All Russian governments in this period faced strong opposition to their regime with the period as a whole punctuated by riots, disturbances and revolutions. Political change was expected in Russia during this period, particularly during the Tsarist regime where the growth of the revolutionary intelligentsia, ironically an effect of the Great Reforms, led many to question the need for a Tsar or a royal family at all. 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 they assassinated their Tsar, it is very likely this did not actually lead to their desired outcome, it being greater political freedom/democracy. Many historians have said Alexander II was considering the formation of a parliament in Russia.
Trotsky described war as the ‘locomotive of history’. How far can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855-1964 was caused only by involvement in wars? During this period the biggest change that happened was the move from Tsarist autocracy to communist dictatorship as well as the short lived provisional government, which was a form of democracy. Furthermore there were changes to economic policy, which had a great impact on society. The wars that occurred did bring change but were not the only causes of change.
In 1905, Russia was still an autocracy, with the Tsar possessing complete political power, unlike other countries in Europe, Russia did not have a national elected parliament therefore people were unable to have a say in how their country was run. This led to the population becoming impatient, as their portrayed ‘father’ would not take on board their problems; this resulted in more people demonstrating for more political freedom and power. More political parties emerged by 1900s all with the common belief of opposing the Tsarist autocracy; there was a high demand for political reform, and the Liberal political group wanted the Tsar to share political power with a parliament elected by the more wealthy members of the population. Even more extreme political opposition surfaced, in 1901, the Social Revolutionaries was founded, and they wanted to give political power to the peasants. The Social Revolutionaries were willing to use violence in order to achieve their goals; they were responsible for over two thousand assassinations, which included the Tsar’s uncle, Grand Duke Sergei.
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.
On the other hand, it can be argued that Trotsky’s leadership of the Red Army during the Civil War was just as, or even more important in the Bolsheviks’ seizure of power, as was the image of the Bolsheviks as being patriotic heroes fighting against Tsarist leaders and foreign invaders. Obviously, it was the October Revolution which brought the Bolshevik Party into power, giving them control of Russia. It can therefore be said that, had this not occurred, then it is incredibly unlikely that the Bolsheviks would ever have come into power. The Revolution was, of course, Lenin’s major goal (though in the end it was organised by Trotsky) for his party, and it was through his leadership and staunch dedication to the fall of the Provisional Government that the Bolsheviks eventually seized power in October 1917. Had it not been for Lenin, the Bolsheviks would never have taken power in the first place, as free elections were to be held in November 1917, with the Social Revolutionaries (SRs) being the most popular at the time.
Finally the failures of the Provisional Government made them vulnerable which coincidentally worked to advantage the Bolsheviks. Personally, I believe that the vulnerable position of the Provisional Government, timing of the governments mistakes, discontent of the soldiers as well as the workers and the occasional guidance from other Bolshevik leaders, was exploited by Lenin, alongside his popular policies and leadership skills he catalyzed the revolution that was inevitable, planning it in such a way that it would benefit long term and not short-term as it had done in 1905 and February 1917. In disagreement, the failures of the provisional government to make the correct decisions led to the Bolsheviks’ success because the Bolsheviks were efficient in using this time to take control of the vulnerability of the Provisional Government which had caused this upon itself. The first mistake was allowing Lenin return from Germany in April as a part of democracy terms, since Lenin, despite being
Tsar Nicholas II wasn’t much of a good ruler for Russia; he ignored the fact that Russia wasn’t doing so good and overlooked the industrialization and nationalism that was occurring throughout Russia. Nicholas II disregarded the troubles the Russians were facing and seemed to only care about himself and him staying in power. This caused people to revolt as they needed a good strong leader to help Russia survive. The main leader who started China’s revolution was Sun Yat-sen who believed China should adopt a democratic government if it were to survive. The revolutions led by him eventually led to the fall of the Qing Dynasty in China.
The invasion of the Ruhr and resultant hyperinflation also had a hugely detriment effect. Finally, the destruction of the Depression in 1929 dealt a huge blow. It s clearly evident that, while it had a substantial impact on the Weimar Republic to 1929, a string of separate factors were also responsible for it’s issues. Before the Treaty of Versailles was even signed, Germany’s fledgling republic experienced many problems. This proves that, while the treaty had a significant impact on the Weimar Republic, it was in no way the sole cause of its issues.
Even though the ordinary Russian citizen initially saw little difference between Nicholas II and the new Provisional Government, the authoritarian regime of the Tsar had not simply been exchanged for another in the short term. However in the long term Lenin's Bolsheviks had seized power in the October Revolution. This was a significant turning point as the totalitarian Government of the Communist party were little different to the autocratic regime of the Tsar to some extent, especially under Stalin. His version of communism differed from that of Lenin before him which resulted in Stalin effectively being a 'red Tsar', devoted to his vision of Russia no matter what the cost
During this revolution, Lenin didn’t play any important role, however, just as well as the 1905 Revolution, he was using this experiences to make something more carefully planned. In the October Revolution, Vladimir Lenin wrote and announced what is known as the April Thesis, in which he attacked Bolsheviks for supporting the Provisional Government. Lenin accused those Bolsheviks who were still supporting the Provisional Government of betraying socialism and suggested that they should leave the party. Some people took Lenin`s advice, arguing that any attempt at revolution was certainly going to fail and would lead to another repressive, authoritarian Russian government. Because of his April Theses, the October Revolution and the July Days would have never sparked up.