The areas to investigate include political, economic, social and military reforms from the Russian government in order to see if they are ‘reluctant reformers’ or not. Socially, Alexander II introduced arguably the most radical reform in 1861 by emancipating the serfs and granting peasants freedom. This is by far the reform that affected the population most widely in the period – by granting this, peasants were allowed to own themselves in body and soul and could dictate their own lives as far as they could. Class bias was reduced and education was given more widely across Russia, regardless of social standing. This certainly fights against the view that Alexander II was reluctant in his reforms on the surface – however, once investigated, the limits of emancipation are clear.
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 was probably due to their authoritarian ideology. It can be considered a fact that for the majority of the 1855-1964 period, the Russian citizens had little if any political freedom. Despite the legalization of political parties in 1905, this was a very short lived concession as Lenin revoked this in 1920. A similar approach was taken by Alexander III in reversing the reforms of Alexander II, including a reduction in power for the Zemstva. A recurring theme throughout the period is the regime’s desire to maintain autocracy, which Lenin’s disregard for democracy in any area and opposition shows.
All three Revolutions played significant part in what came to be a significantly liberalist Europe, including Industrialisation. This essay will explain just in what way the Revolutions and Industrialisation led to the overall rise of liberal government in Europe during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The French Revolution marks the beginning of the liberal movement taking shape in Europe. Not only was the monarchy in crisis (on the verge of bankruptcy after extreme spending and France’s Involvement in the American Revolution), but the people of France were also victim of poor harvest, the worst of which were in 1775 but were still significantly bad in both 1787 and 1788 (Merriman, 2004). On top of there being a scarcity of resources, the people of France were subject to also having to pay high costs for grain, a staple food in France.
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.
History How far did the growth of internal opposition threaten the Tsarist regime in the years 1881-1904? Alexander III took over as the Tsar of Russia shortly after his father’s assassination (Alexander II) with the intention to rule Russia with brute force to assert the autocratic power back into control of the people. This was done with the use of secret police and the tightening of censorship. Nicholas II shortly took over after his father died from medical reasons. He was generally described as a smart man with great manners however lacked those qualities of a practical man.
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.
The second outcome of the revolutions was that the countries were dramatically changed, two great powers were stopped and communist leaders eventually took over in the two countries. Russia and China both shared similar goals in that they both wanted a new form of government and leadership. Russia’s ruler was Tsar Nicholas II which ruled Russia for more than three centuries. China’s ruling dynasty was the Qing Dynasty. 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.
‘How did the crisis of World War I help create a revolutionary situation in Russia?’ Although there were many other solutions that did not involve war after August 1914 to the governments of Austro-Hungary, Russia, Germany and finally, Great Britain war was the resolution that they consciously chose. Each of these countries enjoyed a heightened sense of patriotism none so much as Russia who’s hapless Tsar had seen better times as an autocratic monarch. However it did not all go to plan for Nicholas II; the war was a disaster for Russia. It caused massive inflation, plunged the country into a famine and ultimately cost the lives of nearly 5 million Russian soldiers and civilians as well as a series of military defeats, which as we learnt from the Russo-Japanese war, created conditions suited to Revolution. The demoralisation of the proud Russian peoples created dissent, and discredited the Tsar.
They didn’t get a majority government in 1910 like they did in 1906 which led them to think that social reform was the way to gain votes. Many politicians who came from modest backgrounds also wanted to “wage war” on poverty as they saw it as the scourge of modern day Britain and it was the governments job to fix