Want to know:

Peter Struve criticizes Nikolai II's absolute monarchy in terms of neglected public interests in that his rule more focused on keeping both he and his circle of advisors in power rather than the good of the people. This is evidenced by not allowing anyone in self-government (zemstvos) to be a part of the central government, which would have promoted public interests. Struve argues that Nikolai does not even truly rule, as his advisors/the bureaucracy who are focused on keeping their power are not going to focus on effectively improving and governing such a large nation. Even if the group did have the country's best interests at heart, the country was simply too big to not include more local forms of government.

Get a detailed, AI-powered explanation for this question and thousands more on StudyFetch.