The Social Democrats were split into two groups: the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. The Bolshevik’s was more radical and was led by Lenin. The Menshevik’s agreed to wait for the workers to gain power overtime. Lastly the Liberals believed that to develop Russia you had to work with the middle-class. The growth of the reformists groups led to the 1905 revolution as they all wanted change; they wanted the Tsar to agree with them.
political (defeat of the right –Bukharin), • Ideological (NEP hated by communists; class war against the kulaks; socialism in one country), • Strategic (i.e. defence of Russia)? Conclusion– Economic reasons provided one set of motives –but there were others. Were they connected? Which motives were most decisive?
This was an economic concession that Lenin was forced to make due to the deteriorating economic conditions and the real threat of a revolt against the Bolshevik government. It was always intended as a temporary measure, and the question after Lenin’s death wasn’t whether it should continue or not, but how it should be put an end to. The debate lay between the left-wing, lead by Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev, who advocated a quick movement into rapid industrialisation, which would mean abandoning the New Economic Policy, militarising the labour forces and exploiting peasants for grain to fund the industrialisation; and the right-wing, led by Bukharin, who wanted to continue the New Economic Policy for another 20 years, which would mean peasants would grow wealthier and be encouraged to buy consumer goods, which in turn would lead to more products being made in factories and a gradual process of industrialisation. This became a passionate issue because economic policy was also at the heart of the debate of what a socialist society should look like. The growth of a rich super class led to activities such as property dealing, land speculation, gambling and prostitution, all of which conflicted greatly with the ideology of Communism.
The top-down approach the rulers of Russia had in the period 1855-1964 were superficially different as the communists claimed to represent the people by giving power to the proletariat where as the Tsars were heavily elitist in their ideology. The communists’ efforts to represent the people is corroborated by the introduction of the soviet by the Provisional Government, which was organised as a grassroots effort to practice direct democracy. Although the presence of the Zemstva and Duma, introduced by Alexander II and Nicholas II respectively, presents some evidence the Tsars may have attempted to give Russia a sense of democracy, it was ran by the nobility so it was not representative of the people and thus heavily autocratic in their rule. Conversely, although the communists and the Tsars appear to have ruled differently in their top-down approach, they in fact did not because in practice the communists gave an extremely limited extent of power to the proletariat. The Provisional Government’s vacillating rule on the other hand, from heavily autocratic to democratic led to the governments demise.
During Alexander III rule from 1881-1894 he had made significant changes in Russia like the counter reform, which was literally undoing his fathers Great reforms, which he thought, had weakened Tsarism and left it insecure. In 1881 Alexander III first step as Tsar was throw out Loris-Melikov Plan, which indicated establishment of two new government commissions that were to have an advisory role in relation to proposed new laws. Alexander III saw this as a threat to autocracy in Russia and so he completely rejected this approved plan by his father. Further on in late 1881 Temporary Regulations were introduced, which gave the government special powers to prohibit gathering of more than 12 people, prosecute any individual from political crimes, introduction of Okhrana the secret Police, and the setup of special courts outside the legal system. Then In 1889 the zamstva magistrates were replaced with land captains how were recruited from the nobles and given powers to direct and control peasant affairs in their areas.
Many Russian intellectuals were rising up against the Tsar; they believed that the regime was oppressive and that European countries had more freedom and felt that many Russians lacked basic freedoms seen in other European nations. Even though the formation of political parties was illegal in Russia, these intellectuals started to form groups of people who shared a similar opinion. Some felt that change in Russia could only be achieved through revolution and the overthrowing of the Tsarist regime while others believed that changes needed to be made through reform and a gradual revolution. These opposition groups were known as the Liberals, the Populists and the Marxists. Firstly, the Liberals were made up of middle class Russians such as lawyers, doctors, and teachers and so on.
Document 10 explains an economic factor that contributed to the Russian Revolution. Russia, at the time, was not economically ready for the World War I. But, because they were forced to fight by Tsar Nikolas II, which made Russia weak. In Document 9, Miliukov accuses the government for causing the Revolution because of treason. He describes the government as disorganized.
The bulk of the opposition looked across to Europe where they saw constitutional monarchies leading countries forward into prosperity, whereas Lenin (inspired by Chernyshevsky’s book ‘What is to be done’) studied Marxist theory which promoted the idea of socialism via a dictatorship of the proletariat. The first main success of political opposition is widely considered to be the assassination of Alexander II at the hands of the People’s Will in 1881. Although assassinating the Emperor is an extraordinary feat it is hotly debated whether or not this event helped the opposition achieve their aims (presumably greater political freedom/democracy). On the eve of his death Alexander II was willing to consider Loris Melikov’s proposal of the public playing a more prominent role in directing administrative and financial policy. Furthermore, the assassination caused Alexander III and Konstantin Pobedonostev to inaugurate an age of constant political reaction in which many counter-reforms were created to limit the impact of the Great Reforms in the 1860’s (for example the University Statute of 1884 concerning autonomy of higher education replaced the much more progressive statute of 1863).
Jesse Osborne Block 4; World Studies Louis XIV vs. Peter the Great Peter the Great and Louis XIV had very different approaches to power during their reigns. Louis XIV wanted to please nobles and higher power people, and focused on war and peace, religion, and economic oversight. Meanwhile, Peter I took a drive to modernize the nation of Russia, taking initiative to tame the nobles and reduce their power, achieve secular control of the church, reorganize internal administration, develop an economy and make it powerful. Peter the Great laid the foundations of a modern Russia. He ruthlessly decreased the power on the boyars and demanded they serve his state.
Running head: ANTI-COMMUNISM AND MCCARTHYISM Anti-communism and McCarthyism Melissa Guzman University of Phoenix Anti-communism and McCarthyism Anticommunism was a belief that if you followed the same ideas of the Russians you did not belong here in the United States and should go to Russia. Anticommunism was a major issue in the thirties and forties. It was considered that all anticommunist were liberals. There were two kinds of liberals, the anticommunist liberals, and the fellow-traveling liberals. McCarthyism was a crusade started by Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin.