To regain the support from people, he needed to carry out the reforms in the October Manifesto. His improvements included different aspects, such as political, social and economic approaches. However these were expedients rather than real reforms. He also appointed Peter Stolypin as the prime minister to stabilize the country. Nicholas II had tried his best to regain people’s support and stop the revolution tide through the reforms after the 1905 Revolution.
The October revolution of 1917 in effect, led to the Russian Civil war which was the exact opposite of what the Bolsheviks wanted and this predominantly moved on to Lenin’s death and the power struggle. It is for these reasons that the October Revolution of 1917 was a very significant event in changing the course of Russian history from 1855 to 1964 because without this event, the Bolsheviks would never have seized power and thus the following events would have been very unlikely to happen. However, the October revolution of 1917 was not the most significant event. There were many other events which need to be taken
On the other hand, it can be argued that Trotsky’s leadership of the Red Army during the Civil War was just as, or even more important in the Bolsheviks’ seizure of power, as was the image of the Bolsheviks as being patriotic heroes fighting against Tsarist leaders and foreign invaders. Obviously, it was the October Revolution which brought the Bolshevik Party into power, giving them control of Russia. It can therefore be said that, had this not occurred, then it is incredibly unlikely that the Bolsheviks would ever have come into power. The Revolution was, of course, Lenin’s major goal (though in the end it was organised by Trotsky) for his party, and it was through his leadership and staunch dedication to the fall of the Provisional Government that the Bolsheviks eventually seized power in October 1917. 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.
How far do you agree that Trotsky’s leadership of the red army was responsible for the survival of the Bolshevik government? In October 1917 the Bolshevik’s took control of Russia after staging a revolution. However they faced many dangers/threats while in power from the years 1917-1924 such as a civil war and the economic crisis it caused. The leadership of the red army by Trotsky is a very important reason that the Bolsheviks got into power as his red army implanted the revolution but also to the survival of the Bolsheviks as the red army overcame the Bolsheviks biggest threat of the civil war. However there are other reason which just as or more important than Trotsky’s leadership such as the ideas and sacrifices made by Lenin during the year’s 1917-1924 such as signing the harsh treaty of Brest-Litovsk and enforcing the New Economic Policy or NEP, to create economic sacrifices rather than political ones which allowed the Bolsheviks to remain in power.
A political factor that caused the Russian Revolution was absolutism. As stated in Document 2, absolutism caused strikes, illegal proclamations, underground circles, etc. Document 4 shows the numerous strikes that took place before the Russian Revolution, due to the Bolsheviks’ point of view toward absolutism. Document 3 was stated by a delegate at Samara who talked about absolutism. He believed that the people should own the land.
This was an economic concession that Lenin was forced to make due to the deteriorating economic conditions and the real threat of a revolt against the Bolshevik government. It was always intended as a temporary measure, and the question after Lenin’s death wasn’t whether it should continue or not, but how it should be put an end to. The debate lay between the left-wing, lead by Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev, who advocated a quick movement into rapid industrialisation, which would mean abandoning the New Economic Policy, militarising the labour forces and exploiting peasants for grain to fund the industrialisation; and the right-wing, led by Bukharin, who wanted to continue the New Economic Policy for another 20 years, which would mean peasants would grow wealthier and be encouraged to buy consumer goods, which in turn would lead to more products being made in factories and a gradual process of industrialisation. This became a passionate issue because economic policy was also at the heart of the debate of what a socialist society should look like. The growth of a rich super class led to activities such as property dealing, land speculation, gambling and prostitution, all of which conflicted greatly with the ideology of Communism.
How far do you agree that Trotsky’s leadership of red army was responsible for survival of the Bolshevik government? The Bolsheviks had some control of Russia, when tsar had been abdicated and when the provisional government was in charge for a short period. The Bolsheviks had then taking control of Russia from the Provisional Government, the Bolsheviks' next aim was to maintain their weak hold on the reins of power. But the only way Bolsheviks were to be in full power was to win the civil war in 1918 against the white army. Who were also looking to become in power.
Many historians have said Alexander II was considering the formation of a parliament in Russia. Furthermore, the assassination caused Alexander III to rule in reactionary nature in which many counter-reforms were created to limit the impact of the Great Reforms done by his father. This supports the view that the People’s Will were highly unsuccessful, even in the taking out of Alexander II. It can be said that the only example in this period of effective political opposition was the October 1917 revolution, where, unquestionably, the Bolsheviks took power and let their political vision be known. They were extremely successful in both the short term and the long term.
Trotsky described war as the ‘locomotive of history’. How far can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855-1964 was caused only by involvement in wars? During this period the biggest change that happened was the move from Tsarist autocracy to communist dictatorship as well as the short lived provisional government, which was a form of democracy. Furthermore there were changes to economic policy, which had a great impact on society. The wars that occurred did bring change but were not the only causes of change.
How accurate is it to say that Lenin’s leadership was the most important reason, for Bolsheviks success in the revolution of October/November 1917? In February 1917 no one would’ve expected the Bolsheviks to take political power by October 1917. They were less popular than parties such as the Mensheviks and the Socialist Revolutionaries. Also, some leading Bolsheviks such as Kamenev even supported the Provisional Government in February1917. This was why it was crucial for Lenin to show strong leadership which he did.