# Was Czar Nicholas II a Bad Guy? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 15, 2012, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786 "2012-09-15T14:12:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![gunnergoz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e95f7d/32.png) [@gunnergoz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gunnergoz)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 9:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/21 "2012-09-17T09:05:41Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > From that description, he sounds like…Mitt Romney :eek: Priceless! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/22 "2012-09-17T13:04:10Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > You mean free election singular and the resulting legislature was dissolved the day after it first met. No, there were four separate elections. The first Duma met for two months in 1906. The second one met for four months in 1907. The third Duma held together for its full five year term. The fourth Duma was elected in 1912 and dissolved itself when WWI started in 1914 but reconvened in 1915. It stayed in session through March 1917 when it took over the government following Nicholas’ abdication. It was then dissolved by Kerensky in September of 1917. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/23 "2012-09-17T13:38:06Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > He wasn’t Darth Vader but Jar Jar Binks. Massey could not have provided a more accurate description. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/24 "2012-09-17T13:51:27Z")
And , as Massey said, he was prone to take the advice of the last person he talked to. So he might promise new schools, get another visitor, and the priority would be changed to a battleship. How would you compare him to someone like Kaiser Wilhelm II? (I just selected a similar leader of the time) I think it would come down to the guidance they were getting and the need to follow that advice. I’m not sure there would have been a lot of difference. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/25 "2012-09-17T14:15:30Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > A similar incident occurred in 1914. When Russia was considering the possibility of declaring war on Austria in defense of Serbia, Rasputin of all people told him that going to war would be a terrible idea. It was unfortunately one of the few occasions when Nicholas stood up to Rasputin. Not possible, because Russia never even _considered_ declaring war on Austria until after the war had already begun. What Russia did was _mobilize_ in defense of Serbia, and for Russia, mobilization was a far, far cry from a declaration of war. Russia had to mobilize even to be taken seriously as a _diplomatic_ player in any negotiations over Serbia. In response to Russia’s _mobilization_, Germany declared war on Russia. Nicholas II had his faults, and made many poor decisions, but launching Russia into World War I wasn’t one of them. Russia went to war because she was attacked. > [@Little Nemo](#): > > Witte, as you noted, was a brilliant man. Lots of people probably made worse decisions than he did. But making worse decisions than Rasputin? That’s shameful. It’s easy to say that mobilization was a bad decision, since it provoked Germany’s attack and led to the fall of the Empire. But what was the alternative? Russia would have had to back down from mobilization upon Germany’s demand, which would have been the most craven appeasement imaginable. She would have had to abandon her ally, Serbia, to an attack which would literally have wiped Serbia off the map. This would not have gone unnoticed by Russia’s other ally, France, whom Russia desperately needed for the war against Germany which was probably inevitable whether Russia backed down over Serbia or not. Rasputin didn’t have to worry about these things. Nicholas II did. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/26 "2012-09-17T15:14:39Z")
The sad thing was that Russia COULD have transitioned to a constitutional democracy. Under the wise Count Witte, Russia was achieving growth rates of 12% per year-capital was coming in, and Russia was rapidly industrializing. Education was making rapid gains, and the small farmers were being lifted out of poverty Things were going so well (before the 1905 war) that Lenin and his communists were getting discouraged of launching a communist revolution. Had Nicholas been a good Tsar, he could have transformed Russia-instead, he got caught up in the Kaiser’s insane war plans, and got sucked in. Then the Communists came in, and made Russia a hell for 70 years. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/27 "2012-09-17T16:41:26Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > As a man and father Nicholas was not a bad man. As a ruler, he was a disaster. He was indecisive, and prone to make stupid decisions. I’m going on memory here and no doubt this is a gross oversimplification, but I recall reading he was often preoccupied with his sickly son. Inbreeding among the European royal families produced higher incidences of certain diseases, and wasn’t his son a hemophiliac? Or some sort of other blood disease? They say that contributed to Nicholas’ projection of aloofness. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/28 "2012-09-17T16:54:24Z")
Hemophilia, from Queen Victoria’s genes. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/29 "2012-09-17T18:09:39Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > And , as Massey said, he was prone to take the advice of the last person he talked to. So he might promise new schools, get another visitor, and the priority would be changed to a battleship… _When You Wish Upon a Tsar_… ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/30 "2012-09-17T20:46:27Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > From that description, he sounds like…Mitt Romney :eek: William Manchester in his biography says that in the Dardanelles campaign, it was proposed that Greece attack Turkey, so shipping lanes to Russia would be open. But the Czar, whose regime (and ultimately life) depended on the campaign, refused. He wanted to rule in Constantinople, not the Greeks. So a far more accurate comparison is Barack Hussein Obama, who said he was interested in fairness even though it is well documented that when you raise taxes on the rich, the money you raise decreases (Obama should look at off his his supporters who dodge taxes anyway they can, like Geithner, Buffett, Kerry, etc).. Like Obama, Nicholas was not interested in exploring other views different from his own narrow mindedness, and had a cult of personality. I’m not sure if airpower made a great difference in World War I, but the Czar limited pilots to only proper Russians. One thing of interested to those who are familiar with the “Patty Duke Show”. Nicholas looked an awful lot like his cousin George V of Great Britain. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/31 "2012-09-17T21:01:29Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Not possible, because Russia never even _considered_ declaring war on Austria until after the war had already begun. What Russia did was _mobilize_ in defense of Serbia, and for Russia, mobilization was a far, far cry from a declaration of war. Russia had to mobilize even to be taken seriously as a _diplomatic_ player in any negotiations over Serbia. > > In response to Russia’s _mobilization_, Germany declared war on Russia. All the major powers of the era recognized full mobilization as the prelude to a declaration of war. Nobody had plans for mobilizing and not following up with a formal declaration. It was not a diplomatic maneuver. > [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Nicholas II had his faults, and made many poor decisions, but launching Russia into World War I wasn’t one of them. Russia went to war because she was attacked. > > It’s easy to say that mobilization was a bad decision, since it provoked Germany’s attack and led to the fall of the Empire. But what was the alternative? Russia would have had to back down from mobilization upon Germany’s demand, which would have been the most craven appeasement imaginable. She would have had to abandon her ally, Serbia, to an attack which would literally have wiped Serbia off the map. This would not have gone unnoticed by Russia’s other ally, France, whom Russia desperately needed for the war against Germany which was probably inevitable whether Russia backed down over Serbia or not. > > Rasputin didn’t have to worry about these things. Nicholas II did. I’d say what happened was that Russia went to war because Serbia was attacked. Russia did have good reasons to go to war for Serbia. Serbia was a Russian ally and Russia would have lost face by abandoning an ally to its fate. But it wasn’t an unthinkable option. Let’s not ignore the reality - Serbia was guilty of conspiring against Austria. The organization that killed Franz Ferdinand was being run by a Serbian army officer. It would have been possible for Russia to have decided that Serbia had brought its problems on itself and Russia wasn’t obligated to defend it from the consequences. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/32 "2012-09-17T21:05:48Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > William Manchester in his biography says that in the Dardanelles campaign, it was proposed that Greece attack Turkey, so shipping lanes to Russia would be open. But the > Czar, whose regime (and ultimately life) depended on the campaign, refused. He wanted to rule in Constantinople, not the Greeks. So a far more accurate comparison is Barack Hussein Obama, who said he was interested in fairness even though it is well documented that when you raise taxes on the rich, the money you raise decreases (Obama should look at off his his supporters who dodge taxes anyway they can, like Geithner, Buffett, Kerry, etc).. Like Obama, Nicholas was not interested in exploring other views different from his own narrow mindedness, and had a cult of personality. > I’m not sure if airpower made a great difference in World War I, but the Czar limited pilots to only proper Russians. > > One thing of interested to those who are familiar with the “Patty Duke Show”. Nicholas looked an awful lot like his cousin George V of Great Britain. Whoa, somebody has been knee-deep in Fox News huh? Didn’t you know that every time you mention Obama’s middle name, a GOP voter dies? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/33 "2012-09-17T22:59:20Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > All the major powers of the era recognized full mobilization as the prelude to a declaration of war. Nobody had plans for mobilizing and not following up with a formal declaration. Nobody _planned_ for that, but it remained on the table as an option. Mobilization was far less final in terms of cutting off negotiation than a declaration of war–especially for Russia, which took a long time to mobilize. As David Fromkin put it (_Europe’s Last Summer_), > [@](#): > > Russian mobilization did not pose the deadly danger that German mobilization would. For Germany, mobilization meant war; for Russia, as its government explained to the Germans, it did not. “Russia’s armies”, as an academic authority recently has pointed out, “could remain mobile behind their frontier almost indefinitely”. And the German government really knew that. After mobilizing, Nicholas continued to work for mediation and wrote Wilhelm, > [@](#): > > We are far from wishing for war. As long as the negotiations with Austria on Serbia’s account are taking place my troops shall not make any provocative action. I give you my solemn word for this. All was foreclosed by the German declaration of war. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2012, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/34 "2012-09-17T23:18:45Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > I’m going on memory here and no doubt this is a gross oversimplification, but I recall reading he was often preoccupied with his sickly son. Inbreeding among the European royal families produced higher incidences of certain diseases, and wasn’t his son a hemophiliac? Or some sort of other blood disease? They say that contributed to Nicholas’ projection of aloofness. Contrary to popular belief, hemophilia is NOT caused inbreeding. However, the rest is true. The Tsarevich Alexei did suffer from it, his mother, the Tsarina Alexandra, a granddaughter of Queen Victoria, was a carrier. (She had lost a brother when he was only two-years-old). Alexei’s hemophilia was kept a secret from the general public, so people didn’t the truth about Rasputin. He was assumed to be the Tsarina’s lover. While the rest of **Jim’s Son** ’s post is partisan bullshit, he’s right about Nicholas and George V – they did indeed look a lot alike. (Their mothers were sisters) But seriously, dude, what the fuck does Obama have to do with Tsarist Russia? ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/35 "2012-09-18T00:02:42Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > But seriously, dude, what the fuck does Obama have to do with Tsarist Russia? [Marlin Perkins] Just as the wildebeest herd creates a protective shield around their young, so too can Mutual of Omaha create a protective shield around your home or business [/Marlin Perkins] ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/36 "2012-09-18T00:11:53Z")
What a great slogan! Mutual of Omaha, the wildebeest of insurance companies. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/37 "2012-09-18T00:18:53Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Nicholas looked an awful lot like his cousin George V of Great Britain. I’m glad that [some part](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tsar_Nicholas_II_%26_King_George_V.JPG) of your post makes sense. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Gukumatz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/74df32/32.png) [@Gukumatz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gukumatz)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/38 "2012-09-18T00:20:04Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > From that description, he sounds like…Mitt Romney :eek: > [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > […]So a far more accurate comparison is Barack Hussein Obama, who said he was interested in fairness even though it is well documented that when you raise taxes on the rich, the money you raise decreases (Obama should look at off his his supporters who dodge taxes anyway they can, like Geithner, Buffett, Kerry, etc).. Like Obama, Nicholas was not interested in exploring other views different from his own narrow mindedness, and had a cult of personality.[…] Please keep your political hijacks and potshots out of IMHO. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Whoa, somebody has been knee-deep in Fox News huh? Didn’t you know that every time you mention Obama’s middle name, a GOP voter dies? :dubious: Please keep restrict attacks against other posters to the Pit, where they belong. ETA: Edited this post to include **YogSosoth** ’s stab at Mitt Romney, which I’d accidentally omitted. - Gukumatz, IMHO moderator ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2012, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/39 "2012-09-24T01:18:59Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > And , as Massey said, he was prone to take the advice of the last person he talked to. So he might promise new schools, get another visitor, and the priority would be changed to a battleship. > > How would you compare him to someone like Kaiser Wilhelm II? (I just selected a similar leader of the time) I think it would come down to the guidance they were getting and the need to follow that advice. I’m not sure there would have been a lot of difference. Bumping this because the question about the Kaiser is a good one. Wilhelm also had a lot of insecurities, but unlike Nicholas, he made up for them by acting like a big blowhard. He was very loud, pushy, bombastic, etc. And unlike Russia, Germany was a constitutional monarcy. There wasn’t as much freedom as Britain, or the U.S., but it definitely wasn’t Tsarist Russia. You weren’t going to find the Picklehaubes busting down your door in the middle of the night. He wasn’t a bad guy either, don’t get me wrong. But Wilhelm’s upbringing was completely differrent than Nicholas’s – he was constantly made to feel inferior by his parents, there was a lot of tension between his parents and his grandparents, etc. He was also extemely paranoid. There was also speculation that he suffered from brain damage due to being deprived of oxygen at birth (his [birth](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_ii#Biography) was a very difficult one) Like Nicholas, he was a devoted husband and father, although he tended to be very hard on his sons and favored his daughter. In his case, he was mostly all talk, and in a lot of cases, his mouth got him in a lot of trouble. He wasn’t stupid, but he wasn’t the genius he thought to be. Basically a case of the [Dunning-Kruger effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger) The Kaiser would probably merit his own thread. A fascinating individual. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2012, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786/40 "2012-09-24T01:47:53Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > [Actually not](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocols_of_the_elders_of_zion#Stolypin.27s_fraud_investigation.2C_1905). _The Protocols_ were actually found to be a hoax and banned, by Nicholas himself. > > That’s not to say there were not Jewish pograms in Russia, but the Tsar did NOT order them on the basis of _The Protocols_. I am probably biased because my grandparents and their parents and brothers and sisters were victims of these pogroms. My maternal grandmother told me stories about them. Of course, if it weren’t for the pogroms, they wouldn’t have come to America and they would have faced a much worse fate. From your cite he said, “The Protocols should be confiscated, a good cause cannot be defended by dirty means.” In his opinion, the oppression of Jews was a “good cause” but he wanted to oppress the Jews fairly. I guess that you could argue that there was some honor in that if you squint and turn your head. > [@](#): > > Nicholas was basically a decent guy who was a lousy emperor. > [@](#): > > So again, nice guy, shitty ruler. Honestly, how can you say that? I’m sure that he loved his kids and his dogs and was generous to them and clearly he was sheltered and a dupe for some smart, manipulative people but nice, decent men don’t do what he did. His family was living in insanely excessive luxury while people were starving. This led to the revolution that put his people under the control of even worse monsters for decades. If he really tried to do the right thing but failed, then “nice guy, shitty ruler” would be apt but from your own description, “nice guy” doesn’t follow logically. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-czar-nicholas-ii-a-bad-guy/634786.md?page=3)