Hello Penny,
I´m afraid that i have not the necessary knowledge of this language for disscusing so complex a subject.
And I'm sorry I don't have the Spanish! You'd think I would, living in Southern California, wouldn't you? But I think your English is pretty excellent, anyway!
Well, at least i don´t think Nicholas ordered to kill any innocent child.
Not specifically by name, at any rate. But I am referring to the various state-sanctioned pogroms and the innocents murdered then...
I can understand what you said about the bolsheviks´anger, and have tried many times to put myself in the place of those people that had to see how their own children died in poverty. I can understand they hated what the monarchy-aristocracy simbolized.
What made the difference is that in the Ipatiev house they planed and comitted the murder with "cold mind"(hope you understand, because ít´s the way we say it in spanish and cannot translate).
We say "in cold blood" in English -- it means the same thing. And yes, insofar as the murders of Alexandra and the children are concerned, you and I are in total agreement.
I believe that the cold blooded decision to murder Alexandra and her children was taken in order to "cross the Rubicon," as it were -- to make a sign that the Revolution had gone this far and that there was no going back.
And I also think that with the White Army approaching Ekaterinburg, and no guarantee that the Whites weren't going to win the Civil War right then, that there was a certain element of "getting rid of the evidence."
But we are in complete agreement about the murders of A and the children -- most of this situation appears to me not in black and white, but in shades of grey, but the murders of the Romanovs who were not Nicholas and any of the retainers and servants do look pretty black to me.
When i said they were not human being any more i meant not in the sense you explained. When i say someone is a human being i mean that he/she has those good qualities due to the humanity. However i know this could be only my opinion, and therefore it´s my mistake not having expressed it correctly.
OK. I misunderstood you. I see what you mean, and yes, I would agree that at the time of the murders, these fairly normal and otherwise unremarkable men did abandon what Abraham Lincoln called "the better angels" of their souls.
I agree with you about the difference between the crime in Ekaterinburg and Cielo Drive. I know you spoke about Yurovsky, but since you also commented on the bolsheviks i took Yermakov for example.
He and the Manson´s girls(and boy) in Cielo Drive were following orders and have their "reasons" to do what they did.
In a murder i can try to understand the facts driving the killers to do what they do but there is still no reason to justify it.
That´s what i poorly tried to explain.
No, you explained it just fine. I get you now. And I think that we only disagree about Nicholas. I can understand why the assassins killed him -- as Yurovsky himself said, "I fired at Nicholas, and everyone else did too." It was the rage at Nicholas specifically that drove them -- for reasons already outlined here.
The saddest thing for me remains the fact that all these murders were just so pointless. By the time they happened, there was no way that Nicholas was heading back onto the throne -- things had progressed too far in Russia, and the Dynasty was obsolete. It's a shame that the Family weren't, in the words of one of the guards, "allowed to escape."
