Moscow’s former Institute of Marxism and Leninism recently hosted an all-Russian scholarly and practical conference on the “Monarchist Idea in the 21st Century,” devoted to the 90th anniversary of the abdication of Tsar Nicolas II. The event was attended by members of the all-Russian movement “For Faith and Homeland,” parliamentarians from the State Duma, the Russian Nobleman’s Assembly, the Russian Imperial Union Order, and others.
The conference discussed an important and relevant problem — restoring the monarchy in Russia and inviting the descendant of the Romanov dynasty to the Russian throne. All the speakers — scholars and politicians — agreed that the monarchy is real and will be Russia’s salvation. In particular, deputy head of the State Duma Sergei Baburin characterized Russia as “one of the last bastions standing on the path toward the promotion of anti-values” and underlined that “this bastion is constantly being removed farther away from the doctrine of deliverance, “Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationhood.”
According to Baburin, the events of the late 20th century (the collapse of the USSR) have proved the absolute ineffectiveness of the republican political system in Russia. The country can only be restored if “other peoples unite around it and acknowledge the leadership of the Russian language and culture.” Speakers from the Moscow Patriarchate agreed with Baburin that “parliamentarianism will not take root in Russian soil.” The Russian people have always wanted to have a single strong hand — the tsar’s — and a truly Russian person was and is a supporter of monarchy. (And “the people are silent!”)
The opinions expressed by lay speakers and clergymen differed only in terms of deadlines: to switch to monarchist rule right now or a bit later, when the people are “ready.” The speakers admitted sadly that today Russia does not seem ready to realize the great autocratic idea: “It is pointless to speak about the prospects for a monarchy without the churching of people.” But in spite of everything, wonderful days are ahead — “the Russian emperor, seated on a white horse, will enter the gates of the Kremlin,” and Russia will regain its “ethical, educated, pre-revolutionary hierarchy” — the total antipode of today’s elite. “The Russian imperial house and the Orthodox Church are the two foundations of Russia’s renaissance. After all, what is the president — easy come, easy go, so to whom will the army swear allegiance?”
It is also interesting for Ukrainians to note how easily and naturally the speakers discussed the restoration of the monarchy and Russia’s imperial borders. Indeed, how can the Russian empire do without Ukraine?
Whom are the wise Russian politicians intending to place on the Russian throne? Unfortunately, there is no unanimity on this question. They face an extremely difficult problem — a great “tribe” of people who have tsarist — Romanov — blood running in their veins is now living in many overseas countries. (It is noteworthy that Nicholas II had little tsarist blood because all the Russian tsars starting with Peter I married foreigners, with the result that the blood of every succeeding generation of Russian princes and princesses became increasingly “diluted” — almost foreign).
It is easy to predict that the fatal difficulties of the autocracy project, especially the choice of a tsar, may become a problem for many generations of Russian monarchist politicians. In particular, owing to the lack of a common answer to the question: how to elect a monarch? Some say it should be done according to the principle of “pure and noble blood,” others, the so-called synod monarchists, insist on electing a tsar at an all-Russian synod, as in the case of the young Mikhail Fedorovich in 1613. There is talk about starting a new dynasty (!) although here too there is lack of unanimity — some people are suggesting that Riuryk’s descendant be invited to the Moscow throne (Ukrainians can snooze and lose here again!) while others are longing for a “strong hand” — Stalin or Marshal Zhukov’s grandson. Yet the majority is still inclined to the Romanov house — in 1613 the oath of allegiance was given to Tsar Mikhail Romanov. Furthermore, boundless opportunities for pseudo-candidates will emerge.
There are many prospective candidates for the Russian throne abroad — mostly Europeans and Americans. Some meticulously abide by all the rules, restrictions, and social duties imposed by their titles. They socialize only in the highest ranks of society, and — most importantly — they avoid so-called morganatic marriages — unions with lower-rank persons. Such a careless step certainly excludes tsarist family members from the list of prospective candidates to the throne. There are other descendants of the Romanovs — they live ordinary lives, marry whomever they want without thinking twice of any hypothetical opportunities. Many of them work, sometimes in business, or are pursuing army careers in the US. Some of them are artists, writers, and car washers. All these Romanovs are not fit for the Russian throne.
Today Russian society is mostly fascinated by Princess Maria Vladimirovna Romanova, the head of the Romanov Imperial House (although she is not recognized by all Romanovs) and the great-granddaughter of Tsar Alexander II. Her only son Georgii is regarded (not by everyone) as the only lawful Russian successor to the throne. In spite of this and disregarding his mother’s request, he has categorically refused to live in Russia or even continue his education in Moscow or St. Petersburg.
I will conclude my article by quoting the words of a Russian priest named Dimitrii Kaplun: “The restoration of the monarchy is necessary for peace and love to reign in Russia...Without the return of the monarchy the country is at risk of collapse in the near future. Look what they have done to Ukraine. Our recent brothers have turned their backs on us and are looking to Europe, other families, other apartments — all because they no longer have anything to learn from us and nothing to cling to.”
As for us, Ukrainians, because of a fatal lack of imagination, today we elect a president instead of a hetman (with a heavy mace) and a prime minister instead of a general chancellor. In this respect we can learn much from our “elder brother!”
