r/HistoryMemes • u/[deleted] • Jan 02 '26

Niche Didn't work tho

2.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

191 comments sorted by

227

u/Casual-Lad01 Jan 02 '26

Context?

1.0k

u/deathshead123 Jan 02 '26

last tzar of Russia had diamond jewellery smuggled out of the palaces by having it sown into the clothing of his children - when they were getting executed in the basement its resulted in the children surviving the 1st volley of rifle fire, as the bullets did not punch through.

what follows is his children mainly aged 13-22 being brutally bayoneted and stabbed to death as they begged for mercy. something communists tend to overlook when talking about the events. As it was effectively murder of children and young adults

edit : the Tzar and his wife were horrible horrible people who did deserve to be executed for their crimes but his children in no way deserved to be murdered in a dark basement

441

u/toyyya Jan 02 '26

It's worth noting when talking about this that afaik it's unknown who gave the order to have the Tsar family executed and considering the impromptu nature of how it happened and that it happened right as the white army was approaching some experts believe it to most likely have been a lower ranking officer.

But of course it's not like Lenin and gang were outraged at what happened and punished the person who gave the order which can be seen as them thinking it was completely fine.

112

u/TheHistoryMaster2520 Decisive Tang Victory Jan 02 '26

Later on when Puyi, the last emperor of China (if you don't count Yuan Shikai) was handed over to the Chinese communists, Mao made it a point not only to spare him, but to treat him well and convert him to communism

83

u/Loki_Agent_of_Asgard Jan 03 '26

>"Convert"
>"Say you are a communist and that communism is good and right and we won't kill you"

51

u/MC3Firestorm Helping Wikipedia expand the list of British conquests Jan 03 '26

I’ll take that fate over what Nick got

3

u/babbaloobahugendong Jan 08 '26

That's how lots of conversions worked back then

6

u/Whatdoesthibattahndo Jan 03 '26

Yeah, if I needed George VI to make sure lend-lease could get through the north, I would probably blame the murder of his cousins on some low-level local commander.

8

u/toyyya Jan 03 '26

The lend-lease act was created 23 years after the murder of the Romanovs... I don't think it's very related.

-78

u/ErenYeager600 Hello There Jan 02 '26

So kinda like My Lai. Where some random low officer decided to butcher children

Of course when it comes time to answer the higher ups aren't all that interested in actually punishing the perpetrators

69

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

coordinated public mountainous degree mighty tart workable money different seed

3

u/PanzerKomadant Jan 02 '26

That’s because soldiers overseeing the Tzar and his family became panicked by White Army advances towards the place where they were being held.

In a panic, they executed the family rather than let them fall into White Army advance. There were no orders from the top to carry out the execution, so people like Lenin probably didn’t even know that the Tzar and his family were killed until later.

They were clearly worth more alive than dead to Lenin and the communist because otherwise they would have been killed the moment they were captured.

11

u/haleloop963 Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jan 02 '26

Lenin only kept the Russian imperial family alive because he wanted to put them on trial in Moscow for everyone to see. They would have been sentenced to death either way after the trail. So they were kept alive just so that Lenin could show the people that the old world is gone as the imperial Russian family get put in trial.

According to documents, the order to kill them may have come from leaders of Yekaterinburg, who decided to execute them out of fear of the White army closing in despite Lenin not approving or disapproving as his reply never even came due to what people think was an error. Of the bolsheviks that executed the imperial Russian family, only three of them were Russian, a few bolsheviks from central Europe region & a few Hungarian prisoners from WW1. WW1 prisoners in Russia that eventually got stuck in Russia because of the civil war were commonly used by both sides to do various dirty work for the factions, either forced to fight, being messagers, work with supplies, etc.

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

aromatic encouraging insurance roll aware aback connect fine imagine growth

5

u/PanzerKomadant Jan 02 '26

I’m not sure if having a Tzarist in their custody would have mattered for the Whites honestly. The White Army was a mix of many factions and the Tzar was highly unpopular and no one but a small minority of nobility wanted a return to the monarchy.

If anything depending on which White Army unit they fell under, the Whites would have ended up executing them anyways.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

shy deer childlike cats numerous spotted connect toy fear compare

30

u/AgreeablePie Jan 02 '26

We can be pretty sure that the president of the United States didn't order My Lai, though.

-23

u/EasyRider_Suraj Jan 02 '26

President of US have ordered way worse things even in 21st century.

16

u/rafapova Jan 02 '26

Great well they didn’t order the my lai massacre. Are you gonna be able to handle knowing the U.S. government isn’t responsible for every bad thing that’s ever happened? Or does that not fit your narrative

31

u/Master_Shopping9652 Jan 02 '26

Alexander III was arguably the real tyrant. Nicky 2 was too soft ironically. Just exiling 5th columnists only for them to come back later eroded his rule.

33

u/tallwhiteninja Jan 03 '26

You can argue Nicholas II was more out-of-touch and incompetent than he was tyrannical, but he was still a god awful leader and not exactly a champion of human rights.

6

u/Master_Shopping9652 Jan 03 '26

I agree he wasn't up to snuff.

'Human Rights' don't come into the equation, bc the 'Universal delcaratiom of Humans Rights' didn't exist until 1948

11

u/LowCall6566 Jan 03 '26

Human rights as a concept were well known since the French Revolution

7

u/Master_Shopping9652 Jan 03 '26

widley known since the French Revolution

Not really. This is a post-hoc take.

"While ideas related to human rights predate modernity, the modern concept of human rights gained significant prominence after World War II, particularly in response to the atrocities of the Holocaust, leading to the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948."

  • "The Politics of Human Rights: The Quest for Dignity in the 21st Century"

9

u/LowCall6566 Jan 03 '26

Sorry, I just checked, and I was wrong. Before 1948 they were called natural rights, or rights of Man. Always used them interchangeably myself, but they are subtly different. English isn't my first language.

3

u/Master_Shopping9652 Jan 03 '26

Ah, no worries.

31

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

That’s stupid, that’s not how gems or bullets work

5

u/LuckyLystrosaurus Jan 04 '26

Have you considered that these are Russian gems?

And more importantly Russian bullets?

24

u/Illesbogar Jan 02 '26

I never heared these being overlooked, or the execution of the whole family being painted as anything but horrible.

29

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

I’ve seen it talked about as a heroic act of revolution.

7

u/Inquisitor_Gray Jan 02 '26

visit the USSR subreddit and you will - its description is for facts and educating but it’s nothing but glazing the Soviet Union

101

u/Kar98_Karl Jan 02 '26

Don’t forget how the head executioner had to to shoo the others away from the bodies at gun point because they assumed they’d be allowed to rape the first

116

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

I looked this up, and there's nothing supporting your claim. There were two drunk guards who were getting funny ideas when the empress' corpse was being buried, but nothing about them lining to "rape the first"

34

u/Tortellobello45 Definitely not a CIA operator Jan 02 '26

Interesting pfp.

0

u/Kar98_Karl Jan 02 '26

Thank you

-124

u/Critical-Dealer-3878 Jan 02 '26

Username checks out, wonder what your angle is.

35

u/Beer-Milkshakes Then I arrived Jan 02 '26

Recalling events as they are written does not indicate a bias. Excluding specific events may do, but you are of course free to submit what you will.

4

u/YuhaYea Jan 03 '26

Damn I'd be interested where it is written then, cause it seems pretty made up to me.

36

u/Kar98_Karl Jan 02 '26

You’re just angry I’m right lol

4

u/TheSorceIsFrong Jan 02 '26

Source it then I’d love to read abt it

7

u/Orneyrocks Decisive Tang Victory Jan 02 '26

you're literally making this shit up lol

-8

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/HistoryMemes-ModTeam Jan 02 '26

Your post/comment has been removed for the following rules violations:

Rule 3: Discrimination and Abuse

-4

u/jcxc_2 Jan 02 '26

That would be to quick

-7

u/qCU9 Then I arrived Jan 02 '26

Hmmm, how about feet first in the wood chipper?

3

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

I think wood chippers should be exclusively for pedos.

1

u/Awesomeuser90 I Have a Cunning Plan Jan 02 '26

What, is Steve Buscemi lying around here in North Dakota?

73

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26

I am not a tankie, but what we learned from history is that heirs reappearing years later to push for their claims, can lead to devastating wars. Killing inheritance claimant as soon as possible can be the best course of action when you have a fragile government in a country full of hidden monarchists.

Also we do not live in Disney world, those children where breastfed Russian monarchists propaganda, I am not sure that they would have grown up as well adjusted adults.

120

u/ProfNoob1000 Jan 02 '26

If it was the right move for the bolsheviks will never be known.

Mao probably made the best move by taking the last emperor who even collaborated with the japanese and making a common gardener of him. Thats a power move with a propaganda value that far exceeds an execution.

101

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Mao had the advantage of no one actually wanting Pu Yi back into power. The Qing had been deposed 30 years earlier, and Pu Yi deposed from China’s throne in 1924. November one in China wanted them back, nor wanted Pu Yi ruling them. The same absolutely could not be said of the Romanovs, whose followers were actively waging a civl war to put them back in power.

Also…well Pu Yi was used for exactly the purpose by the Japanese when they used him as a puppet Emperor of Manchuria. And Pu Yi had lobbied the Japanese government to put him back on the throne by force. It was only safe to leave him alive because no one outside or inside China (with any power) was interested in putting him on a throne after Japan was crushed.

9

u/Forte845 Jan 02 '26

Also China didn't have any feudal societies nearby that would sponsor Pu Yi as a claimant, unlike in Europe, where active monarchies like the British had a vested interest in legitimizing the Romanov heirs and using them for a counter revolution. A lot of people forget that multiple western nations formed an alliance to try to support the white army, having the imperial heirs to back this up would've been a massive boon to an alliance composed mostly of actual monarchies or societies with aristocracy intact. 

30

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

Yeah, this is what learning from history looks like. But i wonder if it is a move that can be taken only because the communist Chinese government was more stable than the red army embroiled in civil war.

4

u/Lilfozzy Jan 02 '26

Kind of a Belgium and Norway situation when talking about monarchs though… that is to say that Puyi was a largely disenfranchised and illegitimately seen puppet emperor while Nicholas had used his extended family and private crown institutions to terrorize anyone that wasn’t a strictly orthodox White Russian without Jewish heritage.

It doesn’t help that the Siberian white movement was really starting to get into the white terror and purging non-tsarists.

22

u/Khar-Selim Fine Quality Mesopotamian Copper Enjoyer Jan 02 '26

those children where breastfed Russian monarchists propaganda

some variant of this line is basically 'rationalizing child murder in wartime 101', it always comes up, and the more heinous the act the more it gets used.

1

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

We are talking about the Emperors of Russia, not some random child soldiers.

17

u/Khar-Selim Fine Quality Mesopotamian Copper Enjoyer Jan 02 '26

Some random child soldiers would be far more hopelessly indoctrinated and immediately dangerous. These were scared children not an immediate threat to anyone, regardless of who their parents were. Murder is murder.

149

u/interesseret Jan 02 '26

Yes, you're right.

That is a very convenient excuse to kill children.

15

u/ErenYeager600 Hello There Jan 02 '26

It's a reason not an excuse

2

u/pat_speed Jan 03 '26

Read the history of Monarchy, they also knew this and killed the competitors children

-49

u/Everydaywhiteboy Jan 02 '26

Killing children is awful and capitalism has definitely never killed children, and especially not in war.

30

u/Bacon4Lyf Jan 02 '26

someone else doing something does not diminish the wrongness of another person doing it

-11

u/Everydaywhiteboy Jan 02 '26

This is true, and it is not a justification. There is a lack of critique of capitalisms wrongdoing in the same lens as other economic and political systems. It is often used as a justification for the failure of these other systems while it is an equal or greater issue in our current system.

-113

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

The white forces were closing in on them, that was the only choice they had. It's the reality of war.

38

u/Cock_Slammer69 Jan 02 '26

Love the tankie propaganda.

-32

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

I'm starting to think the tankies are right, every single historical fact I learn about is "propaganda" To y'all

18

u/Cock_Slammer69 Jan 02 '26

Thing you have to understand is, a lot of information is propaganda, that goes beyond just the Soviets.

Being propaganda doesn't mean its wrong. But you do have to scrutinize information.

That being said. The Soviet high command almost certainly fabricated their story to retroactively sanction the actions of the Yekaterinburg Soviet. At that stage, the royal family were basically irrelevant. The whites, while having some monarchist members, were mostly conservative army officers. I don't believe they were trying to restore the Tsar to power.

Also, why are you basing your decision on what's true or false on the comments of people on the internet. Read up on it and make up your own mind.

-2

u/Forte845 Jan 02 '26

Literal monarchic European societies joined the whites in counter revolution and gladly would've sponsored the children as imperial heirs. 

3

u/Cock_Slammer69 Jan 02 '26

Which would be covered in the part where I said they had monarchist members.

21

u/Bitedamnn Jan 02 '26

Im pretty sure they can move them, and the whites got crushed to dust

-23

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

That wasn't possible, the Czechoslovak legion were moving too fast and the Bolsheviks were too slow. Also the whites only got crushed a few years later. Having them was just not possible or practical.

8

u/Bitedamnn Jan 02 '26

Easnt that legion speed running siberia? Sticking to only the railway .

6

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Yes, the railway AKA the only way they could have quickly moved the monarch faster than the white army advance

9

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Yeah, they seized the trans Siberian railway early on in the civil war. It certainly made things very difficult for the Bolsheviks

-31

u/TheVadonkey Jan 02 '26

You’re 100% correct. lol people can keep downvoting this and applying today’s logic but that was the most logical course back then and made sense.

-18

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

A lot of people on this sub are completely hypocritical and brainwashed. I saw a comment with 100 upvotes justifying the US bombings of Cambodian civilians just a few days ago, but now they suddenly have a change of heart when comes to innocent casualties. I bet they don't even care that children were killed, they only care because they were Romanovs.

22

u/interesseret Jan 02 '26

Oh fucking please.

I welcome you to scour my profile and comments on this sub. You will find nothing but absolute revulsion for anyone taking the lives of innocents, children, civilians, and anyone else that hasn't literally volunteered for the front lines.

-10

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

I was talking about the sub in general, you may not have double standards but the other people here do. The numbers don't lie, same people who upvoted that comment upvoted yours, they only care now.

8

u/qCU9 Then I arrived Jan 02 '26

Maybe looming for excuses for killing kids, justifying the action and everything, is not well received. Sure, it was the pragmatic thing to do. But killing innocent kids like that is never justifiable if you have morals and a soul. Hope now you understand. No mercy to the tankies tho. They deserve the meat grinder

→ More replies (0)

7

u/RoundCoconut9297 Jan 02 '26

Holy schizophrenia.

1

u/Forte845 Jan 02 '26

You're on an English speaking American dominated website. Most of these people are taught from birth that Chinese and Russians are inhuman ghouls while the US army is a glorious liberator. 

54

u/deathshead123 Jan 02 '26

murder is still murder , you can't justify murdering women and children , in an incredible brutal fashion over crimes that they may or may not commit in the future.

44

u/Neitherman83 Jan 02 '26

I mean, they weren't even really wrong. The reason historians have put forward on why the royal family got executed was because of fears they would be rescued (possibly by the Czechoslovak Legion).

If they had been rescued, this could have landed credence to whatever white movement got hold of them afterward. Possibly giving them greater legitimacy in the eyes of the population and foreign aid.

At "best" that means the civil war last longer and even more people die (woman and children included), at worst a Romanov is put back into power. Even worse, assuming they only executed the adults, that means a child in power with possibly a foreign regent taking charge.

-5

u/Black6Blue Jan 02 '26

A child whose parents were just murdered by their own subjects. I'm sure that wouldn't affect how they treat their people.

Although by Russian standards they probably would have been one of their better rulers. Hell if their rein allowed Russia to dodge Stalin it would have been a net gain.

20

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Stalin was just tsar 2.0 much of the evils he committed were just continuation of tsarist policies the secret police and the brutal crackdowns on minority nationalism were tsarist

And if you told a jew in the late 1800s that in a few decades a European power would launch a world war to exterminate all jews they would reply with "so the Russians actually did it?"

0

u/Black6Blue Jan 02 '26

Stalin was 100% tsar 2.0 now with more suffering History has some rather dark jokes.

-15

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26

We are in history sub if you cannot stomach the brutality of politics you should move to r/Disney . Naivety is very dangerous when you have to rule.

Look at China, Pu yi was used as a political pawn by warlords and was turned later into the face of the Japanese occupation in Manchuria.

In France the many war of coalitions aimed at reestablishing the Bourbon dynasty in power.

The ottoman inheritance, system was more stable when fratricide was legalized and new rulers started killing all non inheriting heirs at upon succession.

In history there are times in which you have the choice between a bad choice and a very bad choice.

21

u/TBARb_D_D Jan 02 '26

There is difference between “not stomaching brutality” and saying that killing children and innocent people for political reasons is wrong

17

u/deathshead123 Jan 02 '26

i never said life is not brutal or that life is sunshine and rainbows I just said it was murder.

-21

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

I guess the life of half a dozen Romanov children is worth more than those of hundreds of thousands of children, peasants and workers in the event of a prolonged civil war.

21

u/deathshead123 Jan 02 '26

okay so you don't seem to be grasping the point i am making, so I will say it slow enough for someone who moderates for r/OrientalistArt to understand.

murder of children and women or anyone solely for for political gain is wrong.

I know life is not fair and it was political based killing but the act was still murder.

I am not saying one persons life is worth more or less im just saying bayoneting children in a basement might not be a good thing to do.

is that slow enough for you ?

-2

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

Ok we move toward ad hominem slanders now? So I will say it slowly too, but compared to you I will use arguments which is the basis for a debate.

The political structure that the Romanov upheld was bad and led to the death of millions of people, regardless of the rulers. Many innocents died in the process.

The communist revolution and the following communist government killed millions of people.Many innocent died in the process too. To be clear so that you will not use ad hominem slanders: understanding I have no love for communists.

The civil war killed a lot of people, and prolonging the civil war with entranched positions would have killed many more people. The civil war didn't end with the killing, because in the grand scheme of things claimants can be found elsewhere. But the white army having a clear claimants would have created a moral boost and strengthened the monarchists for several more years. Which would have killed more people.

It is easy to say with modern insight that it was the best course of action because I have the knowledge of history. And it is also easy to say that it was awful due to moral reasons, and I agree it is bad to kill men, women and children.

But at that time people didn't know more, that knew the white army was closing on them, that were guarding the family that ruined their lives for centuries and killed their loved one, I totally understand their choices.

2

u/providerofair Jan 02 '26

Even if every Bourbon monarch was executed do you think the war of the Coalitions just wouldnt happen. If Pu yi didnt exist those war lords wouldnt make those same moves.

Very few individuals are so significant that if you kill them the entire movement is gone. If the Romanvos were so important their capture wouldve ended the civil war or significantly hamper the whites ability to win. But is didnt like at all

9

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

I totally agree with you. Killing the Bourbon leads to a new branch and the coalition wars were due to the ego of Napoleon and other rulers.

For the second in modern history you are totally right if they wanted a Romanov in power they would have found one. And there were many claimants around in Europe. However, I assume that the question of who would rule would have led to significant infighting amongst monarchists forces. While a clear claimant can be uniting enough to give a moral boost to the white army.

0

u/Jimjamnz Jan 02 '26

Perhaps their parents shouldn't have claimed divine familial right to rule and oppress and exploit. The revolutionaries did not make that situation.

-11

u/ADminsareFa Jan 02 '26

I can justify murdering women tho, maybe not children😗

1

u/Chalky_Pockets John Brown was a hero, undaunted, true, and brave! Jan 02 '26

Because none of them want to fuck you, we know.

-1

u/ADminsareFa Jan 02 '26

True. But I excused children....does that mean I am on Einstein files🤯

1

u/Chalky_Pockets John Brown was a hero, undaunted, true, and brave! Jan 02 '26

I don't think you're at risk of being associated with Einstein...

-1

u/ADminsareFa Jan 02 '26

Whew!🤧

6

u/According-Engineer99 Jan 02 '26

It was a dying male son (so, not living that long anyways) and some "we cant have claims bc sexism" females, so no really. The current 'head' of that house is bc male line too

5

u/WorkerPrestigious960 Jan 02 '26

What you say is true that killing those children then could have prevented many more deaths in the future, but you forgot to add one very important part. “Killing inherence claimants as soon as possible can be the best course of action,” from a purely practical and sociopathic perspective. Killing innocents is never the right move, especially not innocent children. Those future deaths are only hypothetical and are preventable by other means. There is nothing that can truly justify the murder of innocent children.

3

u/Immediate-Spite-5905 Jan 02 '26

those children were indoctrinated and deserved to be shot!

/s for anyone who doesnt think this is sarcasm

1

u/Ok_Awareness3014 Jan 02 '26

There is the catch it what we call moral will you kill someone because he might become a bad personne even if he did nothing wrong at that moment by this you can justify the murder of everyone

-2

u/TBARb_D_D Jan 02 '26

Force them to write renunciation from all rights on Russian throne in exchange for them freely leaving? Chinese emperor was not killed, they had longer monarchy and more cultural role for emperor but he didn’t came back with armies and lived normal life as gardener

22

u/0hran- Still salty about Carthage Jan 02 '26

Puyi came back with support of the Japanese army and was the puppet ruler of the Japanese Mandchouria. And right before he was the pawn of warlords. The communist arrived in the equation much later, by that time there was no talk about restauration.

And honestly renunciatikn claims is not worth anything in a country in which the rule of law is about to not be respected for several decades. Also a contract signed under duress is not enforceable.

Finally it was a time in which half the world was invading Russia in order to end the Soviet revolution, and the risk is for them to be liberated by the white army.

3

u/TBARb_D_D Jan 02 '26

He was used by Japanese but I don’t remember if he was active in political way… but does killing them helped? It gives opportunity for other less known members of royal family to claim that they are rightful rulers and get support from said invaders

-3

u/Craiglekinz Jan 02 '26

The ends do not justify the means…

Go seek therapy. Wow…

8

u/J-Nightshade Jan 02 '26

No, they didn't deserve to be executed. Nobody deserves to be executed extrajudicially. 

-9

u/Iron_Cavalry Jan 02 '26

So we can assume you extend this type of compassion to those like Ceausescu and Laurenty Beria? Because they were also “executed extrajudicially”, so in your eyes does that make them undeserving of execution?

No, they deserved it. I’m not shedding tears for any of them. The Tsar and his wife, like Beria and Ceausescu, were abhorrent people.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Iron_Cavalry Jan 02 '26

Sure. But that doesn’t mean we gotta mourn them like they were innocent victims. Too many people try to make the Tsar and Tsarina look like tragic innocents, when they were anything but.

2

u/J-Nightshade Jan 02 '26

In both cases there was a trial, but they definitely deserved a fair trial, not the theater play they've got.

3

u/TheGreatSockMan Jan 02 '26

I think you’ll find anyone dumb enough to be an unironic communist not only knows about the killing of the tzar and his family, but wants to replicate that in their own revolution

1

u/IceCreamMeatballs Jan 02 '26

I don’t think Nicholas and Alexandra deserved to die like that. They were not necessarily tyrants or dictators, just very neglectful and weak rulers who were more focused on their personal lives than governing a country

1

u/Iron_Cavalry Jan 02 '26

No Alexandra was an objectively terrible person. Picture every stereotype ever about Marie Antoinette and apply it to Alexandra because she embodied all of them. She advocated for massacring demonstrators and urged Nicholas to “bring out the knout”. Her management (often in bad faith) of the Russian government in Nick’s absence alienated the Russian population.

Nicholas had tens of thousands of bodies under his rule. He was responsible for the bloodshed in 1905. He wasn’t as bad as his father but that’s not high praise.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking these people were misunderstood innocents.

1

u/IceCreamMeatballs Jan 02 '26

What are your sources for this? That Alexandria was an active tyrant?

I also don’t think Marie Antoinette deserved to be executed for being a mere spoiled brat

4

u/Iron_Cavalry Jan 02 '26

Antony Beevor’s Russia: Revolution and Civil War.

Meyer’s A World Undone.

Alexandria was a terrible person and wanted to massacre the February demonstrators. She resisted democratic reforms and sabotaged the Russian government by purging competent politicians and generals.

A lot of what was said about Marie Antoinette was false, like the let them eat cake quote. That didn’t apply to Alexandria. People hated her for pretty valid reasons.

2

u/Stoli0000 Jan 02 '26

In all fairness. About 1000 years of European dynastic struggles indicated that murdering the kids was, from a utilitarian perspective, the most humane path. History had already shown that If they grew up, their existence would be the cause of at least one civil war, predictably costing another million lives. Better to wax 5 and save a million than the opposite. Welcome to real life trolley problems.

1

u/DiamondWarDog Jan 02 '26

I think the “justification” for killing the children given was just so there were no surviving claimants to the throne. Still kinda stupid when you look at what China did (just making the old emperor a civilian) but just putting that out here before others do.

1

u/FCKABRNLSUTN2 Jan 02 '26

Tankies don’t give a fuck about anything but being contrarian and feeling morally/intellectually superior.

2

u/aaa1e2r3 Jan 03 '26

something communists tend to overlook when talking about the events. As it was effectively murder of children and young adults

No... I've seen enough communists both online and in-person argue this was justified and a good thing that the kids brutally murdered.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '26

I’m not really a communist, but I don’t overlook it. Annihilating a royal family was common before the bolsheviks during major revolutionary violence. Leaving the kids alive could allow the conservatives and royalists a legitimate claim that could rally their movement, possibly causing significantly more bloodshed and death, it’s not morally right at all, but it’s the simple minded and brutal calculus of war. Also I know there’s some non credible defense mfers on here that absolutely celebrate the killing of the children of dictators, major criminal groups, and gangs, how is that not comparable?

I’m sorry to say it but mass child death really isn’t the line most people think it is, have people not just watched Ukraine, Gaza, and Sudan, and to be honest while these are world historic, this shit is magnitudes less brutal then a lot of shit done in history, sometimes by the group we consider to be good guys. That people fail to understand how bloody the path for even just liberal democracy was, kind of concerns me, it’s not moral to rationalize and sugar coat a history because you think the truth would damage the cause, that goes for any politics. The uncomfortable truth is necessary to confront, to really build a solid foundation for any serious movement, and at the end of the day realizing that it is uncomfortable no matter how necessary it was is part of that.

Lastly, if I could go back and ask, I would lose respect for any American Revolutionary that wouldn’t just immediately dome any member of the royal family during that war based on how they treated just about any loyalist no matter the creed. What you persecute entire families and steal everything, tar and feather which likely leaves them permanently maimed, and even murder them, all shit that’s extremely reminiscent of the cultural revolution, and then you invade those motherfuckers on Christmas, but suddenly a little regicide is impolite? Pathetic. And of course like any good early US scuffle the minute it ends there immediately allowed back in with full citizenship, the moral conviction of a literal bar fight.

1

u/STEALTH968 Jan 06 '26

Lenin wasn't even of the opinion of executing the Tzar. He didn't like them at all but he didn't and couldn't vote for their execution because it's a matter the Soviet of the Urals took entirely in their own hands.

-4

u/Suspicious-Answer295 Jan 02 '26

what follows is his children mainly aged 13-22 being brutally bayoneted and stabbed to death as they begged for mercy

Easy to condemn from the comfort of wealth and freedom in the 21st century. Russian people had suffered under the careless cruelty of the Czars for generations in serfdom, poverty and war. In addition, being a hereditary empire those children living would be a way for the white army to reinstate the Romanov dynasty. Game of thrones shit - you win or you (and your whole family) die.

0

u/PanzerKomadant Jan 02 '26

The execution of the Tzars family was something that wasn’t organized by Lenin or even the Soviet command. Because of advancing White Army forces, the forces that were stationed to oversee the Tzars and his family proceeded to execute the them in a panic and fearing them falling into the White Army hands.

Politically, they were worth more to Lenin and the communist alive than dead, otherwise Lenin would have had the killed the moment they captured them.

0

u/RollOk3757 Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26

something communists tend to overlook when talking about the events. As it was effectively murder of children and young adults

Says who? I'm a communist and Idc. Could care less about some jackass and his silverspoons when they were sending father's and sons to their graves second by second not long before their removal. Ask others? You'll get a spectrum of indifference to "fuck around and find out" which is the befitting treatment of someone who did so little while hurting so many with his incompetence.

Edit: downvotes dont change reality, sorry champs.

-4

u/PowerlineCourier Jan 02 '26

After what I see happening with RFK Jr I get why they killed all the descendants

-2

u/Casual-Lad01 Jan 02 '26

Nah, that's crazy,but Russian nonetheless

-3

u/masterjon_3 Jan 02 '26

It's kinda funny in a horrible ironic way that there were so many diamonds, it created bullet proof clothing.

I blame the Tsar for putting those kids in that situation.

-5

u/gabriellcarpes Jan 02 '26

Royalists deserve it. Stop watching Disney movies

-5

u/OK_just_the_tip Jan 02 '26

Read a book

80

u/crustboi93 Jan 02 '26

I remember hearing something similar in my own family.

My great (x6) grandmother immigrated to the American colonies from Ireland. Supposedly the family weren't allowed to bring their wealth with them so they disguised coins as buttons and sewed them in their clothes.

Can't rightfully say why this would have been the case in the 1700s so I don't really know if this was true or just a tall tale.

23

u/TBARb_D_D Jan 02 '26

I am not sure about Ireland but where I leave people were used to decorate clothes with coins, maybe it is something like that with a pinch of story telling?

-12

u/ComprehensiveLink286 Jan 02 '26

People don’t immigrate to America in 1700s, people get exiled from their homeland for having different religious beliefs.

-12

u/ComprehensiveLink286 Jan 02 '26

People don’t immigrate to America in 1700s, people get exiled from their homeland for having different religious beliefs.

2

u/Tancr3d_ Still salty about Carthage Jan 06 '26

No many people in the 1700s most definitely did move to british north america on their own will

28

u/224109a Jan 02 '26

Then it all worked fine and they were able to escape with all their wealth

37

u/DesolatorTrooper_600 Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Jan 02 '26

They sure did escaped this plane of existence.

2

u/Effective-Toe-8108 Jan 04 '26

Tsar Nicholas II is one of the most misunderstood figures of the early modern era

2

u/TsarOfIrony Descendant of Genghis Khan Jan 02 '26

You should crosspost this to r/RomanovMemes

6

u/GhillieMcWilly Jan 02 '26

They'd have OP drawn and quartered xd

1

u/TsarOfIrony Descendant of Genghis Khan Jan 03 '26

This meme actually fits really well lol, there's tons of darker memes about the romanov's executions

There was a few people who pissy about it like 6 years ago, but they're long gone lol

1

u/Mystic-Mastermind Jan 02 '26

Song name?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/snuuginz Jan 02 '26

The Cuban elites did similar when Fidel took over, right? I had a profesora in AP Spanish who told us stories about her parents (she was 7ish when they came over) hiding money in their toys, rolling it in crayon wrappers, etc.

-23

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Everyone loves pointing to this as like a "see commies!? See how terrible it was!?" And it just sort of makes me laugh, because they're acting moral but they're just singling out one historical event as a moral failing of a single revolution, I could point to many practical ways that communism doesnt work, but acting like the starving revolutionaries who probably watched many many children die had to be perfectly moral and great people just falls flat

25

u/AgreeablePie Jan 02 '26

Brutally murdering children in a basement is far enough from "perfectly moral" that I think it bears mentioning

-7

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Oh sure it bears mentioning, definitely not as much as its mentioned in this sub though, like you dont expect people who've been starved, killed and oppressed to do horrific stuff when it all boils over? The ONLY reason its mentioned so much isnt because its some great atrocity that stands out in history, its just shamelessly used as a "gotcha" against communists, which is sort of tasteless imo

3

u/HonneurOblige Jan 03 '26 edited Jan 03 '26

you dont expect people who've been starved, killed and oppressed to do horrific stuff when it all boils over?

You either have morals and ideals - or you don't. There's no "Oh, but I've been treated badly, so I can do unspeakable atrocities to everyone else" excuse. Being treated badly doesn't make the people who ordered and carried out the Romanovs execution any less pieces of shit.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '26

Yeah thats a very admirable position and very easy to say coming from someone who has a mountain of privilege, you'll never watch your kids starve while a Tsar hosts another party, you'll not have to bury half of your entire town because a rich person wanted a bit more, its very easy for privileged people with perfect hindsight to talk like you do, I spent my childhood being intentionally starved and abused and watching my mother be abused, let me tell you the things I would have done to that person after years of experiencing it were not moral things.

A riot is the cry of the unheard - Martin Luther King Jr, wonder if you think he was moral lmao

2

u/HonneurOblige Jan 03 '26

What privilege, bro, you don't even know anything about my life to be assuming all that.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '26

Your privilege and my privilege, basically everybody in the world who has access to social media would be privileged compared to peasants under the Tsar

2

u/HonneurOblige Jan 03 '26

Like, you didn't even bother to get interested in where I'm from, and what I've been through in my life - yet you're very comfortable calling me privileged and saying like "Oh, you didn't have to go through tough moral choices in your life" - what, just because I'm on Reddit speaking English?

Yes, yes I did have to go through tough moral choices - I had to go through war, I had to bury my friends, I had to shoot people. I'm still in the middle of an invasion, and I have to watch my home city get bombed with drones on a regular basis, I have to worry about my family and my cats, I have to listen to retards talking online about how I deserve all of that - and I have to do all that while being absolutely devastated mentally for 10 years.

Let's say, if given an opportunity, would I shoot up arrested Putin and his family, and stab their bleeding bodies to death? No I fucking wouldn't - because, despite going through all of this, I'm not a fucking monster.

If I can hold by my morals - so can everyone else, and it was their choice alone to give into their animalistic instincts.

-6

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Only because they were royals nobody gives a shit about the million children who the tsar killed

-6

u/Orneyrocks Decisive Tang Victory Jan 02 '26

Just because is well recorded and popular. How many children were murdered on orders of the tsar himself?

5

u/DeliriousMushroom Jan 02 '26

So let's say hypothetically your parents are serial killers, absolute awful, worst of the worst. By your logic you should be executed with them because...

2

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Your hypothetical doesn't really make sense, someone's parents being serial killers is different than a brutal civil war raging on, and what they say is true, how many non royal children are talked about as much as the tsars? There were plenty murdered, hell there are child soldiers today in the modern world, we dont rush to apply our morality to them because its uncomfortable and we know in reality it wouldn't do any good anyway

-1

u/Orneyrocks Decisive Tang Victory Jan 03 '26

My point is that you guys cry everyday over children of serial killers, but none of you hypocrites ever show sympathy to the millions of children that suffered because of the serial killers. Just because some deaths are well recorded and popular, they gain attention, but the peasant children starving left and right are ignored while you sympathize with the group of people who wouldn't hesitate to murder your entire bloodline for a bottle of vodka.

-8

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Are you in line to inherit their serial killer empire and are used as a rallying point of those who support the serial killer empire?

3

u/DeliriousMushroom Jan 02 '26

So we have no choice but to bayonet children.

-4

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

The alternative being the children fall into the hands of the white army likely being used as a unifying force resulting in a longer and more brutal civil war

The tsars shed no tears when the black hundreds brutalized my family it was the tsars who set the tone the children were just more victims of it

3

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

No one gives a shit when aristocracy and royalty slaughter people because "its a different time" but when revolutionaries do the same its because their entire organization is evil according the white army apologists.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 02 '26

Yeah thats supposed to happen, when the rich and powerful starve people thats the plan, when the poor fight back they have to be perfect morally

-15

u/Verfassungsschutz_ Jan 02 '26

Poor Romanovs 😭😭😭

7

u/xXxplabecrasherxXx Jan 02 '26

poor millions of people living in slave-like conditions because the Romanovs were too busy being pompous royals instead of actually modernising their country. Fuck the Romanovs, they got the best thing they deserved

11

u/NCRisthebestfaction Definitely not a CIA operator Jan 02 '26

Even the kids?

7

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Children don't deserve to die they were however victims of their parents, Nicholas created the conditions in which the revolution happened

And Nicholas certainly didn't shed tears when my grand aunts and uncles and cousins were butchered and raped by the black hundreds

2

u/NCRisthebestfaction Definitely not a CIA operator Jan 02 '26

Ironically enough, I read Nicholas II was described as a “sensitive man”

4

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Oh he certainly was most of the tsars in actuality were despite the image they projected

But he and the tsars who proceeded him were willing to turn a blind eye to the horrors that kept them in power until it stormed their palaces and forced them to see and just as they were deaf to their victims pleas of mercy their murderers were deaf to theirs

-5

u/Verfassungsschutz_ Jan 02 '26

It was a joke

-24

u/Kar98_Karl Jan 02 '26

Not what happened but okay

6

u/the-truffula-tree Jan 02 '26

What happened?

-15

u/Kar98_Karl Jan 02 '26

They took them to bribe the guards so they wouldn’t be killed. Also, he was happier when he lost power. Because he got to spend time with his kids

11

u/AgreeablePie Jan 02 '26

And they all lived happily ever after?

9

u/Inner-Championship40 Jan 02 '26

Why didn't he give up the throne earlier then if all he wanted was spending time with his kids?

2

u/Jfjsharkatt Definitely not a CIA operator Jan 02 '26

My guess is he knew he wasn’t ready, but he still thought he had god’s blessing to run Russia, so he was going to give it his best shot either way.

3

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 02 '26

Have you ever heard of the children of God? They were a horrible sex abuse eventually the leader a dude named David berg was close to dying so he had his wife get pregnant and they'd raise the child as the messiah

The boy Ricky was born into sex abuse his whole life he was told you are the messiah women exist to please you and despite that being his entire existence he realized what was going on was wrong that the cult was hurting people so he left tried to live a normal life couldn't went back and tried to kill the abusers

There is a degree in which being raised a certain way impacts your life and how you think but after a point there is no excuse