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.
He soon became her confidant and personal adviser, and also convinced her to fill some governmental offices with his own handpicked candidates. Many of whom had loyalty to him and not to the Tsar What evidence is there for the total lack of support for the tsar in the period of 1916-1917? Despite miltarys successes in 1916, the Russian war effort is still characterised by shortages, poor command, death and desertion. Away from the front, the conflict causes starvation, inflation and a torrent of refugees. Both soldiers and civilians blame the defeats in the war and the growing crises on the home front on Tsar.
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.
The lack of unity opposition possessed was a key factor in its failure throughout the period. Division in opinion and ideology were consistent problems for opposition, which only fully united in the February revolution. Even then there were still divisions in opinion, however there was one common cause to unite behind. Other attributing factors such as heavy repression by rulers, well timed reforms and the continuing use of military force ultimately meant that opposition to Russian Governments was rarely successful in the 1855-1964. The peasantry were consistent opponents of Russian Government throughout the period, yet were rarely successful in doing so.
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. As a result, they would more than likely have won the elections, leaving the Bolsheviks with very little power, and an inability to revolt because of the new, more popular government. Because Lenin pushed for the Revolution, and saw it through, the Bolsheviks’ hold on power grew from nothing to full power, making Lenin responsible for their growing hold on power. Once the Bolsheviks
‘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.
This would lead to the army losing their faith in the Tsar which was extremely vital, for as long as the army remained loyal to the him, they were able to put down any threat of revolution however, the poor conditions eventually led to them refusing to fire upon rioters. For these reasons, the First World War contributed majorly to the downfall of Imperial Russia. After his downfall, the War became increasingly unpopular. Popular demands for peace were growing intense, especially within the army. The Provisional Government attempted to regain the support of both the Russian
There were a lot of different factors in 1917 which were not there in 1905 some of these factors strongly suggest why Tsarism was abolished in 1917 but not the years before. Some of the events that occurred where World War One which had a catastrophic impact on Russia at the time, the lack of Faith in the Tsar as he had lost one war before and was losing another, the lack of faith in reforms such as the October Manifesto as that was revoked after only a few years and the lack of military conduct as the Cossacks the Tsars most loyal and ruthless troops left him as they wanted change like everybody else. World War One was defiantly one of the main factors that caused the fall of the Tsar as it truly showed to everyone that he was a terrible Country leader as people were dying in the city’s, because they had no food, fuel in 1905 life never got that tough for the people as they had enough to survive but as all the transport links where being used for moving the military so food was left on the docks to rot, as the people in the city’s had no food people started to start Bread riots to try to get the Tsars attention as they really had no food and it was there last resort. Furthermore people had no clean Living and working conditions a lot worse than before. These Factors started to turn everyone against the Tsar as they could see how terrible he really was and how much he wasn’t helping the country or its people which finally lead the end of the Tsar.
Ali Adenwala 12J Due: 5/1/15 Why did the Bolsheviks succeed in 1917 whilst other political parties failed to gain power? [2nd Draft] The Bolshevik’s seizure of power was due, significantly, to the external environment of deterioration festering around them at the time, the most incremental and significant being the failure of other political parties to act and distance themselves from the Provisional Government. This directly heightened Lenin’s role in the revolution, allowing him to exploit these weaknesses, with the help of Trotsky, whom he appropriated successfully to achieve the parties main end: a socialist, Bolshevik government, Sovnarkom. Lenin placed Trotsky as the leader of the Petrograd Soviet’s Military Revolutionary Committee (MRC) on September 25th 1917, to carry out a planned uprising, where Trotsky, between October 24th and 25th, ordered the Bolshevik Red Guards to seize key positions in Petrograd. This led to the taking over of railway stations, and post and telegraph offices, meaning that the PG was left totally defenseless, allowing the Bolsheviks to seize control.
Causes of the Russian Revolution, Feb 1917 With a complex dynamic such as that of 1917 Russia there cannot be one single cause, we must examine whether it was the long term, medium term or short term causes that was the biggest catalyst in causing the revolution. The Tsarist Autocratic system had failed to industrialize Russia and prevented it from becoming a major European power. In 1905 the Russian people were not happy with every aspect of their life, which caused social unrest leading to a year of “revolution”. The war was not going well for Russia and with the Tsar in charge of the army, leaving the Tsarina to rule at home matters were only made worse. The War also had massive social and economic impacts on Russia that resulted in a strike that ended with a revolution.