If in the Sublime Porte in the 17th century the sultan decided to establish a Human Rights Council, then it is clear which person's rights would be implied. The council would have been made up of Janissaries. Times and customs were courageous and simple, without hypocrisy.
Since then, much water has flowed under the bridge, and regimes similar to the Sultan are currently forced to build scenery. Today, not janissaries are being introduced to the councils, but civilians, or at least those who are dressed in civilian clothes, and leave the service scimitar at home.
The Human Rights Council itself is an exotic thing. Where there are real institutions – parliament, court, press, elections, where the law prevails – human rights are protected without a special council under the head. If the institutions do not work, then this Council is of little use.
On the other hand, when the institutions do not work, the country lives according to the concepts, and according to the concepts of the first person. Direct access to this person allows sometimes, not systematically, but to help someone. This is a great temptation. But even this largely illusory possibility with the tightening of autocracy comes to naught. The regime is simplified, its style becomes straightforward and rough, any structure takes on a finished, frank bureaucratic look. And during the war – the military-bureaucratic.
In Russian history, everything related to bureaucracy, as a rule, has a negative connotation.
On June 2, 1915, the breeder, financier, millionaire Alexei Ivanovich Putilov had a conversation with the French ambassador Maurice Paleolog. Lighting a cigar, Putilov said:
“The days of kingship are numbered. She died irretrievably. Revolution is inevitable. Anything can serve as an occasion – a strike, a famine, a mutiny in Moscow or a palace scandal. The greatest crime of tsarism is that it did not want to admit, besides its bureaucracy, any other center of political life. And on the day when officials surrender it, the Russian state itself will fall apart.
Indeed, an unenviable sight when a huge country has such a simple device.
True, in fairness it must be said that Russian tsarism made an incredible effort on itself and allowed the creation of a parliament in the person of the Duma. Although for this the tsar needed to experience personal horror during the first revolution in Russia, horror up to the intention to leave the throne. Rasputin persuaded Nicholas not to leave the throne, and Prime Minister Witte actually forced him to sign the Manifesto on Civil and Political Freedoms.
Nikolai himself sincerely did not understand what the need for the State Duma was, and even more so did not realize what kind of insurance it could provide him in the event of a political crisis. He thought: if they want the Duma, let it be a cardboard toy.
Nikolai himself sincerely did not understand what the need for the State Duma was
There was no such thing in the old Russia that Nikolai understood: many political parties, inter-party alliances, alliances with business people, talk about a government of public trust – and it’s just the end of the world when the factory owners themselves draw their workers into social activities.
Russia in the second decade of the 20th century had a large business community, but Nicholas did not see him as a potential ally either. It is likely that this was the master's disdain for the former serfs, who had become rich. But at the beginning of the 20th century, such a view was clearly insufficient for the head of state, where large private business provides record rates of economic growth and will inevitably strive for political influence, and for this it will want to have a parliament with real powers.
The main request of the Russian bourgeoisie is to provide open common rules of the game in business.
It seems to be a local task, but in fact it is absolutely revolutionary. In the future, its successful solution could lead to a normal limitation of the autocracy. But at that moment it was not the king. The most active, in today's language, creative forces of Russian society had a much more serious opponent than the tsar. Namely, the bureaucracy, which in the Russian Empire was stronger than the autocrat. And she stood up.
The bureaucracy of the early 20th century, above all the Petersburg bureaucracy, had its own specific economic interests. The highest officials and the court, including the large Romanov family, have long been members of the boards of directors of large commercial structures, owned shares, securities, and played on the stock exchange. Plus corruption. And most importantly, due to their proximity to the throne, the highest bureaucracy had access to state loans. That is, to the same free money, for which Moscow giants, like Ryabushinsky and Vtorov, fought first of all to develop their business.
The highest officials were on the boards of directors, owned shares, played on the stock exchange
Their business was losing perspective because of the St. Petersburg bureaucracy. That is why, first of all, Moscow business (St. Petersburg business is more connected with the capital's bureaucracy) wanted political influence through the State Duma, expanding its powers, appointing ministers, controlling the budget, and further down the list. And even in the military year of 1915, attempts in this direction continued.
Putilov, a witness to this unsuccessful struggle, while talking with the French ambassador, knew that he was talking about the St. Petersburg bureaucracy: it would easily surrender the sovereign at the first sign of his weakening, there would simply be no practical need for him. And there will be no other support from the sovereign. In addition, he got involved in the World War.
The Petersburg bureaucracy will easily surrender the sovereign at the first sign of his weakening.
First of all, from euphoria. Due to the economic and demographic rise in the country, the instinct of state self-preservation weakened, and military victories were wanted. The security forces strongly supported this desire and directly demanded money from the king.
Prime Minister Kokovtsov, the last of the glorious trinity of strong Russian prime ministers after Witte and Stolypin, was categorically against it. Witte once expressed a seditious thought:
“In the interests of Russia, one should not try to play a leading role, it is advisable to move into the second row of world powers, while organizing the country, restoring internal peace.”
Kokovtsov shared this position and was fired by Nikolai. Upon learning of the dismissal, the Dowager Empress Nicholas' mother said:
"We are on the right path to disaster."
Kokovtsov foresaw one more bad circumstance in advance. The arms race, the demonstration of its successes, will instill in the mass consciousness the idea that war is inevitable and will be successful. Nervous excitement will rise so high that it will overwhelm even the most staunch opponents of the war. Prime Minister Kokovtsov looked into the water. Mass patriotic enthusiasm at the beginning of the war will intoxicate everyone, but the hangover will be terrible. Nikolai did not think about it.
He wanted to quench the complex from defeat in the Russo-Japanese War. In addition, I wanted to act as an older brother and help the Serbs. And finally, the main thing: the dream of sitting down for the White Tsar in the sacred city of Constantinople, the birthplace of Orthodoxy, and also just sitting on the coveted straits in the Mediterranean Sea and opening them at your own, and not Turkish, discretion.
The end of all these dreams is known – October 1917.
During the time of Soviet power, there was no stone left unturned from the former Russia. But the main principle was preserved: the bureaucracy with its ability to combine power and property remained the ruling class. She really doesn't need any real institutions.