I've been trying to learn more about Russian history lately, and the
story of Alexander II really caught my attention. As I often say, I consider a "good" leader to be anyone who enacts positive reforms that distribute power and create inclusive institutions, even if they are still undeniably autocratic or authoritarian. This is because I believe meaningful change cannot happen without a solid foundation, and attempts at rapid reform often result in revolution, coups, and civil war.
Alexander II's story, to me, is another tale of the far left shooting itself in the foot. Here we had a forward-thinking ruler who-- although far from ideal-- clearly understood the need for fundamental reforms to the Russian sociopolitical system. Killing someone like this at a pivotal time in Russian history is a huge mistake in hindsight, as it led directly to the ascent of Alexander III, who extinguished all hope for meaningful change. But I would argue that actions like these are foreseeably stupid in the moment too, as they demonstrate a complete unwillingness to "take what you can get" when the opportunity affords itself. From what I've read about this assassination, modern leftists could learn many lessons from this ("Don't shoot a gift horse in the mouth" might be one).
If anyone here is more familiar with Russian history than me, is this assessment fair? How might things be different if Alexander II had lived longer?
