Exhibit E: Catherine the Great, (and other "great" women in history)

Once in a long while, I'll hear women talk about how rotten the world is- purely because men have 'dominated' it. And this argument is always followed by the addendum that if women were in charge, everything would just be wonderful. No crime, no war, no suffering. Inequality and poverty would be reduced. Everyone would live in peace. It would be a perfect world if only women were in charge.

It is men, with their tendency to violence, which has made the world an awful place. Women, with their kind, motherly tendencies would set the world onto the path of an everlasting golden age. (Whenever I hear women say this, I groan inwardly, because I know better. In addition, I don't say anything to argue with them- also because I know better.)

In the words of the comedienne Elaine Boosler: "When women are depressed, they either eat or go shopping. Men invade another country."

Oh, really?

Hmm, let's see if this stands-up to scrutiny. Let's examine the career of Tsarina Catherine the Great, and I will advance my theory that if women are put-into positions of power, they will start to exhibit the worst, man-like behavior.

Catherine the Great. (1729-1796)

Her reign followed the brief (1761-1762) reign of Peter III, grandson of Peter the Great. In fact, she overthrew him with the help of his palace guards. Tsarina Catherine ruled the Russian empire from 1762-1796. Surely, the 'Tsarina of all Rus' would lead the nation into an era of peace?

Not exactly: in 1763, she orders the army to invade Lithuania. Then, Catherine's Russia declares war on Turkey in 1768; the war drags-on for six years. The end result forced Turkey to hand-over the Sea of Azov and a portion of the northern Black Sea coast to Russia. Turkey was also obliged to accept Russia's construction of a Black Sea fleet and the independence of the Crimea. (In 1783, Russia goes the extra mile and annexes the Crimea outright.)

This conquest having been complete, Catherine masterminded a diplomatic conspiracy aimed at carving-up Poland. In July 1772, Russia obtained large segments of what is now Belarus, while Austria and Prussia annexed Galicia and West Prussia, effectively denying sea access for the rump Polish state.

In 1788, Russia declares war on Sweden. This sharp little engagement lasts for 2 years. The same year, Catherine declares a protectorate over the rump Polish state. The second partition of Poland took place in 1795, when an uprising caused Russia and Prussia to conspire to erase Poland from the map. Poland didn't re-appear as a country until 1917.

This woman's career is defined by expansionism and war. Dismembering Poland and invading your neighbors doesn't sound like a very nice, womanly thing to do. Well, her neighboring nations were ruled by men, so perhaps circumstances forced her to go to war? That's the only way you can deal with men. Very well, dear reader, take that specious argument.

Let's look at her domestic policies, shall we? Didn't she have theories about being an 'enlightened autocrat?' Didn't she correspond with enlightened philosophers of the day like Voltaire? Well yes, Catherine did espouse ideas about enlightened autocracy. For instance, she tried to introduce European-style schooling and the practice of smallpox inoculation to Russia. But in reality, she devoted much of her domestic attention to strengthening her own rule. When her early 'enlightened' reforms began to erode her power, she later spent her major efforts on stamping-out competing power-centers within Russia. In addition, she ignored the poor and increased the scale and depth of the autocracy (much like all of the successful Tsars before her).

According to the Russian poll-tax census of the 1760s, 56.2 percent of the rural population consisted of serfs. For all intensive purposes, serfs were invisible to Russian law. They were subject to the whims of their squires, and had no status in the imperial system. Couldn't their lives have been improved? Given the limited amount of freedom afforded to the serfs, their lives couldn't get much worse, right? Wrong.

Under Catherine's rule, the government attitude towards serfs witnessed a major deterioration. The squires were given a free-hand to squeeze the peasantry as never before. In addition to this, inequality between the rich and poor increased. Catherine's era has been dubbed the 'golden age of the Russian nobility.' Never before had the Russian upper class been so privileged, so economically advantaged and so handsomely rewarded for doing so little. In exchange, they abdicated nearly all political pretensions (thus, strengthening Catherine's own power).

As if to demonstrate the unhappiness of large segments of the populace, a fugitive Cossack, Emelian Pugachev, waged intermittent uprisings against the state between 1772 and 1774. The Pugachev Rebellion was bloodily crushed by Catherine's forces. Over 1,500 landlords were reported killed before the wave of violence was suppressed. When the rebellion was crushed, the perpetrators were shipped to Moscow, where they were paraded through the streets in cages before being interrogated and executed.

The Pugachev Rebellion proved that local administration had been too hollowed-out, so Catherine embarked on a number of reforms to increase the influence of the central government in administering local affairs. Similarly, she severely limited the Orthodox Church's resources and capacity to address its various problems- she sequestered church landholdings and the peasants who worked on it. (Thus, further reducing competition to the power of the state.)

Her later years were marked by bitterness and political repression. Concerned by the example of the American Revolution, she ordered an empire-wide raid of book-stores to impound seditious writings in 1787. She erected a harsh and repressive censorship, greatly restricting the import of foreign books, imprisoning dissident figures and ultimately closing most private printing shops. By 1789, fearful that the French revolution might inspire similar uprisings in Russia, she started to undo many of her other earlier liberal reforms. By 1800, the Russian publishing industry had been reduced to almost nil.

To top it all off, her semi-public love-affairs (with such favorite nobles such as Orlov, Potemkin and Zubov) took-on the aura of scandal.

So what does all this prove? Put a woman into a position of near-absolute power, and she will reign in as heavy-handed and autocratic a fashion as a man.

Surely, Catherine was an aberration? She may have been a woman, but perhaps she was the one-out-of a thousand who wasn't a paragon of the true motherly, loving nature of women? Well, let's look at a few other women leaders in recent history.

Indira Gandhi. (1917-1984)

How about Indira Gandhi? She held India's office of the Prime Minister from 1966 to 1977. She rode the crest of popularity after India's triumph in the war of 1971 against Pakistan. In 1973, Delhi and north India were rocked by demonstrations angry at high inflation, the poor state of the economy, rampant corruption, and poor standards of living. The explosion of a nuclear device in 1974 helped to enhance her reputation among middle-class Indians as a tough political leader. And in 1975, she annexed the Himalayan kingdom of Sikkim. In June of that year, the High Court of Allahabad found her guilty of using illegal practices during the last election campaign, and ordered her to vacate her seat. There were demands for her resignation.

Mrs. Gandhi's response was to declare a state of emergency, under which her political foes were imprisoned, constitutional rights abrogated, and the press placed under strict censorship. Meanwhile, the eldest of her two sons, Sanjay Gandhi, started to run the country as though it were his personal fiefdom, and earned the fierce hatred of many whom his policies had victimized. He ordered the removal of slum dwellings, and in an attempt to curb India's growing population, initiated a highly resented program of forced sterilization.

In early 1977, confident that she had debilitated her opposition, Mrs. Gandhi called for fresh elections, and found herself trounced by a newly formed coalition of political parties. Her Congress party lost badly at the polls. Many declared that she was a spent force; but, three years later, she was to return as Prime Minister of India a second time.

In the second, post-Emergency, period of her Prime Ministership, Indira Gandhi was preoccupied by efforts to resolve the political problems in the state of Punjab. In her attempt to crush the secessionist movement of Sikh militants, led by Jarnail Singh Bindranwale, she ordered an assault upon the holiest Sikh shrine in Amritsar, called the "Golden Temple". It was here that Bindranwale and his armed supporters had holed up, and it was from the Golden Temple that they waged their campaign of terrorism not merely against the government, but against moderate Sikhs and Hindus. "Operation Bluestar", waged in June 1984, led to the death of Bindranwale, and the Golden Temple was stripped clean of Sikh terrorists; however, the Golden Temple was damaged, and Mrs. Gandhi earned the undying hatred of Sikhs who bitterly resented the desacralization of their sacred space. In November 1984, Mrs. Gandhi was assassinated, at her residence, by two of her own Sikh bodyguards, who claimed to be avenging the insult heaped upon the Sikh people.

Hmm, perhaps Indira was another aberration? Perhaps not.

Empress Dowager Tzu-Hsi. (1835-1908)

Howabout the Empress Dowager Tzu-hsi of the late Qing dynasty in China? She was only the third woman in Chinese history to hold such a large amount of power. By the time she turned 17, she was one of the concubines of the Emperor Hsien-Feng. The emperor had many wives and concubines, but only Tzu-hsi gave him a son. Upon the birth of their son, she immediately moved up in the court and upon the death of her husband she was given the title of Empress of the Western Palace. Tzu-hsi thus became the empress dowager in 1861. Her son, Chih, became the Emperor. He was only 5 years old when he took the throne, with the support of revolutionary eunuchs within the palace, the empress seized control of the government.

However, she still could not rule openly; she had to rule through her son. When Chih turned 17, his mother's reign had come to an end. She selected a wife and four concubines for him. Her son died of venereal disease in 1875 and Tzu-Hsi became ruler once again. However, the empress still was not totally free to rule, for her son's favorite concubine was pregnant and if she delivered a boy, the boy would be the new emperor and his mother dowager empress. She would not let this happen, so mysteriously the concubine died before giving birth.

Tzu-Hsi lived in extravagance; she squandered money on banquets, jewels, and other luxuries. She was typically served 150 different dishes at a single banquet. She drank from a jade cup and ate with golden chopsticks. She used funds earmarked for the navy to build herself a lavish summer palace. (The lack of military funds contributed to China's defeat in the 1894 Sino-Japanese war.) At the end of her life, her personal jewelry vault held 3,000 ebony boxes of jewels.

Throughout her rule, Tzu-Hsi was very conservative, and opposed reforms to modernize China. She was also not averse to the use of violence- (according to one popular legend, she once had 500 peasants slaughtered because she had a headache! This legend, however, is probably just that- a legend.)

To deflect popular unhappiness away from her corrupt, venal government, Tzu-Hsi encouraged a surge in anti-foreign sentiment among the populace. She commanded the violently anti-foreign secret society (the "Society of the Righteous and Harmonious Fists", aka the Boxers) to attack foreign legations in Peking; this siege lasted eight weeks. On August 14th a mixed foreign expeditionary force of 19,000 troops battered its way in and captured Peking. Peking was looted, many Chinese people were tortured, raped and killed. Tzu-Hsi fled the city with the emperor to the city of Sian. Before fleeing the Summer Palace, Tzu-Hsi summoned the emperor's concubines and told them to stay behind. One of them begged to be allowed to accompany the emperor. Tzu-Hsi dealt with the concubine promptly. "Throw this despicable minion down the well!" She ordered the guards. The order was carried-out.

The Boxer Rebellion was over; at least 250 foreigners had been killed and China had to accept a humiliating peace settlement.

In 1908, Tzu-Hsi suffered a stroke and chose her three year old nephew, P'u Yi, to succeed her. Upon her death in 1908, she was buried in splendor, covered in diamonds. Four years later, P'u Yi was forced from the throne by revolutionaries, ending the reign of the Qing dynasty. In 1928, revolutionaries dynamited Tzu-Hsi's tomb and looted it while desecrating her body.

Gee, thanks for the history lesson, gaywad. What's your point?

My point: I think we can safely put to rest any ideas that women, if given the chance to dominate the globe, will put the world right. Next time you hear a woman say that male leaders are violent and are the cause of the world's misery, bring-up the decidedly mixed records of Catherine the Great, Indira Gandhi or the Empress Dowager Tzu-Hsi. Or preferably, all three. You can find other examples out there if you know your history. (Here are a few hints for you to start-on: look-up Countess Nadasdy, the early 17th-century Hungarian noblewoman who had a funny idea about taking baths in human blood. Or Ilse Koch, who worked in the Buchenwald concentration-camp...)

The world is a violent place not because of men, but because of people. People can be cruel, greedy, power-hungry and vicious. Women are just as bad as men. They have the exact same capacity to be violent, and if you think it's not true, then you're deluding yourself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Never again allow a woman to hold the supreme power in the State..." -- Empress Dowager Tzu-Hsi's final words.

Back to Home