Sadly Russia never really recovered from communist revolution which resulted in a century of negative population selection, especially visible in its “leadership” today :(
I've always thought that Russia never recovered from anarchists / nihilists / whatever murdering Alexander II. Finland remembers him as the last good emperor, and his statue is still at the center of the main square of Helsinki, between the government palace, the university main building, and the main cathedral.
Under Alexander II, Russia was on its way to becoming yet another European constitutional monarchy. His son Alexander III reversed the course, and Nicholas II continued with nationalistic autocratic rule, which ultimately ruined the backward empire and and paved the way to communism.
We cannot trust unelected leaders to share their power with others.
Monarchy is really nothing but autocracy. Leaders like Putin and Xi Jinping might as well give themselves the title "King", except they won't because that might make people start asking question like "Why are you the king and not I? . "Why does all power have to be concentrated in one person?"
a century of negative population selection, especially visible in its “leadership” today
This makes it sound like there was some evolutionary pressure of something.
I hope everyone understands that ~2 generations is insufficent to have any selective pressure (Putin was born in 1952)
Indeed, WW2 and the Ukranian famine in the 1930s had much more effect on the population than any political system.
And it's unclear what "negative population selection" means anyway. There's no evidence that Russians are in any way inferior to any other population group.
Yeah, look at Russia in 1917 and 1947 under communists (won the war. From wooden plough to atomic piles). Compare with 1991 vs. 2021 under capitalists (banana republic, production is a fraction).
Freemen could own land, debts could be paid - and many serfs simply walked away to start new lives in the growing towns. Some could exchange military service for freedom.
Comments
Sadly Russia never really recovered from communist revolution which resulted in a century of negative population selection, especially visible in its “leadership” today :(
I've always thought that Russia never recovered from anarchists / nihilists / whatever murdering Alexander II. Finland remembers him as the last good emperor, and his statue is still at the center of the main square of Helsinki, between the government palace, the university main building, and the main cathedral.
Under Alexander II, Russia was on its way to becoming yet another European constitutional monarchy. His son Alexander III reversed the course, and Nicholas II continued with nationalistic autocratic rule, which ultimately ruined the backward empire and and paved the way to communism.
Alexander III was already autocratic, reactionary and against his father's reforms even before the latter's assasination.
We cannot trust unelected leaders to share their power with others.
Monarchy is really nothing but autocracy. Leaders like Putin and Xi Jinping might as well give themselves the title "King", except they won't because that might make people start asking question like "Why are you the king and not I? . "Why does all power have to be concentrated in one person?"
This makes it sound like there was some evolutionary pressure of something.
I hope everyone understands that ~2 generations is insufficent to have any selective pressure (Putin was born in 1952)
Indeed, WW2 and the Ukranian famine in the 1930s had much more effect on the population than any political system.
And it's unclear what "negative population selection" means anyway. There's no evidence that Russians are in any way inferior to any other population group.
Yeah, look at Russia in 1917 and 1947 under communists (won the war. From wooden plough to atomic piles). Compare with 1991 vs. 2021 under capitalists (banana republic, production is a fraction).
If communism beats anything, it's feudalism.
feudalism had avenues of escape for the serfs
What avenues? Even the freed serfs were landless and indebted.
Freemen could own land, debts could be paid - and many serfs simply walked away to start new lives in the growing towns. Some could exchange military service for freedom.
it was my understanding that before that there wasnt much anything to run to...?
Communism just make sure everyone is equally a serf, except the inner party.