State vs. Market

Hi,
Also, I'm a bite sad this thread evolved into a "was Russia
strong" topic, but here is what I've grasped about this issue in
the very valuable book of Francois Bluche titled "the enlighted
despotism": Russia by the mid-18th century was an extremely
impressive power but in a 17th century fashion. The steel
industry Catherine the Great developped was the same (only
privatised) as the one Peter I and Elizabeth of Russia created
according to a backward-ish system based on protectionist
theory and partly slave-like workforce.
The ideal of Catherine, Frederick, Joseph II and cie was not
Georges III's England the European Superpower of the time nor
even Louis XV's France but the Sun-King realm and way of
development . Of course this wasn't a bad choice per se as
their countries were closer from 1640's France than from 1780's
England. Hence their very power proves what their
weaknesses are.
Concidering the Russian victories against Kazan, the Ottoman,
Poland or Sweden, even though they testify the rising strenght
of the Czars, they've been won against second or third rank
powers. And for 1812-3 Russian victory upon Napoleon, one
couldn't argue the burn-it-all-so-they-won't-have-anything-to-
eat strategy is proof of a major power behaviour...
Bye.

Originally posted by Maharbbal Concidering the Russian victories against Kazan, the Ottoman, Poland or Sweden, even though they testify the rising strenght of the Czars, they've been won against second or third rank powers.

I didn't want to continue this subject any more, but I have to react now. Maharbbal, you shouldn't minimize Russian enemies (and victories). For example Sweden. However in the begining of the 18th c. Swedish army was recognized as the best European army, it lost with Russia. Or Ottoman Empire - even thought its offensive power was broken in 1683, it was still a powerfull country in the 18th c.. You also forgot about Prussia, which was defeated by Russia in the 18th c. and only thanks to the liking of the new Tsar for Prussia this country survived the war with Russia.

Originally posted by Maharbbal And for 1812-3 Russian victory upon Napoleon, one couldn't argue the burn-it-all-so-they-won't-have-anything-to- eat strategy is proof of a major power behaviour...

Good Russian strategy shows that the country had not only numerous army, but also talented commanders. IMHO it is not important how sombody wins, but if he wins.

BTW, sombody can blame Napoleon that he won many battles thanks to better strategy and tactic . 

Edited by ataman

Originally posted by Temujin ataman, does the book by Kennedy also has statistics of Prussia and Austria? and perhaps also of the smaller German principalities?

Edited by ataman - 26-Aug-2006 at 08:25

I like your vision of a Golden Economic Age. But I'm not sure it ever existed.

Considering the state's role in the economy, I'm conviced it should strickly stick to what it does best.E. g. sending satelites in the galaxy