Blaming the Tsar for the Decline and Fall of the Romanov Dynasty

617 Words3 Pages
1. Too what extent was Tsar Nicholas to blame for the decline and downfall of the Romanov Dynasty? Tsar Nicholas II was to a large extent to blame for the decline and downfall of the Romanov Dynasty. Nicholas was blind to the political, economic and social issues of the land he was ruling over. It could be seen through Nicholas’s actions that he wasn’t born to be an autocratic ruler of Russia, being reluctant to take on the position. He had a soft upholding and not a strong resilience to other peoples thoughts, being influenced by those who knew they could push him. Nicholas wanted to follow his fathers footsteps of being a great ruler, being a strong decisive man, but as you will see it isn’t who he turned out to be. With the outbreak of WW1 Nicholas mismanages the social, economic and political problems leading to major discontent of the Russian people. Tsar Nicholas didn’t try to help the aching people of Russia. The economic downfall that he got stuck in the middle of went downhill when he came into the power of Russia. The industrialization of Europe meant that the Russian economy was left behind, leading to decreased working conditions and a dysfunctional society. Russia In the early 20th Century had 80% of the people as peasants. So the social groups were formed by what class they were in. Resulting in different political parties being formed. From WW1 Nicholas lost many supporters. Because he left the homefront there was very poor organization for the women and children back home. The prices had risen so much that transport was limited, so not much food could reach Petrograd before it was rotting. The Russians were furious losing the support for their leader. Nicholas was appointed after his father died to be the autocratic ruler of Russia. Nicholas by this time of the late 19th Century when he came into power should’ve realized that he
Open Document