[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/monarchy/ - STOP THINKING LIKE REPUBLICANS

They're just LARPing, right?...right???

Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload4 per post.


IN CASE 8CHAN IS DOWN: http://txti.es/monarchy FOR NEWS ABOUT WHERE TO REGROUP

File: 791aa09b9ba258a⋯.jpg (177.13 KB,990x550,9:5,russian-empire-ussr.jpg)

File: 8f68529af405d66⋯.jpg (430.76 KB,611x900,611:900,Feats_of_Staff_Captain_Nes….jpg)

 No.7751

I'm looking for a few good source materials and apologists for the Russian Empire. I want material on industrialization and sources to make counter-arguments against the average attribution of industrialization only to Soviets. I also want evidence of Russian advances in technology and facts. This isn't only for industrialization, but pro-imperial stances on life there in general and an anti-Soviet hub.

>often overlooked, the Russian Imperial Air Service

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Russian_Air_Service

Also, a few positive outlooks on the recent Tsars of Russia.

This thread will also be open to argumentation and refutation from opponents, but the primary goal is uncovering information and sources.

It isn't too common for the average pro-Soviet to make Imperial Russia seem like the Flintstones and cavemen. They often tout Russia as backwards, reactionary, and stagnant. Half the problem with this and industrialization is with all the land and wealth, the Russian terrain and infrastructure was still in development. My pov is that industrialization was partially forestalled because infrastructure and rough terrain made access to wealth difficult and infrastructure was more important for the Russian Empire. This is why the construction of railroads and other accomplishments matter and were progressing around the 1900s. Improvements were inevitably coming.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7752

File: 7bb76cea9b6efa4⋯.jpg (104.48 KB,661x499,661:499,abolition-of-serfdom-tsar-….jpg)

For those who say the Tsardom couldn't bring effective change, here is the Tsar Liberator.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7754

I use this article a lot, you can use the sources that the author cites to great effect:

https://mises.org/wire/how-communism-survived-thanks-capitalist-technology

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7758

File: e86f2d3cd13ae28⋯.png (469.3 KB,1600x1332,400:333,1557785717.png)

>>7751

>I'm looking for a few good source materials and apologists for the Russian Empire

Most of the information I get is in Russian. These pages are in Russian too, but lot of what they cite are from English sources if you're willing to research them yourself:

https://sputnikipogrom.com/history/empire-economics/86685/ee-1/#.XQI8UxYzbiw

https://sputnikipogrom.com/history/empire-economics/86872/ee-2/#.XQI8WBYzbiw

You could also maybe run it through Google Translate and see what you get.

>attribution of industrialization only to Soviets

The commies as usual took credit for something they didn't do and claimed the Empire's achievements as their own. The economy was industrializing rapidly before the civil war, but when everyone got back to work again after the war, the Soviet government paraded this as some kind of miracle of communism, that a country at peace is economically better off than a country when it was fighting in World War 1 and a civil war.

Also, even if we assume that Russia wouldn't have industrialized at all, why would this necessarily be a bad thing? Finland didn't industrialize until the 70s and they were always wealthier than us. Other countries also industrialized without having to murder and enslave their population.The whole industrialization thing sort of makes sense if you're looking at society from the top-down like some sort of farm full of cattle with unrealized potential and that everyone is dependent on the government in order to live a good life, but if you look at society from the bottom-up and assume that people should be free to earn money and live how they want without the government's help or hindrance (as was pretty much the case in the 20th century empire after Stolypin's reforms) it doesn't really matter if the country is industrialized or not, it just means there's a lot of open jobs, not enough labour, and the people who build factories to solve this problem would earn a lot of money and make products a lot cheaper, hence why a lot of factories were being built regardless of whether the government was involved or not.

If we had to explain it in terms of how it is in the 21st century, it's like how modern bolsheviks are accusing our countries of being backwards and stagnant because we don't have the robots and AI and automation like east Asian countries do "and that's why we're being over-taken by China", while at the same time saying that capitalists would use this technology to "steal everyone's jobs" if we had it here, so it's necessary for commies to come to power and run the robots and AI themselves so that they can redistribute the resources "fairly" to everyone and achieve "luxury space communism" or some shit, as if this utopian bullshit worked the first time during the first industrialization.

>My pov is that industrialization was partially forestalled because infrastructure and rough terrain made access to wealth difficult and infrastructure was more important for the Russian Empire.

This is a popular misconception, but wealth isn't something that is "accessed" or fought over, it is something that's generated. The argument that "the climate isn't right" or the "terrain isn't right" has been beaten to death here in Russia and only communists and vatniks use it to justify how shitty the country was even after all the favours that they and Putin did for us.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7772

All you need to is point out Japan's industrialization and current status despite having access to far less resources than Russia.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7773

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.7775

File: 49e68815f3c30c5⋯.pdf (317.67 KB,TsaristEconomy.pdf)

I'll throw in a PDF I found too.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]