During Alexander III rule from 1881-1894 he had made significant changes in Russia like the counter reform, which was literally undoing his fathers Great reforms, which he thought, had weakened Tsarism and left it insecure. In 1881 Alexander III first step as Tsar was throw out Loris-Melikov Plan, which indicated establishment of two new government commissions that were to have an advisory role in relation to proposed new laws. Alexander III saw this as a threat to autocracy in Russia and so he completely rejected this approved plan by his father. Further on in late 1881 Temporary Regulations were introduced, which gave the government special powers to prohibit gathering of more than 12 people, prosecute any individual from political crimes, introduction of Okhrana the secret Police, and the setup of special courts outside the legal system. Then In 1889 the zamstva magistrates were replaced with land captains how were recruited from the nobles and given powers to direct and control peasant affairs in their areas.
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.
Lenin, like the Tsars, was incredibly effective at appeasing the people politically while giving them very little or any political influence or representation. The Tsars used the Duma, Nicholas 2nd, and the Zemstva, Alexander 2nd, to ‘give’ the people the people what they desired politically. However these organisations were in reality still controlled by the Tsar and were very restricted in their abilities to create any change. Lenin used an election, the façade of Soviet power and a pyramidal structure of Government to, like the Tsars, give an illusion of democracy. Lenin like the Tsars had absolute power in Russia to the extent that he could ignore advice from his party and single handily dictate changes.
Conscripted peasants had begun to lose interest, and their welfare was harmed with the conscription of animals, meaning beasts of burden and the like were deposed to military use. Most of the officers had bought their positions for reasons of prestige and glory, meaning that they were inexperienced and not fit to lead armies into war. He, despite the warnings of his advisors, joined the front ranks. Nicholas believed he was doing the right thing, rather than realizing the incompetence of his own aggressive nationalism. This led to Russia being in the control of the German Alexandria, who was hated by the Russian people because of her inability to speak Russian, her reliance on Grigory Rasputin, a mystic who claimed to heal her son, her antisocial, depressed attitude and a general political incompetence to rival Nicholas’s.
When King Henry was crowned the supreme head of the Church of England, Moore refused to recognize his authority. He was executed in 1535. The English people had little sympathy for the situation and the Reformation continued. The English people began to have a radical view and King Henry took control over the Erasmian Humanists. [15] [16] King Henry VIII also reformed the clergy in particular the bishops’ position.
Their argument to autocracy was based on the view that it was a practical necessity due to the Empire being so vast and diverse. They did not take advice from an elected parliament and instead, the country was run by the Committee of Ministers (established in 1861) whose membership consisted of around 10 to 13 administrators. The Tsar had the overall power to both appoint and dismiss ministers, which therefore supports the view that repression was a consistent occurrence, as democracy for the people was never allowed. This autocratic style of government was exchanged between rulers in 1917 when the Bolsheviks seized power in the October Revolution, with Vladimir Lenin as their figurehead. The Commissars similarly demonstrated absolute rule during their reigns as Heads of State.
Explain how Tsar Nicholas II was able to maintain his autocracy; what elements of Russian society opposed this? As with all autocrats with absolute power over their country, Tsar Nicholas II had no intention of sharing his power with anyone and so developed various methods to keep his power as well as prevent the people from starting any kind of rebellion and overthrowing him. Although many were used the ones that Nicholas used more than the rest were the Okrana, beaurocracy, the Cossacks and the church. The Okrana were a group that Tsar Nicholas used to make sure that no one was speaking up against him or giving other people ideas about overthrowing him. The Okrana were a secret police force under the direct control of the Tsar.
How far do you think Russia had moved in the direction of a parliamentary system of government by 1914? A parliamentary system of government is where there is a government in which members of the cabinet are appointed from elected members of an assembly, and in order to remain in power, must hold the vote of the majority. Right from 1613, Russia had been an autocracy ruled by Tsars. The tsar had no limits on his power and one of the Tsars strongest supporters was the official State Church, the Russian Orthodox Church. The Tsar had advisers, but he was not bound to listen to their advice, and laws were made by imperial decree.
The other people were middle class people, who were more educated and wealthier than the worker class, but still minor against the tsar. Nicholas II wasn’t a good ruler: he avoided important decisions, neglected the importance of the policy and suppressed any resistance. He tried to crush any fears of a revolution by entering a war and consequently uniting his country, but his war tactics weren’t glorious. Russia’s people, the ones who accepted the life for many years, started to stir up, for example workers were striking, but their actions were brutally wiped out. As long as the tsar had his army he was unconquerable.
How far were the policies of Stolypin Successful? Stolypin’s policies were unsuccessful, by 1909; the reform programme advocated by Stolypin had run into the sands. Most of his legislative proposals never emerged from the Duma and vigorous opposition to the whole concept of reform was being voiced from the Right. Nicholas II was increasingly persuaded that it was reform - not revolution - that was threatening the continuance of his regime. Stolypin himself began to adopt nationalist policies, aimed at asserting the rights of Russians inside the multinational empire.