How far were divisions among Russia’s opponents responsible for the survival of the Tsarist in the years of 1881-1905? In 1883 Emancipation of the Labour movement was established by Plekhanov. At this moment in time there wasn’t a very large group of the Bourgeoisie. Meaning it was an incredibly small group with less than 400 members. They faced problems such as Industrialisation, meaning that it was increasingly difficult to find members as there weren’t enough workers.
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. In 1917 people started to lose faith in terms of reforms as the October Manifesto set up by Witte to help people and try to get the country back on track was removed after only a few years of it being in place not long enough for it to have an impact on Russian life. As in 1905 there had never been any real big reforms like on the October manifesto so people where excited as they thought something new and good would be
The Successes and Failures of Tsar Nicholas II between 1894 and 1917 – NOTES Nicholas II was the last Tsar of Russia, and perhaps the most incompetent of them. Most of this incompetance stemmed from his failiure to adapt to the rapidly changing and hostile conditions in Russia. Like his father he was tutored by Konstantin pobedonostev (a firm believer in autocracy), whose teachings developed in Nicholas a strong autocratic mentality, one of the reasons for his downfall. Although Nicholas did come up with a few limited reforms, they were mostly superficial in nature. Therefore it is safe to say that Nicholas ll had greater number of failures than successes during his reign.
Some peasants left to work in the cities as the Tsar wanted Russia to be an industrial power, however the living conditions there hardly improved, which matched their dreadful working conditions. This poor treatment is what led to the 1917 strikes that helped force the Tsar to abdicate from the throne. This was an important factor in bringing down the Tsar because with so many people opposing him (over the years, because of food shortages and war failures, they were supported by women and army members, and the number of workers on strike rose to 250 000), he had no choice but to give up. However, I believe there is more causes behind this so I wouldn’t label it the most important factor of the Tsar’s abdication. Russia’s poor performance in WW1 played a very significant role in bringing down the Tsar too.
There were many factors in the survival of Tsarist rule from 1881 – 1905. The divisions among it's opponents played a part, as it meant that Tsarist opposition had no common goals, and couldn't work together to achieve it. The October Manifesto is another factor, it split up Nicholas' opposition even further by dividing the Liberals into two groups. Pobedonostsev & his repressive policies played a large part in the Survival of Tsarist autocracy, as he was able to keep the people down, not giving them enough ground to start a successful revolution. Lastly, Russia's backward society is one of the main reasons Nicholas II survived after 1905.
In 1905, Russia was still an autocracy, with the Tsar possessing complete political power, unlike other countries in Europe, Russia did not have a national elected parliament therefore people were unable to have a say in how their country was run. This led to the population becoming impatient, as their portrayed ‘father’ would not take on board their problems; this resulted in more people demonstrating for more political freedom and power. More political parties emerged by 1900s all with the common belief of opposing the Tsarist autocracy; there was a high demand for political reform, and the Liberal political group wanted the Tsar to share political power with a parliament elected by the more wealthy members of the population. Even more extreme political opposition surfaced, in 1901, the Social Revolutionaries was founded, and they wanted to give political power to the peasants. The Social Revolutionaries were willing to use violence in order to achieve their goals; they were responsible for over two thousand assassinations, which included the Tsar’s uncle, Grand Duke Sergei.
Firstly the tsar did not help the peasants personally, but instead leave the burden to the prime ministers when they cannot rule like a democracy today. Also it leads to the growing economic problem which is a major factor in why the Romanov’s failed. The war came, the economy was shattered, and it could not last for 4 years of heavy warfare. A war in which it would not be over by Christmas as many wanted. But it wasn’t the prime ministers sole fault the agriculture failed, Russia did have four Dumas during this time and although their power was restricted, the tsar did come close to fall in power in 1905
Although there were a few cases of the Tsar redistributing land to the peasants Riasanovsky claims that the “Fundamental inequality and widespread destitution could not be remedied by a re-division of the peasants inadequate land” This further brings the idea of Marxism into Russia which is discussed later. Although we see a positive action from the Tsar in relation to the inequality of the Russian people it did little to change or help the Russian society. This further displays that Nicholas had little knowledge of how to run a country
How far was the Russo Japanese War responsible for the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution? The Russo Japanese war of 1904 was a factor contributing to the outbreak of the 1905 revolution, however it is not completely true to say that it was entirely responsible. In Russia at this time and before, there was a lot of tension. The population of Russia were very unhappy with a number of things, for example: no land, pollution, no money etc. This caused a lot of distress amongst Russia’s population as well as depression.
Good morning. Today, the resulting conflict between Russian and Japanese imperialism, occurring at the turn of the twentieth century will be discussed. This brief war was the result of direct territorial acquisition from both parties and the increasingly tense political and economic affairs of that decade. Whilst the Russo-Japanese war was fought predominantly in North-East China and the surrounding oceans, the outcome not only affected the diplomatic relations between Russia and Japan, but had further direct influence on nations which were indirectly involved. The Russo-Japanese war was declared on the 8th of February 1904 in the method of a formal letter from Japan, and continued until the 5th of September 1905, with Russia’s defeat.