Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities in autocratic rule between tsars and communists
Tsarism in Russia
Fall of tsarism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Fall of Tsarism in Russia
Some sources suggest that autocracy is outdated and the reason for the
collapse of Tsarist Russia. However, other sources suggest that
without the complications of war, Russia may have prospered. Tolstoy
and Kokovstov both have conflicting views. Tolstoy the pessimist,
believed that autocracy was an outdated form of government not suited
to 20th Century Russia. However Kokovstov the optimist thought that
Russia would have prospered if it wasn't for the Great War.
Source C uses an extract taken from Tolstoy's letter to Tsar Nicholas
II, three years before the revolution of 1905.
There was a significant growth in the army of secret police, which
indicates that the Tsar is not strong enough and needs a personal army
to enforce his authority. This is proved in events such as Bloody
Sunday whereby police open fire on innocent workers in a peaceful
protest for requesting descent pay and conditions. Russia had now
become a police state. As people are attacked for open thought and
speech, this furthermore proves Tolstoy's argument, "autocracy is
outdated".
"The policy of censorship continued to produce meaningless bans"
indicates that the government was out of touch with the Russian
citizens. This situation could be compared with Nazi Germany because
Russia appears to be a police state. Religious persecution was at its
worst, which shows that the Tsar was very dependant on Orthodox
Christians because they believed he was ordained by God. The situation
was getting worse because the government's policy of increasing taxes
had failed and now peasan...
... middle of paper ...
...hlighted the outdated form of government in Russia.
However Kokovstov is not completely correct as it may have been that
without war, Tsarism in Russia may have still collapsed. Tolstoy's
idea appears to contribute more as it is clear that autocracy was out
of date. The Tsar tried to handle too much responsibility all on his
own. The Russian people were extremely dissatisfied with Tsarism. Tsar
Nicholas II was gradually losing everything from the people of Russia
to his own personal army. The effects of war caused the necessary
levels of resentment to topple the Tsar therefore had Tsarism not been
out of date, maybe the war would have not been such a problem.
I will side with L. Tolstoy as all of my conclusions lead me to
believe that Tsarism was definitely out of date and for this reason a
revolution was inevitable.
...oved to be singularly influential and daunting. This is, perhaps, the greatest obstacles to achieving true democracy in Russia—the authoritarian and repressive traditions that refuse to die out with the passage of time.
For centuries, autocratic and repressive tsarist regimes ruled the country and population under sever economic and social conditions; consequently, during the late 19th century and early 20th century, various movements were staging demonstrations to overthrow the oppressive government. Poor involvement in WWI also added to the rising discontent against Nicholas as Russian armies suffered terrible casualties and defeats because of a lack of food and equipment; in addition, the country was industrially backward compared to countries such as Britain, France, Germany, and the USA. It had failed to modernize, this was to do with the tsars lack of effort for reforms. The country was undergoing tremendous hardships as industrial and agricultural output dropped. Famine and poor morale could be found in all aspects of Russian life. Furthermore, the tsar committed a fatal mistake when he appointed himself supreme commander of the armed forces because he was responsible for the armies constant string of defeats.
It was said that the educated people, the contact with other countries should contribute to the government policy. As said in document 1 , "By 1900 there were political parties raging from far right defenders of autocracy and russian power over all other ethnicities, to far left revolutionaries calling for the overthrow of the government." The government there was autocratic, which was when the tsar had all the power/control of the government. Another cause for the Russian Revolution was the outbreak of WW1. "Even before the war urban workers all over the Russian empire had been increasingly radical, but the war brought the government's incompentence and the people's grievances into sharper relief. The first months of the war were a disaster for Russia." It is much easier to overthrow a government than to try andcreate a new government. As said in document 2,"Chaos, conflict, uncertaunty; more violence are much more common and often led to centralized, authoritarian governments." There was celebration all over the streets after the indication that the tsar was overthrown after 300 years of a tsarist government ruling. "The problem was that, after the party, governing problems arose immediately.
The Extent to Which the First World War Contributed to the Fall of Czardom in Russia
Tsarism during the period after the 1905 revolution and the March revolution of 1917 faced a ‘wave of social discontent’ (Hobsbawm, 1995, p. 57). This was no surprise, as there was many who during that period had thought that there was a ‘straight road [to] a socialist future’ (Hobsbawm, 1995, p. 57). However many saw that there was not the means to happen in Russia at the time. Hobsbawm plants the idea of a Bourgeoisies revolution and the class struggles, combined with Karl Marx’s ideas about the impending revolutions. Centralised in Europe was the ideas of socialism and revolution. Hobsbawm reflects the ideas of the time, that they were ‘helpless’ by 1914 and by 1916 the majority followed. This was just the popular opinion of the time of the Russian public. Although he jumps between times, starting with the October revolution then jumping to the ‘overthrow(ing) of Tsarism’ (Hobsbawm, 1995, p. 57) then back to the post October revolution. This does not affect the readability of the section. It gives a well-rounded description of the period to form a good base for Part II.
The Romanov Rule in Russia The Romanovs had ruled Russia since 1613. When the last tsar of all,
Edward Dunes’ life as a revolutionary during Russia’s transition from a Tsarist state to that of a Marxist-Socialist regime, was propagated by many situational influences/factors stemming from his families relocation from Riga to Moscow. As a young boy in Riga, Dunes’ thirst for books along with a good educational elevated his potential to be a highly skilled worker. Dune’s childhood education coupled with factory life in Moscow along with a subsequent influential individual in his life with his father’s heavy labor socialist views, molded Dune into the Bolshevik revolutionary he became.
The Russian revolution of February 1917 was a momentous event in the course of Russian history. The causes of the revolution were very critical and even today historians debate on what was the primary cause of the revolution. The revolution began in Petrograd as “a workers’ revolt” in response to bread shortages. It removed Russia from the war and brought about the transformation of the Russian Empire into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, replacing Russia’s monarchy with the world’s first Communist state. The revolution opened the door for Russia to fully enter the industrial age. Before 1917, Russia was a mostly agrarian nation. The Russian working class had been for many years fed up with the ways they had to live and work and it was only a matter of time before they had to take a stand. Peasants worked many hours for low wages and no land, which caused many families to lose their lives. Some would argue that World War I led to the intense downfall of Russia, while others believe that the main cause was the peasant unrest because of harsh living conditions. Although World War I cost Russia many resources and much land, the primary cause of the Russian Revolution was the peasant unrest due to living conditions because even before the war began in Russia there were outbreaks from peasants due to the lack of food and land that were only going to get worse with time.
Nicholas 2's firm and obstinant belief of his commitment to autocracy can be clearly seen in a letter of reply he sent to a liberal zemstvo head before his coronation. "I shall maintain the principal of autocracy just as firmly and unflinchingly as it was preserved by my unforgettable dead father (Alexandra 3)"(Nicholas & Alexandra, Robert K. Massie). His ultra-conservative political outlook was influenced greatly when a child Tsar Nicholas was educated by the reactionary tutor Konstantin Pobenonstev, enemy of all reform. If there were any doubts about Nicholas' belief in autocracy they would have been put to rest. Pobenonstev was once called "The Highest Priest of Social Stagnation". He once declared, "Among the falsest of political principles is the principle of sovereignty of the people".
The Similarities of Tsarist and Communist Rule in Russia Both forms of government did depend on high degree of central control. However, some Tsars and Stalin exerted more central controls than others. Stalin’s stronger use of central control created differences between the two forms of government. The Tsars used different levels of central control.
The resignation of Nicholas II March 1917, in union with the organization of a temporary government in Russia built on western values of constitutional moderation, and the capture of control by the Bolsheviks in October is the political crucial opinions of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The actions of that historic year must also be viewed more broadly, however: as aburst of social strains associated with quick development; as a disaster of political modernization, in relations of the tensions sited on old-fashioned traditions by the burdens of Westernization; and as a social disruption in the widest sense, concerning a massive, unprompted expropriation of upper class land by fuming peasants, the devastation of outmoded social patterns and morals, and the scuffle for a new, democratic society.
Rule of Lenin vs the Tsar The beginning of the 20th century saw a great change in the political structure of the Russia. A country once led under an autocracy leadership. was suddenly changed into a communist state overnight. Dictatorship and communism are at separate ends of the political spectrum. This study so clearly shows both involve the oppression of society and a strict regime in which people are unable to voice their opinions.
out of touch with his people. 'He heard of the blood and tears of the
There were many events that lead up to the Bolshevik Revolution. First off, in 1848, Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels published a thought-provoking book. The Communist Manifesto expressed their support of a world in which there was no difference in class. A world in which the workers and commoners ran the show and there was no high and supreme ruler. Many intellectual Russians began to become aware of this pamphlet as well as the advanced state of the world compared to Russia. Other countries were going through an industrial revolution, while the Czars had made it clear that no industrial surge was about to happen in Russia. The popularity of the Czars further went down hill as Nicolas II’s poor military and political decisions caused mass losses in World War I. Eventually, the citizens could take no more and began a riot in St. Petersburg that led to the first Russian Revolution of 1917.
Russia had been defeated in all except the war with Turkey and its government and economy had the scars to prove it. A severe lack of food and poor living conditions amongst the peasant population led firstly to strikes and quickly escalated to violent riots. Tsar Nicholas II ruled Russia with an iron hand while much of Europe was moving away from the monarchical system of rule. All lands were owned by the Tsar’s family and Nobel land lords, while the factories and industrial complexes were owned by the capitalists’. There were no unions or labour laws and the justice system had made almost all other laws in favour of the ruling elite.