Was "Peter the Great" a reformer? - Of course not. All reform projects and everything positive that is in them began to be prepared even before the liar Ordin-Nashchokin and V. V. Golitsyn, and then Tsar Peter himself:
- Muscovy became the Russian Empire, was it possible without it, or rather the recognition of this status by other countries hostile to us? - But our State was rightfully the successor of the Byzantine Empire;
- strengthening the center of state power in the person of the emperor, the head of the Russian Empire;
- reform of public administration, introduction of the status of military, state and court service;
- reform of the economy and industry (which took place in a curtailed form, since serfdom did not provide an opportunity for their development;
- the reform of the army (but it actually obeyed the new allies) and the creation of the Russian fleet (but the ships built according to European standards for warm seas were of no strategic importance, since the Baltic was under the complete control of the allies and enemies of Russia and this fleet soon rotted away at the freezing berths Kronstadt and St. Petersburg),
- development of printing and education.
Everything negative that the liar brought, that was against the Good of the country:
- the subordination of the foreign policy of the Russian state to Western interests, which brought to naught all the works and achievements of the Russian Kingdom (1547 - 1721) and its people;
- the feudolization of the Russian state, the transformation of the serf system into a slave system, instead of its abolition, as happened in Europe;
- freezing the development potential of the state economy and the Russian people for almost 200 years;
- the beginning of the destruction of the Church through its transformation into an object of government and struggle, and even the destruction of those who disagree with the innovations introduced into the church service.
All reform projects, the need for which, undoubtedly, was, were mainly prepared by foreigners, and their coordinator, at first, was most likely F. A. Golovin, who, after returning from the Grand Embassy, became something of a prime minister, a conductor of a pro-Western model of state with Russian characteristics. The liar did not have the education necessary for the reigning person and therefore introduced the practice of collegial management. This made it possible to develop sufficiently reasonable and necessary government decisions and decrees.
The only positive thing that can be “conditionally” assessed as the “merit” of the liar to the Russian State is that the country, through its despotism and terror, and numerous victims of the Russian people, avoided, or rather postponed the Second Civil War for 200 years. And it is not known in what form and in what territories it would have remained after that.
Continuation: "Why wasn't the liar exposed?"
