Post by seanobaron on Jun 14, 2008 8:17:32 GMT -5
Yep, this is an essay I wrote for Modern History. I got 10/20. I felt that itch to write some humour. So I did. And my grades reflected this. Oh well. Enjoy.
“The difficulties faced by the autocracy before 1900 were insurmountable.”
Do you agree? Argue you case.
Screw the ethical argument. 1800’s Russia was a business and the Tsar ran it like a business. The Tsar had to make a profit, keep the worker’s happy and make sure that he kept the top place. Sure, the old bastard had some problems to tackle, but he dealt with them and could have dealt with anything that was thrown at him. Unfortunately for Old Man Alexander II, he didn’t. But he could have, that’s the point of the argument. The difficulties faced by the autocracy were not insurmountable, they were surmountable. Very surmountable.
Russia was a crap-hole before 1900. It was a crap-hole after 1900, it’s a crap-hole now, but mentioning that would just be a waste of time. Never-the-less, the serf-class, before and after emancipation, had a pretty bad union... no union at all. They worked in less-than-enviable working conditions for less-than-enviable pay. Economically, though, this was pretty good for Old Man Tsar. The Tsar owned the farmland monopoly, reaping brilliant rewards for the serf’s back breaking labour and gaining an advantage via poverty. Everyone’s happy.
Whilst maintaining profit margins via their less-than-ethical industrial relations, Russia was failing to utilise the mercantilism and imperialism that other European countries had so readily adopted. People who worked in Russia generally worked for Russia. There were exports, but these firms were usually owned by foreign investors. The Russians set up their own American colony, Alaska, but sold it for a cool $7.2 million to the yanks. But, getting back to the point, Old Man Tsar had no desire to go out and make some cash in the world, which he could have done very easily through trade. Lazy bastard.
The less-than-ethical industrial relations was a double sided sword, however, as whilst the Tsar benefited from treating the working class like crap, some of the working class didn’t like being treated like crap. The poor guys were beaten, censored and silenced by a police state. This animosity was kept below the surface with intimidation and fear, but people still thought that the Tsar was a wanker. Old Man Tsar did have one thing going for him though: the church was on his side, a divine blessing giving him his right to rule. He should have emphasised this. This would have solved a couple of problems.
Ultimately, Old Man Tsar really spoilt the bureaucracy. They were corrupt but were allowed to get away with it. What the bastard’s didn’t realize was that they had a job to do. What the biggest bastard didn’t realize was that they had a job to do and that he had better make sure that they were doing it. The greatest flaw in the administrative machine was the human flaw. Still, such a flaw could have been fixed, via severe punishments for such corruption. Sick the security police on them.
One of the greatest challenges to face the Tsar was that people were trying to kill him, among other negative actions against him. There were more revolutionary ideologies than you could poke a stick at, or would want to, and a lot of them wanted Old Man Tsar out of the top position/dead. This could have been remedied by removing either the head or the body of the opposition; gaining public support or having Lenin whacked would have worked nicely. Just saying, is all.
When Russia beat France in the Patriotic War, people got a warm, fuzzy feeling in their tummies. The Russians of course. The French were pissed. However, this principal was reversed after the Crimean War, where Russia was really screwed over. The Russians were pissed, on vodka. The fact remains, though, that one of the greatest challenges to the Tsar was other countries. Military defeats fuelled the Tsar’s political opponents to question the autocracy. Such defeats, or even conflicts, could have been avoided, should have been avoided. They may have been a challenge, but not an insurmountable challenge.
The Tsar had a lot of challenges in life. Which he failed. However, this was not inevitable, the challenges were not insurmountable. Old Man Tsar overcame any issues with the local economy, Russia wasn’t going bankrupt anytime soon, but with some initiative there could have been a greater profit margin. Society’s issues could have been overcome, via maintaining “divine right” and keeping the bureaucracy on egg-shells. Also, a political advantage could have been maintained by defeating opponents of the Tsar or of Russia. It would have been difficult, but the difficulties faced by the autocracy were not insurmountable.
“The difficulties faced by the autocracy before 1900 were insurmountable.”
Do you agree? Argue you case.
Screw the ethical argument. 1800’s Russia was a business and the Tsar ran it like a business. The Tsar had to make a profit, keep the worker’s happy and make sure that he kept the top place. Sure, the old bastard had some problems to tackle, but he dealt with them and could have dealt with anything that was thrown at him. Unfortunately for Old Man Alexander II, he didn’t. But he could have, that’s the point of the argument. The difficulties faced by the autocracy were not insurmountable, they were surmountable. Very surmountable.
Russia was a crap-hole before 1900. It was a crap-hole after 1900, it’s a crap-hole now, but mentioning that would just be a waste of time. Never-the-less, the serf-class, before and after emancipation, had a pretty bad union... no union at all. They worked in less-than-enviable working conditions for less-than-enviable pay. Economically, though, this was pretty good for Old Man Tsar. The Tsar owned the farmland monopoly, reaping brilliant rewards for the serf’s back breaking labour and gaining an advantage via poverty. Everyone’s happy.
Whilst maintaining profit margins via their less-than-ethical industrial relations, Russia was failing to utilise the mercantilism and imperialism that other European countries had so readily adopted. People who worked in Russia generally worked for Russia. There were exports, but these firms were usually owned by foreign investors. The Russians set up their own American colony, Alaska, but sold it for a cool $7.2 million to the yanks. But, getting back to the point, Old Man Tsar had no desire to go out and make some cash in the world, which he could have done very easily through trade. Lazy bastard.
The less-than-ethical industrial relations was a double sided sword, however, as whilst the Tsar benefited from treating the working class like crap, some of the working class didn’t like being treated like crap. The poor guys were beaten, censored and silenced by a police state. This animosity was kept below the surface with intimidation and fear, but people still thought that the Tsar was a wanker. Old Man Tsar did have one thing going for him though: the church was on his side, a divine blessing giving him his right to rule. He should have emphasised this. This would have solved a couple of problems.
Ultimately, Old Man Tsar really spoilt the bureaucracy. They were corrupt but were allowed to get away with it. What the bastard’s didn’t realize was that they had a job to do. What the biggest bastard didn’t realize was that they had a job to do and that he had better make sure that they were doing it. The greatest flaw in the administrative machine was the human flaw. Still, such a flaw could have been fixed, via severe punishments for such corruption. Sick the security police on them.
One of the greatest challenges to face the Tsar was that people were trying to kill him, among other negative actions against him. There were more revolutionary ideologies than you could poke a stick at, or would want to, and a lot of them wanted Old Man Tsar out of the top position/dead. This could have been remedied by removing either the head or the body of the opposition; gaining public support or having Lenin whacked would have worked nicely. Just saying, is all.
When Russia beat France in the Patriotic War, people got a warm, fuzzy feeling in their tummies. The Russians of course. The French were pissed. However, this principal was reversed after the Crimean War, where Russia was really screwed over. The Russians were pissed, on vodka. The fact remains, though, that one of the greatest challenges to the Tsar was other countries. Military defeats fuelled the Tsar’s political opponents to question the autocracy. Such defeats, or even conflicts, could have been avoided, should have been avoided. They may have been a challenge, but not an insurmountable challenge.
The Tsar had a lot of challenges in life. Which he failed. However, this was not inevitable, the challenges were not insurmountable. Old Man Tsar overcame any issues with the local economy, Russia wasn’t going bankrupt anytime soon, but with some initiative there could have been a greater profit margin. Society’s issues could have been overcome, via maintaining “divine right” and keeping the bureaucracy on egg-shells. Also, a political advantage could have been maintained by defeating opponents of the Tsar or of Russia. It would have been difficult, but the difficulties faced by the autocracy were not insurmountable.
