Defending Tsarist Russia

I'm a little disappointed in Peter Hitchens, normally one of my favourite British political commentators.  In a passage mainly about Cuba, he deflected criticism that by attacking Castro he defends Batista with the analogy, "No more do I defend the Tsarist autocracy which ruled Russia before the Bolshevik revolution," adding later (provocatively for monarchist readers) that "[i]f Russia had had only the February Revolution of 1917, and not the October putsch, it would have been saved from a long nightmare."  As I just wrote in a comment at his blog,

Well why not? I do. Tsarist Russia has been unfairly maligned by leftist propaganda for more than a century and as a staunch monarchist I am always sorry to see otherwise discerning right-wingers falling for it. Consider this observation from a 1998 letter to The Independent from Oleg Goridevsky:

Russia under Nicholas II, with all the survivals of feudalism, had opposition political parties, independent trade unions and newspapers, a rather radical parliament and a modern legal system. Its agriculture was on the level of the USA, with industry rapidly approaching the West European level.

In the USSR there was total tyranny, no political liberties and practically no human rights. Its economy was not viable; agriculture was destroyed. The terror against the population reached a scope unprecedented in history.

No wonder many Russians look back at Tsarist Russia as a paradise lost.

What is often overlooked is that after the 1905 upheavals subsided, conditions were actually improving considerably in Tsarist Russia and very well might have continued to do so had it not been for the 1914-18 War you rightly mourn as the end of traditional European civilisation. Imperial Russia had its flaws, but they were not insurmountable, and it deserves better [from conservatives]. Nicholas II was a good man who loved his country and served it to the best of his ability. As Dominic Lieven points out in his excellent biography, he was neither as weak nor as unintelligent as commonly thought. I cannot accept any abolition of any monarchy for any reason; Kerensky's republic might have been more tolerable than Communism (anything would be), but it was essentially no more legitimate than the USSR--or Putin's regime today.

-----

I might have added that while I can't endorse every point of this defense of Nicholas II and Tsarist Russia by a Russian Orthodox priest, it is worth reading as a counterbalance to the mountain of calumnies commonly hurled at pre-1917 Russia.

Meanwhile, back in the United States, political hype has reached a fever pitch difficult even for determined non-voters to ignore.  With that in mind I conclude this entry on Russia (thanks to the Mad Monarchist) with a pertinent observation from the great Tsarist Russian conservative statesman Konstantin Pobedonostsev (1827-1907):

“In a Democracy, the real rulers are the dexterous manipulators of votes, with their placemen, the mechanics who so skillfully operate the hidden springs which move the puppets in the arena of democratic elections. Men of this kind are ever ready with loud speeches lauding equality; in reality, they rule the people as any despot or military dictator might rule it.”

Guillaume & Stephanie II

I hadn't sent an alarm, but nevertheless found myself up by 4:00 AM this morning to watch the two-hour religious ceremony at Luxembourg's Notre Dame Cathedral live via Wort.lu.  I'm glad I did as it was a beautiful service with a glittering array of royal guests in attendance.  Being a musician, I noted with approval (while wishing I could have been one of the three cellists in the orchestra) the choices of Gigout's Grand Choeur Dialogue for the processional, Mozart's Missa Brevis in C as the mass setting, anthems by Mendelssohn and Handel (the famous Hallelujah Chorus), and the Finale from Guilmaunt's Symphony in D Minor for the recessional, though I do wish that TV commentators (whether American, British, or Luxembourgish) would not feel at liberty to talk so much during the music.

Bride Countess Stephanie (now HRH Hereditary Grand Duchess), who looked every inch the beautiful fairytale princess, was escorted down the aisle by her brother Count Jehan de Lannoy, as their father Count Philippe at 90 is a bit old for such a role.  (Stephanie is the youngest of eight children.)  Touchingly, they stopped to share a moment with him upon reaching the altar and the service began with a minute of silence in honour of their mother Countess Alix (1941-2012) who died in August.  The Catholic nuptial liturgy, celebrated with dignity by Archbishop Jean-Claude Hollerich, was conducted mostly in French with some Latin and a few greetings and prayers in English (presumably for the benefit of international guests and viewers).  Afterwards, the bride and groom appeared on the palace balcony where they delighted cheering crowds with kisses and were subsequently joined by the rest of the grand ducal family.  I congratulate Their Royal Highnesses and wish them and their families all the best. 

Guillaume & Stephanie I

Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume and Countess Stephanie de Lannoy exchanged civil vows at Luxembourg's town hall, mingling afterwards with enthusiastic crowds.  I only caught the tail end of the live stream, but video highlights are available here and here.  I usually wish I were British, but this weekend would be quite happy to be Luxembourgish.  The couple's relaxed, warm, and happy demeanour is clearly reciprocated by their future subjects.  There is not much of a sense of pressure; everyone is just having a good time.  Blessed in many ways and enjoying its rare turn in the spotlight this weekend, Luxembourg is truly a fortunate country to have Guillaume & Stephanie as its future grand ducal couple.

J K Rowling defends the Crown

Though a longtime fan of Harry Potter, I've been critical of some of author J K Rowling's other political beliefs.  So it's a relief to know that unlike the actor who played her most famous character in the movies, in this interview with Jon Stewart (starting at about 26:30) she demonstrates an admirably concise understanding of one important benefit of the Crown (its separation of State from Government), even suggesting that what the USA needs is "a monarch" and the Queen would be glad to have us back!  (Thanks to my brother William for the link.)

King Norodom Sihanouk (1922-2012)

Cambodia's former King Norodom Sihanouk, father of the present sovereign, died in Beijing today at the age of 89, ending a remarkable life (pictures).  I remember how happy I was as a 15-year-old royalist when he was restored to the throne in 1993, having already been at the center of Cambodian politics off and on for more than half a century; at the time I assumed this restoration would be the first of many.  RIP.

The Only Candidate We Need

Dictators Go, Monarchs Stay

I am not a fan of American neoconservative Democracy projects, but this article by former Bush administration security adviser Elliott Abrams nevertheless makes good points comparing monarchies to republics in the Middle East.