Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maxim...
The Russian Empire had an impressive history, and it was in many ways not all that different from other notable European countries.
The question was - at what point R.I. started falling behind the leading European countries, becoming this backward place, that finally collapsed of its own internal controversies?
I'd put my finger at the "Age of Enlightenment," - from that point on Russian Monarchy refused to follow the suit of the most advanced countries, which impeded its social progress, and as the direct result of it - its technological progress.
I think that RI always lagged behind the leading European powers. Perhaps Kievan Rus before the Mongol invasion (10-13 century) had a good development. Writing (Novgorod) and technology development were impressive. But then there was always a backlog. But I do not agree with this backlog is the main reason for the collapse. Lack of literacy made it easier to manipulate the consciousness of the masses. Unrest in the WWI led to palace coup. Fanatics (Bolsheviks) took advantage of this .
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
The articles of the likes of "Sputnik and Pogrom" are not a serious source of information, particularly when it comes to history.
It was link from Google for example. Later, I gave links from the English wiki.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
The facts and figures speak against Russian Empire, as a country that had any successful future.
I don't see these facts. On the contrary, I see a trend for development.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
Or rather - it would have had future, if it were developing in the vacuum. But it was not developing in the vacuum - it was developing side by side with other countries, and those, more successful of them already made all the necessary adjustments, and were in a process of colonizing the countries that fell behind in their development.
Civil war lasted 5 years, 10 million people died, country lay in ruins. Why these countries did not colonize Russia after that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
R.I in this respect, in spite of all its potential was already in semi-colonial situation in terms of its financial dependency on European countries, which was making Russia's perspectives rather bleak.
As I understand it, foreign investment in the economy is good for the development of the country. For example, in 2014 sanctions against Russia is intended to limit foreign investment, and it works, Russia's economy is slowing. Why is foreign investment in the Russian Empire so bad?
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
In spite of all their minuses, the Bolsheviks managed to unhinge Russia from this dependency, which made the capitalist world to hate them to no end)))
Nationalization and lack of investment is not the best solution for the development of a country. The economy of the USSR was very special and the standard of living is not so high. But it was also a great country (starting with Stalin).
You says evident things. I don't want to debate with Maxim. Not sence. We says about basic statistic but he, as answer, names a few names of artists, as statement the great country.
Statistics is figures. You can explain this in many ways. And the explanation of Soviet history does not stand up to criticism. A new explanation of many things is required.
And it is not "few names". It was a powerful system. I agree that the mass quality of life was not high. But science, art, military affairs were at a very high level.
You write "Statistics is figures". It's right! And do you know proverb "The serious people talk of figures"?
Maxim, by such logics, Russia is wealthy now and luxuriant, because it has a few millioners.
I may to name analogs of the greats representatives from other countries, by the way. I think, likely, it's comparision will be not in favor of Russia.
You write "Statistics is figures". It's right! And do you know proverb "The serious people talk of figures"?
No, I dont know this proverb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpeenko
Maxim, by such logics, Russia is wealthy now and luxuriant, because it has a few millioners.
Do you think, that Russia now is not great country? I think that is great. But not because of the millionaires, of course . History, culture, international influence. Multinationality and satisfactory quality of life is prerequisites for the development of the country. In 90 years, science and technology was damaged. Interesting, how quickly it will turn out to be restored. But in general, the Russian Federation is a great country that controls a huge region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpeenko
I may to name analogs of the greats representatives from other countries, by the way. I think, likely, it's comparision will be not in favor of Russia.
I think that Russia (and emigrants from Russia, of course) will definitely be in top ten. Maybe in top 5-6.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Later, I gave links from the English wiki.
I think that is great. But not because of the millionaires, of course 