"Sam ikh privel v podval..." "he led them to the basement himself"

[Romanov_Fan19]

I Have been thinking about this   and have come to  the conclusion  that   it wasnt  ALL  his fault  its not fair  to his memory to blame for  everything (I Think)  everyone makes mistakes after  all      thats my  2  cents anyway

[rskkiya]

Yes I think that he did lead them to the basement himself.

[Laura Mabee]

I don't think that the everything was all of Nicky's fault. Yes, he was a bad Tsar, but there was revolutiom before he came about. WWI and Rasputin didn't help the the family either... those were out of Nicky's hands.

[David_Pritchard]

I don't think that the everything was all of Nicky's fault. Yes, he was a bad Tsar, but there was revolutiom before he came about. WWI and Rasputin didn't help the the family either... those were out of Nicky's hands.

Was there revolution before Nicholas II came to the Russian Throne? Yes, the 1825 Decemberist Revolution. The 1905 Revolution was of the Emperor's making, the failed and humiliating war with Japan, the lack of even the most basic democratisation, the disaster of the Coronation and the Balls that just could not be cancelled, turned loyal Russian people against the Emperor.

World War One was also in the hands of Nicholas II, he was the sole person to make a declaration of war, it was his trust in the French and their phony military intelligence that brought Russia into the war. Remember that Austria-Hungary and Germany did not declare war on Russia but rather it was Nicholas II standing on the balcony of the Winter Palace who declared war on them.

The presence of Rasputin, speaking to, visiting, writing to any member of the Imperial family could have been stopped with a signature on an Ukaze, the monster Rasputin could have found himself in an Chuchi igloo in Chuhotka for the remainder of his life.

Let us not forget that Nicholas II was God's Annointed Tsar-Autocrator. Without his permission no one could divorce, adopt or change their name. If only he had the power to change things, then only Nicholas II he can be held responsible when they go terribly wrong.

DAP

[Laura Mabee]

David,
I am under the impression that war was declared against Russia before Russia decalred to be in the war (WWI). Are you suggesting that WWI wouldn't have envolved Russia? I believe that I have read that Germany declared War on Russia, before War was declared back. Nicky -from what I understand- did not like wars. Before Nicky was at the throne revolutionaries were everywhere. Even when a Tsar did something right (Alexander II-Serif declaration) revolutionaries would go at him anyway.  I think no matter the reign there will be revolutionaries....
About Rasputin, Do you really think it was up to Nicky to have him associated with the family? As I recall he tried to send him away once, but Alix would have none of it. Nicky was a weak man, but I believe a revolution and their over-throw was destined before Nicky got the throne. Do I think Nicky's poor rule helped accelerate the Revolution? Yes.. but I do believe it was destined before his actions.

[David_Pritchard]

Nicholas had the final say about the disposition of Rasputin, that he allowed himself to be nagged and bullied by his hysterical wife is another issue. In the end it was his word that was law not Alix's.

There were revolutionairies of the 1880-1915 period in every country. Let us not forget President Garfield, President McKinley, the Austrian Empress were murdered by anarchist/nihilist types. Nicholas II inspired two revolutions, not just revolutionary activities.

DAP

[clockworkgirl21]

I do think Nikolai had a large role in "leading them to the basement himself". He was a weak ruler, and Rasputin didn't help any. Really, I can't blame him for Rasputin, though. How many of you would be able to turn away the only man who really helped your ill son?

[Laura Mabee]

My attitude towards this is pretty much like clockworkgirl21's.  :-/

[Valmont]

We all make mistakes.. I do not think it was ALL his fault  even though he had a lot  of doing regarding that. I agree that he had  the FINAL word regarding EVERYTHING. and he knew it... Why he didn't??.. I think we'll  never know... besides, as clockworkgirl21 says?.. Who would have done different regarding Rasputin  if anyone would have been in Nicholas shoes??
I think he did not use his power the way he was meant. He was the Tsar and loved or hated he still have the power that ALL rulers have over their people. I think he could have done different, I guess he did not know how... and THAT I can only guess... I wasn't there... you know???

[xX_Mashka_Xx]

He was only partly to blame. Alot of the Russian people's hatred towards the royal family, was because of, to them, the unknown influence Rasputin had on the IF. Also the war. The Tsar was often with the soldiers & the matters were left to governmant officials, many of them incompetent(due to the fact they were chosen by Father Grigori). Also, there were uprisings during the reigns of previous Tsars just before Nicholas. The revolution was bound to happen, and it just so happened that the major things that trigerred the revolution, came about during Nicholas's reign. It didn't help though, that Nicholas had very liitle preparation in becoming Tsar of Russia. It wasn't all his fault, alot of it wasn't.

[Belochka]

Nikolai innocently followed instructions in good faith, unaware what was to come. He was unknowingly deceived by the malicious intent of Yurovsky.

It is erroneous to presume that Nikolai was in any way responsible for the act of others forcing him to "lead them to the basement" in order to be brutally murdered.

Blame Yurovsky, blame Lenin and his cohorts for their callousness, blame the bolshevik mentality seeking to destroy all visible remnants of the Imperial government -  for it was they who were responsible; they performed or endorsed the act of pre-meditated coldblooded serial murder against the I.F. and other innocents who accompanied them.  

[Marialana]

I will agree that Nicholas lacked many of the capabilities needed in being a strong leader & Tsar. Many of his decisions, including listening to the wrong people too many times, caused a huge backlash & buildup of resentment against him. But there were so many other factors at work which ultimately caused the Revolution. In my opinion, it would have happened with or without his character flaws, it was only a question of when. Russia had been on the brink, so to speak, for a long time coming. In addition, I truly believe that the mistakes he made came out of true devotion to his work and the sincere belief that he was doing what was best for Russia & his family. That goes along way in understanding his actions, and I don't blame him in a way that speaks negatively towards him at all - I have nothing but respect for the man.
That said, I believe that Nicholas was responsible for his mistakes and his government's many missteps. He was not, however, responsible for the brutality & inhumanity perpetrated upon him & his family that night in 1918. The responsibilty for that lies with his murderers alone.

[Valmont]

I agree with Marialana 100%.........


Arturo Vega-Llausás

[Belochka]

Full responsibility for Nikolai's death lies at the hands of the Soviets. For Radzinsky to suggest responsibility lies else where - is vulgar and deceptive.

Radzinsky's pathetic statement only serves to divert his audience away from the band of murderers who participated in the crime; under the auspice of the Leninist government.

[AlexP]

This is a very delicate topic to discuss for many reasons.

Let's try to consider the topic historically.

Anyone in power is in power because there are bases of support that allow that person to remain in power.

The High Nobility

It is extremely fair and honest to say that Nicolas II totally alienated the "dvorianstvo" and they became exceedingly hostile to him.  In terms of the nobility, he simply was too liberal in their pre-1917 conception of things.  So they set out, collectively or not, to destabilize him.  And to a large degree, they succeeded.

L'Affaire Raspoutine.

The second base of power for the monarchy was the church, even though Peter the Great believed he had emasculated it centuries before.  With the growing influence of Rasputine, and with all of the nefarious appointments he made to the clergy (there was one Metropolitan of St. Petersburg that was such a voracious lover of little boys that the Emperor was forced to send him packing), by 1916, the respectability of the church, vis-a-vis the working masses and the bourgeoisie, was in complete shambles.  That surely assisted in  quickening the demise of the monarchy.

The Army and The War

This is an extremely complex issue here.  Nonetheless, when the Emperor replaced the Grand Duke as head of the Imperial Armies, that was a major catastrophe.  The blame for disaster could only lie at the Emperor's hands.  And add this to the Empress's very direct meddling in politics, by the end of 1915-1916, the Emperor had lost the real and effective support of the Army.  Revolution, or at least change, became inevitable.

The Empress

The Empress had a tremenduous and serious public relations problem with the Russian people.  She was perceived, by both the Nobility at Court, and the people at large, as a German, not as an Englishwoman.  A majority of those close to her in the final years were either Baltic Germans, or Balts with German-sounding last names, whether or not the family had been in Russian for three-or-four hundred years did not matter in the eyes of the people.  Her dealings with Rasputin caused her to be lambasted in the underground, but freely available, press, and on the occasion even newspapers subject to direct censor like Petersburg Vedemostii would find a way to print an article about her without mentioning her name or status.  And yet all knew.

So yes, indeed, the Emperor, may his soul rest in peace, had a dominant role in the catastrophe that followed, the chaos that ensued in beloved in Mother Russia and the subsequent persecution of the Church.

Qui sème le vent récolte la tempête.