The personality of Nicholas II contributed to his downfall in 1917. Nicholas II did not have the personal attributes necessary to bring Russia effectively out of its problems: he was shy and quiet, and easily led. He was not charismatic and this did nothing more to endear him to the people of Russia once they had started to once again lose faith in him after the 1905 revolution. The Memoirs of Count Witte in 1912 and the diary of the Tsars sister shows these attributes to be correct, both agreeing the Tsar is ‘not unintelligent’ and ‘he means well’ however he was ‘trained as a soldier’ and seemed ‘incapable of steering the ship of state into a quiet harbour’ overall condemning Nicholas II unfit to rule; however not completely blaming him for this lack of characteristic, and rather the way he was brought up as a soldier instead of a leader. This upbringing was a
(30 marks) January 2010 To what extent did Russia undergo economic and political reform in the years 1906-14? (30 marks) OR How far was Lenin responsible for the Bolsheviks’ growing hold on power in the years 1917-24? (30 marks) How significant were the personalities of the contenders to succeed Lenin in accounting for Stalin’s defeat of his opponents in the years 1924-29? (30 marks) OR How far did Stalin’s social policies change the lives of children and women in the years to 1945? (30 marks) May 2010 How far do you agree that the use of repression was the main reason for the weakness of opposition to Tsarism in the years 1881-1914?
One major aspect that contributed to the Tsarist governments path towards the March Revolution is the decisions that we made by Tsar Nicholas II during WWI. The decisions that Tsar Nicholas II made during WWI made a huge impact towards the March Revolution. His distance as a leader is one trait that came to the surface during this time and heavily contributed to his downfall. The Tsar would avoid any aspect of political landscape that he didn’t like or that he found offensively modern. Just a few examples of things he would avoid are the left, public opinion, industry, the press and unions.
Assess the effectiveness of the Bolshevik government in creating changes in society in the period 1917-1928. During the years 1917 through to 1928 the Bolshevik government created changes within society, in the areas of social relationships within classes, a result of political and economic changes, education, health, religion and women. In order to assess the extent to which these changes were effective it is important to look at the original aims of the Bolsheviks. The extent to which they achieved these aims determines their overall effectiveness is creating changes within society. A change in society occurred in June of 1918 with the introduction of War Communism.
Patterns of Russian Demography have changed since the breakup of the USSR. What are the key factors and processes associated with the change? In your answer discuss the concepts of relative location, distance decay, and demographic transition. Explain how these have affected the contemporary political landscapes of the Russian Realm. Russia used to be a superpower in the 20th century.
By 1914 revolution was in the making, and Tsar Nicholas II sealed his fate by inadvertently leading Russia into what would become WWI. ‘What leads most frequently to misunderstandings of the relationship between an ideology and its historical function is the failure to distinguish its objective from its subjective function. The concepts of a dictatorship derive directly from the economic
Nicholas II attempted to rule Russia as an autocrat as he believed that autocracy was the only was to save Russia from anarchy. As historian Orland Figes noted, “instead of embracing reform, [Nicholas] adhered rigidly to his own archaic vision of autocracy.” He had ascended to the throne in 1894 after his father Alexander III died suddenly. He had not been prepared for life as a ruler as his father had not briefed him in matters of the state, believing Nicholas to be unintelligent and weak. And Alexander was probably right. Nicholas turned out to be inflexible in his views and politically naive.
Who was the greater ruler: Alexander II or Alexander III In establishing which was the greater ruler out of Alexander II or Alexander III it is first important to consider the aims and successes of each one. Whilst many would say Alexander III’s stablisation of Russia through strict reform was necessary, it can be argued that on the grander scale the modernisation of Russia was a far more important end goal, and one that would solve many of the inherent problems such as famine and low production, unlike Alexander III’s staunch Conservatism. Although Alexander III’s programmes of Russification can be seen as important in creating a sense of national identity, it is nonetheless necessary to remember that this on the whole created more of a sense of disunity, as is the case with many of his anti-modernising reforms. Repressing of the national identities of groups such as the Ukrainians and Poles only strengthened the revolutionary resolve and anti-Russian fervour, and the entire concept seemed only to have the short-term goal in mind. However the major issue with Alexander III lies not with his policies themselves but more with the ideology that lay behind them.
Ella Pope 1 Why did the 1905 Revolution fail? (25 marks) The unrest in 1905 led to some changes in Russia, for example the introduction of Dumas. However in terms of a revolution it did ultimately fail for one of the main reasons that there was little coordination between the opposition groups and there was not a significant amount of change in Russia as autocracy still remained. One reason why the 1905 revolution failed was due to the loyalty of the army. Despite the fact there was mutinies like on the battleship Potemkin there was not enough of them to have a serious effect.
Or could it be a release from the class system with a new way of thinking? One of the leading political figures and revolutionary thinkers of the 20th century, Lenin masterminded the Bolshevik take-over of power in Russia in 1917 and was the architect and first head of the Soviet state. He posthumously gave name to the Marxist-Leninist ideology, but by the death of the communist system in 1991, his legacy was largely discredited. Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov grew up in a good educated family in provincial Russia. He excelled at school and went on to study law.