Why Was the Pg so Short-Lived Plan

593 Words3 Pages
Why was the PG so short-lived? * After Feb revolution, the autocratic system had died when on March 2nd Nicholas II was forced to abdicate. * Resulted in Dual Authority. * Provisional Government - leader was Kerensky & Petrograd Soviet * Didn’t have any experience. * Even from the start it was clear that the Provisional Govermenet weren’t going to hold the authority. * Order Number One * Didn’t help that they weren’t elected body meaning they had no legitimate authority. – didn’t represent the people. * Did nothing to try and help end power from the soviets – sign already that they were weak and useless. However this was not the only problem that showed why they were so short-lived. * Left behind with The problems that the Tsar had faced were still very prominent. * War – continued to fight for loan and duty. * People of Russia wanted to get out war – what the Bolsheviks were offering, whereas Kerensky saw it as defensive war. * Lost terriorty in Poland & Western Russia – PG were blamed for losses just like the Tsar was when took charge. * War made finical problems – Inflation still a problem and food shortages were high. * Russia expected these things to be stored out – PG short-lived because they were full of empty promises. Promised land reform to the peasants ( made up a large amount of the population , Bolshevik priority was to keep them on their side) no action was taken * Couldn’t guarantee food supplies as because soviet controlled the railways. * Political reform also promised political reform in an attempt to stop the revolutionaries but no action was taken. * No control or loyalty of army which they really needed. Similar pattern to the Tsar, when the army turned against him , no control. * However they did reduce working hours to 8 hours , abolish the Orkhrana
Open Document