[wagglebee]

What doomed Russian was it's backwardness and its military incompetence. War had moved past where all you needed to win was feed numbers to the battlefield. Technology was at a point where it could kill and maim faster then you could feed the beast. The Russo-Japanese War did send the message that battlefield technology was the deciding factor, but obviously it fell on deaf ears.

Excellent point and this is at least partly due to the fact that western Europe was much further along with technology in general.

As far as Czar Nicholas II goes, he was a good and decent man, and I think cared for the Russian people. However he wasn't very bright, his father poorly prepared him for the throne, he was way too mild mannered to be the Czar of Russia. I think he did care for the Russian people but didn't know how to be effective, whatever levers he had to pull or push were corrupt, obsolete and made things worse. None of this he understood it was beyond him and outside his world view.

As I said in my first post on this thread, I think he would have made an excellent constitutional monarch in the manner exemplified by his cousin George V. Unfortunately, it is difficult to transition from an autocracy to a democratic republic (Russia still hasn't done it) and I think Nicholas was doomed from the outset.

[Little Bill]

Read “August 1914” by the divine Alexander a very profound book. The Russians were doomed by history and the Orthodox Church in Russia was doomed by Peter when adopted the Byzantine model.

[kalee]

How does one go from believing oneself to be God’s absolute authority on earth for the Russian people to constrained rule at the people’s pleasure? England needed the Protectorate, the Restoration, and overthrow of Charles II to get King and subjects accustomed to the idea. If the monarchy ever returns to Russia,it will be modern, the royals and the people have had time to make the necessary adjustments in expectation.