REREAD my posts .
In the Protocals, freemasons were considered the puppets of the "Jewish conspiracy" [three post refer to freemasons, the rest were regarding the jews] and I am familiar with the issue of the emigrated jew that Alix discusses in the letter - YES, I POSTED IT! She is more charitable there than in other comments - yet she continues to make antisemetic comments elsewhere in later letters.
I would recommend that you read these letters Rich C, you would find the text very interesting. It's also true that many people today and in the last 80 years still express antisemitic views, I won't argue that fact.She was a creature of her time. But that doesn't change the evidence.
Do you have a source for your claim that she tried to pass "legislation" to liberate russian jews...as a historian and scholar I am honestly interested in any evidence that you possess. It could make for an interesting positive trait but only if you can document it.
positive trait She tried to take care of her family inspite of her own difficult emotional and physical health, and she wanted her daughters to fall happily in love, as she did.
rs
PS, RichC, PLEASE join me on the Anti semitism thread so that we can discuss this further there.!i
Excuse me but *you* brought this up here with your comments, on this positive traits thread, saying she was an anti-semite, calling people deluded for disagreeing, not me. Stop jumping all over me for defending her HERE.
When I say scholarly, I mean peer reviewed scholarship. In my view, to call ones self a scholar, one has to be in the academy. I'm just a guy who's interested in the Romanovs. So, I'm not a scholar, but I don't think a scholar would label her an anti-semite based on what you have posted here; stuff that's been known for decades.
Also, as I said earlier, but you ignored, you have to take her comments in the context of the situation in which she wrote those lines. She was trying to get Nicholas to do what she wanted and she wasn't above appealing to
his anti-semitic leanings to do that. Her comments are hardly laudable. She was a creature of her time and that doesn't change the evidence, as you say, but it does change how one judges it's meaning. But you aren't doing that. You are judging her as if she said these things on national television, today, in 2005, and I don't think that is fair.
You are holding her to a standard that, I dare say, you yourself have never been held to, or any of the rest of us. All of her private correspondence and diaries are open for the world to see. I wonder what one would find if one went through all of your private correspondence, or indeed, any random individual who didn't expect the world to ever see what they were saying. That's why I say it is important to consider the context and to whose eyes those lines were meant for. They weren't meant for your eyes, rskkiya...
What public statements did Alexandra make regarding the Jews? None that I know of. The only thing that I can find is the proposed legislation to give them equal rights, the source for which I have cited.
