliver sermons, build a relationship with their congregation, provide moral guidance, participate in church governance, organize holiday events, charitable functions, often missionary work, general community outreach, etc. You can say all this is useless but it's still actual work that they're expected to do. By comparison a constitutional monarch can have somebody write their speeches, plan all their events, manage their schedule and calender, etc. All they have to do is show up. Frankly the hardest part about being a figurehead king would be not getting caught doing anything scandalous. When the most difficult part of your job is not letting people know how much fun you're having, then you know you've got it pretty easy.

>>2824427
Yeah, Parvus.

Anti-communist Russian diasporoids won't tell you this but the White Army and those aligned with them during the civil war hated Tsar Nicholas because he was a retard who kept losing wars and created the conditions that allowed the revolution to happen.

>>2824272
most monarchs were really just failsons

>>2824242
>Constitutional monarchs really had everything figured out.
this guy got ACK'd at the hands of people who didn't even want to kill him, in the name of resisting his own job becoming easier lol

>>2824580
>>2824427
Double agents are wild because they can always dip their toes in both pools, so to speak, and wait for a winner to emerge, and say they were secretly on that side all along and only did what was necessary. But they'll never ever be above suspicion. Why choose that life for yourself?

>>2824741
>Anti-communist Russian diasporoids won't tell you this but the White Army and those aligned with them during the civil war hated Tsar Nicholas because he was a retard who kept losing wars and created the conditions that allowed the revolution to happen.
Sort of. The White Army was a huge coalition. It consisted of everyone from social democrats who were mad at the Bolshevik "betrayal" lf Kerensky's provisional government and the constituent assembly, kadets (liberal republicans), constitutional monarchists, proto-fascists like the black hundreds, and full on absolute monarchists

>>2824908
Also true of louis XVI, if he let himself get deposed the thermidorians probably would've put him back as a "compromise" with Austria, also he wasn't supposed to be killed before he fled anyway

>>2824914
>social democrats who were mad at the Bolshevik "betrayal"
Idk why they just didn't accept the Bolshevik invitation to form a coalition like the Left SRs did.

>>2823274

Dude also refused to nationalize weapons production & distribution during WWI despite generals begging him to. #gigaretardindeed

>>2825088
Because they knew they wouldn't be in charge duh, why would join a coalition you would be a minority and nobody else in the group agrees with your position, that would be stupid unless you have a plan to poison your internal opposition and come out on top.

>>2823274

1. Unlawful assembly–spurious event that the cabinet ministers took the discretion of handling… the Tsar wasn't at the Winter Palace nor aware.
   
2. Back in those days they'd disperse multitudes with violence (unlike with riot gear or non-lethal methods). It is no reconciliation, but realistically that response isn't uncommon or unprecedented.
   
3. It probably doesn't mean much to leftists (who likely already made up their mind on who the bad guy is here), but the Tsar did pay compensate the injured.
   
   

>>2824242
>Constitutional monarchs really had everything figured out. They don't have to do shit apart from appear dignified and statesmanlike in public.
First off, then it isn't really a monarchy anymore.
Then it pretty much is just another rich guy; monarchists (believe it or not) don't see civil sovereigns as merely another rich guy like leftists do, but as Hobbes says… the soul of the Commonwealth… the sun, root, unity, and head, etc, a preeminent personage who saves us from ourselves (on account of factionalism)…
Like anyone else, leadership is wanted.
Lastly, unless the monarch is sacred (which is not the case in most countries except like Thailand or Japan), that point is null, because do-nothing kings are also susceptible to public outrage or can be usurped still (like Pepin the Short did to Childeric III)… who asked Pope Zachary and re-affirmed this:
>Whether it was fitting that those who held the royal title but lacked true power should remain kings, or whether the crown should belong to the one who actually wielded authority
Pope decided upon the latter, the person who wielded authority… which is why Louis XIV said that it was same to see on one hand the mere title of a king and on the other all the prestige and kingly actions and power…
That's fine… any regime is going to fall… you might as well say it's stupid to even try, because someday your own effort will fail and be ground to the dust with any revolutionary regime… as the case with the Soviet Union, –the Russian Tsars and the French monarchy since Louis XIV far surpassed that regime in years, and North Korea also wised up and has a dynasty basically (so far).

>>2826781
Minority factions join coalitions all the time. You do that when you have common goals with your coalition partners to work towards. Call me crazy, but you would think that the main goal of the Socialist Revolutionary party would be socialist revolution, and that there would be enough common ground with the party currently leading a socialist revolution that they could work together.

Material conditions make it so every leader of an empire at the late stages act like a retard. Look at trump for example.

>>2824272
It's not only the particular virtue of persons that is accounted for; having a hereditary monarch takes into account the virtue of being a family, the trust between father and son, the preservation of the cult of personaltiy itself, etc… "I could live through my descendants".
I consider a familial bond to be very, very strong, stronger than friendship, stronger than partisanship, stronger than any other association… in keeping loyalty… the son generally speaking has more incentive to be trusted with the keys (not to betray his father), keep the cult of personality going, present the state as a familial state (so the public at large too can see themselves as a family, and take that unity of a familial bond upon themselves and cohere together better).
Western people wouldn't get it… they're unaccustomed to seeing themselves as a family… they prefer their political parties (unless it's a corporatist party) and being Republicans, Democrats, Tories, Labour, Green party, Libertarian… even if it makes them enemies rather than a kindred people… and dissipates their collective strength.
One party leftists are another kind of corporatist, but without the familialism associated with a preeminent royal household (instead a political corporate party) except in nuanced cases like DPRK.

>>2826827
There have been rulers that narrowly avoided the collapse of their empires with competent leadership. 3rd century Roman emperors like Aurelian and Diocletian come to mind.

The chief aim of monarchy that appeals to that… like State Shinto… is to have a kind of community of pleasures and pains manifest through one person for all persons, and to have an arbiter and decisive, unitary leadership with the final authority.

>>2826781
>Because they knew they wouldn't be in charge duh
but they weren't in charge of the white army either

>>2826848
None of those words mean anything and I know it