hero of the era 1861 - 1913: results of opinion
So, "positive personality № January 1961-1913" . Summarize in the comments made by free opinions. Poll I do not become conscious, because then the blame would go like "... and why my favorite NN is not included? And he is the most important was!". So just summing both opinions and attitudes. What happened in descending order:
1. Witte - 25
2. Alexander III - 20
3. Stolypin - 13
4. Alexander II - 5
5. Mendeleev - 5
6. adm. Makarov - 4
7-9. Milutin, vel.kn. Konst.Nikolaevich, Gorchakov - 3
10-13. Skobelev, Pobedonostsev Carl Siemens, Vernadsky - 2
course, you can choose up to ten leaders opinion and voting is done on them. If such an interesting experiment - do it. Other candidates have called 1 time, there are many. Interesting to obtain with the opinion of the emperors, and them in this period there were three:
Alexander III - 20
Alexander II - 5
Nicholas II - 1
Ie Nicholas the 2 nd call only member, though he deployed motivated opinion.
And in our discussion (at work) is also "won" as a result of Witte, as in the post: After putting some of the various arguments "On the table all agreed that its integral effect - the most positive, if viewed in the longer historical perspective, and summarize as "+" and "-" (none of the views, of course, was not a perfect person with the only perfect solution). Triple winners at us, on the positive impact on the development of the country, lined up as:
1. Witte
2. Milutin
3. Alexander III
from the sphere of scientific importance, too, have identified the Mendeleev as the most serious systemic phenomenon. You can put it as number 4.
from the views expressed, as clearly seen that a bunch of "Alexander III - Witte," in spite of the massive promotion Stolypin-seer, and Alexander II-deliverer and Progressor, remains out of any competition by a wide margin. And now let's try to understand why? Why not Stolypin? Not Alexander II? No naval?
The fact is that when we try to take the trouble to identify "significant personality era with the highest positive influence "that Volens-nevolens have to analyze not flashy bright exterior steps / events (or throw a tragic end as that of Alexander II and Stolypin) and the construction of such a figure in long-term systems or subsystems, a decisive influence on the development of the country and have proved their viability in the follow the historical trials. And on this indicator Witte simply has no equal, or as one of the commentators said - " Witte, without options ".
What same subsystem was built Witte? No, this is not financial reforms - too bright, but not too long, and - the construction of modern cardiovascular system of the country, или единой железнодорожной сети, с едиными жёсткими правилами и государственной принадлежностью, которая позволяет централизованно управлять тарифной policy. And the highest peak of this work - the construction of Great Siberian Way, or the Trans-Siberian Railway, as now we call it. This core network, because it is not chaotic a set of small nemagistralnyh private line, pulling in a strong impetus to the development of other related subsystems - from river transport to agriculture and Industry, near the railway. And, therefore, gave a great new opportunity to develop the country as a whole and raised to the active life of the new huge Regions, former economically and strategically "asleep" - such as the Urals, Altai, Kulunda steppe, Angara, Transbaikalia, Maritime, etc. And - most important - this backbone is not only proven its viability in peacetime, but also withstood a serious test of strength and need for the country During both world wars. And allowed to keep as part of those territories which were annexed to Russia in the East after 1689, since Nerchinsk contract.
may be made the following objection: Witte's not so long been at the helm, to shape the whole network, because part of it was built after, with the same Stolypin. This is so. But here it is important to bear in mind two things:
1) That the principles laid Witte development of the transport network as a reference, rather than chaotic a set of private lines, as under Alexander II-m: the unification of the rules from Warsaw to Vladivostok, focused redemption (even under pressure) lines in the coffers of the private hand, a decisive reduction in the share of speculation on prospective railway concessions, further development of the lines already on the best destinations, without dubbing. This network in its basic contours, serves the society and now, Witte principles of its development, has proved its worth, were fixed.
2) Focus (And resources) on critical areas, including financial and focus (especially important in the political system!), And tight coordination construction and application efforts at the highest level (the Emperor - Chairman of the Council of Ministers - the Ministers - the leaders of the directions). This was particularly important in the construction of Trans-Siberian Railway, has demanded an enormous investment, labor and finance. And the personal role Witte in this concentration - crucial.
And by the way: Witte acted in a direction opposite faktichesski modern liberal would-be reformers (all these Chubais-Dvorkovich-Gref), ie focus resources and management, rather than crushed core network to pieces by the principle "it is profitable, it is not profitable, and we are disadvantageous from the isolate, let them slowly dying ".
Witte their energy and initiative (and of course, with the most active and effective support of Alexander III, about which should also be remembered) built a strong organizational system with uninterrupted funding and competent engineering staff, which enabled the implementation of sverhproekt , the then "world wonder". Analogue scale and significance of this sverhproekta him on the subsequent development of the country - it is only a "nuclear program" Stalin - Beria PSU (1946-1953). But the role of Witte in comparison with Beria in his sverhproekta was somewhat higher: Beria was Stalin's directives implementing purposeful, though talented, and acted in a more rigid framework, without creating a base for financing the project (it was the task of Stalin), and Witte is not only shaped the initiative proposals, but also worked actively on the concentration field of finance, because if this problem was much more complicated than a monolithic Stalinist times.
Both sverhproekta (Russian Trans-Siberian and Soviet nuclear and space) was solved and have successfully global problem: the first - to create a modern support network, the ridge of the country in its present understanding, the second - a solution, "June 22", ie preventing sudden and nevnezapnogo attack on the gigantic territory country, which is difficult to protect the traditional ways. First sverhproekt the country has about 120 years, the second - about 60, and while that is not visible reduction of their extreme importance and significance to society.
There is another serious objection to Witte: Manchurian adventure, turning the Great Siberian road to Harbin - Port Arthur. Yes, this is so: Witte initially actively promoted an alternative draft Amur, and overcame it. There have even been situations where it can be called "bad guys", or certainly, imperfect man. Yes, this change in Harbin (and the construction of the Far and Port Arthur) "burned" about a quarter Total reserves sverhproekta, and unwittingly initiated the emergence of a competitive economic entity in Manchuria. But 3 / 4 wasted resources - all the same continued to work for the country, and worked successfully, after many decades. Circulatory support system was created, and it functioned.
Same happened with Stalin and Beria's atomic project - about a third of resources spent on it since 1991, are impaired (Dnepropetrovsk - "Southern", Semipalatinsk polygon, Kharkiv's industrial base, etc.). So neither Witte after the death of Alexander III-rd or Stalin - Beria posleznaniem not possessed, and made decisions that could be partially suboptimal in light of subsequent events. But he somehow kept the project viable and still fulfills its purpose! Therefore, such objection is not very effective. Finale of Witte was also very sad (unpopular): he had to diplomatically deal with all the results of Russian-Japanese war, and he was insulting nickname "Polusahalinsky. But: Polusahalinsky, but Trans-Siberian. The first problem was solved later, while the latter is left for posterity.
Consequently, no competition Witte in terms of the overall positive effect in 1861-1913, in my opinion, no. Of course, very close to it stands, and Alexander III, both patronize his efforts, is also very important contribution to the military reformers of the era Milutin (mentioned in the comments Legatus_Minorom). Milutin also transformed complex and vital system and has had some good results.
Stolypin ... But with them difficult. I do not want to deny that it was strong, serious personality. Part of his endeavors was strategically correct - in particular, immigration policy (in Far East and Siberia for his being moved to 3 million. And a half returned, but a half left and stuck), was true and the construction of Trans-Siberian Amur direction (ie, a return to a variant of the late Alexander III), but his land policy (the allocation of community and education "strong" villagers, farmers) was incompatible with the mentality of the nation, gradually accumulated social explosion and, most likely was from a historical perspective is doomed. That is, the balance of pluses and minuses of Stolypin in building sustainable systems was markedly worse than that of Witte. But the brightness of its image influenced, of course, tragic end. Like Kennedy.
naval (mentioned a few). Then this is the reason: because the fleet, unlike Britain, Japan, USA, is not for Russia just as critical to the development and protection of the country, so the global impact success in this field is much lower than people who were engaged in ground realities. And the effectiveness of spending resources on land transport the network was incomparably higher than the Navy - and particularly in the context of their limitations.
As for the "saint" of Nicholas II ... something very eloquently that it referred to Only one commentator. Next, talk about it (in the context of the integral of a positive influence) I think superfluous, since it is quite different excitation shit and only pollute the discussion. Tearful fans Ganina Yama let hang out in other posts.
* * *
And yet, on the one for the road. When we speak of the "French loaf, "we must remember that was the French booth, which is" fart "(you know what I mean), and one which" eat "." eat "until now, as rather an optimal reference transportation system. I mean, I do not like the aggressive sweeping ohaivanie Russian empire - as well as similar ohaivanie Soviet Union. And she, and another - this one, the total of our historic River Road. And evaluate their need to calmly and adequately. And, of course, to avoid partisan shit in its history - the Soviet whether imperial Do.
[I was about ohaivanie "baseless" (in the style of the sad memory of acad. Pokrovsky), not about legitimate criticism.]
0 comments:
Post a Comment