• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Maybe they were on a better trajectory, idk.

    They were. Russia between 1905 and 1914 was developing faster than at any point under Bolsheviks.

    I haven’t studied it extensively, so I could be very mistaken, but it seems like a case of rose colored glasses.

    Not entirely, one can call NEP sort of a continuation of those few years.

    I guess I struggle to see pre-socialist Russia as better than modern Russia, unless we’re merely looking at trajectory.

    In quality, not in quantity. Most people were illiterate and rural, but those who were literate had better quality of that literacy, so to say. Among those capable of touching power it was more decentralized, however strange that would seem. Quality of those people was better too, it wasn’t an organized mafia group. They had professors in the parliament and they didn’t have thieves there.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Interesting, I’ll have to read up on pre-Soviet Russia then. I also don’t know to what extent Putin’s power is limited. If you have any resources comparing modern Russia to pre-Soviet Russia, I’d be interested in reading more.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        I also don’t know to what extent Putin’s power is limited.

        To no extent, but it’s more of a gang than a monarchy.

        If you have any resources comparing modern Russia to pre-Soviet Russia, I’d be interested in reading more.

        I’ll look for them, what I say is a digest of a lot of little things learned, so.