Alexander III re-implements Tsarist form, through the use of repression and terror. At the end of the Crimean War, Alexander II realised that Russia was no longer a great military power. His advisers argued that a backwards economy which is reliant on the serfs could not compete with modernized powers such as Britain and France. He also became increasingly unpopular at this time, meaning he needed to do something
The first step Stalin took towards removing the threat of Trotsky was to lie to him about the date of Lenin’s funeral. As a result, Trotsky was absent. This is important because it appeared that Trotsky wasn’t interested in being present at Lenin’s burial. It also allowed Stalin to steal on a march on Trotsky because, in Trotsky’s absence, Stalin gave a speech, in which he dedicated himself to the continuation of Lenin’s ways. This speech was important because it allowed Stalin to appear as one of the leading mourners, and also suggesting continuity between himself and Lenin.
In 1924 Lenin dies leaving the role as leader of the communist open. Lenin did not want Stalin, but Trotsky to take over his position. But as Lenin’s strokes got worse, he lost the ability to participate in the CC (Central Committee). Lenin had information about Stalin that could have been very damaging if it was released in public. Stalin had many calculated methods to achieve the power of Russia.
This essay will aim to examine each factor in turn, before coming to a solid conclusion on the main reasons for the revolution in Russia, in 1917. When Nicholas came to the throne in 1894, he - like the other Tsars before him - felt that he was only Tsar because God wanted him to be one. There were no political parties allowed, and the only other politicians working with the Tsar were the council of ministers which was made up of the Russian nobility. The same year, Tsar Nicholas married Alexandra, a granddaughter of Queen Victoria and a German princess. She was despised by the Russian people because of the way she advised her husband on government matters and because of her devotion to Rasputin who ‘cured‘ her son of haemophilia.
Nicholas II may have believed that, by taking charge, his army would be inspired and would fight with renewed vigour. Unfortunately, the Tsar knew little about the command and organisation of large military forces, and the series of defeats and humiliations continued. The organisation of the Russian army deteriorated and there were massive shortages of ammunition, equipment, and medical supplies. Nicholas II's decision to take charge meant that he was increasingly seen by the Russian people as having personal responsibility for the military disasters inflicted on Russia. Therefore it can be argued that it was not the protesters on the streets of Petrograd but the poor leadership
In the testament, Lenin flawed all of the main power contenders at the time of his death. The testament stated that Stalin had to be removed from his powerful positions, Trotsky was too self-assured and Zinoviev and Kamenev didn’t support the October incident and therefore had questionable loyalty. By criticising all the main contenders to be named successor meant that it seemed Lenin didn’t want anyone to take charge of the USSR! This links with his ego affecting why there was no obvious successor because his testament shows how he didn’t trust anyone to be able to carry on his theory in the USSR. The
Theme: Assess the view that throughout 1855-1964, Russian rulers opposed change. To assess this view it is important to consider a number of areas including the role of opposition, and backwardness and poor state of the country. Trotsky described war as a ‘locomotive of change’ and Russian involvement in war throughout the period meant that this was very much the case. Russian rulers were also to some degree reluctant reformers who were opposed to change as most changes throughout the period were forced upon them and were usually followed with restrictions, such as the Fundamental Laws reducing the impact of the Duma. This was probably due to their authoritarian ideology.
Assess the causes for the creation of the duma in 1905 During the late 19th century and the early 20th century, the nation of Russia was undergoing a period of turmoil, change, poverty and revolt. The current Tsar, Nicholas II, was a leader put in charge at the wrong time, and coupled with a few bad choices, was falling out of favour with his people. He was losing his grip on the Russian leadership and drastic change was needed to make the people happy, thus the Duma was created. The Duma was an elected parliament for Russia, with the power to make laws, and due to this Nicholas II could no longer be called an autocrat. This allowed freedom of speech in Russia, letting all males in Russia the right to vote.
The Tsar’s ability to make false promises to the people was a reason for him being able to survive the revolution of 1905 but not of 1907 as people knew by then that he was untrustworthy. Secondly, the 1905 revolution happened before the outbreak of WW1 which meant although there was a lot of discontent in Russia in 1905 there was a lot less that the people could blame the Tsar for. In 1917 the Tsar had the power to pull out of the war which was a main reason for the suffering in Russia at the time. This was because millions of men went to fight in WW1 and this meant that back at home there was little food being produced
In fact, the readiness which the oppositions accepted the government’s political and economic bribes, showed that neither of these groups were really serious about revolution. For instance, the middle classes were granted the October Manifesto after the spontaneous strikes that developed in St. Petersburg on October 1905. This reform established the political rights and set up an elected legislative assembly, or duma, with real, not merely consultative powers. On the other hand, the peasants were dissatisfied about the land issue. They believed that the land was “God’s” that no one should have the right to buy or sell the land.