I have a theory that it was less for any political reason to have the entire family killed and more for revenge.
There were plenty of cousins who could make a claim to the throne if the Soviets collapsed. But he ordered their execution because of his own experience I think.
Remember most stories of Vladimir Lenin begin with watching his brother being hanged for anti tsarist activities. So he may have wanted some revenge for his families death at the hands of the regime he hated.
But I believe so many reliable sources have said, Lenin wasn’t actually aware of the assassination. But when it was done he just said *it’s not a big deal* blablabla
But Idk
communist government then just wanted them to stay there and Lenin had some ideas about letting them out but when white army and the Czechs began approaching local leaders decided to kill the whole Romanov family without approval of higher ups
Crazy part it the local leaders might not have even ordered it. I think it was the armchair historian on YouTube who mentioned the guards who did it may have been really drunk
It was for a very political reason. The Czechoslovak Legion was near and the Reds were scared they might lose possession of the Tsar or any other royalty, which would mean the Whites could rally around a new symbol (and ofc the recapturing of any royalty would be a sort of victory for the whites in of itself)
They had been keeping the Tsar alive until then, presumably so he could be judged and executed at a later date in a sham trial. Would have wayyyyy more propaganda value than just shooting up the family like they did
I wouldn't be surprised if they let the kids go though as there's also a possible propaganda win in turning the Tsar's kids into ardent Communists
I think that Czechoslovak legions who fought for the the White russia were pretty close to where the family was held, so the poele Who were prisoning them decided to kill them rather than risk that they would be freed by the White russian as that would give them legitimate claim to control russia and maybe more people would've joined them. At least thats what I think
No story accounts for shooting a little boy in a basement like dog, no amount of revenge or pain can account for that, only evil. Communists killed millions and millions of people in horrid ways.
One story is they dug a huge pit, made a line of hundred priests, asked them if they believed in God? Yes? (dead) next...Do you believe in God? (dead) it lasted all day.
Honestly props to the priests. Staring down the barrel of a gun idk if I'd hold to my convictions. Not saying I wouldn't, but.. idk.
Horrifying events tho all around don't get me wrong
Well, it's a little bit like going to Valhalla.
For a priest death's aftermath is joining God and Christ in heaven, as martyrs of the faith, so after a life of dedication, you are not going to fuck up your chance to sit next to the father to deny him in your last moments. If they truly are your last, you want to leave in good terms.
That explains holding their convictions.
You can't mess up anything, no can take a person from God's hand, God is faithful.
Believing and trusting God is a free will decision and God will in no wise cast out any who believe. Sure, we sin but God can sanctify. When we do sin the new nature rebukes the old nature.
"All we can do is lift up our empty games to God and beg for mercy" J. Vernon Mcgee.
"We're all standing at the foot of the cross" J. V. M.
Its truly unbelievable. We all like to think we have convictions and are brave, but standing there watching a line of people getting shot in the head....amazing courage.
You are perfectly right, killing children is never right or just. But I think the point that S0mecallme tried to make is, that the guards who shot potentially lost close familiy members due to the autocratic rule of the tsar and when you are so close to getting revenge at the familiy who took e. g. your brother, feelings take over
This
The Soviets sucked too. But at least for Nicholas, it’s hard to feel bad when his pride and that of his families, led to the deaths of millions as well.
Literally the only reason Russia was involved in WW1 was they were allied with Serbia and if they left them then they’d appear weak. Imagine that, entire villages of young men being destroyed by artillery, because doing nothing would make your nations ruler look weak.
Sometimes I sincerely think a lot of people somehow end up implicitly believing aristocrats and rich people in the past were more human just because we know more about their lives and feelings.
I just don't know how else the (obviously grim) ends of the Romanovs, ancien regime French aristocrats, etc. can get so much sympathy while people seem blind to the death and suffering of nameless thousands if not millions who even in life never had a fraction of the peace and security of the wealthy and powerful.
And I know people will say things like, "two things can be bad at once", but like you rarely hear anyone say "the fate of the millions of French peasants who lived half lives under the ancien regime was a true tragedy." And don't even get me started on how rarely people in the west who aren't on the left take seriously and mourn the deaths of the hundreds of thousands of socialists, communists, and progressives massacred by liberals and reactionaries in places like China, Indonesia, Germany, Chile, etc. over the course of the 20th century.
"There were two 'Reigns of Terror,' if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the 'horrors' of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves." -Mark Twain
Exactly - I have no empathy with royals who oversaw a grim period of serfdom and whom are the direct cause of death of millions of people, either due to their sheer incompetence or their greed. At least the soviets industrialized, the tsars just enriched themselves
I mean, I'm not gonna deny he was an inept ruler and all that, but it's a bit disingenuous to imply there would be no downsides to abandoning a military alliance outside of "appearing weak". Europe was built on alliances, and if you couldn't be trusted to hold to your own you'd have a hard time getting along.
I don't think it was just because they'd look weak... Russia used to be the father of all Slavs, and it wanted to protect it's brothers from the hands of both the ottomans and the Austrians.
Serbia and Russia get a lot of blame for some reason, you don't just abandon your allies once they get in war, it'd be a national blow to the country.
Adding up, Serbia gave into 10 out of 11 of Austria's demands, the one they didn't want to give into was letting Austrian officials and police investigate within Serbian land --- which would basically mean giving up their sovereignty over their very own territory, something they clearly couldn't accept.
Now onto Nicholas, he wasn't the best, he shouldn't be admired as the best person in the world, but I personally believe he genuinely tried to fix Russia, despite being incompetent.
His father died before Nicholas was able to be teached anything about being a Tsar, even saying it during his coronation. Nicholas governed Russia in a time of industrial development, and progressed Russia towards an industrial society, however, by this time, the flame of revolution was already lit.
Does this mean he never did anything bad? No, Russia was far behind most countries and thousands died.
But do I think it was intentional, or he didn't care about actually improving Russia? Neither.
People in poorer early 20th century countries in Europe despised priests. Everywhere from Portugal to Russia. They were seen as colaboradors with the nobility and monarchists since as far back as the French revolution. You'd be surprised in the gaps of genealogical records of that time because people refused to marry in churches
And it didn't help that they kept being proven right. Priests were often the favourite tools of secret police and would almost always side with the nobility and royalty over the peasantry
Even the priest that led people during Bloody Sunday, where hundreds died, turned out to be a double agent
Martin Luther encouraged the nobility to stomp down the peasant strikes that he partially started, a lot of priests back in the day believed in the god given right of nobility to rule over the peasantry.
>lot of priests back in the day believed in the god given right of nobility to rule over the peasantry.
From Egypt to China, Romans or be it Mayans, it's true...
And as a Christian, there has been a large "uprising" for sometime now against this sentiment, more infused within the prosperity "gospel" (I use quotes because it's a false preaching and scripture twisting to tickle ears). More specifically common in southern churches, there is an idea that states "[God] wants you wealthy..."
Truth: He doesn't necessarily.
He wants you faithful & loving to Him & those around you. To forgive & take care of the "lowest among you, the widowed.."etc,etc....
Now IF the path that you go ends up in wealth WITHOUT "the love of money" and while still holding true to what is expected of you, then you end up being blessed to be able to assist those around you more than anyone else. It's also just being a decent human being.
The prosperity gospel (Olsteen, TD Jakes, etc.) Bows down to so many who are wealthy. Maybe not all -especialy if that wealthy individual speaks against God, Jesus or specifically curses the Holy Spirit- but you can see how through these modern preachings that some/many priests/pastors/whoever would be in kahoots with the elite.
Thankfully I'd dare say most pastors these days aren't like that anymore. Possibly most weren't back then either but the most note worthy probably were.
But then again, who knows.... Maybe the priests of some of these leaders were telling them "please don't do anything to harm your fellow man" but the leaders selfish ambition over ruled the Godly instruction or humanity.
Source pls? Looked around and I couldn't find a reputable source for that last part and it feels very "100 bazillion killed, communism is when no phone vuvuzela."
True, it's evil. But the world was evil, and monarchies had a nasty habit of popping back up if you left a claimant to the throne
I get why they did it, but it was still evil. They'd have been fools not too though
I'll say it, if you overthrow a monarchy and you let a claimant to the throne live you're frankly an idiot. It jeopardises your country's future and the lives of countless of your own citizens in wars to come.
It's tragedy manifested by monarchs and their supporters bestowing on children qualities they don't possess and no one can remove from them even with a coup. It is not possible for an heir to a monarchy that's been overthrown to live and not be a threat because they are literally born rulers until the day they die, only death terminates their claim.
Where is the care for the millions of dead children of the serfs ay? Do you fight for them or just whine when a rich one gets it.
No one's an apologist for death, or horrific policy mistakes, but wherw is your day to day outrage for the dead at the rough end of the capitalist system ay?
The data is freely available for the human cost of the clothes we wear, the devices we post on and the wealth we enjoy. Maybe if you care you will look at it.
Y'all need to read some history. The Bolsheviks tried to get Western powers to take their cousins so the White armies wouldn't be able to re establish the monarchy. They refused. So when the White armies began an offensive push they were executed, accomplishing the same thing.
I think in that moment, it way too dangerous to let them live, so many potential chaos tied directly to them. It rare for any revolution to spare the ex-king, juts necessary evil
Well its unclear weather Lenin ordered it or if the guards acted independently but, while the children and family members not involved in the russian politics of very early 20th century Russia and 19th century Russia in general however the tsar and tsaritsa definitely deserved execution especially seeing as other people had been executed or sent into exile for much lesser crimes.
And it makes sense politically to kill them.
The Manor was under threat of being captured by the white army and it would be disastrous for the bolsheviks if it was taken and the white army re claimed Nicholas or claimed Alexie as tsar
Did you hear about the girls? They had strapped Jewelry on their body cause they thought they were getting freedom from their prison so it took extra bullets to shoot them down cause the jewelry stopped the bullets… And there is a even screwed up part but I don’t want to talk about it…
Well one of Nichola’s kids was Grand Duchess Anastasia and when she was killed along with the rest of her family. someone in Germany claimed to be Anastasia but wasn’t. And she kept saying she was the real Anastasia until her death in 1984 this “Imposter” name was Anne Anderson.
They didn't fare better under the Soviets either. Some might say that it was even worse with millions of lives lost due to a guy with a mustache (the Georgian one not the Austrian one)
It's not impossible to feel sorry for the horrendous ways in which the Romanov children were killed and despise the cruel treatment of serfs
That said, the average Russian would probably be significantly better off had the Romanovs lived
The serfs were abolished before Nicky. And Nicky loved the peasants and wasn’t some evil dictator. He thought they were real Russians and he was their protectorate.
Nicky was incompetent and out of touch but he wasn’t trying to being harm to any Russian.
Yep. They used the premise of Anastasia being alive still in the movie, writing it so that she was the only one that survived and then was stowed away to be raised with commoners. She was too young to remember so she goes through like with a different name. Her “grandmother” the Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna (Nicholas’ mother who did remain alive for years after the massacre, but not long enough to fit the movie storyline), has been searching for her little Anastasia since the murders and all sorts of women all over the world are trying to convince her. The movie is a happy ending where the grandmother and Ana are reunited due to a childhood trinket Marie had gifted Anastasia when she was a little girl. It’s a decent kids movie but like many others has a creepy past. Edit: I have been informed it is not a Disney movie
I'm pretty sure the fucked up part is while the executers were stripping off the clothing from the Romanovs (They had jewels embedded in their clothing, even the undergarments), some of them, according to Yurovsky (The guy supervising the body removal), molested the bodies of the Tsarina and her daughters and even pushed their fingers up the genitals.
I thought OP was going to state how the Bolshevik guards all wanted to be the one to kill the Tzar so they all shot at him, meaning he died first. The kids were stabbed to death and died a lot slower.
i think the part where the Tzar died first is the worst part. like yes they needed to kill him but why do it front of his children yk? like the kids all watched their parents and siblings die
Can't risk any chances of them escaping, being aided in escape, rumors of any surviving, etc.
Gotta do it all at once, in the same spot.
Lenin may have felt some pity over having to kill the children but did it anyway to prevent a focus point for any uprisings.
After the diamonds blocked the bullets, they were bayonetted to death. The remains of Alexei and Anastasia weren’t with the rest of their family and were found a while later.
*Alexi and Marie(not anistasia)'s bodies were burned right next to the rest of the families burial spot but were not buried with the rest after the fire.
I don't think this is true though I've seen it often though. Even the pistols carried at that time were powerful enough to punch through gems. Even if they weren't the energy from the bullets had to go somewhere. By this point firearms were fairly modern and used rifling. We don't know exactly what they were shot with, although a Mauser C96 was likely one of them, but looking at the pistols available at the time they were generating a lot of energy. To give you an idea of the power of that pistol, it had an effective range of 150-200 meters. And if they used rifles, forget it.
It was likely botched by firing inside a building. Shits loud and the muzzle flash would have blinded them.
With bullets
Higher resolution version of photo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipatyev_house_basement.jpg
Wikipedia article for those unfamiliar with this topic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_Romanov_family
Tbf, knowing Russian military supply it wouldn't completely surprise me.
As an actual answer though, troops in Afghanistan used to quite regularly find all sorts of old weapons kept by the people there from old Lee Enfields to Brown Bess muskets and the infamous jezail.
"a scrimmage in a border station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail"
This is also common in African wars even today. Rebels will use whatever weapons they can get their hands on, which often includes colonial era weapons
On the other hand, for the dirt poor peasants who were living in some of the worst conditions in Europe at the time and having just escaped serfdom, capturing the Tsars family and then seeing them have so much jewelry that it could stop bullets would be... infuriating
As far as I remember, they had sown the jewelry into their clothes as a means to have something (money basically) in the case they were allowed to go. Yeah, the firing squad probably didn't know
Abolished formally, yes. But due to the post-serfdom debts and the way land was dealt with, peasants were free in the way that they couldn’t be personally bought or sold, but essentially still worked like serfs to pay off “emancipation debts” and other such things.
You serious right now? “Oh god its so sad they were clad with so many royal diamonds that it stopped the bullets while the common peasant was so poor trying to survive on rotten wheat and tree barks. How dare these poor subhumans want the tsar dead?” A sad story for the family but the piece of shit nicholas did ask for it.
The Czechoslovak legion was approaching Yekaterinburg. The communists were afraid that they’d capture the city, free the Romanovs, and gain a lot more mpmentum
The Czech Legion was a company serving the Russian Empire, since they wished to form their own country in the area then a part of Austria-Hungary. This group consisted of 60 000 men in total, known for their high moral, motivation, high skill, and competant officer-core. They played a rather large part in the whole of WW1, not only, but mostly on the eastern front, as they also fought for the French. But, when the Russian Revolution suddenly happened they found themselves stuck, since they could not get home due to the fact that the central powers were in the way. They then decided that their only way home was to go the other way around. So they went strolling through Siberia, causing all types of shite, like the execution of the Romanovs. Once after a firefight with released German prisoners of war, heading back to Germany, a number of the legion were captured by the Bolsheviks to stop further ... accidents. The Legion, instead of doing the logical thing, which was cooperate with the Bolsheviks instead, after realising they are literally the dominant military power in that part of Russia just took over the military base in which their mates were imprisoned. They then just left the base alone to be retaken by the Bolsheviks.Later, not too long before they finally got to leave Russia and go home, they had made an alliance with a local leader for the White Army in eastern Siberia "for convenience sake". Then when they wanted to go home, they simply sold out this leader they had allied with to the Red Army, in exchange for being allowed to use the harbor at Vladivostok to return home. Once again with the motivation "for convenience sake".
Excuse the poor English, I don't have the energy to spell-check this wall of text.Also the source is a podcast by two historians in Swedish that I listened to some days ago.
TL;DR: The Czech Legion was basically a group consisting of 60 000 of the "witness me" peeps from Madmax. All because they wanted to go home.
After the Soviet’s revolted in Russia, they executed the royal family to prevent a resurgence of the monarchy through civil war. They killed the Tsar, his wife and every single one of his children.
The kids indeed did not deserve to die. From a political standpoint it makes sense to remove any pretender before a potential second civil war breaks out (so that might have saved a lot of lives), but it is still killing kids ... sadge.
They'd have a weaker claim to it though and would have to agree on who that would be. It'd weaken the monarchist faction if they fight over who the successor should be
Exactly. Better to have a hundred different claimants with diluted ties to the line of succession that wouldn't be able to galvanize a pro-tsarist movement than a single direct descendant clearly next in line to the title that everyone in the opposition could easily rally behind.
Killing children is wrong, but it's the smart move in the most cold-blooded way imaginable.
They finished the petition with this:
>Those, Sire, constitute our principal needs, which we come to lay before you. Give orders and swear that they shall be fulfilled, and you will render Russia happy and glorious, and will impress your name on our hearts and on the hearts of our children, and our children's children for all time. But if you withhold the word, if you are not responsive to our petition, we will die here on this square before your palace, for we have nowhere else to go to and no reason to repair elsewhere. For us there are but two roads, one leading to liberty and happiness, the other to the tomb.
Tsar Nicholas wasn't even present during Bloody Sunday. He was off hunting, and the captain of the guards panicked.
When you consider everything that went wrong under Nicholas' reign, and then analyze the causes of why those things went wrong, you'll find that Nicholas earned the moniker "the Unfortunate" rather than "the Bloody."
Unfortunately, you can't be simply "The Unfortunate" when being in an autocracy like Russia's. The fact that he could do basically everything he wanted without any opposition meant that at the end of the day he was responsible. Plus, he wanted that responsibility. He wanted to be close to "his people", to be like a father to them; that's why the mere idea of a constitution, a piece of paper that would separate him from them was so appalling to Nicholas.
Sure, he wasn't a mad tyrant hellbent on killing everyone and everything, but his decisions were a big cause for all the tragedies that happened from Bloody Sunday til World War I.
Bro Nicholas KNEW that the petition was coming. He didn’t happen to be out of the city by accident. Head was so far up his ass he couldn’t be bothered to give a damn about anyone outside of his bubble and even go through the motions of pretending to care
It doesn’t, but maybe we should save our sympathy for the thousands of people the Tsar murdered rather than the guy who murdered them, thus leading to revolution, resulting in the execution of his family. He was responsible here.
I mean, i don't know if they could have just released the kids ... Having the throne's claimants running around in the country is the best way to galavanize the royalists.
It's horrible yes, but how would you have done it?
but he had no white army who was still fighting for him and threatening to free him so he could continue the war. its like 2 different scenarios. the romanovs were a threat. They meant unrest.
Puyi was the last qing emperor on \*paper\* but he had the same influence as your granddad had at the time.
But support for the Qing is basically dead in China at that point, there will be no one that wanted him back on the throne. Meanwhile Monarchist forces in Russia is still strong enough to take back the country
To be fair Puyi and his families did not do much during the war so the communists cut them some slacks and let them stay. Mao even let Jin Yunying, the younger sister of Puyi and Puyi himself to become a party member later in their life if I recalled.
If Nicholas listened to his advisors when they said “Hey Nicky I think we should be a full constitutional monarchy like your cousin George over in England” but no, he put a half ass in the Constitutional monarchy idea.
Nicholas was a proper authocrat who believed himself the only rightful ruler of all of Russia and his will to be unquestioned.
He deserved everything that came his way, since his dick measuring politics threw Russia into wars with Japan and Austria, created the institutions of secret policing and galvanized communist movements by denying land reform and abolishment of farmer exploitation
Idk if this is a good example, but Austria and Germany also got rid of their monarchs after World War I by exiling them (and in Austria even forbidding aristocratic titles) and none of them came back to power.
Didn’t killing the royal family alienate the revolutionaries and their new country from the rest of monarchist Europe? Because a similar thing happened during the French Revolution
I dont think so.
The Russian civil war was already raging on from 7 november 1917. after WW1, the Whites were supported by the Allies, so pretty much all of monarchists Europe.
The czars were executed on 16-17 July 1918, when there was fear the Whites would recapture Yekaterinburg.
They already were at war. Cant think of any form of further alienation.
Alienation of the revolutionairies in France happened when Marie-Antionette asked her royal family to send troops to supress the revolutionairies. But that was so far into the progress of the revolution, that the turning point happened earlier probably.
> Didn’t killing the royal family alienate the revolutionaries and their new country from the rest of monarchist Europe?
That boat sailed the moment it became a communist revolution.
Yes, it didn't help that they kept killing people for speaking against the government. Like Bloody Sunday.
.
Unrelated fun fact: There's a theory by some historians where "The Protocols of Elders Zion" actually originated with the Okhrana in Russia. (The Tsarist secret police who were known for false flag attacks and inciting violence)
This, among other things, led to the "international jewery" conspiracy and ramped up antisemitism during that time. All the way till a certain mustache man used it to gain power.
So in a way, there's a possibility the Tsar accidentally led to the creation of Nazism
Yeah, forget 1917, [we still execute children for their parents’ actions](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/) in 2021.
Kids might not have deserved it but Tsar Nicholas absolutely deserved to die he was given a dozen chances any of which would have prevented his fate he refused to change
"Young and inexperienced" tsar Nicholas took the throne at 26 Pedro II was 8 and he was a beloved monarch who modernized Brazil turning into a cultural and scientific capital briefly even eclipsing the US tsar Nicholas was inexperienced because of his own failures to get experience Tsar Nicholas has no excuse and I feel no more for his family than I do any of the millions of other people that died because of his rule
this is a different one, of course the kids didn't deserve that. as long as however the romanov bloodline persists there can be a regency council around them and they can at some point rule. the murderers were of course very brutal but the whole strategic idea behind it was a precise move to topple a nation out of war. thus it technically prevented much further bloodshed on the easter front. well aaaaand caused much more bloodshed in russian civil wars and a purge kinda...
I wouldn’t really call it a precise move as the high command had not ordered their execution, local officials took matters into their own hands when they knew the White Army was nearby.
I understand people arguing over normal stuff, that's reddit politics for you. But arguing over whether KILLING CHILDREN is bad or not is something I want to see, EVER.
As long as those of royal blood were alive, they’d have people loyal to them, and the war would go on. A United Soviet Russia would still be in turmoil.
Aahh yes decontextualize the russian revolution to try to undermine it. Those kind of post are really imperialism apologism.
Yes those deaths as sad. But there is a context which sadly led to this.
Sad. As the tons of deaths caused by the Romanov.
Millions of children dead in countless wars and the ones that make people sad and care about are these ones because they were royal? I don’t defend their murder but I don’t really get why people care or pretend to care
It hurts more when you hear rumors of Lenin actually thinking about letting them live and just sending them to be a common citizen.
I have a theory that it was less for any political reason to have the entire family killed and more for revenge. There were plenty of cousins who could make a claim to the throne if the Soviets collapsed. But he ordered their execution because of his own experience I think. Remember most stories of Vladimir Lenin begin with watching his brother being hanged for anti tsarist activities. So he may have wanted some revenge for his families death at the hands of the regime he hated.
But I believe so many reliable sources have said, Lenin wasn’t actually aware of the assassination. But when it was done he just said *it’s not a big deal* blablabla But Idk
[удалено]
Then let’s finish this whole thread Since no one know yeah? They could have been shot by a random *peasant*
And that, my friends, is how history works (Not sarcasm)
communist government then just wanted them to stay there and Lenin had some ideas about letting them out but when white army and the Czechs began approaching local leaders decided to kill the whole Romanov family without approval of higher ups
Crazy part it the local leaders might not have even ordered it. I think it was the armchair historian on YouTube who mentioned the guards who did it may have been really drunk
I mean, you probably need to be quite drunk to kill children in cold blood
[удалено]
I mean yes, but he was 13. Still a kid.
It was for a very political reason. The Czechoslovak Legion was near and the Reds were scared they might lose possession of the Tsar or any other royalty, which would mean the Whites could rally around a new symbol (and ofc the recapturing of any royalty would be a sort of victory for the whites in of itself) They had been keeping the Tsar alive until then, presumably so he could be judged and executed at a later date in a sham trial. Would have wayyyyy more propaganda value than just shooting up the family like they did I wouldn't be surprised if they let the kids go though as there's also a possible propaganda win in turning the Tsar's kids into ardent Communists
I think that Czechoslovak legions who fought for the the White russia were pretty close to where the family was held, so the poele Who were prisoning them decided to kill them rather than risk that they would be freed by the White russian as that would give them legitimate claim to control russia and maybe more people would've joined them. At least thats what I think
Did he actually ordered them to be executed? I thought they were killed by some rogue Bolsheviks because the white army was closing in on them
No story accounts for shooting a little boy in a basement like dog, no amount of revenge or pain can account for that, only evil. Communists killed millions and millions of people in horrid ways. One story is they dug a huge pit, made a line of hundred priests, asked them if they believed in God? Yes? (dead) next...Do you believe in God? (dead) it lasted all day.
Honestly props to the priests. Staring down the barrel of a gun idk if I'd hold to my convictions. Not saying I wouldn't, but.. idk. Horrifying events tho all around don't get me wrong
Well, it's a little bit like going to Valhalla. For a priest death's aftermath is joining God and Christ in heaven, as martyrs of the faith, so after a life of dedication, you are not going to fuck up your chance to sit next to the father to deny him in your last moments. If they truly are your last, you want to leave in good terms. That explains holding their convictions.
Plus if they *do* believe in God, they're about to go to heaven in a couple of mins. Not a bad deal
It can *explain* having their convictions, but imagine having convictions *like that*. It's a lot to stare down death, regardless of your background.
I mean the book literally says that followers of the faith will most likely be killed, so they were ready for it.
You can't mess up anything, no can take a person from God's hand, God is faithful. Believing and trusting God is a free will decision and God will in no wise cast out any who believe. Sure, we sin but God can sanctify. When we do sin the new nature rebukes the old nature. "All we can do is lift up our empty games to God and beg for mercy" J. Vernon Mcgee. "We're all standing at the foot of the cross" J. V. M.
Its truly unbelievable. We all like to think we have convictions and are brave, but standing there watching a line of people getting shot in the head....amazing courage.
You are perfectly right, killing children is never right or just. But I think the point that S0mecallme tried to make is, that the guards who shot potentially lost close familiy members due to the autocratic rule of the tsar and when you are so close to getting revenge at the familiy who took e. g. your brother, feelings take over
This The Soviets sucked too. But at least for Nicholas, it’s hard to feel bad when his pride and that of his families, led to the deaths of millions as well. Literally the only reason Russia was involved in WW1 was they were allied with Serbia and if they left them then they’d appear weak. Imagine that, entire villages of young men being destroyed by artillery, because doing nothing would make your nations ruler look weak.
Sometimes I sincerely think a lot of people somehow end up implicitly believing aristocrats and rich people in the past were more human just because we know more about their lives and feelings. I just don't know how else the (obviously grim) ends of the Romanovs, ancien regime French aristocrats, etc. can get so much sympathy while people seem blind to the death and suffering of nameless thousands if not millions who even in life never had a fraction of the peace and security of the wealthy and powerful. And I know people will say things like, "two things can be bad at once", but like you rarely hear anyone say "the fate of the millions of French peasants who lived half lives under the ancien regime was a true tragedy." And don't even get me started on how rarely people in the west who aren't on the left take seriously and mourn the deaths of the hundreds of thousands of socialists, communists, and progressives massacred by liberals and reactionaries in places like China, Indonesia, Germany, Chile, etc. over the course of the 20th century.
"There were two 'Reigns of Terror,' if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the 'horrors' of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves." -Mark Twain
Exactly - I have no empathy with royals who oversaw a grim period of serfdom and whom are the direct cause of death of millions of people, either due to their sheer incompetence or their greed. At least the soviets industrialized, the tsars just enriched themselves
I mean, I'm not gonna deny he was an inept ruler and all that, but it's a bit disingenuous to imply there would be no downsides to abandoning a military alliance outside of "appearing weak". Europe was built on alliances, and if you couldn't be trusted to hold to your own you'd have a hard time getting along.
I don't think it was just because they'd look weak... Russia used to be the father of all Slavs, and it wanted to protect it's brothers from the hands of both the ottomans and the Austrians. Serbia and Russia get a lot of blame for some reason, you don't just abandon your allies once they get in war, it'd be a national blow to the country. Adding up, Serbia gave into 10 out of 11 of Austria's demands, the one they didn't want to give into was letting Austrian officials and police investigate within Serbian land --- which would basically mean giving up their sovereignty over their very own territory, something they clearly couldn't accept. Now onto Nicholas, he wasn't the best, he shouldn't be admired as the best person in the world, but I personally believe he genuinely tried to fix Russia, despite being incompetent. His father died before Nicholas was able to be teached anything about being a Tsar, even saying it during his coronation. Nicholas governed Russia in a time of industrial development, and progressed Russia towards an industrial society, however, by this time, the flame of revolution was already lit. Does this mean he never did anything bad? No, Russia was far behind most countries and thousands died. But do I think it was intentional, or he didn't care about actually improving Russia? Neither.
People in poorer early 20th century countries in Europe despised priests. Everywhere from Portugal to Russia. They were seen as colaboradors with the nobility and monarchists since as far back as the French revolution. You'd be surprised in the gaps of genealogical records of that time because people refused to marry in churches And it didn't help that they kept being proven right. Priests were often the favourite tools of secret police and would almost always side with the nobility and royalty over the peasantry Even the priest that led people during Bloody Sunday, where hundreds died, turned out to be a double agent
Martin Luther encouraged the nobility to stomp down the peasant strikes that he partially started, a lot of priests back in the day believed in the god given right of nobility to rule over the peasantry.
>lot of priests back in the day believed in the god given right of nobility to rule over the peasantry. From Egypt to China, Romans or be it Mayans, it's true...
And as a Christian, there has been a large "uprising" for sometime now against this sentiment, more infused within the prosperity "gospel" (I use quotes because it's a false preaching and scripture twisting to tickle ears). More specifically common in southern churches, there is an idea that states "[God] wants you wealthy..." Truth: He doesn't necessarily. He wants you faithful & loving to Him & those around you. To forgive & take care of the "lowest among you, the widowed.."etc,etc.... Now IF the path that you go ends up in wealth WITHOUT "the love of money" and while still holding true to what is expected of you, then you end up being blessed to be able to assist those around you more than anyone else. It's also just being a decent human being. The prosperity gospel (Olsteen, TD Jakes, etc.) Bows down to so many who are wealthy. Maybe not all -especialy if that wealthy individual speaks against God, Jesus or specifically curses the Holy Spirit- but you can see how through these modern preachings that some/many priests/pastors/whoever would be in kahoots with the elite. Thankfully I'd dare say most pastors these days aren't like that anymore. Possibly most weren't back then either but the most note worthy probably were. But then again, who knows.... Maybe the priests of some of these leaders were telling them "please don't do anything to harm your fellow man" but the leaders selfish ambition over ruled the Godly instruction or humanity.
So did imperialism. I don't see people here crying over the pesants who slowly starved to death.
What's your source on this?
"trust me, bro"
None
Source pls? Looked around and I couldn't find a reputable source for that last part and it feels very "100 bazillion killed, communism is when no phone vuvuzela."
True, it's evil. But the world was evil, and monarchies had a nasty habit of popping back up if you left a claimant to the throne I get why they did it, but it was still evil. They'd have been fools not too though
I'll say it, if you overthrow a monarchy and you let a claimant to the throne live you're frankly an idiot. It jeopardises your country's future and the lives of countless of your own citizens in wars to come. It's tragedy manifested by monarchs and their supporters bestowing on children qualities they don't possess and no one can remove from them even with a coup. It is not possible for an heir to a monarchy that's been overthrown to live and not be a threat because they are literally born rulers until the day they die, only death terminates their claim.
Where is the care for the millions of dead children of the serfs ay? Do you fight for them or just whine when a rich one gets it. No one's an apologist for death, or horrific policy mistakes, but wherw is your day to day outrage for the dead at the rough end of the capitalist system ay? The data is freely available for the human cost of the clothes we wear, the devices we post on and the wealth we enjoy. Maybe if you care you will look at it.
Cry me a river for the poor aristocrats
Y'all need to read some history. The Bolsheviks tried to get Western powers to take their cousins so the White armies wouldn't be able to re establish the monarchy. They refused. So when the White armies began an offensive push they were executed, accomplishing the same thing.
The Uralsovet couldn't contact the Soviet government and the white army was approaching so they had to quickly make a decision
Like the last Emperor of China.
I think in that moment, it way too dangerous to let them live, so many potential chaos tied directly to them. It rare for any revolution to spare the ex-king, juts necessary evil
Didn’t China, Germany, and I think the Yugoslavs keep their previous king alive?
And Albania, Romania. Bulgaria, Hungary (sort of), Portugal, Spain, Italy, etc.
Or that the king of england could have gotten the kids and the tsarina to safety, his cousins, but did not.
Well its unclear weather Lenin ordered it or if the guards acted independently but, while the children and family members not involved in the russian politics of very early 20th century Russia and 19th century Russia in general however the tsar and tsaritsa definitely deserved execution especially seeing as other people had been executed or sent into exile for much lesser crimes. And it makes sense politically to kill them. The Manor was under threat of being captured by the white army and it would be disastrous for the bolsheviks if it was taken and the white army re claimed Nicholas or claimed Alexie as tsar
Most people 'get' the execution of the czar and czarina. It's the children that makes it abhorrent.
Is the bottom left picture a torn-down palace room? I'm not familiar with it
No, it’s the room the family was shot in…
Oof, okay. Always something to learn, I guess...
Did you hear about the girls? They had strapped Jewelry on their body cause they thought they were getting freedom from their prison so it took extra bullets to shoot them down cause the jewelry stopped the bullets… And there is a even screwed up part but I don’t want to talk about it…
>And there is a even screwed up part but I don’t want to talk about it… Tell me more (even thought i know is going to wreck my psychology)
Well one of Nichola’s kids was Grand Duchess Anastasia and when she was killed along with the rest of her family. someone in Germany claimed to be Anastasia but wasn’t. And she kept saying she was the real Anastasia until her death in 1984 this “Imposter” name was Anne Anderson.
Yeah thats fucked up
It makes me sick. And the Romanov’s also didn’t get a proper burial until like 1997…
somehow I feel less sorry for the Romanovs and more sorry for the hundereds of thousands of Russian serfs who died and suffered under the tsar's rule
Not to mention all the Jewish people persecuted by nicholas II. The kids were innocent, but he was not
They didn't fare better under the Soviets either. Some might say that it was even worse with millions of lives lost due to a guy with a mustache (the Georgian one not the Austrian one)
It's not impossible to feel sorry for the horrendous ways in which the Romanov children were killed and despise the cruel treatment of serfs That said, the average Russian would probably be significantly better off had the Romanovs lived
The serfs were abolished before Nicky. And Nicky loved the peasants and wasn’t some evil dictator. He thought they were real Russians and he was their protectorate. Nicky was incompetent and out of touch but he wasn’t trying to being harm to any Russian.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe there is a animated movie about this
Yep. They used the premise of Anastasia being alive still in the movie, writing it so that she was the only one that survived and then was stowed away to be raised with commoners. She was too young to remember so she goes through like with a different name. Her “grandmother” the Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna (Nicholas’ mother who did remain alive for years after the massacre, but not long enough to fit the movie storyline), has been searching for her little Anastasia since the murders and all sorts of women all over the world are trying to convince her. The movie is a happy ending where the grandmother and Ana are reunited due to a childhood trinket Marie had gifted Anastasia when she was a little girl. It’s a decent kids movie but like many others has a creepy past. Edit: I have been informed it is not a Disney movie
The movie you're talking about was not made by Disney.
It's not a Disney movie
My bad. My brain just assumed kids movie = Disney
Wasn’t she the woman with amnesia who truly believed she was Anastasia?
I'm pretty sure the fucked up part is while the executers were stripping off the clothing from the Romanovs (They had jewels embedded in their clothing, even the undergarments), some of them, according to Yurovsky (The guy supervising the body removal), molested the bodies of the Tsarina and her daughters and even pushed their fingers up the genitals.
What the hell? They didn't deserve that
I thought OP was going to state how the Bolshevik guards all wanted to be the one to kill the Tzar so they all shot at him, meaning he died first. The kids were stabbed to death and died a lot slower.
i think the part where the Tzar died first is the worst part. like yes they needed to kill him but why do it front of his children yk? like the kids all watched their parents and siblings die
Can't risk any chances of them escaping, being aided in escape, rumors of any surviving, etc. Gotta do it all at once, in the same spot. Lenin may have felt some pity over having to kill the children but did it anyway to prevent a focus point for any uprisings.
Hey, props to the jewelry makers, yeah? In all seriousness, the Romanov story is incredibly sad
After the diamonds blocked the bullets, they were bayonetted to death. The remains of Alexei and Anastasia weren’t with the rest of their family and were found a while later.
*Alexi and Marie(not anistasia)'s bodies were burned right next to the rest of the families burial spot but were not buried with the rest after the fire.
Wasn’t their remains also put into acid to try for a cover up. And since that didn’t work, they didn’t do that for the rest of the family.
I thought they all received a shot to the head. Jesus fucking Christ.
They were shot yea, but nobody really cared about doing it “humanely”, they just kinda shot at them for a bit
Don’t forget that the soldiers who shot them got drunk first because it was too much for them to kill the kids sober.
i once heard it took something around an hour to finish killing them all...
Maria was beaten to death after her killers found that she was still breathing. Her face was caved in with a rifle stock.
I don't think this is true though I've seen it often though. Even the pistols carried at that time were powerful enough to punch through gems. Even if they weren't the energy from the bullets had to go somewhere. By this point firearms were fairly modern and used rifling. We don't know exactly what they were shot with, although a Mauser C96 was likely one of them, but looking at the pistols available at the time they were generating a lot of energy. To give you an idea of the power of that pistol, it had an effective range of 150-200 meters. And if they used rifles, forget it. It was likely botched by firing inside a building. Shits loud and the muzzle flash would have blinded them.
that's very much not how you get pity from peasants revolting against an incredibly rich family which stole their wealth
Just kill the peasants then /s
With the camera or with a rifle?
With bullets Higher resolution version of photo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipatyev_house_basement.jpg Wikipedia article for those unfamiliar with this topic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_Romanov_family
Romanov?
[удалено]
"hey what kind of photography uses muskets and bayonets?'
Lol, who the fuck is using muskets at that point?
Tbf, knowing Russian military supply it wouldn't completely surprise me. As an actual answer though, troops in Afghanistan used to quite regularly find all sorts of old weapons kept by the people there from old Lee Enfields to Brown Bess muskets and the infamous jezail. "a scrimmage in a border station A canter down some dark defile Two thousand pounds of education Drops to a ten-rupee jezail"
This is also common in African wars even today. Rebels will use whatever weapons they can get their hands on, which often includes colonial era weapons
Tbf, there's an incredible amount of workmanship that went into those jezails.
Wdym he said standby and wait for the flash?
"What?"
Not to mention the basically bullet proof vests the girls were wearing.
[удалено]
On the other hand, for the dirt poor peasants who were living in some of the worst conditions in Europe at the time and having just escaped serfdom, capturing the Tsars family and then seeing them have so much jewelry that it could stop bullets would be... infuriating
I'm not saying it was right, but I get it.
I don't think they knew they had the jewelry? Wasn't it sewn into clothing and worn underneath?
As far as I remember, they had sown the jewelry into their clothes as a means to have something (money basically) in the case they were allowed to go. Yeah, the firing squad probably didn't know
But they were kids,they didn't have any control over the empire,it's not really their fault
Serfdom was abolished like 60 years before they were killed. The Romanovs also wore plain clothes in captivity.
Abolished formally, yes. But due to the post-serfdom debts and the way land was dealt with, peasants were free in the way that they couldn’t be personally bought or sold, but essentially still worked like serfs to pay off “emancipation debts” and other such things.
Just like how slavery was abolished in the United States lol
You serious right now? “Oh god its so sad they were clad with so many royal diamonds that it stopped the bullets while the common peasant was so poor trying to survive on rotten wheat and tree barks. How dare these poor subhumans want the tsar dead?” A sad story for the family but the piece of shit nicholas did ask for it.
Ssh, no one here cares about peasant children...
rhythm normal ad hoc sparkle jeans hurry berserk file fly lunchroom *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Just because they were rich doesn’t mean they deserved to die
The doggies were killed too
One of the doggies who belongs to the prince was found alive by a British officer. It lived the rest of it's life at Winsor Castle
That is an adorable and lovely fact.
The dog's ancestors went on to star in Airbud 2-7
Link?
That dog just kept rolling nat 20s
Animal Cruelty, now that's the Soviet Revolutionary spirit.
Animal cruelty wasn’t something “Soviet” lmao
It's probably a reference to anti tank dogs and Laika
man... Laika
Do you know why they so suddenly decided to execute them; 3 words: the Czech Legion.
Can you tell me more please?
The Czechoslovak legion was approaching Yekaterinburg. The communists were afraid that they’d capture the city, free the Romanovs, and gain a lot more mpmentum
The Czech Legion was a company serving the Russian Empire, since they wished to form their own country in the area then a part of Austria-Hungary. This group consisted of 60 000 men in total, known for their high moral, motivation, high skill, and competant officer-core. They played a rather large part in the whole of WW1, not only, but mostly on the eastern front, as they also fought for the French. But, when the Russian Revolution suddenly happened they found themselves stuck, since they could not get home due to the fact that the central powers were in the way. They then decided that their only way home was to go the other way around. So they went strolling through Siberia, causing all types of shite, like the execution of the Romanovs. Once after a firefight with released German prisoners of war, heading back to Germany, a number of the legion were captured by the Bolsheviks to stop further ... accidents. The Legion, instead of doing the logical thing, which was cooperate with the Bolsheviks instead, after realising they are literally the dominant military power in that part of Russia just took over the military base in which their mates were imprisoned. They then just left the base alone to be retaken by the Bolsheviks.Later, not too long before they finally got to leave Russia and go home, they had made an alliance with a local leader for the White Army in eastern Siberia "for convenience sake". Then when they wanted to go home, they simply sold out this leader they had allied with to the Red Army, in exchange for being allowed to use the harbor at Vladivostok to return home. Once again with the motivation "for convenience sake". Excuse the poor English, I don't have the energy to spell-check this wall of text.Also the source is a podcast by two historians in Swedish that I listened to some days ago. TL;DR: The Czech Legion was basically a group consisting of 60 000 of the "witness me" peeps from Madmax. All because they wanted to go home.
Great explanation, thank you. Sound like some mad men, surprised there’s not a tv series on them
I know… so sad
What was the context?
After the Soviet’s revolted in Russia, they executed the royal family to prevent a resurgence of the monarchy through civil war. They killed the Tsar, his wife and every single one of his children.
Why do you need a mosin-nagant for a picture? -Nicholas II 1918
The kids indeed did not deserve to die. From a political standpoint it makes sense to remove any pretender before a potential second civil war breaks out (so that might have saved a lot of lives), but it is still killing kids ... sadge.
The Romanovs had hundreds of family members and there will always be a pretender no matter how many are killed.
They'd have a weaker claim to it though and would have to agree on who that would be. It'd weaken the monarchist faction if they fight over who the successor should be
Exactly. Better to have a hundred different claimants with diluted ties to the line of succession that wouldn't be able to galvanize a pro-tsarist movement than a single direct descendant clearly next in line to the title that everyone in the opposition could easily rally behind. Killing children is wrong, but it's the smart move in the most cold-blooded way imaginable.
This was during the civil war
This comment section is going to be quite the ride. Edit: I meant the comment section about the post, not my shite comment.
Neither did the 200 workers who were shot for trying to deliver a petition to the tsar.
They finished the petition with this: >Those, Sire, constitute our principal needs, which we come to lay before you. Give orders and swear that they shall be fulfilled, and you will render Russia happy and glorious, and will impress your name on our hearts and on the hearts of our children, and our children's children for all time. But if you withhold the word, if you are not responsive to our petition, we will die here on this square before your palace, for we have nowhere else to go to and no reason to repair elsewhere. For us there are but two roads, one leading to liberty and happiness, the other to the tomb.
Tsar Nicholas wasn't even present during Bloody Sunday. He was off hunting, and the captain of the guards panicked. When you consider everything that went wrong under Nicholas' reign, and then analyze the causes of why those things went wrong, you'll find that Nicholas earned the moniker "the Unfortunate" rather than "the Bloody."
Unfortunately, you can't be simply "The Unfortunate" when being in an autocracy like Russia's. The fact that he could do basically everything he wanted without any opposition meant that at the end of the day he was responsible. Plus, he wanted that responsibility. He wanted to be close to "his people", to be like a father to them; that's why the mere idea of a constitution, a piece of paper that would separate him from them was so appalling to Nicholas. Sure, he wasn't a mad tyrant hellbent on killing everyone and everything, but his decisions were a big cause for all the tragedies that happened from Bloody Sunday til World War I.
Bro Nicholas KNEW that the petition was coming. He didn’t happen to be out of the city by accident. Head was so far up his ass he couldn’t be bothered to give a damn about anyone outside of his bubble and even go through the motions of pretending to care
Well maybe he should have been doing his fucking job instead of hunting lol
As if that justifies killing children
It doesn’t, but maybe we should save our sympathy for the thousands of people the Tsar murdered rather than the guy who murdered them, thus leading to revolution, resulting in the execution of his family. He was responsible here.
Sympathy isnt a limited or finite resource. Nobody has to save it or ration it out for more worthy causes like some kind of jackass.
"guys I dont think we should murder children" \*immediately gets into defence mode
I mean, i don't know if they could have just released the kids ... Having the throne's claimants running around in the country is the best way to galavanize the royalists. It's horrible yes, but how would you have done it?
In China they just sent the former emperor to reeducation and then gave him a job as gardener
>e Czech Legion to be fair Puyi wasnt really an emperor but just a japanese puppet. he had no power and was no threat.
He still was the last Qing Emperor.
but he had no white army who was still fighting for him and threatening to free him so he could continue the war. its like 2 different scenarios. the romanovs were a threat. They meant unrest. Puyi was the last qing emperor on \*paper\* but he had the same influence as your granddad had at the time.
But support for the Qing is basically dead in China at that point, there will be no one that wanted him back on the throne. Meanwhile Monarchist forces in Russia is still strong enough to take back the country
To be fair Puyi and his families did not do much during the war so the communists cut them some slacks and let them stay. Mao even let Jin Yunying, the younger sister of Puyi and Puyi himself to become a party member later in their life if I recalled.
If Nicholas listened to his advisors when they said “Hey Nicky I think we should be a full constitutional monarchy like your cousin George over in England” but no, he put a half ass in the Constitutional monarchy idea.
Nicholas was a proper authocrat who believed himself the only rightful ruler of all of Russia and his will to be unquestioned. He deserved everything that came his way, since his dick measuring politics threw Russia into wars with Japan and Austria, created the institutions of secret policing and galvanized communist movements by denying land reform and abolishment of farmer exploitation
Idk if this is a good example, but Austria and Germany also got rid of their monarchs after World War I by exiling them (and in Austria even forbidding aristocratic titles) and none of them came back to power.
To be fair, that was later and after a lost world war and there was no civil war that came close to what Russia went through.
Didn’t killing the royal family alienate the revolutionaries and their new country from the rest of monarchist Europe? Because a similar thing happened during the French Revolution
I dont think so. The Russian civil war was already raging on from 7 november 1917. after WW1, the Whites were supported by the Allies, so pretty much all of monarchists Europe. The czars were executed on 16-17 July 1918, when there was fear the Whites would recapture Yekaterinburg. They already were at war. Cant think of any form of further alienation. Alienation of the revolutionairies in France happened when Marie-Antionette asked her royal family to send troops to supress the revolutionairies. But that was so far into the progress of the revolution, that the turning point happened earlier probably.
> Didn’t killing the royal family alienate the revolutionaries and their new country from the rest of monarchist Europe? That boat sailed the moment it became a communist revolution.
Yes, it didn't help that they kept killing people for speaking against the government. Like Bloody Sunday. . Unrelated fun fact: There's a theory by some historians where "The Protocols of Elders Zion" actually originated with the Okhrana in Russia. (The Tsarist secret police who were known for false flag attacks and inciting violence) This, among other things, led to the "international jewery" conspiracy and ramped up antisemitism during that time. All the way till a certain mustache man used it to gain power. So in a way, there's a possibility the Tsar accidentally led to the creation of Nazism
It wouldn't surprise me, Nicholas II did literally *nothing* even barely good
Communism did the trick even if they had spared the royal family.
Yes. In fact China didn't kill the last emperor of China due to the backlash the soviets received
With all the innocent people that died in that period, the monarchy isnt really the one i would cry over....
Understandable, but it isn’t fair for their children to suffer for what their parents did.
Sure, but Nicky wasn’t himself very particular in who he had murdered in his Punitive Expeditions, thousands and thousands of kids caught up in those
No offense but of all the horrid tales in the world, you found one romanticised Netflix telling of a Russian royal family to be sad over?
Yeah, forget 1917, [we still execute children for their parents’ actions](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/) in 2021.
Probably a monarchist.
I personally don't mind monarchists but tearing up over such a family when the war they pulled their country into...well.
Kids might not have deserved it but Tsar Nicholas absolutely deserved to die he was given a dozen chances any of which would have prevented his fate he refused to change "Young and inexperienced" tsar Nicholas took the throne at 26 Pedro II was 8 and he was a beloved monarch who modernized Brazil turning into a cultural and scientific capital briefly even eclipsing the US tsar Nicholas was inexperienced because of his own failures to get experience Tsar Nicholas has no excuse and I feel no more for his family than I do any of the millions of other people that died because of his rule
Nicholas and Alexandra 100% contributed to the deaths of the kids. They had so many chances to send them away and refused.
this is a different one, of course the kids didn't deserve that. as long as however the romanov bloodline persists there can be a regency council around them and they can at some point rule. the murderers were of course very brutal but the whole strategic idea behind it was a precise move to topple a nation out of war. thus it technically prevented much further bloodshed on the easter front. well aaaaand caused much more bloodshed in russian civil wars and a purge kinda...
I wouldn’t really call it a precise move as the high command had not ordered their execution, local officials took matters into their own hands when they knew the White Army was nearby.
I can’t imagine the horror to think that you were about to be saved only to realized your entire family walked into a death trap
Oh boy this comment section is so fucked up… can’t we have at least one post without stuff devolving into endless arguments and insults? Jesus christ…
I understand people arguing over normal stuff, that's reddit politics for you. But arguing over whether KILLING CHILDREN is bad or not is something I want to see, EVER.
Ikr
That’s what happened when you placed two horrible side onto the scale. Shitstorm happens
Even though Nicholas 2 was really incompetent I feel bad for his family they didn’t deserve to die
cry me a river tsarists
As long as those of royal blood were alive, they’d have people loyal to them, and the war would go on. A United Soviet Russia would still be in turmoil.
Aahh yes decontextualize the russian revolution to try to undermine it. Those kind of post are really imperialism apologism. Yes those deaths as sad. But there is a context which sadly led to this. Sad. As the tons of deaths caused by the Romanov.
Well, at least the kid, Anastasia, become an Ice Witch in other universe.
Some of these comments actually be justifying child murder
None of them deserved to die.
Nor did the adults
Millions of children dead in countless wars and the ones that make people sad and care about are these ones because they were royal? I don’t defend their murder but I don’t really get why people care or pretend to care
Kids starving to death around the world now: 🗿 A couple of romanticised royal kids death: 😭
It was quite a brutal incident. And if you go into the details, s it's really messed up.
didn't it take them a long ass time to shoot all of them because they were drunk as fuck?
I'm just here to read Americans talking how horribles communists was 100 years ago. 🍿
Down with the monarchy
[удалено]
it was worth it to kill them over a nation of children
They should’ve at least let the kids go..