These views are expressed in his two key works, A Concise History of the Russian Revolution (published in 1995) and Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime 1919-1924 (published in 1994). Pipe’s believes that Lenin was primarily responsible for the success of the uprising, even though Pipe’s recognizes Lenin’s role as the most important, he still hypocritically called Lenin’s April Theses “totally out of touch with reality, if not positively mad” despite the fact that this theses played a huge role in the Lenin and Bolshevik uprising. Pipe’s also believes that Trotsky just carried out Lenin’s commands. However the role or Trotsky and his actions before the October revolution were very evidently done on his own accord, with Lenin accompanying Trotsky in his decisions. In early October, 1917, Trotsky was elected
All of the rulers of Russia had similar priorities, although some were more forceful than others. The main ones were the retention of power, being an autocracy or a dictatorship and crushing opposition. The communist rulers had different priorities however to the Tsars in terms of political ideology and social aims. The Tsars were not uniform in their aims though as each one faced different situations and wanted a different kind of ruling. For example Alexander II was a humanitarian but Nicholas II mainly wanted modernisation for Russia.
This essay will focus on a number of different examples where repression occurred, whilst also considering phases where restraint over the Russian people was relaxed. There were a number of similarities between the Russian leaders in terms of repression which suggests that it was a consistent theme from the end of the Crimean War all the way through to Nikita Khrushchev’s reign. One of these strands of continuity was the constant use of an authoritarian approach displayed by each leader. The late Tsars of Russia claimed that their power was ordained by God, with their authority determined through the ‘divine right of Kings’. Their argument to autocracy was based on the view that it was a practical necessity due to the Empire being so vast and diverse.
Assemblies which are also known as parliaments or legislatures provide a key role in government. They act as national debating chambers and public forums in which government polices and major issues can be discussed and analysed. In most cases they are invested with formal law-making power giving them some capacity to shape and influence public policy. However, assemblies have been criticised by Heywood (2002, p. 311) as being no more than “talking shops” that do little more than rubber stamp decisions that have effectively been made elsewhere. This essay will firstly discuss how parliamentary and presidential systems differ, the different types of legislature and their main functions.
Admittedly, Lenin had begun to use the Cheka and had set up show trials before Stalin came to power, but some historians such as Stephen Cohen, see this as a response to the awful civil war in Russia, in which, Lenin needed to extend his control over the whole of the Russian people. It is seen by some historians as more of a necessary act of control to keep the country together, and the Bolsheviks in power, rather than a vicious attack on the potential threat of the Russian people. In “The History of Terrorism” the historians argue that “For Lenin, terror was not the principal instrument” that he wanted to use to gain control. This reveals that perhaps he only used it in times of need, rather than simply because he was able
Russia and England 1850 – 1900 In comparison to England Russia's politics and government was specifically run by one man, the Tsar Nicholas II and all decisions had to be confirmed by him before acted upon. This lead to a lack of political freedom in Russia as there was no voting system and all decision making was left to the Tsar so Russia was built in the view of one man's intentions. Whereas England at the time had Queen Victoria on the throne backed by a liberal government, which lead to decisions being made by the people so England was built to govern the needs of the people. In terms of economy England wiped the floor with Russia due to it's connections with other colonies across the seas leading to naval trade, allowing them not
There is debate on whether the development of the Russian government was influenced mainly by war, or other factors in the ideology and personal beliefs of the ruler, or Opposition to the ruler. The development of Russian government can be defined as a change in type or style of the leadership and the extent of consultation or representation that the Russian people have within their government. War is ultimately the driving force behind nearly every reform and change in government in Russia, nearly every governmental change can be traced back to a need to improve the military capability of Russia. During the period from 1855 to 1924 there was a variety of Opposition groups to the Tsarist and Communist governments, however due to the fact that the majority of which were unsuccessful in inducing change, their influence on the development of the Russian government was not as much as that of war. Opposition did influence governmental change under every ruler apart from Alexander III who kept the opposition “underground”.
Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution. People often refer to the UK having an 'unwritten constitution' but that's not strictly true, large parts of it are written down, much of it in the laws passed in Parliament - known as statute law. Therefore, the UK constitution is often described as 'partly written and wholly uncodified' (Uncodified means that the UK does not have a single, written constitution.). Over the years, Parliament has passed laws that limit parliamentary sovereignty. These laws reflect political developments both within and outside the UK.
History SL Nelson Joseph Option 3 The Sixth Amendment and Stalin’s procedure to find the guilty were on to opposite ends because of the right to trial where in Stalinist Russia there had been no way to get a chance to trial and in the U.S, citizens are allowed a right to trial no matter what even though the culprit may be obvious. The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution is the section of the Bill of Rights that guarantees a U.S citizen a trial with a fair jury, an attorney if the accused person wants one, and the chance to confront witnesses who is accusing the defendant of a crime, meaning he or she can see who is making accusations. In Stalinist Russia, There was none or very little chance to get a trial because of those
''The UK constitution is not fit for purpose'' The bulk of liberal democracies in the world are ones of which have a constitution known as codified. The UK does not have a codified constitution or an entrenched constitution. This puts the UK in a small group of liberal democracies to not have a codified system along side with Israel, Saudi Arabia and New Zealand. Instead the UK has a constitution that contains a variety of written and unwritten sources which lays out the laws, rules and conventions of how the UK is to be governed whilst protecting the rights of the citizens. It is a common question amongst political scientists as to whether the UK constitution is fit for purpose.