Through his well-known zest and ambition, he did his best to resolve most of them, and made considerable steps in the direction of prosperity and positive reform. However, his actions did not always have the intended effect and the outcome he envisioned. As his own rule shows, and later during the rule of Catherine the Great, the greatest effect of his reforms was that Russian society found itself splintered in classes that lacked communication skills and literacy, and even in the context of the same class, disconnects arose and some disagreements were never resolved (Anderson, “Peter the Great”). I agree with the quote “I have conquered an empire but I have not been able to conquer myself.” He is saying that he has been victorious over someone else in battle, but is not able to control his own self. For example, he may have even been discontented with himself and hasn 't been able to overcome that sensation, or perhaps he had an interpersonal conflict we do not know of.
They felt like society in England was corrupt and straying away from Christian belief so they sought for religious freedom and the idea that they could start a colony that would be whole and unified in God. By doing this, they ran into another form of division when they came across the Native Americans who were already habitants of the land. The Puritans looked at these people as if they were animals or savages and built a wall of division between the two different cultures of people. In John Smith’s, “A General History of Virginia, he said, “Each hour expecting the fury of the savages, when God, the patron of all good endeavors, in that desperate extremity so changed the hearts of the savages, that they brought such plenty of their fruits and provisions that no man wanted.” This just shows you of how they viewed the natives and since it wasn’t one of them, then they were bad people. Instead of trying to get along and work with the Indians, they fought them so that they could have land to establish their colony on.
Sir Thomas Roe, an English diplomat and ambassador to Constantinople once said "The Ottoman Empire has the body of a sick old man, who tried to appear healthy, although his end was near." Definitely, the Ottoman Empire wouldn't stay strong and young forever. Due its fast and rapid success in expanding, having a strong court system, and having an efficient system of taxation, other great powers in Europe felt threatened. After all, if the empire was expanding and gaining much power quickly, it would be unexceptional for it to invade one of these great powers. Europe sensed the Ottoman jeopardy, so countries such as Britain, France, and Italy allied and plans were made to ensure the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Leaders are trusted by their people to uphold high standards of diplomacy and to make citizens’ lives less burdensome. The Soviet Union needed a figure who would help improve and strengthen the country. Joseph Stalin took this role, promising to get the country out of World War I, paying debts, and giving land to the citizens. While he followed through on a few of his promises, he ultimately betrayed his people by lying to them. Through his leadership, Stalin made many decisions to help the Soviet Union, but he made even more choices that harmed individual people due to his abuse of power.
Historian Brian Landers stated in his book that "The Mongols brought terror to Europe on a scale not seen again until the twentieth century." Despite of their ruthless, the Mongol Empire did has positive impacts on the development of Europe in five different areas, namely political, economic, social, weapons advancement and spread of Christianity due to the Mongol exchange. First, in political aspects, some said the mongols have a negative impact on Europe , as they changed the political history of Europe, especially of Russia, because of their ruling in conquered countries. Genghis Khan used the psychological warfare, the terror tactics, to deal with the resistance: surrender or die. The Mongols usual policy was slaughtered and depopulated the entire cities that resisted, and
It can be argued that Peter the Great had a lot to pick up after, especially following Ivan IV’s reign, the Time of Troubles, false Tsardom, and the great Raskol. However, Peter the Great creatively used all of these disadvantages to his own advantage. Rather than “tearing apart” society, Peter the Great reoriented Russian society by means of merit and collective productive contribution to society. Although it can be disputed “whether Peter the Great was a “revolutionary” tsar, Peter’s immense impact on Russia’s service system is simply undeniable” (Kaiser and Marker 226). It was perhaps Peter’s different upbringing that allowed him to formulate such distinguishable values that the country ran on during his reign.
Both having a sporty background of being physical, they were involved in several wars and recognized similarly. Peter the Great was recognized by reorganizing his army and created the first Russian Navy. Louis XIV was revengeful, he attacked people who were disobedient such as nobles in exile while Peter the Great wanted to centralize power and strengthen his military such as expanded Russian borders. Peter also demanded money from mercantilist policy because of his new military. But like Peter, Louis XIV who had a semi feudal society, he wanted a mercantile nation to create an efficient army.
Together, these Khrushchev used these four tools to his advantage and over time he slowly became the new leader of Russia that everyone cited with “de-Stalinization.” In his speeches, Nikita Khrushchev chastised Joseph Stalin and tried to belittle him as a person much as he possibly could. He made claims that Stalin was single-handedly responsible for taking Russia off of a safe course of development and putting it on one that did not yield the desired results. Taking things one step further, he also claimed that many of his opponents were at one point or another working with Stalin as he committed these “crimes” against the Russian people
For examples, one of the biggest changes was religion. Back then, there were many disputes about the Catholic teachings. The two prominent religious figures, who completely impacted the way people view religion, were a German monk named Martin Luther, and a Frenchman named John Calvin. Their understandings of true faith and predestination caused many people to find flaws in the catholic doctrines, which later formed a group called the protestants. As conflicts between the catholics and the protestants became more violent, it affected the English economy.
Power in many cases, blinds the person from seeing both sides of a problem or not thinking something through. In my knowledge, people in history with absolute power tend to make huge mistakes because they didn 't think an idea through or were only focused on what they want. Ivan the terrible was a young, absolute leader of Russia. He made good decisions at first, but then started making mistakes. Ivan only trusted the head of the church, and no one else.