Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

3 Whisky Happy Hour
The Ricochet Podcast
GLoP Culture
Beyond the Polls with Henry Olsen
Gray Matters
Daily Signal
The Erick Erickson Show
Giving Ventures
Mom Wars
3 Martini Lunch
Chicks on The Right
Parsing Immigration Policy
Federalist Radio Hour
What the Hell Is Going On
Freedom to Learn
The Learning Curve
The Conservative Woman’s Guide
Heritage Explains
Not Dead Yet
Who Funds that?
The Radio Free Hillsdale Hour
The Glenn Show
Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
Hillsdale Dialogues
Law Talk with Epstein, Yoo & Cooke
The Libertarian
The Report Card with Nat Malkus
The Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’Connor
The American Idea
Madison’s Notes
Conservative Crossroads with Henry Olsen
The Back of the Book
Martini Shot
The Dave Carter Show
The Powerline Show
In Dissent
Heard at Heritage
Smart Girl Politics
James Lileks’ The Diner
Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture
JobMakers
One on One with Robert Doar
Homeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeRicochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.
From The Memoirs of Count Witte:
I was criticized by some blockheads for building up industry too rapidly. Also, I was criticized for using “artificial means” in promoting industry. What does this stupid phrase mean? By what means other than artificial can industry develop? Everything that man does is, to a certain degree, artificial. Only barbarians manage to live without artificial means. Industry has always been developed by artificial means; and the artificial measures I employed were far weaker than those employed for the same ends by other states. This, of course, our salon ignoramuses do not know.
Sergei Witte (1849-1915) was Finance Minister to a couple of czars, and how could a guy not be prickly in such circumstances?
Here’s another quote, which may not have been echoed by everyone in Russia but – I’ll bet – would have made perfect sense to certain Russian social strata: “He [Feldman, one of the few other members of the Southwestern Railroad Board who, according to Witte, knew anything about railroads] was old, very kind, well educated. Undoubtedly he was of Jewish origin, but he had long ago become so Germanized that he was accepted as Russian.”
This book is over 800 pages long and I am certainly not going to read it all. But somebody should! Either because it is surprising, or because it is not. Witte’s story is a monument to all sorts of actions and beliefs just barely remembered or forgotten for good reasons. It may not be a guide to modern Russia, but neither is it utterly disconnected from the place.
I came across cholera riots. I had only ever heard of the 1892 Tashkent ones, but in that same year, there were some in Saratov, too. I found these by noticing in the index, under “Students,” extensive lists of references, but just one for “medical.” There should have been more, but I think indexing hadn’t yet been automated by 1990 when this volume came out. Anyway, why were these kids mentioned at all? Witte had visited the afflicted areas and found that medical students, unlike many doctors, had shown up, and rendered such aid as they could. Which was not very much. A physician, and probably not just in Russia, might have been outranked by a nutritionist or a yoga coach, if either of those existed back then. Witte himself had been counseled by a professor to avoid fruits, drink weak tea, and bathe a lot — with calomel! Anyway, he overcame somewhat his earlier unfavorable impressions, deciding that Russian student youth, despite its “shortcomings and its lack of balance, sometimes approaching barbarism, is very sincere and senses who loves it and who hates it.” The Czar was pretty much in the latter camp, as he was still sore at the punks who had assassinated his dad.
I must confess again that I haven’t read this whole book, but I do think that where I haven't gone, there remains plenty of negativity. Somehow – I sure wasn’t looking for it – I came across Witte on naval affairs. Since ships and harbors don't get built for free, even in Russia, he would have a lot to say about such expenditures. At one point, some admirals — but not all admirals, and not Witte either — thought a place called Libau would be perfect for a naval base. The naysayers then, or at least Witte in this memoir finished in 1912 and published only after his death, said it “would be a complete waste of money – as turned out to be the case.” And was it? It depends on the timescale, but Latvian scavengers aren't complaining. I am still uncertain if this Baltic coastal area is ice-free, or if such ice as it gets is no worse than Murmansk ever sees, but Witte traveled to the latter and thought it superior. Oh, well!
Back to railways: there are many references to those. This is what really interested me, because I had the idea that Russian dreams and fantasies of a railway network amounted to a kind of geopolitics. All that land out there had to be important, or next to something which was important, or next to something which was next to something which was something; on and on and on. Witte’s judgment in this book was that “strategic” concerns, much boosted by military men, were never as compelling as economic ones. Russia did spend three decades building railroads mostly in the West but “in the end we had to fight in the Far East.” Note Witte was much involved in the Russo-Japanese War – he even went to America for negotiations leading to the Treaty of Portsmouth – but he did not live long enough to see much of WWI.
___
A couple more observations. Peasants get a lot of treatment in this book. Witte – and I’m sure everyone in the aforementioned Russian social strata – spoke explicitly of a peasant problem. I think it is generally considered pretty odd that Communism should have caught on first in such a non-urban, non-industrial country – theory predicted quite the opposite – but now I’d say any economic idea that attributed so much to one's class as opposed to oneself was going to find Russia highly congenial. Or at least fertile, as mushrooms find dung. Classes? Classes that are not only wildly disproportionate in size and power but doing everything all wrong? We’ve got ‘em! Now, any economic theory will postulate that everyone is doing it all wrong. But Marxism may have been a perfect fit for this place. Demographically and sociologically, or at least for amateur demographers and sociologists seeking professional employment in or near a brand-new dictatorship, Russia may have hit the sweet spot.
Another observation, not in this book at all, but online: after my initial reaction to that business about the Jew who got German enough to pass for Russian - “Huh?” - I recalled having seen guides to Russian text-message shortcuts. I thought these existed for both Cyrillic and Latin keypads. And maybe they do. The one I just found does not say if "Xyx?" or "Xax?" means "Huh?" But I bet it would be understood! Google Translate, by the way, suggests "Xm?"
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.
Discussion (16)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Your posts are always interesting.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Yes, and they never commit the faux pas of assuming that I know less history than I actually do. In fact, sometimes an article (this very one, now that I think about it!) will be so distant from that doing that discourtesy that it is almost as uncomfortable as it (doing the discourtesy) would have been.
It makes a man determined, at least for a few minutes, to better his mind. And sometimes it works. I just finished a history book (Stalin's War, by Sean McMeekin) wherein having the memory of the answer to "just where is Slovenia, again?" readily at hand was convenient. Probably, anyway. I have little doubt that repeatedly looking it up over the Ricochet years was at least occasionally an action triggered by one of the John H. series.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Good post. Thx.
I have the impression (though admittedly without data) that Czarist Russia had enormous social and economic inequality (kinda like Saudi Arabia where 5,000 families own the whole country). In Western Europe and the USA, innovation & opportunity grew out of a middle class culture (see, McCloskey). Peasants and aristos don't think like that which is why they tend to be more stagnant arrangements. The absence of a middle leaves entitlement and unchecked self-aggrandizing power at one end and pessimism and envy at the other (kinda like the Democratic Party's vision of a bourgeois-free utopia).
Government-driven change is "artificial" in that it does not spontaneously arise from an economically vibrant populace but that does not mean "false." Roads, sanitation and literacy programs are also "artificial" in this sense but that does not have to mean impractical or delusional (see, Great Society, New Green Deal, California High-Speed Rail etc).
Witte et al did not jump-start a middle class. Middle-class movements require that a middle class already exist (Glorious Revolution, MAGA) although the Meiji revolution may have helped to foster a middle class and middle class expectations.
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Somewhat at variance with what I said about Communism catching on in an unlikely setting, I recalled, imperfectly, another point of view. But last night - for I always sleep on my posts before publishing them! - it came to me. It was something I'd seen in Joe Scarborough's book about the Truman Doctrine...and now I know, having gone back to the library to look at it, that he was quoting George Kennan. The latter had pointed out how insecure Russia, its czars, and their subjects, always were. Either as a result or as a cause - probably both - everyone was not merely tough but implacable. Whatever they were in, they were in it to win. Kennan noted Marxism had "smoldered ineffectually" in Europe for half a century before energizing Russia. Although he didn't say why it should have taken that long - maybe Russian troublemakers had over the decades been more interested in the anarchy thing or the nihilism thing? - once it did happen, the embrace of Marxism would be fiery and firm. Russians might show patience from time to time but they did expect open clashes, the destruction of or by enemies, and victory as opposed to truce or compromise. Here was a doctrine that postulated that economic conflict, like other conflicts, was harsh at least, and if violent, unsurprisingly so. Communism was at last on its way!
Kennan of course said this better. The Long Telegram was long but its points are, still, succinct. As for me, I will now hush, but before posting this I would like to note an amazing property of the Ricochet search function: if you ask it for "George Kennan" or even "Joe Scarborough," you get hits containing those exact names. Wow!
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
The Revolutions Podcast did extensive coverage of the factors leading to the Russian revolution of 1917. If I recall, podcaster Mike Duncan singled out Sergei Witte for his rare competence, unusual among the aristocracy and bureaucracy of Tsarist Russia.
You're seeing five of 16 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.