Perhaps creating a system of power based off of bloodlines wasn't a good idea. Something to think about if you ever have kids and aspire to be a monarch
every time you're overthrowing a monarch you either kill potential heirs to the throne or run into the possibility of someone challenging your legitimacy in a few years. there's even passages in The Prince, by Machiavelli that goes over this.
remember that this was in the early 20th century, in a largely agrarian country and as the world's first worker's revolution. they needed to be as paranoid/careful as they could to succeed.
yes, but there is a difference between someone who the people have been told their entire lives is entitled to power by god and some random fuck the bourgeoisie and foreign powers decided to back as their counter-revolutionary leader. one can be done with much more ease and speed while the other takes longer and needs actual political work. nobody cares about a thirds cousin fuckwit, but the king's child? that's someone people can rally behind.
of course counter-revolution is a constant for a proletarian State, but there's no need to do the reactionaries' work for them. there's no way keeping them hostage would have been any better optics (the soviets kept the Romanov children hostage for decades while torturing them and using them as bargaining chips!!!!!!!!)
no one cares about the Romanov family except for monarchists (lmao) and leftists, this is literally a non-issue.
you really think that if the Romanovs were to be in the custody of the bolsheviks for a while that the torture accusations wouldn't pour in? you might think it wasn't necessary to minimize the chances that someone with a direct claim to the throne shows up, but leading thinkers of taking power against monarchies, like Machiavelli, would disagree.
i'm saying no one cares about what happened to them now, back then, as futures heirs to the throne, it was a very different story. to say that a post satirizing the killing of aristocrats is specifically talking (and gloating!) about killing children and hyperfixating on it is arguing against something that only exists in your head, at best, and being dishonest, at worse.
I don't say it to dunk on them, and the killing makes me really uncomfortable. I think the issue is not seeing the situation as real, not living in their present day in the midst of all the history that came before it.
I think anyone would understand shooting down like, a German bomber that the Nazis decided to put a couple of babies in.
yes, and when neolibs drone strike children, they imagine those children will grow up to be terrorists. perceived threat and actual threat aren’t the same thing.
I mean, one of those is significantly more realistic. You make some other good points though
no no worries, sorry the thread is kinda hostile, and you might be right about it being really useless. I still think if it was cut and dry, it's just a trolley problem, but you made good points that it might have been excessive and counterproductive. Either way it sucks, and someone is guilty for creating that situation, either directly or indirectly
Batista also was not a hereditary monarch operating under a centuries old divine right to rule, meaning his kids mean fuck all to anyone compared to the Romanovs.
If you're gonna do a lazy comparison to anything, at least do it to Puyi and the Chinese revolution so theres some kind of point that doesnt fall apart in the basic definitions.
The tsar did not willingly go into the custody of the Bolsheviks, he abdicated to the Provisional government and when the October revolution happened the royals simply had no resources to do anything about it.
And its very easy to theorize about possible alternative strategies but most would probably just have been seen as impractical or ineffective, holding the tsars kids as hostages would probably have lead to the white armies attempting to "call the bluff" or just not caring in the face of eradicating bolshevism, as well as moving them being a risky proposition due to the possibility of collaborators or spies making a move when not in a fortified position.
I don't know who started this trend of pretending every unfortunate but considered necessary action that one's side performs is actually cool and awesome.
Real "Slay Queen Madeline Albright 500000 Kids" energy.
Wherent some white forces getting closer than usual that week ? Yeah they probably got drunk and made that decision but presenting it some "i just woke up and decided to kill the tsar family for no real reason" is missing some context
Yes and "tHeY KiLLeD tEh rOmAnOv KidDeRiNoS nOoO" is also a longstanding anti-communist talking point, so it's fucking hilarious seeing it pop up here.
<3 to murder children <3 <3
Perhaps creating a system of power based off of bloodlines wasn't a good idea. Something to think about if you ever have kids and aspire to be a monarch
every time you're overthrowing a monarch you either kill potential heirs to the throne or run into the possibility of someone challenging your legitimacy in a few years. there's even passages in The Prince, by Machiavelli that goes over this.
remember that this was in the early 20th century, in a largely agrarian country and as the world's first worker's revolution. they needed to be as paranoid/careful as they could to succeed.
deleted by creator
Trotsky, I know you're still salty about things, but damm why you gotta do the state departments work for them?
deleted by creator
41st:
:owned:
yes, but there is a difference between someone who the people have been told their entire lives is entitled to power by god and some random fuck the bourgeoisie and foreign powers decided to back as their counter-revolutionary leader. one can be done with much more ease and speed while the other takes longer and needs actual political work. nobody cares about a thirds cousin fuckwit, but the king's child? that's someone people can rally behind.
of course counter-revolution is a constant for a proletarian State, but there's no need to do the reactionaries' work for them. there's no way keeping them hostage would have been any better optics (the soviets kept the Romanov children hostage for decades while torturing them and using them as bargaining chips!!!!!!!!)
no one cares about the Romanov family except for monarchists (lmao) and leftists, this is literally a non-issue.
deleted by creator
you really think that if the Romanovs were to be in the custody of the bolsheviks for a while that the torture accusations wouldn't pour in? you might think it wasn't necessary to minimize the chances that someone with a direct claim to the throne shows up, but leading thinkers of taking power against monarchies, like Machiavelli, would disagree.
i'm saying no one cares about what happened to them now, back then, as futures heirs to the throne, it was a very different story. to say that a post satirizing the killing of aristocrats is specifically talking (and gloating!) about killing children and hyperfixating on it is arguing against something that only exists in your head, at best, and being dishonest, at worse.
deleted by creator
The no-name third cousin isn't much of a threat
deleted by creator
I mean, empires have been sustained off the legitimacy of a 5-year old
The people who did it could have easily imagined one of those kids decreeing the massacre of their families
You're right and also I don't think this person studies history lol
I don't say it to dunk on them, and the killing makes me really uncomfortable. I think the issue is not seeing the situation as real, not living in their present day in the midst of all the history that came before it.
I think anyone would understand shooting down like, a German bomber that the Nazis decided to put a couple of babies in.
deleted by creator
:owned:
deleted by creator
I mean, one of those is significantly more realistic. You make some other good points though
deleted by creator
no no worries, sorry the thread is kinda hostile, and you might be right about it being really useless. I still think if it was cut and dry, it's just a trolley problem, but you made good points that it might have been excessive and counterproductive. Either way it sucks, and someone is guilty for creating that situation, either directly or indirectly
deleted by creator
<3 to lick boots of dead monarchs <3 <3
edit: :bootlicker:
<3 to tone police 100+ year old dead royal brats
"but aktually the optics were really problematic"
deleted by creator
:owned:
Based. More evidence that self-organizing power structures deliver good results.
Also I applaud getting blind drunk before yeeting the rich.
deleted by creator
love to focus group solutions to ending monarchism for maximum syngergy in the marketplace of ideas in the middle of a people's revolution lol
deleted by creator
:fidel-si:
deleted by creator
Batista also was not a hereditary monarch operating under a centuries old divine right to rule, meaning his kids mean fuck all to anyone compared to the Romanovs.
If you're gonna do a lazy comparison to anything, at least do it to Puyi and the Chinese revolution so theres some kind of point that doesnt fall apart in the basic definitions.
deleted by creator
The tsar did not willingly go into the custody of the Bolsheviks, he abdicated to the Provisional government and when the October revolution happened the royals simply had no resources to do anything about it.
And its very easy to theorize about possible alternative strategies but most would probably just have been seen as impractical or ineffective, holding the tsars kids as hostages would probably have lead to the white armies attempting to "call the bluff" or just not caring in the face of eradicating bolshevism, as well as moving them being a risky proposition due to the possibility of collaborators or spies making a move when not in a fortified position.
deleted by creator
If I could do it again, I'd have also killed Batista and his kids.
deleted by creator
How do you know I'm not really me tho
deleted by creator
I'm a tastemaker.
deleted by creator
damn this is a good question
deleted by creator
Yes, also:
:owned:
I don't know who started this trend of pretending every unfortunate but considered necessary action that one's side performs is actually cool and awesome.
Real "Slay Queen Madeline Albright 500000 Kids" energy.
Wherent some white forces getting closer than usual that week ? Yeah they probably got drunk and made that decision but presenting it some "i just woke up and decided to kill the tsar family for no real reason" is missing some context
Yes and "tHeY KiLLeD tEh rOmAnOv KidDeRiNoS nOoO" is also a longstanding anti-communist talking point, so it's fucking hilarious seeing it pop up here.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
btw :owned:
deleted by creator