Spicy, but also a very complete understanding of the political purpose behind murdering the old regime in the course of seizing control of a state or monarchy. Surviving members of the monarchy or whatever become rallying points for political opposition, which is to say terrorists and insurgents.
On the other hand, China reforming Puyi is an extremely powerful argument against murdering the old regime, so your certainly have options.
In the Soviet Union's defense, they were probably thinking of the French Revolution as their primary example, where not too long after the Ancien Regime was overthrown there was a Bourbon Restoration. In China though Puyi had already been overthrown once and had only been restored as a Japanese puppet, so there wasn't much of a threat of an Imperial restoration.
In China though Puyi had already been overthrown once
Twice actually, there was restoration attempt in 1917 which immediately failed and only proven how incredibly unpopular he and his dynasty was. Unlike Romanovs which had entire armies of more or less honest followers, nobody in China wanted Qing back.
Agreed. I understand why the people who made the decision and carried out the murders did so and I think that given the context and what information they had available their decision is understandable. I wouldn't have ordered it, but I cannot judge them for doing so.
On the other hand, China reforming Puyi is an extremely powerful argument against murdering the old regime, so your certainly have options.
To be fair, China had the luxury of having him safely in hands for years. Romanovs were few days of being freed by whiteguard army. Soviets did not had options.
Agreed. I wouldn't have done it, personally, but I understand why they did and I think it was a reasonable decision given what the guards knew at the time.
Spicy, but also a very complete understanding of the political purpose behind murdering the old regime in the course of seizing control of a state or monarchy. Surviving members of the monarchy or whatever become rallying points for political opposition, which is to say terrorists and insurgents.
On the other hand, China reforming Puyi is an extremely powerful argument against murdering the old regime, so your certainly have options.
In the Soviet Union's defense, they were probably thinking of the French Revolution as their primary example, where not too long after the Ancien Regime was overthrown there was a Bourbon Restoration. In China though Puyi had already been overthrown once and had only been restored as a Japanese puppet, so there wasn't much of a threat of an Imperial restoration.
Twice actually, there was restoration attempt in 1917 which immediately failed and only proven how incredibly unpopular he and his dynasty was. Unlike Romanovs which had entire armies of more or less honest followers, nobody in China wanted Qing back.
Agreed. I understand why the people who made the decision and carried out the murders did so and I think that given the context and what information they had available their decision is understandable. I wouldn't have ordered it, but I cannot judge them for doing so.
To be fair, China had the luxury of having him safely in hands for years. Romanovs were few days of being freed by whiteguard army. Soviets did not had options.
Agreed. I wouldn't have done it, personally, but I understand why they did and I think it was a reasonable decision given what the guards knew at the time.
I mean they were correct, Yekaterinburg was surrounded and did fell less than week later.