Analysis Of Konstantin Pobedonostsev's Reflections Of A Russian Statesman

After the assassination of Alexander the Great in 1881 by Russian socialist revolutionaries, Alexander III ascended to the throne and began to develop a reactionary policy that would be used to suppress the power of anti-tsarist rivals (Kort 23). In the late 1800s, Tsar Alexander III was faced with growing insurrection from the populist peasants, who were demanding more freedoms and land under the Tsarist regime. However, he was unwilling to give up his traditional centralized authority for a more democratic system of ruling. Instead, he sought political guidance from his advisor, Konstantin Pobedonostsev, an Orthodox religious conservative and loyal member of the Russian autocracy. Pobedonostsev was quick to hound revolutionaries by means

In Reflections of a Russian Statesman, Konstantin Pobedonostsev starts off his discussion by describing democracy as a system that is built on falsehood. He notes that the most fictitious principle of democracy is this idea that the power lies at the hands of the majority. Instead, he believes the concept of popular sovereignty is merely an illusion created by a delegation of leaders that in reality, “are in no way restricted by the opinions of their constituents, but are guided by their own views and considerations…” (RORS 4). This claim is Pobedonostsev’s attempt to show that a democratic state is disguised under the phrase “the will of the people” but instead is ruled by the interests of a minority that consists of a body of elected representatives such as Parliament. To advance his arguments, Pobedonostsev refers to countries that have incorporated the parliamentary system and how its members have failed to satisfy any of their promises. In theory, they care about public welfare, but in practice they formulate lies to get elected and gain personal wealth and fame. To Pobedonostsev, Parliament is a despotic entity that fools people into believing in a fantasy where “the representative as such, surrenders his personality, and serves as the embodiment of the will and opinions of his constituents” (RORS 5). Lenin, however, disagrees with Pobedonostsev’s criticisms of democratic representation. His revolutionary scheme, which involves the proletariat takeover of the bourgeoisie state, consists of a small private unit of party leaders executing the socialist policies that the larger public unit of workers’ demand. In the excerpt What is to be Done?, Lenin labels these two distinguished committees as the Organization of Revolutionists and the Organization of Workers. Unlike Pobedonostsev who thinks a