Podcasts about tsars

Nous sommes le 31 octobre 1803. Alexandre 1er, empereur de Russie, grand-duc de Finlande et roi de Pologne, octroie à Nikolaï Karamzine, un titre inédit. Un titre que personne d'autre ne portera après lui, celui d'historiographe officiel de la Russie. Mais qui est l'homme qui mérite cet honneur ? Karamzine a trente-six ans à cette époque, il a voyagé dans l'Europe des Lumières et assisté, pratiquement en direct, à la Révolution française. A son retour, il se fixe à Moscou, crée un journal et publie des œuvres dans la veine que l'on dira du « sentimentalisme ». C'est un ambitieux qui s'est donné pour projet de réformer la langue littéraire de son pays natal. Une langue qu'il juge ampoulée, manquant de simplicité. Mais son grand œuvre, celui qui va supplanter tous les autres, sera de raconter l'histoire de la mère patrie. En exalter la grandeur mais aussi en dénoncer les failles. Mais, s'il croit profondément en la nécessité d'éduquer le peuple, il argumente aussi en faveur du maintien du servage. S'il dénonce la tyrannie des tsars, il reste opposé à l'avènement d'une République. La parution de sa colossale « Histoire de l'Etat russe » sera retentissante, et son auteur s'attirera foudre et admiration. Et pourtant, aujourd'hui, Karamzine est peu lu dans son pays et peu traduit ailleurs. Qu'a-t-il à nous dire qui nous éclaire encore ? Partons sur ses traces ? Avec nous : Julie Bouvard, diplômée de l'Université de la Sorbonne Paris IV en littérature russe. Traductrice du texte intitulé « Ma confession » de Nikolaï Karamzine, aux éditions Kniga-Lamiroy. Sujets traités : Nikolaï Karamzine, Russie, Europe, lumières, Révolution française, Moscou, tsars, oeuvre Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Annie, Ella & André review the Spirit's chaotic 3-2 win over the Chicago Stars (or Tsars).We review yet another new lineup, and ask whether the inconsistency is harming cohesion. Then we review all the goals, good and bad, and marvel at Rose Kouassi's first goal and unique Stat Trick™ performance.We also discuss the Spirit's inclusion in the upcoming Champions Cup, 'Empowering Legendary Females', 'pitch please', Unwell FC, and apologize to members of the Daddy Gang who enjoy being part of the Daddy Gang.Thank you for listening, please subscribe, rate, and review. It means a lot to us!

The Tsarevich Dmitry Ivanovich died from an accidental self-inflicted knife wound in 1591... but that didn't stop him from popping up to try and reclaim his throne in 1604. And 1607. And 1611. And 1612. And... https://order-of-the-jackalope.com/samozvantsy Key sources for this episode include Chester S.L. Dunning's Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Romanov Dynasty; Maureen Perrie's Pretenders and Popular Monarchism in Early Modern Russia: The False Tsars of the Time of Troubles; Paul Avrich's Russian Rebels, 1600-1800; and Peter Julicher's Renegades, Rebels and Rogues Under the Tsars. Special thanks to Kristen Harkness for her help with Russian transliteration and pronunciation. (Sorry, Kristen, I still beefed it!) The Ancient and Esoteric Order of the Jackalope is a secret society devoted to the idea that that which is least known is best to know. Each episode we share a strange story or amazing fact, and no topic is off limits -- if it's interesting or entertaining, we'll cover about it! Email: jackalope@order-of-the-jackalope.com Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/order-of-the-jackalope.com Discord: https://discord.gg/Mbap3UQyCB TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@orderjackalope Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/orderjackalope YouTube: https://youtube.com/@orderjackalope

In this international episode of the ‘Tsars. Data. Facts' podcast, Ben Aris, founder and editor-in-chief of BNE IntelliNews, talks about the surprising resilience of the Russian economy in the face of severe Western sanctions. Despite initial expectations of economic collapse, Russia's GDP has grown over the past two years. The berlin based analyst explains how Russia has made adjustments by shifting its exports to Asia, reorganising its supply chains and boosting domestic production. He also looks at how the sanctions have affected Europe, particularly Germany.

Virginie Girod vous emmène à bord du Transsibérien, le train mythique des tsars. Au milieu du XIXe siècle, le gouverneur général de la Sibérie Orientale imagine la création d'une ligne ferroviaire de 9000 kilomètres reliant Moscou à Vladivostok, afin, notamment, de créer un trait d'union entre les peuples de l'immense territoire russe. Mais le projet ne convainc pas le tsar. Quelques années plus tard, la publication d'un livre de Jules Verne va contribuer à changer la donne. En 1891, le chantier est inauguré. Un quart de siècle durant, 90 000 hommes participent à l'aventure titanesque du mythique Transsibérien.

Marie-Soleil Michon se demande si on est bons pour ne rien faire ? Christophe Dupéré cherche des TSARS pour toutes les affaires que les fantastiques détestent Virginie Fortin parle des enfants qui pratiquent des sports de combat ! BONNE ÉCOUTE !

Send us a text“Enjoy this episode? Please share it with at least ONE friend who you think needs to hear it!”Biblical historian, Christian contrarian researcher, and author of The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, Gary Wayne reveals the shocking truth behind secret societies, ancient bloodlines, and their hidden influence on human history in episode 191 of Far Out with Faust.From the Nephilim and the Watchers of Genesis 6 to the Freemasons, Jesuits, and the Priory of Sion, Gary exposes the elite families who claim divine rights to rule the world. He unpacks the House of Windsor's bloodline, King Charles III's connection to Vlad the Impaler, and how powerful dynasties—including the Romanovs and Tsars—are still fighting for control today. Are we living in the final stages of an ancient New World Order prophecy? And what do UFOs, fallen angels, and interdimensional beings have to do with it?Topics include:•The Genesis 6 Conspiracy — the hidden war between humanity and the fallen ones•How royal bloodlines trace their lineage to gods, giants, and Nephilim•The House of Windsor, King Charles III, and their occult connections•The Romanov dynasty, Vladimir Putin, and the battle of bloodlines•The Jesuits, Freemasons, and Priory of Sion — who really runs the world?•World Wars as elite-engineered conflicts to reshape global power•Why modern institutions suppress ancient knowledge and forbidden texts•UFOs, fallen angels, and interdimensional entities—is there a connection?•The Book of Enoch and other lost scriptures that rewrite history•Atlantis, the New World Order, and the origins of global control•The real meaning behind Lord of the Rings and the myth of the Ringlords•The missing years of Jesus—was he trained in secret schools?•Could biblical prophecy explain current global events?•The occult, alchemy, and the suppressed sciences of the ancient world…and much more!

À rattraper ce 4 février 2025 Le tsar du Canada Vos étoiles de la santé 2 candidats de la région dans un gros show télé

We're onto our second episode of the year - looking at the story of Islam in Russia! Flying us through the history is Dr Danielle Ross, a specialist of Islamic and Russian-Soviet history at the State University of Utah.  Russia is home to one of the world's largest Muslim populations, with a rich and complex history that stretches back over a thousand years. We start with its early introduction in the Volga region, and travel through the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Crimea. We explore the role of Tatar Muslims, and the shifting policies of Tsars, Soviets, and modern Russia towards their Muslim citizens. Despite periods of repression and revival, Islam remains a vital force in Russia's diverse society today, shaping everything from local traditions to geopolitical dynamics. Join us as we uncover the resilience and contributions of Russia's Muslim communities in this captivating episode.

Grigori Raspoutine est sans aucun doute l'homme religieux qui a le plus marqué l'époque des derniers Tsars de Russie. Mais comment un homme issu du milieu paysan a-t-il réussi à devenir un intime de la famille impérial et par la même occasion devenir l'homme à abattre du palais ? Entre mystique, organisateur d'*rgie, guérisseurs et potentiel manipulateur, qui était Raspoutine ? C'est ce que l'on va essayé de voir en semble dans un nouveau moment d'Occulture ! --------------------------- La majorité des musiques de la sponso ont été créées par @Creeptorecords ! --------------------------- Devenez membre de cette chaine pour bénéficier d'avantages exclusifs : https://www.youtube.com/c/Occulture/membership --------------------------- Tous les liens utiles de la chaine (réseaux sociaux, boutiques, chaine secondaire...) : bento.me/occulture --------------------------- Sources : LIVRES Radzinsky, Edvard (2010). Le dossier Raspoutine Fuhrmann, Joseph T. (1990). Raspoutine : une vie Smith, Douglas (2016). Raspoutine : la foi, le pouvoir et le crépuscule des Romanov Smith, Douglas (2017). « Grigori Raspoutine et le déclenchement de la Première Guerre mondiale : juin 1914 » Prince Youssoupoff, La Fin de Raspoutine, Paris, Plon, 1927 Félix Youssoupov, Avant l'exil (1887-1919), Paris, Plon, 1952 Michel Heller, Histoire de la Russie et de son empire, Paris, Perrin, 2015 Henri Troyat, Nicolas II, le dernier tsar, Paris, Flammarion, 1994 Raspoutine, Maria ; Barham, Patte (1977). Raspoutine : l'homme derrière le mythe SITES https://phantommanorlegends.wordpress.com https://tvtropes-org. https://pm20-zbw-eu.translate.goog/mirador/?manifestId=https://pm20.zbw.eu/iiif/folder/pe/023964/manifest.json&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=fr&_x_tr_hl=fr https://powo.science.kew.org/ https://www.genialvegetal.net/-Bistorte- https://fr.wikipedia.org http://calendrier.egliseorthodoxe.com www.tyumen-city.ru https://fr.orthodoxwiki.org Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

This is the weekly columWine scores. Oh, my. On one level, ridiculous. On another level, essential to wine's success over the past half century. Some observations.Anyone who ever took a test or got a report card in grade school immediately understands a wine score. Robert Parker was the most visible person to grasp that, and a parade of imitators reinforced it. Many were based on a 100-point scale, but in practice it is a 80-100 point scale. If your wine score was a 79 or less, you might as well drink it alone, directly out of the bottle, preferably disguised by a brown paper bag so as not to reveal your pathetic wine-buying error.There are other scoring schemes. Jancis Robinson, England's gracious gift to worldwide wine information, uses a scoring system that goes from 12 to 20 points, but she also opts for decimals, so her 20-point scale actually is a 17-point scale. Others use stars, usually 5, and half stars can be awarded.Except, wait. Wine evaluation is not sweating students filling in boxes with No.2 pencils while the clock ticks and gimlet-eyed proctors observe. The exact same wine tastes different given the circumstances of the sipping. How many of you experienced exalting joy sipping wine at a winery redolent with the bonhomie atmosphere of friends and a bucolic tableau spilling forth from the charcuterie board and tasting area, only to later discover you did not experience the same elevated bliss at home, in the kitchen, with last night's dirty dishes stacked in the sink awaiting Scotch-Brite Heavy Duty attention?Professional wine scorers often taste multiple wines at a time. Taste, spit, punch a one or two sentence description into the laptop, assign a score. Rinse. Repeat with another wine. That is not how normal human beings experience wine.For the 17 years of this wine column, I have eschewed scores. I understand their simplicity and value, but I decided to go with my strength as a story teller and entertaining writer for my lane. The world did not need another pince-nezed cognoscente to contribute to effluence of wine tasting evaluations in a grade school paradigm.I hope you agree, and thank you for being part of the adventure.Tasting notes• Cline Family Cellars Hat Strap Chardonnay, Los Carneros, Sonoma County 2021: Rich, full-bodied, admirable restraint on the oak and butter, while still deftly delivering some of that popular style. $25-30 Link to my review• Rodney Strong Vineyards Russian River Valley Reserve Pinot Noir 2021: Smooth, compelling complexity and depth. Easy drinker with delicious fruit. $60 Link to my reviewLast roundLast night I watched Dancing with the Tsars. Peter and Catherine were great. But Ivan was terrible. Wine time. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit gusclemens.substack.com/subscribe

Bienvenue dans Les Fabuleux Destins, le podcast pour découvrir des histoires vraies et étonnantes. Cette semaine découvrez l'histoire fascinante de Sidney Reilly, un espion dont la vie semble tout droit sortie d'un roman d'aventures. Au début du 20e siècle, cet homme, connu sous le nom de « l'espion le plus mystérieux du monde », a mené des missions risquées au cœur des intrigues internationales. De l'Empire russe aux couloirs du pouvoir britannique, Reilly a navigué entre trahisons et secrets d'État, sa vie oscillant entre génie du renseignement et homme en fuite. Au service secret de sa majesté  En 1899, Sidney Reilly, espion britannique né Rozenblum, revient dans sa Russie natale, une ville figée par l'hiver, mais bouillonnante d'agents étrangers et de jeux de pouvoir. Missionné pour infiltrer l'élite militaire et politique, il se retrouve pris entre la Russie des Tsars, les ambitions japonaises et… ses propres intérêts. De Saint-Pétersbourg à Port Arthur en passant par les usines allemandes, Reilly joue double-jeu et accumule les risques.  Pour découvrir d'autres récits passionnants, cliquez ci-dessous : [INEDIT] Joseph D. Pistone, le premier infiltré de l'histoire du FBI : immersion dans la mafia New Yorkaise (1/4) [INEDIT] Joseph D. Pistone, le premier infiltré de l'histoire du FBI : nom de code, “Donny Brasco” (2/4) [INEDIT] Joseph D. Pistone, le premier infiltré de l'histoire du FBI : les Bonanno pris au piège (3/4) [INEDIT] Joseph D. Pistone, le premier infiltré de l'histoire du FBI : la tête du “traître” mise à prix (4/4) Un podcast Bababam Originals Ecriture : Clément Prévaux Production : Bababam  Voix : Florian Bayoux  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Partagez votre opinion avec la rédactionAlors que le Kremlin intensifie depuis quelques jours ses attaques sur l'Ukraine, et que Vladimir Poutine accroît ses menaces sur l'Occident, quel impact cela engendre-t-il sur la vie de nos compatriotes au pays des Tsars ? Aussi, pour connaître, la situation de nos expatriés sur place, Lesfrancais.press fait le point avec Franck Ferrari, conseiller des Français de Russie. La suite sur Lesfrancais.pressSupport the show

From the introduction of North Korean troops into the war in Ukraine to a budding friendship with Elon Musk, Putin continues to make strange headlines. The real question is whether Putin actually knows what he's doing or if he, as a wannabe 21st century Russian Tsar, is subject to the same seemingly inevitable historical forces as the Tsars of yesteryear. As both a seasoned Putin watcher and the author of many books about Russia, Mark Galeotti is as well positioned as anyone to determined if Putin is a prisoner or a master of history. Churchill famously described Russia as "a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma." In his new book, Forged in War: A Military History of Russia from its Beginnings to Today, however, Galeotti unwraps this mystery by seeing Russia as an eternal prisoner of its geo-strategic vulnerabilities and thus, like Putin, always insecure, land-hungry and bellicose. Professor Mark Galeotti is one of the foremost Russia-watchers today, who used to travel there regularly to teach, lecture, talk to his contacts, and generally watch the unfolding story of the Putin era, until the Kremlin banned him indefinitely in 2022. Based in the UK, he is an Honorary Professor at UCL and heads the consultancy Mayak Intelligence. He is also a Senior Associate Fellow with both RUSI and the Council on Geostrategy, as well as a Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Institute of International Relations Prague. Before then, he was Professor of Global Affairs at NYU and head of History at Keele University, and was educated at Robinson College, Cambridge, and the LSE. A prolific author on Russia and security affairs, he frequently acts as consultant to various government, commercial and law-enforcement agencies.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

The bellicose and authoritarian Russian state's propaganda exploitation of the anarcho-pacifist novelist Leo Tolstoy is an obvious and perverse irony. But a less obvious irony also presents itself. Like all fascist regimes, that of Vladimir Putin is stigmatizing and even criminalizing homosexuality and other sexual "deviance." Following alarming reports of "concentration camps" for gay men in the Russian republic of Chechnya, Moscow began to impose an anti-gay agenda nationwide. A 2020 constitutional reform officially enshrined "traditional marriage," while a "gay propaganda law" imposes penalties on any outward expression of gay identity, resulting in police raids on Moscow gay bars. The "LGBT movement" has been designated a "terrorist organization"; media depictions of same-sex love are banned as "deviant content." Yet the venerable littérateur now glorified as a symbol of Russian nationalism may have himself been gay. In Episode 249 of the CounterVortex podcast, Bill Weinberg interviews Javier Sethness Castro, author of Queer Tolstoy: A Psychobiography (Routledge 2023). In one sickening propaganda display, Tolstoy's photo was dramatically plastered by Putin's regime onto a barrier fence erected around the Mariupol Drama Theater—a civilian refuge that was bombed during the initial invasion of the Ukrainian port city in March 2022, leading to hundreds of deaths (including many children). By contrast, Marta Albertini, Tolstoy's great-grand daughter, hosts Ukrainian refugees in Switzerland. Sethness Castro notes that some contemporary Ukrainian ant-war writers are in the actual tradition of Tolstoy. Victoria Amelina, a Ukrainian poet and war-crimes investigator who was killed in a missile attack on a pizzeria in Kramatorsk in 2023, wrote the book Dom's Dream Kingdom, narrated from the perspective of a dog who watches his human family struggle over Ukrainian history. This is reminiscent of Tolstoy's short story "Strider," an early harbinger of the animal rights movement, which is written from the perspective of a horse. Another link to Tolstoy in the news is the British Columbia government's recent apology to the Doukhobors, a Russian dissident religious sect, for forcibly assimilating their children in the 1950's. Tolstoy supported the Doukhobors, who were persecuted by the Tsars for their pacifism, and even wrote Resurrection (1899) to finance their migration from the Russian Empire to Canada. His son Sergei Tolstoy and biographer Aylmer Maude led the resettlement, and Peter Kropotkin (another paradoxical anarchist aristocrat) also encouraged it. A reassessment of Tolstoy's sexuality is apropos at this moment in light of recent challenges raised against millennia of Christian homophobia. In any case, Tolstoy's anti-militarism provides important perspectives for our current moment, with multiple genocides ongoing, and humanity on the knife's edge due to the risk of escalating regional wars in both Europe and the Middle East. Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/countervortex Production by Chris Rywalt We ask listeners to donate just $1 per weekly podcast via Patreon -- or $2 for our new special offer! We now have 69 subscribers. If you appreciate our work, please become Number 70!

Nous sommes le 17 février 1880 à Saint-Pétersbourg. Ce jour-là, une gigantesque explosion ravage un étage entier du palais des tsars. L'événement provoque la panique dans la capitale impériale. Elle est l'œuvre d'un nommé Khaltourine, membre du groupe « la Volonté du Peuple ». Cela fait déjà quelques années que ses camarades et lui clament, haut et fort, qu'ils ont l'intention d'assassiner Alexandre II et de mettre fin au régime autocratique. Cet attentat est un tournant dans le combat mené contre le mouvement révolutionnaire. Une commission de lutte contre les crimes d'Etat est instituée. Elle donnera naissance à l'Okhrana, une police secrète, qui va tisser des réseaux à travers l'Europe entière, formant des agents provocateurs, des espions engagés dans la traque des exilés politiques dont elle fait des terroristes. Une véritable machine répressive ne reculant devant aucun moyen : fausses conspirations, interception de correspondances, corruption de la presse et aussi collaboration avec les organes de sécurité d'autres pays. En quoi l'Ohkrana peut-elle être considérée comme la mère de toutes les polices politiques ? Pourquoi sera-t-elle incapable d'endiguer le tumulte révolutionnaire ? De quelle manière a-t-elle façonnée la Russie que l'on connaît aujourd'hui ? Invité : Alexandre Sumpf , maître de conférences à l'Université de Strasbourg. Auteur de : « Okhrana – La police secrète des tsars » aux éditions du Cerf. Sujets traités : Okhrana, Saint-Pétersbourg, Tsars, Khaltourine, Alexandre II, police, espions , exilés , terroristes, Russie Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be : https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement.

Le 17 juillet 1918, le tsar Nicolas II et sa famille sont assassinés par le régime soviétique à Iékaterinbourg. La Première Guerre mondiale et les révolutions de 1917 avaient déjà fait chuter l'Empire russe. Malgré son abdication, Nicolas II et les Romanov sont retenus prisonniers. Lénine ordonne leur exécution, confiée à Iourovski, un membre respecté du Soviet local. Le télégramme de Moscou est clair : éliminer les Romanov. Ce massacre met un terme à la dynastie impériale et change l'histoire de la Russie. Les questions sur leur survie et les raisons de leur exécution persistent encore aujourd'hui. Merci pour votre écoute Retrouvez l'ensemble des épisodes de l'Heure H sur notre plateforme Auvio.be : https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/22750 Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement.

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Britain and Russia maintained a frosty civility for a few years after Napoleon's defeat in 1815. But, by the 1820s, their relations degenerated into constant acrimonious rivalry over Persia, the Ottoman Empire, Central Asia--the Great Game--and, towards the end of the century, East Asia. The First Cold War: Anglo-Russian Relations in the 19th Century (Hurst, 2024) presents for the first time the Russian perspective on this 'game', drawing on the archives of the Tsars' Imperial Ministry. Both world powers became convinced of the expansionist aims of the other, and considered these to be at their own expense. When one was successful, the other upped the ante, and so it went on. London and St Petersburg were at war only once, during the Crimean War. But Russophobia and Anglophobia became ingrained on each side, as these two great empires hovered on the brink of hostilities for nearly 100 years. Not until Britain and Russia recognized that they had more to fear from Wilhelmine Germany did they largely set aside their rivalries in the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which also had major repercussions for the balance of power in Europe. Before that came a century of competition, diplomacy and tension, lucidly charted in this comprehensive new history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

Stéphane Bern raconte les Grands-Ducs et princes de la maison Romanov, les frères, cousins et oncles du Tsar et leurs descendants qui ont quitté, contraints et forcés, la Russie, en espérant pouvoir reprendre un jour le pouvoir qui leur a échappé, après 300 ans passés à la tête du pays. Ou la véritable histoire de l'exil des Romanov après la chute du tsar Nicolas II… Quel a été le lieu d'exil des Romanov ? Quels soutiens ont-ils reçu ? Avaient-ils une chance de refonder l'empire des tsars ? Pour en parler, Stéphane Bern reçoit Boris Prassoloff, auteur de "Tsars sans empire, les Romanov en exil" (Perrin).

Stéphane Bern raconte les Grands-Ducs et princes de la maison Romanov, les frères, cousins et oncles du Tsar et leurs descendants qui ont quitté, contraints et forcés, la Russie, en espérant pouvoir reprendre un jour le pouvoir qui leur a échappé, après 300 ans passés à la tête du pays. Ou la véritable histoire de l'exil des Romanov après la chute du tsar Nicolas II… Quel a été le lieu d'exil des Romanov ? Quels soutiens ont-ils reçu ? Avaient-ils une chance de refonder l'empire des tsars ? Pour en parler, Stéphane Bern reçoit Boris Prassoloff, auteur de "Tsars sans empire, les Romanov en exil" (Perrin).

durée : 00:58:12 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann - L'idée d'Europe ne s'est pas constituée seulement dans l'enthousiasme de la création politique en période de paix. Elle a aussi été construite par des désirs impérialistes. Tsars, Soviétiques, Fascistes, Nazis, quelles étaient leurs idées de l'Europe ? - invités : Christian Ingrao Historien, directeur de recherche au CNRS; Jacques Rupnik Historien, politologue, directeur de recherche émérite au CERI/Sciences Po; Marie-Bénédicte Vincent Professeure d'histoire contemporaine à l'Université de Franche-Comté, membre du centre de recherche Lucien Febvre

For a country that features so prominently in the news and so wildly in many conspiracy theories, Russia is a country that many Americans—especially many in the press—scarcely understand. Dan Mahoney's new review essay in CRB gives a clarifying survey of major trends, challenges, and attitudes in Russian politics since the days of the Tsars. Without emotional theatrics but with moral clarity, Mahoney equips readers with resources for a fuller understanding of Russia's past and its possible future.  

Découvrez l'abonnement "Au Coeur de l'Histoire +" et accédez à des heures de programmes, des archives inédites, des épisodes en avant-première et une sélection d'épisodes sur des grandes thématiques. Profitez de cette offre sur Apple Podcasts dès aujourd'hui ! Avec le règne d'Ivan le terrible au XVIe siècle, le pouvoir en Russie prend une dimension autocratique. Une seule personne détient le pouvoir absolu. Comment cette pratique personnelle du pouvoir a-t-elle traversé les siècles, jusqu'à Vladimir Poutine ? Pour en parler, Virginie Girod reçoit Pierre Gonneau, professeur à Sorbonne Université et directeur d'études à l'École pratique des hautes études, spécialiste du monde russophone et auteur de La Guerre Russe ou le prix de l'Empire. D'Ivan le Terrible à Poutine (Tallandier). En 1453, la chute de Constantinople marque la fin de l'empire Byzantin. La Russie moscovite reprend le flambeau impérial. “Le tsar russe est l'héritier de l'empereur byzantin. C'est un seul monarque universel qui a vocation à diriger tous les chrétiens, en particulier les chrétiens orthodoxes” explique Pierre Gonneau. La Russie n'est pas encore l'immense territoire que l'on connaît aujourd'hui. Coincé entre la Volga et son affluent l'Oka, Moscou doit d'abord procéder à un “rassemblement des terres russes” divisées en principautés, prélude à son expansion. Le règne d'Ivan le Terrible (1530-1584), le premier à se faire officiellement couronner tsar, est une rupture dans l'histoire russe : “ça devient le monarque absolu, l'autocrate. (...) Tout le pouvoir vient de lui et ne peut être que délégué. Il n'y a pas de contrepoids”. Les tsars et tsarines vont régner plus de 350 ans sur la Russie, installant progressivement l'idée d'une monarchie populaire dans laquelle le souverain affiche sa proximité avec le peuple. L'empire laisse une marque profonde dans l'histoire russe. Dans l'Union Soviétique qui lui succède, l'autocratie perdure. Même si en principe le pouvoir est collégial, “dans les faits, aussi bien Lénine que Staline vont gouverner en autocrate” souligne Pierre Gonneau. Selon l'historien, la Russie contemporaine s'est éloignée du régime présidentiel pour revenir à une forme d'autocratie. Vladimir Poutine, héritier de la puissance des tsars ? “Il y a la peur du déclin qui joue comme un réflexe, pour dire qu'il faut éviter tout ce qui est morcellement. (...) C'est l'un des arguments de Poutine pour rétablir la verticale du pouvoir”. Thèmes abordés : Russie, URSS, Vladimir Poutine, Tsar, Gengis Khan, religion orthodoxe "Au cœur de l'histoire" est un podcast Europe 1 Studio- Présentation : Virginie Girod - Production : Nathan Laporte et Caroline Garnier - Réalisation : Clément Ibrahim- Composition de la musique originale : Julien Tharaud et Sébastien Guidis- Rédaction et Diffusion : Nathan Laporte- Communication : Marie Corpet- Visuel : Sidonie Mangin

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Fisher's treatment of the history of Finland, in the context of its relations with Russia, was released in 1899—at the start of the first attempted wave of Russification. At this time, it seems, many Finns regarded it as a misunderstanding. A mistake. Not a contrivance of Nicholas II, but a villainy emanating instead, fen-sucked, from the sinister Russian state machinery—the fief of a myopic and obdurate cadre of supremacists and absolutists. Men like the rabid anti-semite Konstantin Pobedonostsev who, by the camera's harsh testimony, seems to have died long before he stopped coming in to work, and like Ivan Goremykin who in an ironic twist of fate would not so very much later – after 1906 – have to stretch his mind to try to contend with the obscenity of constitutional monarchy at home. Men who all nursed a bitter grudge at the perceived slight to their omnipotence called Finland. The long-standing arrangements and understandings between Finland and the Tsars had up to this time, for the better part of a century, served both parties very well. And would undoubtedly have stood Russia in good stead into the twentieth century. Every Tsar reaffirmed a solemn pledge to maintain the Fundamental Laws underpinning the constitutional order, to uphold Alexander I's promise to respect "their religion, their laws, their liberties and their rights." Every Tsar honored it—until Nicholas II. In return, Finland turned its back on Sweden to stand at Russia's side bringing with it a domain which was loyal, orderly and industrious and soon enough became highly educated and prosperous too. Regardless of the shocks and reversals the Empire encountered, the Grand Duchy was unwavering so far as imperial internal security went, producing never "...a conspirator or an agitator against Russia. It provided instead generals for her armies and admirals for her fleet." Subversion and coercion efforts against the Finnish state would be abruptly halted in the immediate aftermath of the bitter defeat meted out by Japan in 1905; Saint Petersburg had unrest aplenty across its vast and ethnically diverse extent without manufacturing more. These efforts would resume. Finland would be driven to, at the first opportunity, declare independence in 1917. The events of the twentieth century would be profoundly influenced by the collapse of Russo-Finnish cooperation, by the Winter War and by Finland's politics and diplomatic efforts during the Cold War. While the impact of some of these developments may be seen as broadly beneficial to Europe, much of it was to the critical detriment of the prevailing political orders in Russia. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

In this week's episode of Let's Get Civical, Lizzie and Arden indulge in one of history's most notorious families, The Romanovs! Join them as they examine their rise to power, their epic downfall, and the role of one very interesting man named Rasputin!  Follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @letsgetcivical, @lizzie_the_rock_stewart, and @ardenjulianna. Or visit us at letsgetcivical.com for all the exciting updates! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stéphane Bern raconte une grande-Duchesse et une terrible nuit, une princesse qui fait encore parler d'elle aujourd'hui, plus de 100 ans après son assassinat. Ou la véritable histoire de la nuit de la mort de la Grande-duchesse Anastasia Romanov.Qui était cette favorite de son père le tsar Nicolas II ? Pourquoi sa mort cette nuit du 17 juillet 1918 a-t-elle ouvert la voie à un mythe qui a parcouru le XXe siècle ? Et est-on bien sûr qu'elle n'est pas de la famille d'Anne Roumanoff ?Pour en parler, Stéphane Bern reçoit Alexandre Sumpf, historien spécialiste de l'histoire de la Russie, auteur de «Okhrana, La police secrète des Tsars».

In this compelling episode of 'Adams Archive' with Austin Adams, we dive deep into the recent eruption of conflict between Hamas and Israel, ignited by a shocking attack at a music festival. However, this isn't just a retelling of events; it's an attempt to comprehend the emotional and historical weight of the Israeli-Palestinian territorial disputes. Austin steps back from the rapid-fire conclusions and reactions of the media to present a well-researched understanding of the situation, from its deep-rooted religious aspects to the modern-day power struggles. Questioning the prevalent narratives, Austin refuses to merely echo popular sentiment. Instead, he encourages listeners to think critically, challenge widely accepted stances, and arrive at informed opinions. Join us in this essential exploration as we seek truth amidst the chaos. Join the conversation and think beyond the headlines with 'The Adams Archive'.   All the links: https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams Substack: https://austinadams.substack.com   ----more---- Full Transcription    Hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adams archive. My name is Austin Adams, and thank you so much for listening today. On today's episode, we are going to be discussing the war that has just broken out between Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. and Israel. Now, this has been something that I've been sitting on for a few days. I believe the original attack, which happened at a music festival happened a little over about five or so days ago now. And I sat and didn't say a word. And the reason that I did that was because so many people were so quick to call for war. So many people were so quick to give a Pretty strong position for something that they likely didn't have historical context on and I didn't want to be one of those people I was somewhat familiar with this particular situation in Palestine and the difficulty that was going on there for a while due to the Um, Israel basically, um, you know, we'll get into the context of it, but, but to me, it was, it was a hard topic to discuss because so many people were so emotionally charged and anytime that you see. emotions extremely high after a singular event with very little information coming out, and the media calls for war, you have to stop and think, do we, or can we trust the organizations that are giving us this information? Um, can we trust that the people of influence who are calling for war have our best, best interest in mind, or are they being potentially paid? So when all of that comes up to me, I wasn't educated enough to speak out initially. So I paused, I went dark on social media, since this happened until today, and didn't give my opinion that much because it was very heated. But today I will. Today, we'll dive into the historical context of the. Israeli Palestinian Dispute of Territory. We will dive into the religious context of the land that they occupy. We will dive into the current events and the terrorist attacks and the retaliations that are happening between Hamas and influencers. And we'll question the narrative, as you always should. So, today will be a little bit more serious episode, but I appreciate you being here. Uh, I value you more than you ever know, and I hope you realize that I'm not just gonna come on here and say whatever, whatever I think I should say based on where some people may or may not think I fall within the political spectrum. So, you got the wrong guy. Alright? Alright, so today. Alright, so today. We're going to jump into the Palestine and Israel. Let's jump into it. The Adams Archive. So if we realized, if we realized one thing over the last four years, it's that when Everybody on social media, everybody on mainstream media, all of the celebrities, all of the political organizations, all of the, uh, Historically corrupt politicians, all of the the same people that were pushing the same things that we knew have been going on for the last four years that were not in our best interest when all of these people are pushing the same narrative, the same talking points. The same, something should be going on in your head, right? When everybody out there is saying the same thing, ringing the same bell over one to two specific talking points at a singular time, it's time to stop. It's time to question the narrative and it's time to do your due diligence. And that's what I did. Okay, now where I'm going to start this podcast off is by giving you the historical context and not from myself. I'm actually going to pass the microphone to Lex Friedman, who just dropped a podcast today, where he discussed some of the historical context. Um, I want to do this justice. Um, he did a, a podcast that was three hours with Jared Kushner and they got together and this was the opening that they had that I thought was pretty concise surrounding what is the actual issues that we are discussing here. All right. So let's go ahead and listen to that. And then we'll walk through some of these articles that I'm seeing or that I pulled up for us here. So here we go. And now, dear friends, here's Jared. Krishna did a lot of this conversation before the Hamas attack on Israel, and we decided to sit down again and finish the discussion to address the current situation, which is still developing. If I may allow me to summarize the situation as it stands today, it's morning. Monday, October 9th, on Saturday, October 7th at 630 AM Israel time, Hamas fired thousands of rockets into southern Israel. The rocket attack served as cover for a multi pronged infiltration of Israel territory by over 1, 000 Hamas militants. This is shortly after at 740 AM. The Hamas militants went door to door in border towns, killing civilians and taking captives, including women and children. In response to this, Israeli Air Force began carrying out strikes in Gaza, also fighting on the ground in Israel to clear out Hamas militants from Israel territory and preparing to mobilize Israeli troops for potential ground attack on Hamas in Gaza. Now, of course, this is what it appears to be right now. And this Along with other things might change because the, the situation is still developing. The IDF is ordering civilian residents of Gaza to evacuate their homes for their safety. Benjamin Netanyahu declared war in several statements and warned Israelis to brace themselves for a long and difficult war. Just today, Israeli ministers ordered a quote, complete siege of. Gaza interrupting supplies of electricity, food, water and fuel from Israel to Gaza. As of now, October 9th, the death toll is over 1200 people and over 130 hostages taken to Gaza by Hamas. So As I said, the events are rapidly unfolding, so these numbers will sadly increase, but hopefully our words here can at least in part speak to the, the timeless underlying currents of the history and, uh, as you write about the power dynamics of the region. So for people who don't know, Gaza is a 25 miles long, six miles wide strip of territory along the Mediterranean sea. It borders Israel on the east and north and Egypt on the southwest. It's densely populated about 2. 3 million people. And there's been a blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt since. 2007 when Hamas took power. I can just summarize that Hamas is a Palestinian militant group which rules the Gaza Strip. It originated in 1988 and it came to power in Gaza in 2006. As part of its charter, it's sworn to the destruction of Israel and it is designated by the United States, European Union, UK, and of course Israel as a terrorist group. So given that context, what are your feelings as a human being? Uh, and what is your analysis as the former senior advisor to the president under the Trump administration of the current situation in Israel and Gaza? So I think you did an excellent job of summarizing a lot of the the context but Watching what's unfolded over the last 48 hours has been truly heartbreaking to see We're still in the early stages of what's developing but seeing the images uh on x of um You know, militants, uh, terrorists going door to door with machine guns, gunning down innocent civilians, uh, seeing beheaded Israeli soldiers, seeing, uh, young, 20 year olds at a rave, uh, dance party to celebrate peace, uh, with, uh, militants flying in and then you know, shooting machine guns to, to kill people indiscriminately, uh, seeing, uh, young children, uh, captive and, and held prisoner, seeing 80 year old grandmothers, a Holocaust survivor also being taken captive. Uh, these are just images. and actions that we have not seen in this world since, uh, 9 11. This is a terror attack on the scale of which, uh, we have not seen, and it's been incredibly hard for a lot of people to comprehend. Um, my heart goes out, obviously, to, uh, all of the, the families of the victims, uh, to... So what I'm gonna look for here is there's a couple spots within this episode that I believe might be of a bit more value to you. Um, before we get, uh, into listening to everybody else's opinions, I just want the facts, right? Um, so let's go and jump to 10 minutes and 28 seconds in and see what they have to say about the  families of those who are helping. And power will make the right decisions to paradigm you about the journey towards this historic progress towards peace with Abraham, of course, but first on this situation to step back and some of the history, uh, is there things about the history of Hamas and Gaza that's important to understand what is happening now? Just your comments, your thoughts, your understanding of Hamas. I think you did an excellent job, Lex, of really giving the summary. Just a couple things maybe I'll add to it is that Hamas was originally founded from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which is a group that's caused a lot of issues in the region. Um, they've, uh, they've attacked Israel many times in the past. There's a lot of discussion about how Israel, uh, is an occupying power. Well, in Gaza in 2005, they withdrew from all the land and then they say Israel's an apartheid state. Well, Israel then gave governance of the region to the Palestinians. And then what's happened is, is the Palestinian people's lives have now gone down, not up since then. Uh, I will say that under, uh, Hamas's leadership, uh, in, in Gaza. The people have suffered the most are the Palestinian people and I see I've I've watched cries throughout my time in government from people saying, we want to see the Palestinian people live a better life. I agree with those people. I think that the Palestinian people in Gaza are essentially hostages in. Uh, in Gaza, you have basically 2. 2 million people that are being held hostage by 30, 000 Hamas, uh, terrorists, and that's really the problem. And I would just encourage people to, uh, to push their attention and energy in this moment and their anger towards Hamas. Those are the people who are killing innocent civilians, who are, uh, murdering indiscriminately. And those are the people So you can  hear him almost everything that he's speaking to his emotion, he's not kind of the again, this is Jared Kushner's not not speaking to the history where he was asked the history. He's not speaking to it. So let's jump over here. And let's see how this is summarized where it says The region known as Palestine has been inhabited by various people over millennia. By the 1800s and early 1900s, nationalism grew among both Arab, Palestinians, and Jews. Jews faced persecution in Europe and sought a homeland, leading to the Zionist movement. Many Jews began migrating to Palestine, then part of the Ottoman Empire, and later a British mandate after World War I. The Balfour Declaration, which is very important when we're discussing this, issued by Britain in 1917 expressed support for a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. This raised concerns among Arab Palestinians about their rights and future in the land. After World War II and the Holocaust, there was increased sympathy for Jewish survivors and greater support for the Jewish state. In 1947, the United Nations approved a partition plan, which proposed dividing Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem under international administration. However, tensions escalated, and in 1948, the State of Israel was declared, and Arab states intervened, and the 1948 Arab Israeli War ensued. So, Israel expanded its territory beyond the UN partition plan, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled their homes. So Israel expanded its territory beyond the UN partition plan, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes. That's where it starts to get complicated. Right. Since then, there have been several wars and uprisings. Key events include the 1967 Six Day War, where Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Sinai Peninsula in Golan Heights. The 1973 Yom Kippur War, Arab states launched an attack on Israel. The 1987 and 19, er, and 2000 Antifa Dadas. Palestinian uprisings against Israeli occupation. And then in 1993, the Oslo Accords, which was an attempt at peace, establishing Palestinian self governance in parts of the West Bank and Gaza. So the main issues of the conflict include borders and territory. The status of Jerusalem considered holy by Jews, Muslims, and Christians, the rights of Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements within the West Bank, and security concerns from both sides. So that's a really fundamental. breakdown. It says attempts at peace have been made, but lasting solutions remain elusive. Both sides have experienced sufferings and losses and narratives vary based on perspectives. It's a deeply sensitive and multifaceted issue and we've just scratched the surface. Interesting. So if we start to break that down, what do you think the comparison, right? And this is what, what my position at this very point is, is. Specifically to kind of my position is to educate myself, right? Everything that we just talked about there is not something that I remember deeply studying, right? It's something that is very, what people use the word nuanced, which is kind of pissing off the people who are just pro Israel all the way. Um, but it is nuanced, right? It is a complex issue and there are. Valid points to both sides, essentially what that explained to you is that the, um, within Palestine, their land was taken over and, and declared as Jewish territory by Britain. Then when Israel became into power in 1947, when they approved the partition plan. Right. Dividing Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, Israel started to push that border closer and closer to Palestine and started to continue pushing out Palestinians. And so that's caused a lot of tension, including the four or five things that we just discussed. Now, when we look at both sides of the argument, the Israeli perspective is historical and religious connections. So Jews have an ancient historical and religious connection to the land, dating back thousands of years to biblical times. The Jewish Diaspora maintained this connection during their long history of persecution. Now, the next part of that is modern Zionism and right to self determination, this says. Given centuries of persecution culminating in the Holocaust, many Jews believe in the necessity of a Jewish homeland for their safety and self determination. Which, sure, that's a Maybe understandable, but maybe not at the demise of a completely settled culture, potentially, right? It says legal mandate supporters point to the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent League of Nations mandate as international recognition of the Jewish right to establish a homeland in Palestine And then security concerns. Due to hostile neighbors and multiple wars, Israel emphasizes its right to security. This includes control over certain territories deemed strategic for defense. And then terrorism. Israelis are concerned about attacks on civilians, rightfully, by Palestinian militant groups, underscoring the need for stringent security measures and military responses, right? That's where we've started to hear the words, open air prisons consistently regarding Palestine, basically saying that. Palestine or the Gaza Strip has walls built around it, not allowing anybody from the Palestinians to exit those walls. They can't leave their, their 140 mile strip of land without. Approval from the Israelis, or if they try to, apparently there's been many, many responses that were lethal leading to hundreds, if not thousands of deaths over this time period. So these people feel as if they're imprisoned. They feel as if their land is being encroached upon, that they're being forced out of their homes. And that is why you have these radicalized terrorist groups enacting terrorism. So, when everybody's pushing to say we're pro Israel or we're pro Palestine, there's a common denominator that everybody, I believe, agrees on, which is that nobody is pro Hamas with any sense to them. All of the actions that have happened have been completely and utterly horrible. Now what we get into, and what we will get into a little bit later, is that it really breaks down to Two main events, some of which I have questions around, but we'll get to that in a little bit Let's look at the Palestinian perspective It says historical and continuous presence Palestinians emphasize their continuous presence in the regions for centuries and the majority Status in modern times prior to the large scale Jewish immigration of the 20th century, right? They lived there They say they've been there their families their grandparents their great great great grandparents all lived in Palestine and now The Jews were given a piece of paper that says you can go take over their land and they didn't like that. It says displacement and Nakba, N A K B A. The 1948 war led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians known as the Nakba or catastrophe. Many Palestinians demand the right to return to their homes or compensation. The next point it makes is occupation and human rights. Palestinians oppose Israeli occupation on the West Bank and the blockades of Gaza, viewing them as violations of their rights. They demand statehood. Based on pre 1967 borders, East Jerusalem, Palestinians see East Jerusalem captured by Israel in 1967 as the capital of a future Palestinian state and highlighted significance to Muslims and Christians. Now, when people think of Palestine, it's a lot of people are just so specifically associating it with Muslims because of Hamas. But that's not the case. There's, I believe, 20 percent of the people that live in Gaza are Christians, right? So we have to make that distinction. This is not specifically and only related to religious backgrounds. It also has to do with, mostly, according to the Palestinians, territory disputes, right? And the fact that they believe that they've lived there, they've always been there, and you shouldn't just be able to hand a piece of paper to somebody and say, Hey, you can go take over their land. It says both narratives have deep emotional, historical, and political Elements. Many on both sides seek peace, but the question remains how to reconcile their respective narratives and aspirations. Thank you. Chat GPT. So based on that, now we have some of the historical background when we're talking about Israel and Palestine, right? Which is really what this conversation is about, but maybe it shouldn't be. Right. Maybe we're, we're harping too much on those historical backgrounds. And maybe Hamas who's enacting these horrible atrocious acts should just be obliterated off of the face of the earth. Maybe now what I think is a better perspective is understanding that again, once you realize that when the mainstream media, I'll say it again, the mainstream media, celebrities, Western governments, historically corrupt, consistently war calling politicians. Are all saying the same exact thing at the same exact time, all calling for extreme violence from saying there's a good guy and a bad guy, and here's who the bad guy is, and you should absolutely believe this is who the good guy is. Maybe. You should question the narratives. Maybe you should sit back before deciding to throw on a frickin football jersey and throwing a Ukraine flag on your head, or throwing a Palestinian flag on your head, or throwing an Israeli flag on your head. As you guys know by now, I am anti war. I enacts... Or, or intends to enact violence against you or somebody that you love. But when we're talking about the military industrial complex, it's generally not about the surface level conflict. And that's why when we get into some of the other things that we're going to discuss here, like the very first attack during the assault of Gaza, right. During that. Rave the the music festival, whatever was happening when we look at that and we say there was 230 or so people I believe was the final number of people who died from that event horrific terrible and Hamas was the one who enacted it But the question that I have is, how many times have we gone into a war under false pretenses? How many times have we seen the news articles saying weapons of mass destruction, right? Even when everybody's comparing this to 9 11. What percentage of the American public looks at 9 11 and puts a big question mark around who enacted that and why, right? We go back to the picture of George Bush throwing the airplane at the Jenga towers. A lot of people have some questions about 9 11 and a lot of people believe that it may have been an inside job, a false flag conducted on Americans by America or by three letter agencies or by our government or by the military industrial complex in order to convince Americans to send their children to die in a war. So when we look at this singular event, the one that set it all off, the one that we've seen videos of over and over again, 230 people died. But that does not mean that we don't question the narrative. That does not mean that we don't put a question mark around it and maybe sit and wait and ask some questions. Like, who is set to gain from this? Who is responsible for this? And should we immediately... Now, again, this is not sympathizing with Hamas. If you kill innocent civilians, you should die a horrid, long death, especially if they're women and children. So, unequivocally, very clearly, I do not support any of the actions that have happened here. But what I will say is, That we should, that doesn't mean that we blindly have faith in the mainstream media that has deceived us over and over and over again over the last 100 years. That doesn't mean that we have blind faith in whatever it is that they're telling us just specifically because they pissed us off because America is built off of patriotism and love, right, at least at the civilian level. In understanding that there is good and there is evil in this world and when there is evil that it should be destroyed and I don't disagree with that, but I am going to say that historically. When we go to war, which we very well may very soon, one of my biggest concerns about what's going on in Israel and in Palestine right now is that the U. S. intervention may or may not lead to a act within the United States, either enacted by the terrorist organizations that is enacting them in Palestine and in Israel right now, or potentially potentially. By the same people who enacted 9 11 in order to get us to go to war, and I'm not talking about the alleged pilots, I'm talking about the shadowy individuals who potentially crafted those actions behind the scenes in order to convince you and I to go to war. So my concern is for sure. We very well may have terrorists who crossed our borders while Joe Biden was bumbling and eating ice cream and sniffing young children's hair that are terrorists that are here today, that are in our communities, that are, that are calling for acts of war against Americans who are sitting, waiting, ready to make their move. The second they're called upon to do so. One very valid concern. My second concern. Is that Even if that is not the case, it is so easy to enact one act of terrorism under false pretenses as a false flag to convince you and convince I and convince everyone else in the United States that it is in our best interest to immediately engage in this war. And it doesn't just stop there. The second we step in. Iran will step in, right? Guess who was just having a meeting and exchanging handshakes with China just months ago? Palestine, right? You look at everything that's culminating here, right? You look at the same narrative playing again, that now we very well may be leading ourselves blindly shouting, asking for a world war, calling for it from the top of our lungs on social media over two events. One being what happened at the music festival and two under the fog of war. We have had articles that have come out saying, well, and let's, let's go back. Let's go back to one, one being what happened at the music festival. Now the times of Israel said that in Egypt, spy chief warned Netanyahu of the Gaza assault and was ignored. Now, the Prime Minister is actively denying that, but it says Abbas Kamel, the powerful head of Egyptian intelligence, warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 10 days before the attack. In that report, Kamel, or Kamel, K A M E L, warned Israel that something unusual, a terrible operation was about to take place around Gaza. Kamel said reportedly aghast at Netanyahu's passivity. Upon hearing the report and there was a second article that came out that says Egypt Egypt intelligence official says Israel ignored Repeated warnings of something big Cairo official says is real Israel focused on West Bank instead of Gaza Egypt spy chief Said to warn prime minister of terrible operation. So there's your first one now. There's questions about that, right? We question the false flag narrative now. I threw out some some Polls today on Instagram and I'll kind of walk you through what those results were. My phone's dead So I let's see if I can pull it up here actually What I asked people was whether or not, yeah, it's gone. Um, what, what I asked people first was, do you have a strong opinion? Do you have a strong opinion in this war about one side or the other? Right. What I'm trying to gauge there is, is how many people are, are pro this or pro that, right? How many people have a horse in the game? How many people are wearing a jersey? I believe it was a little bit over 50%. So they had a strong opinion one way or the other about the war. The next question I asked was, are you pro Israel? Are you pro Palestine? Or, if you answer no to the above two, are you simply anti Hamas, and then are you something else, none of the above? The overwhelming majority, well, it was about 38 percent said they were pro Israel. Only about 4 percent of people said they were pro Palestine. 32 percent of people said they were anti Hamas, and did not identify as pro Israel. And then another 30%, or whatever the math is there, identified as. None of the above, which I found to be interesting, right? Because that's my position. I am not pro Israel I believe that there is certain specific aspects of this that should be addressed I don't think the right way to address those things is by killing innocent civilians Like Hamas is doing but that doesn't mean that I'm pro the the I'm not taking a side in in the overall underarching issue here. I will absolutely condemn people committing acts of terrorism, but I fall into that category. I'm not pro Israel. Again, I'll say that. I am not pro Israel. I am not. Pro Palestine. What I am is anti terrorism. What I am is pro questioning narratives. What I am is pro shutting up, being quiet, and letting things play out so that we can get out of the fog of war. Because as we know from Ukraine and Russia, how many articles, how many claims, how many videos ended up being video game footage? It's like how much propaganda will the war machine push out in order to convince you to beat the war drum and call your children to war, to enable them to enact a false flag on our own soil, to convince you that it's in our best interest to either spend our tax money or spend our children's blood to go to war with a country 7, 000 miles away from us over a territory dispute. That we have nothing to do with. They are playing all of our emotions. That is my position. And I won't allow it. I will, however, say that the acts if true, and if not conducted under false pretenses or under a false flag or under propaganda, are true. In the way that they are saying, then yeah, absolutely obliterate a terrorist organization all for it, but I'm not going to say in this territory dispute that I'm pro Israel. I'm not going to say in this territory dispute that I'm pro Palestine and a good way that I've heard this, uh, a good correlation to this, not a correlation, but a good analogy was when it comes to the Native Americans and the English settlers, right? It's like. If England shows up on your shores and decides to take over all of your land and you're a Native American and shove you into these small little settlements with people with machine guns standing around it saying you can't leave, and also we control your gas, electricity, and water consumption. And then those Indians, being somewhat savage, go and start scalping people as a response. It's like, yeah, maybe don't scalp people, but also maybe don't overthrow people from the land that they've lived on forever and expect no response. It's like there's no good position within the like, yeah, don't behead people. Don't commit acts of terrorism. Don't kill civilians and rape women. Also, don't displace massive populations via force and imprison them in small locations and expect them not to respond. And that's just such a controversial position to hold right now. And again, I'm open to being wrong. I've been wrong before. You guys know it. And I'll tell you when I'm wrong. But right now, I just in this territory dispute in this religious dispute, whether you're on the Jewish side, and you say it's a religious biblical conversation, or dispute, and you're on the Palestinian side and saying, Hey, dude, I've just I've fucking lived here for 400 years, a thousand years. Maybe don't throw me out of my house. It's like, it's all bad. None of it is good. Now it's really not good to commit acts of terrorism. But again, then you have to go back to questioning the narrative because why now, why now is everybody deciding that today is the day that we just accept wholeheartedly. Everything that is coming out of the mainstream media. Well, CNN said it, so it must be true. Fox News said it, so it must be true. It's like, why now? Why are we deciding today that everything that they say is true, when just three weeks ago, two weeks ago, everything they said was believed to be bullshit? Why are we not questioning narratives when we're being literally emotionally manipulated at the most fundamental and primal level, trying to say that, you know, they're doing this to children and this to women and this to, you know. It's like, yeah, if they are doing that, I agree. Blow them off the face of the earth. As long as you're not also killing women and children in the process. But... If we know anything, it's that the media lies. Influencers try to influence, and nobody knows what the fuck they're talking about, usually. Right, so that gets me to the next story. The next story being the, what came out a day or two ago. There was a journalist who said that When she was leaving an area, and I'll get you the name of her, um, cause I had her pulled up here, um, her name is, let's see, hmm, her name, Nicole Zedek, Z E D E K, for I 24 News. Now what she reported, is that there was 40, 40 babies had been found. In Kahar Aza, and some had been beheaded. It's not a war. It's not a battlefield. You see the babies, the mother, the father in their bedrooms, in their protection rooms, and how the terrorists killed them. It's a massacre. So the I D F major general Atia rou, who told the outlet at the time, the bodies were discovered. Now, Nicole Zdech claims that they chopped the heads off of children and women. And that comes from somebody who said, sorry, that was David Ben Zion. She allegedly, Nicole, overheard somebody, a soldier saying that that's what happened. Now, it doesn't sound like she saw it for herself and she's been constantly questioned about this. Now, the reason, and you're like, Oh my gosh, how could you question this horrific act? It's like. Again, this isn't a new playbook, right? You go all the way back to George Bush and, and getting us into the Gulf War, I believe it was, right? The incubator babies, right? Here's a clip that I found on that, if you don't recall that. Here it is from 15 years ago. August 2nd, 1990. Iraq attacks Kuwait, claiming the Kuwaitis are slant drilling into Iraq's oil fields. U. S. President George Herbert Walker Bush pushes for a land war against Iraq. But, polls show the U. S. public is split 50 50 on that idea. Then comes this eyewitness testimony before a congressional committee from a 15 year old Kuwaiti girl. The claim is she cannot be identified for fear of reprisals. While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers coming to the hospital with guns. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators and left the children to die on the cold floor. The U. S. public is outraged. The result? Support for land war zooms. It's a turning point. Desert Storm is launched. 135, 000 Iraqis are killed. An estimated 1 million Iraqis, many of them children and old people, then die as a result of 10 years of sanctions. One small problem. There never were any incubator baby deaths. Not one. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's investigative flagship program, The Fifth Estate, reveals the girl to be the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter, given her lines and coached in acting by the giant American PR firm, Hill and Knowlton. It's one phase in a 10 million joint U. S. Kuwaiti campaign of deception. This man is lying. I, myself, buried 14 newborn babies. That had been taken from their incubators. This man is lying. They had kids in incubators, and they were thrown out of the incubators so that Kuwait could be systematically dismantled. There were a lot of people who participated in a conspiracy. Yes, an out and out conspiracy of fake organizations, false documents, fraud, and disinformation. So, if a new man named Bush is in the White House and helps engineer a brazen deception in order to achieve global geopolitical goals as well as domestic and personal ones, It wouldn't be a first, would it? Great question. It wouldn't be a first, would it? So when you understand that that was all built off of a lie, it starts to make the narratives that we're seeing look a lot like a playbook. Of what went on to get us into previous wars with similar types of organizations So when i'm saying question everything i'm not saying that these things aren't true I'm, not saying there's no possibility because there's horrible people who do horrible things and we've talked about them before right, they usually just wear suits and not, uh, you know garbs, but However the point in this is that Don't just run blindly and call for war from the United States, right? There was the one of the polls that I did was do you believe that the United States will go to war to help? Israel there was between fit. I put it as 0 25 percent 50 percent and then 100 percent likelihood 64 percent of people said 100 percent 27 or something like that said 50 percent it was like 12 percent said 0% So more than 80 percent of people think that we're going to get pulled into this war. Now with the second question I asked on the back of that one was, do you think the United States should go to war? 90 percent of people answered, absolutely not. 80 percent of people believe that we will go to war. 90 percent of people believe that we shouldn't. And you have to realize the power of storytelling right when when they weaponize these types of stories these outrage stories against you and against I and build these narratives and have these in excitable enticing politicians telling these stories. You have to still, even under the emotions, even under the frustration, even under every bit of me that would love to just rip apart whoever would do that to a child. Every fiber of my being, I would love nothing more than to be locked in a room with somebody who did that to a baby and see what I could do to them. Every part of me. But again, that doesn't mean that we don't have to have a level of skepticism and level headedness. We're really starting to see shifting or sifting through the the influencers and narratives who is blindly going to follow the machine and who's going to At least continue their skepticism when it's ours, the, the, you know, I say our side, you shouldn't have a side when it's not the extreme liberal left pushing the narratives when it's the conservative right, when it's the, the libertarian party, when it's the, you know, when it's the people right of center who are starting to bang this war drum, it's amazing to me how many conservatives were anti war for the last seven, eight years. It's amazing to me And all of a sudden are calling for women and children to, to, or are calling for the men and the women of our country to go to war on behalf of Israel immediately without any confirmation of the atrocious acts that are being peddled as these stories, right? So quick to call for war. So quick to say that we should be backing Israel. So quick to say that yes, send our military operators over there to do what they do best. There is a profitable machine, a highly profitable machine behind war. And allegedly some of the congressmen were investing in war stocks just prior to this breaking out. That's interesting. So here is the woman on Buck, Clay and Buck show discussing this. Skepticism around the babies. Now, another layer of my skepticism around this baby decapitation situation is the fact that Netanyahu came out and said that they were beheading soldiers today. If it was completely confirmed 100 percent with validated evidence that this happened, why would he not also say that about the children, the babies, the toddlers that they're talking about here? Because all it does is add to his agenda. So if that is not true, or at the very least, it has not been completely confirmed with evidence outside of these one to two. Decently far left reporters, um, why, why would he not say that? So to me, that just adds another layer of skepticism around this story. Now, again, I, I can't tell you, I, I'm not just going to, I'm not going to continue backpelling. You already know my position. It's horrible. It's terrible. If it's true, but ask questions. That's my whole position on this entire thing. Right? And again, if these terrorists are doing these things, yeah. Destroy them. But that doesn't mean that Israel is right in this land dispute. And it doesn't mean that Palestine is right. It's, it's just too complicated. And I'm not the guy to solve that for you. Right, and honestly, I'm not the guy to give you the full history on all of this. There's other podcasts that you can listen to that are much more suited to that than I am. But, um, what I will tell you from a normal guy's perspective who likes to maybe take a... level headed approach to crazy issues like this is that always have a level of skepticism when it comes to calling for war. Because there's so much money and it's usually not from one of the sides that's fighting it. These are banker's wars. And there's actually a great breakdown of the banker's wars. Um, let's see if we can find any of these. It says all are all wars bankers wars. I believe there's a long long discussion About this from a let's see if I can find it. Hmm. There was a good Instagram called truth Truth behold or something like that that posted all the parts of it But I'll, I'll find it and I'll, I'll post it somewhere for you guys. Uh, but it's called Banker's Wars and, uh, I believe it's some sort of documentary for you. So hopefully that helps. Um, but all wars are Banker's Wars is essentially the idea. All wars. When we talk about the, the, the elite banking families of the world, the people that own the Raytheons, the BlackRocks, the Vanguards, they own all of it. These elite bankers, you know, their names by now, if you're listening to this now, there was even a, a. More interesting, uh, post on Instagram that I saw somebody post, which related, uh, Palestine, or I'm sorry, Israel, to the Rothschilds family, which said, let's see here if I can get it, here it is, it said, Baron Edmund de Rothschilds, the scion of the Rothschilds family, is the biggest individual stockholder in the Israel corporation. Which has invested roughly half of his 10 million overall in the state. After Edmund's death, his son's James de Rothschild's instructed PICA to transfer most of its land in Israel to the Jewish national fund. And on December 31st, 1958, PICA agreed to vest its rights to landholdings in Syria and Lebanon to the state of Israel. After Baron de Hirsch died in 1896, the Hirsch founded Jewish. Colonization Association, ICA started supporting the settlement of Palestine and Baron Rothschild's took an active role in the organization and transferred his Palestinian land holdings as well as 15 million francs to it. In 1970, Bank Kalal A Rothschild's family business in Israel increased its business volume by 80 percent to the amount of 137 million Aira, however you pronounce their finances. Um, so very interesting. Uh, another report that comes from finbold. com says that members of Congress purchased war stocks ahead of the Hamas attack in Israel. Another post that I found interesting, this was by ThatPatriotMom. On Instagram, stated problem, reaction, solution, round and round like a hamster wheel. This is the oldest trick in the book into manipulating the masses. There is a reason we are funding both sides of this conflict and I'll continue with that post in a second because she did a great job. We funded this. We gave Iran 6 billion. Right. You want to talk about problems that we should be solving. The problems that we should be solving are not 7, 000 miles away from here. The problems that we should be solving are at our borders, maintaining border security so that terrorists don't come here and do the things that these news companies are saying they're doing there. The problems that we should be solving here is the fact that Joe Biden gave 6 billion to Iran, which essentially funded this terrorist campaign in a prisoner swap, which they gave us. No money and an equal amount of prisoners. Right? I'm pretty sure I played that clip here. The problems that we should be solving is the fact that we funded and basically essentially created Hamas. Just like we did ISIS. Just like we did basically all of the other terrorist organizations to go against the larger enemies that we have. In fact, there was a, let me pull this article up for you guys, an ex CIA analyst. And this comes from RT. com an ex CIA analyst said 100 percent he is sure that Hamas is using US supplied weapons. Again, one more time for you, ex CIA analyst is 100 percent sure that Hamas is using U. S. supplied weapons. It says, Washington is expected to prioritize aid to Israel and put conditions on continued funding in Ukraine. Now I saw a meme that had rockets shooting up from one side and rockets shooting up from the other side. And it said, U. S. taxpayers and U. S. taxpayers, right? We are literally funding both sides of this war, and there's certain organizations and corporations who put our politicians in the power who are profiting off of it. So when you look at a casualty rate of 230 people, 230 people dying for a corporation to make tens if not Hundreds of billions of dollars of your tax dollars or the silent tax dollars, which is inflation over time because the federal, the Fed prints money in order to fund these things because we owe money. We don't have any money, right? So it says Hamas is using U. S. supplied weapons. To attack Israel, even, and I'll pull this up for you, Um, Hamas is using US supplied weapons to attack Israel, even as Washington prepares to step up military aid to West Jerusalem, former CIA analyst Larry Johnson told RT on Monday. He said, It's probably 100 percent sure that the weapons were supplied by the United States, Johnson opined. Opined? Opined? O P I N E D? Interesting. Is that the act of having an opinion? Huh, new word every day. And you guys are along for the ride to see how much of an indeed I am. Explaining that the only question was whether the Palestinian government's or militant groups weapons had come from U. S. supplies diverted from Ukraine, Afghanistan, or the Palestinian Authority. In the West Bank, noting there were no effective controls on the billions of dollars of arms and military financing funneled from the U. S. to Ukraine in the last two years. Johnson observed that even weapons supplied by Israel to Ukraine might have made it back to Hamas via the black market, suggesting the war unfolding in Gaza will tell us how extensive some of these weapons supplies have been. Huh. It says the conflict will also force a reevaluation of Washington's blank check to Ukraine. The ex analyst predicted Congress is going to insist that Israel gets put at the front of the line and that Ukraine's going to go to the back of the line. It's also going to embolden and make happen inspections and accounting in order to deliver to allow Ukraine to have any more weapons. Now that's interesting, right? It's like as soon as the money tree starts to dwindle for Ukraine, all of the sudden this massive war breaks out overseas. And just a fun fact for you, just one fun fact for you is that since World War II, we have funded Israel more than any other country in the world to the amount of 158 billion total. Fun fact for you. All right, let's see what else that we got here in some of these files I pulled up. Let's let's finish her, her, her comment there. It says this letter written in. On 8 15 of 1871, from high ranking Freemason Albert Pike outlined three world wars that would usher in the New World Order. It is debated whether or not this letter actually existed, but considering how accurate it seems to be, I will just put it out there for you to read and use your own discernment. The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Tsars in Russia, and of making that country a fortress. Of aesthetic communism, the divergences caused by the agent tour or the agents of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic empires will be used to foment this war at the end of the war. Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken. The second world war must be fermented by talking about taking advantage of the differences between the fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be brought enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel and Palestine. During the Second World War, which is exactly what happened, by the way, during the Second World War, international communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christ, Christendom, which would then be restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it to be the final social cataclysm. The third world war is the plan to bring Satanism into the mainstream and is detailed in my slides. Let's find that full letter. It says 815 1871 Albert Pike. I bet you we can find it. 815 1871 Albert. All right. Here we go. Here is the letter and it's coming from Lightshipministries. org And so it says it seems to the new world order Starts when people lose confidence in governments it is the feet of iron and clay as in the book of Daniel and Revelation 7 18 and Unfold or 7 into 18 unfolding before our eyes Interesting. For a short time, this letter was on display in the British Museum Library in London, and it was copied by William Guy Carr, former intelligence officer in the Royal Canadian Navy. And it reads what we just read about the First World War, right, was that it was, um, to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Tsars in Russia and making that country a fortress of aesthetic communism. Check. Um, the divergences cause the agent tour of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic empires will be used to foment the war. Check. At the end of the war, communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments in order to weaken the religions. So students of history recognize the political alliances of England, on one side, and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co conspirator of Albert, Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing the First World War. Okay, we talked about the Second World War, which says that after the Second World War, communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia. And on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of communism into China. Now here's where it says, the Third World War. The Third World War, according to this Illuminati... Nostradamus, in 1871, says the Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the Agentur of the Illuminati between the political Zionists and the leaders of the Islamic world. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam and political Zionism Right? Islam being the modern Muslim Arabic world and Zionism being the state of Israel mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile, the other nations, once more divided on this issue, will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual, and economical exhaustion. We shall unleash the nihilists. And the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm, which in all its honor will show clearly to the nations that the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery, and of the most bloody turmoil, then everywhere the citizens obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries will exterminate those destroyers of civilization and the multitude disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits Will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine. of Lucifer brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement, which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time. Interesting. So since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, world events in the Middle East show a growing unrest and instability between Jews and Arabs. This is completely in line with the call for a third world war to be fought between the two and their allies on both sides. This third world war is still to come and recent events show us that this is not off. I wonder when this article was written. Well, it was before 2018. This was written in 2006. This article talking about this. Wow. Hmm. Very interesting. I want to see if we can get a copy of this full writing because that would be interesting. Hmm. So one website that this is pointing to is three world wars. com. And it says three world wars, tracking the progress of the planned three world Wars, I wonder when this was last updated because it looks pretty damn old and it looks like some shitty Website that you probably should question However, that doesn't take away from the validity that this person is essentially Figuring out exactly what they were going to do almost ten years ago now, right seven years ago Hmm an introduction or an introduction to conspiratorial history Albert Pike's plan for World War three Yeah, this website's not good at all. Um, let's look and see if we have, if maybe if at least has the documents. Now this looks better over here a little bit, um, 3worldwars. com slash Albert Pike 2. Um, and this says, continue from, uh, uh, Part 1, who was Albert Pike? So he should just be Albert Pike slash Albert Pike. It says, very few outsiders know about the intimate plans of Albert Pike and the architects of the New World Order. In the 19th century, Albert Pike established a framework for bringing in the New World Order based on a vision revealed to him. Albert Pike wrote a blueprint of events that would play themselves out in the 20th century with even more of these events yet to come. It is the blueprint for which we believe unseen leaders are following today, knowing early or not to engineer the planned third and final. World War, Albert Pike was born on December 29th, 1809 in Boston and was the oldest of six children born to Benjamin and Sarah Andrews Pike. See how long this is. Okay, I won't make you guys read it yourself. That's not too long. Um, let's see. Is there anything of value in here? Uh, he studied at Harvard and later served as a Brigadier General of the Confederate Army after the Civil War. Pike was found guilty of treason and jailed, only to be pardoned by fellow Freemason President Andrew Jackson. Interesting. So there's evidence. April 22nd 1866, who met with him the day the next day at the White House. On June 20th, 1867, Scottish Rite officials conferred upon Johnson the Freemasonry degrees, and he later went to Boston to dedicate a Masonic temple. Pike was said to be a genius, able to write, read, and write in 16 different languages, although I cannot find a record anywhere of what those languages were. In addition, he is widely accused of plagiarism, so to take a pinch. So take that with a pinch of salt At various stages of his life. He was a poet, philosopher, frontiersman, soldier, humanitarian, and philanthropist, a 33 degree Mason. He was one of the founding fathers and head of the ancient accepted Scottish Rite of free masonry. Being the grand commander of North American Free Masonry from 1859 and retains that position until his death in 1891. In 1869, he was a top leader in the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Wow. Now what you have to know about this is all of it can be like, they have all of these logs from all the Freemasons, um, that kind of like outlines who did what, when. So there is ways to corroborate this evidence. Incidentally, Freemason. RE itself was a fascinating subject and I could devote an entire website to that. Right. Okay. Thank you. Pike was said to be a Satanist who indulged in the occult, and he apparently possessed a bracelet, which he used in CO to summon Lucifer with whom he had a constant communication. He was the grand master of a Luciferian group, known as the Order of the Palladium or Sovereign Counsel of Wisdom, which had been founded in Paris in 1737. Uh, Pauladism, P A L L A D I S M, Pauladism has been brought to Greece from Egypt by Pythagoras in the 5th century. Interesting. And it was the cult of Satan that was introduced to the inner circle of the Masonic lodges. It was aligned with the Palladium of the Templars. In 1801, Isaac Long, a Jew, brought a statue of Baphomet, or Satan, to Charleston, South Carolina, where he helped to establish the ancient and accepted Scottish Right. Long apparently chose Charleston because it was geographically located on the 33rd parallel of latitude. Incidentally, so is Baghdad. And this council is considered to be the mother supreme council of all Masonic lodges in the world. Interesting. There's a monument. A confederate brigadier general as a lawyer, writer, see if there's a monument somewhere for him. The statue stands on a pedestal near the foot of Capitol Hill between the Department of Labor building and the Municipal building. Very interesting. Very, very interesting. Lots more to be read there. However, so there's the third world war letter that breaks down exactly saying that it's going to be caused in this exact manner. That's pretty wild. I haven't read up on that at all.  

In this edition of Channeling History, we explore Russian history and how it affects modern Russia by channeling three Tzars, Peter the Great, Alexander the II and Nicholas II. They discuss how historic reigns affect the people of Russia today. Please subscribe to our channel, give us a like and tell your friends.

« En 1917, l'autocratie s'est effondrée sans que ses légions de mouchards, de provocateurs, de gendarmes, de bourreaux, de sergents de ville, de cosaques, de juges, de généraux, de popes, puissent retarder encore le cours inflexible de l'histoire. » Dans cette citation, l'opposant au régime Victor Serge acte l'échec de la Russie tsariste, mais surtout de sa police politique, l'Okhrana, chargée de protéger la Sainte Russie face aux divers courants révolutionnaires, communistes, anarchistes et nihilistes, et insiste sur le caractère inéluctable de cet échec. Alors, ce combat était-il vraiment perdu d'avance ? Comment cette organisation menait-elle son combat, notamment en France, le cœur des opposants en exil ? Au-delà des échecs de l'Okhrana et de son impuissance à endiguer la marche de l'histoire, l'auteur s'interroge sur sa postérité au sein même du système répressif bolchevique du FSB, et jusqu'au fameux KGB. L'invité : Alexandre Sumpf est historien, maître de conférences à l'université de Strasbourg, auteur de plusieurs monographies remarquées sur l'histoire de la Russie et de l'URSS, dont De Lénine à Gagarine. Une histoire sociale de l'Union soviétique, et Raspoutine. Nous le recevons pour son dernier ouvrage, Okhrana. La police secrète des Tsars, 1883-1917 (CERF, 443 pages, 24 €).

Questions and answers about the Australian Communist Party, death penalty for Tsars, Borg reform, UPS updates, drag bans, and book recommendations!   Check us out on social media: Merch: https://www.teepublic.com/stores/teach-me-communism?ref_id=10068 Instagram: @teachmecommunism Twitter: @teachcommunism Gmail: teachmecommunism@gmail.com Patreon: Patreon.com/teachmecommunism  And like and subscribe to us at Teach Me Communism on YouTube!   Solidarity forever!

In this episode, we look at the murders of the last Tsars (royal family) of Russia in 1918, including the decline of Tsar Nicholas as ruler and the increasing instability of Russia throughout WWI. We cover their grizzly deaths at the hands of the new communist regime, and finish by looking at a century of conspiracy theories that followed their deaths, including a theory that one of his daughters survived. Cast List: James Sherwood An author, curator and broadcaster specialising in sartorial and royal history, fashion and bespoke tailoring, whose work has featured in the Financial Times, the International Herald Tribune, and the Independent on Sunday. Helen Rappaport An author and historian, she has written several books and is an expert on the period 1837–1918 in late Imperial and revolutionary Russia and Victorian Britain. Andrew Cook: A British author, popular historian and former British civil servant, who specialises in early 20th century espionage history. Christopher Warwick: A royal biographer and historian, he is the author of fourteen published books on modern royal subjects and is the authorised biographer of HRH the Princess Margaret. Guy Walters: A British author, historian, and journalist who has written several books on WWII. As a journalist for The Times, he writes on historical topics for the national press.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, we cover the period right before the Russian army goes into full attack mode against Napoleon's Grand Armee. Kutuzov has been busy with a number of different assignments and the death of two Tsars. Support the show

Who were the rulers of Russia prior to the 1917 Revolution? How accessible were they to the ordinary peoples of the Russian empire? How did a foreign-born princess manage to secure absolute power in St Petersburg, and what impact did the Napoleonic Wars have on tsarist influence? Speaking to Danny Bird, Simon Sebag Montefiore answers listener questions about the Russian tsars, from the ancient origins of their regal title to the monarchy's dramatic collapse. (Ad) Simon Sebag Montefiore is the author of The Romanovs: 1613-1918. Buy it now on Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Romanovs-1613-1918-Simon-Sebag-Montefiore/dp/1474600875crid=Y7HQ1IS420LY&keywords=attack+warning+red+julie+mcdowall&qid=1680258464&sprefix=attack+warnon%2Caps%2C189&sr=8-1/?tag=bbchistory045-21&ascsubtag=historyextra-social-histboty Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Écoutez la suite de l'histoire consacrée à Grigori Raspoutine, racontée dans un épisode inédit en deux parties par Virginie Girod. Aventurier, guérisseur, pèlerin itinérant, incarnation du Diable ? Raspoutine, c'est sans doute tout cela à la fois. Après une enfance très pieuse, Raspoutine se rapproche de Saint-Pétersbourg. Désormais reconnu, il se produit alors dans la capitale de la Russie ou au Palais impérial, la résidence principale du tsar. Le jeune Sibérien est devenu un starets : un guérisseur capable de voir l'avenir. Raspoutine s'adonne à des séances d'exorcisme et de prières. Rapidement, il est admis au contact du couple impérial : il devient l'homme, le confident qui parle à l'oreille des tsars. C'est en 1912, que toute sa légende va s'écrire. Le tsarévitch Alexis, héritier du trône, est hémophile. S'il meurt, c'est toute l'autocratie qui est menacée. En octobre 1912, lors d'un séjour de chasse de ses parents en Pologne, il se blesse à la jambe, et l'hématome prend de l'ampleur. Les médecins se disent impuissants, et les derniers sacrements sont administrés au tsarévitch. Averti, Raspoutine arrive au secours d'Alexis : il jette les remèdes prescrit par les médecins, il commence à prier pour lui et le miracle arrive … “Au cœur de l'Histoire” est une production Europe 1 Studio.Sujets abordés : Russie – Tsar - Guérisseur - Mystère- Sibérie - Romanov - Révolution bolchéviques- Aristocratie – Empire  

"Au cœur de l'Histoire" vous emmène à la découverte du mystérieux : Grigori Raspoutine. Virginie Girod vous raconte son récit et comment l'histoire de ce guérisseur s'est entremêlée avec celle de la Russie. Pour les uns, Raspoutine est encore un saint qui a prédit tous les maux de son pays à partir des révolutions bolcheviques de 1917. Pour les autres, il est un débauché et un manipulateur qui a précipité la Russie dans la crise. Originaire de Sibérie, fils de paysan, ce guérisseur ou plutôt maître spirituel charismatique comme il l'aime à se définir est très proche des derniers tsars de Russie, les Romanov. Alors qu'il quitte la Sibérie en 1904, il commence à se faire un nom dans la haute société russe. Maitre spirituel, chamane, Raspoutine est demandé par tous, dans les cercles influents de Saint Pétersbourg. Une réputation qui l'amène jusque devant les portes de la résidence du tsar. “Au cœur de l'Histoire” est une production Europe 1 Studio.Sujets abordés : Russie – Tsar - Guérisseur - Mystère- Sibérie - Romanov - Révolution bolchéviques- Aristocratie – Empire

Photo: No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow 1908 Potsdam 2/2: #Ukraine: #Russia: #Stalin: #Kutuzov: The legend of Kutuzov and the four-century-long entanglement of Crimea, the Tatars, the Tsars, the Soviets and Kyiv. Stephen Kotkin, Hoover Institution. https://freebeacon.com/culture/the-war-in-ukraine-today-and-yesterday/?utm_source=Hoover+Daily+Report&utm_campaign=25f543f0aa-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_09_05_04_36_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_21b1edff3c-25f543f0aa-72527561

Photo: No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow 1906 Potsdam  1/2: #Ukraine: #Russia: #Stalin: #Kutuzov: The legend of Kutuzov and the four-century-long entanglement of Crimea, the Tatars, the Tsars, the Soviets and Kyiv. Stephen Kotkin, Hoover Institution. https://freebeacon.com/culture/the-war-in-ukraine-today-and-yesterday/?utm_source=Hoover+Daily+Report&utm_campaign=25f543f0aa-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_09_05_04_36_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_21b1edff3c-25f543f0aa-72527561

Today's show rundown: It looks like the Biden Family is a vortex of COVID. Dr. Jill is sequestered in South Carolina, and someone else has to handle him - how ever will he get his suit coat on? The Democrats and the Media - every time they pass a bill that will hurt us, they pat themselves on the back and tell us how much they are helping us, all the while our pocketbooks get emptor and emptier. These people do NOT deserve to be in office. CBS morning have run a story saying that the reason for childhood obesity is - CLIMATE CHANGE...not video games, or cell phones, it's because it's too hot for kids to go outside. It makes sense that we have a Tsar of Climate control, seeing as we are headed towards a communist future. When Biden says we will have a climate Tsar - you have to look who works for him...they are The Who's who of the crazy left, tree hugging, loonies who have now found a home on the government dole. The Atlantic says the Rosary is now a sign of extremism - it is being compared to an AR-15. Because the Catholics claim it is a weapon against evil, including Pope Francis himself, who has said we need to stand up and practice spiritual combat (praying). Mark can now prove it - in a recent study, using blood work, of left wing beta males, has shown that these guys are indeed testosterone deficient. When this group was given testosterone, over time, they became more conservative. This study shows that physically weak men are more likely to be socialists. https://bluntforcetruth.com/voicemail/ Luke 22:31 Verse Concepts “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future