Looking at repression, the problems they dealt with and how they solved them: the terrorist attacks and harsh punishments, reform groups and the black hundreds and finally the revolutionary ideas and closing of newspapers and trade unions. Then I will consider the reforms: poor, unhappy peasants and the abolishment of redemption payments and freeing of communes, underproductive agriculture and ‘The Peasant Land Bank’ and lastly the effect of the Duma. Overall I think that both the repressions and reforms had equal impact in stabilising Russia, but are also dependant on each other. Firstly, Repression, Russia had a terrorist problem during and following the 1905 revolution. In 1907, 1,200 government officials were murdered in political terrorist attacks by revolutionaries.
To what extent was the lack of political representation the most significant cause of the 1905 revolution? There were a number of different causes that contributed to the start of the 1905 Russian revolution however some were more significant than others. One of the contributing factors was the lack of political representation due to the existence of an autocratic regime. Whilst this was an important factor, the most significant factors were the social and economical issues that caused unrest amongst the Russian population. The long-term policies of Russification imposed by the Tsar in the 1880s, caused a lot of political unrest within Russia and these contributed to the 1905 revolution.
This clash of aims created trouble for the government, as in April 1917 demonstrations in Petrograd began to stop the war. The Provisional Government had unknowingly placed themselves as the nations target, not giving in to Russia’s most crucial demand, to get out of the war. This made it easier for political opposition, such as the Bolsheviks, who told the people they would give them what they wanted, ‘peace, bread and land’, to rise
In January 1905, there was a revolutionary tide in Russia. This was mainly caused by the defeat of the Russo-Japanese War in September and the Bloody Sunday Incident in January. In the country, workers, peasants and merchants were holding demonstrations in order to express their discontent to the Tsarist government. Although Nicholas II issued the October Manifesto to pacify the discontent of people temporarily, he still had to face some problems after the 1905 Revolution. To regain the support from people, he needed to carry out the reforms in the October Manifesto.
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 fact that peasantry took part in the 1905 revolution (also known as Bloody Sunday)shows that the suspicions of the peasants changing were true and to the Tsar and his government this could have appeared to be a threat because they always feared peasantry development, the Tsar and the Empress especially. However the peasants had not planned to overthrow the Tsar as they supported Tsardom, they only demanded for some changes that would reduce the working hours to 8 hours per day, allow workers to earn minimum wage of a rouble a day and to abolish overtime. From a point of view these demands would seem to be reasonable but to the soldiers these were perverse. When the 200,000 petitioners were instructed to retreat but didn’t because of the amount of people, the soldiers took it as if they were not cooperating and decided to open fire at the peaceful demonstrators. The reason why the soldiers were at liberty to shoot the demonstrators was because the Tsar was not present at the mass demonstration because after he was informed about the potential revolution the Tsar quickly decided to leave St Petersburg with his family to avoid trouble 15 miles away in Tsarkoe Selo.
Lastly, Russia's backward society is one of the main reasons Nicholas II survived after 1905. There were three main groups that opposed the Tsar up until 1905. The Social Democratic Labour Party (SDLP) was a Marxist political party for the industrial workers in Russia. They disliked the Tsar the most, and wanted to wrest control from him and have Russia become the first communist state in the world. However, there was a dispute on how the party should be run.
Additionally there were developments that occurred without war, which illustrates that involvement in war was not the only cause for change. Therefore war was an important catalyst and factor to significant changes but was not the sole cause of change. The war that caused most change was Word War One due to its role in the February revolution in 1917 and the fall of the provisional government in the October revolution. The defeats of the war dwindled support from liberals and Octobrists for the Tsarist regime, which was further worsened by criticism from organisations including the Central War Industries committee and the union of Zemstva. This formed support and reason for the Progressive Bloc.
As well as this, the conservatism may have caused a ‘domino effect’ of sorts, which in turn, could have led to the foundations of all of the other causes that led up to emancipation. These other causes are social, political, and economical factors that would have led up to the emancipation of the Serfs. It is interesting to note, however, that had the Tsar taken a more liberal look on his rule, the Emancipation may never have taken place. Firstly, there are a few political causes for the emancipation, such as the bankruptcy of the Nobles in 1860. This was due to the inefficiency of Serfdom, and by this time, roughly 60% of Serfs had been mortgaged to the government.
During the revolution, members of the imperial parliament gained control of the country.The army leadership felt they did not have the means to suppress the revolution and Tsar Nicholas II of Russia. It is argued that the social and economic factors were the most important catalyst and the main cause of the revolution. Others may argue that the military factors were the downfall and breaking point of the country. Although the military factors were important and did play a huge role, the social and economic factors were perhaps the more important reason. The military issues perhaps would not have escalated the way they did if it was not for existing social and economic problems at home.