This ultimately marked the end of Nicholas’ unlimited power as an autocratic ruler and the beginning of a constitutional monarchy. The Manifesto would grant fundamental civil liberties to the people, and create a legislative body known as the Duma through which all laws must be approved by in order to be operative. However, due to the fact that the Duma was merely a consultative body, the people were not satisfied with the law. The Duma’s ultimately represented the mouthpiece of the Tsar’s opposition and the voice of the Russian people. The outbreak of World War One in 1914 also spelt disaster for the Tsar upon his decision to take direct command of the Russian army, which meant that every military failure would now be associated with him personally and contributed to the growing sense of dissent.
One major aspect that contributed to the Tsarist governments path towards the March Revolution is the decisions that we made by Tsar Nicholas II during WWI. The decisions that Tsar Nicholas II made during WWI made a huge impact towards the March Revolution. His distance as a leader is one trait that came to the surface during this time and heavily contributed to his downfall. The Tsar would avoid any aspect of political landscape that he didn’t like or that he found offensively modern. Just a few examples of things he would avoid are the left, public opinion, industry, the press and unions.
However after Karakazov attempts to assassinate the Tsar in 1866, he becomes much more autocratic, revealing that he had no intention of significantly developing politics, his use of the Zemstvas were in fact to help sustain autocracy, through making local administration more efficient. It can be suggested from this that Alexander II had put the Zemstva Act in place to appease the nobles angered by the Emancipation Act. Alexander III was much more of a successful autocrat. His reactionary attitude led to the reversal of many of his father’s liberal reforms, and was in some cases angered by them. Alexander III re-implements Tsarist form, through the use of repression and terror.
Nicholas II was faced with various issues during his reign from 1894-1917. His ineffectual personality was partly to blame for his ineffectual ruling. He was not able to listen to the needs of his public, and so violent uprisings such as Bloody Sunday occurred. His response was to initiate the October Manifest and the instigation of the Russian Duma, but neither of these pleased the public and so the February revolution of 1917 occurred, which ultimately created the fall of Tsar Nicholas II. Nicholas II attempted to rule Russia as an autocrat as he believed that autocracy was the only was to save Russia from anarchy.
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.
A bewildered Nicholas beseeched his brother-in-law Grand Duke Alexander, "What am I going to do? What is going to happen to me, to all of Russia? I am not prepared to be a Tsar, I have never wanted to become one, and I know nothing of the business of ruling." Though his hesitance about ruling, Nicholas II was a strong believer in the autocratic power of the Tsar and opposed democratic reforms. When Nicholas took the throne, he had some experience in Government under his belt, but due to his father's untimely death he had not fully been elevated into the higher tiers of the Russian Government.
Was the Tsar’s personal inadequacy that led to the revolution of Feb/March 1917? Essentially, Tsar Nicholas II was a lacking ruler, he was unwilling to get rid of autocracy which then resulted to no reforms in government which was often corrupt mainly due to the fact that it was an autocracy. This led to the demands of the people being ignored causing there to be universal discontent all over the land of Russia, logically Nicholas’s inadequacy as a Tsar would be a reasonable consideration for what led to the 1917 revolution, however there were other reason not just Nicholas lacking strength in leadership which resulted to the revolution. For example, there had been lingering discontent growing especially with the industrial workers and peasants beforehand concerning their conditions of work. This led to an increase in strikes.
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
Stalin was more popular because of Trotsky’s “political paralysis” he couldn’t be a good public speaker. This links to my next point because they both result in Stalin’s getting more power. Stalin made an alliance with Zinoviev and Kamenev to form the triumvirate. The triumvirate’s main aim was to defeat Trotsky. Trotsky advocated a permanent revolution with Stalin didn’t want.
There were two views on the Tsarism regime, the Liberal theory where they believed things were getting better and the regime could have survived and the Marxist theory where they believed the Tsarist regime was outdated and could no longer work and the masses would rise up. Although these two views were debated amongst the people of Russia it was not what made the revolution inevitable, different factors such as the war, food shortages, working conditions, etc.... are what mad the revolution inevitable as they showed the Tsar’s weaknesses and made him vulnerable. The main reasons why it was inevitable that Russia would face a revolution in 1917 was the War. This was one of the main reasons as the Tsar was over ambitious once he got to the Front, he thought they could win the war which meant pro-longing the suffering back in Russia, as the people thought the war was dragging on and that they were unlikely to win, therefore even more soldiers would die leaving the women and children without husbands, fathers or brothers. This made the people more frustrated with the Tsar as 10 million soldiers had already died, therefore they did not want the suffering to go on longer if they were not going to win.