Both the storming of the Winter Palace and the execution of Tsar Nicholas II and his family ushered in the rise of Socialism in Russia. Although both Mr. Reed and Mr. Medvedev’s accounts were both from two different revolutionaries, the Bolsheviks and the Petrograd Soviets, points of view, both Reed and Medvedev had vastly different experiences. From the standpoint of each of these men, John Reed, an American who had never experienced or seen Socialism, and Pavel Medvedev, a soldier in the resistance against the Provisional Government, I believe they each had positive views on what they had experienced. Based on where Reed and Medvedev came from and what they did as an occupation would definitely affect what they saw and how they would interpret …show more content…
John Reed documented the storming of the Winter Palace, the main headquarters of the Provisional Government, and the capture of its officials. Rather than a malicious and violent siege on the Winter Complex, the Bolshevik’s entry into the complex was met rather unopposed. Because the military had also split from the government, the only opposition was the yunkers ,or imperial guard, and even they fled their posts leaving their weapons in the place they had stood before. After the Bolshevik’s entry into the palace, looting by the militia and soldiers ensued, but even that was quickly put to and end after someone shouted “Don’t take anything. This is property of the People!”(John Reed, pg. 480) I believe this would give Mr. Reed a positive view of the Bolshevik Revolutionaries, because not only did they take the palace without bloodshed but the militia stopped their looting to give the clothing and other materials that could be made useful to the people of Russia. This showed Mr. Reed that this revolution was not just for another group of people to take power but for the people of Russia to control their country and that it could be accomplished non-violently. The Bolsheviks willingness to be peaceful was again shown once they had captured the main government …show more content…
Rather than letting the the White Russian’s of the Provisional Government have a chance of extraditing the royal family and their caretakers from the Urals, the commandant of the guard ordered their execution. After Medvedev's task of retrieving all of the guns from rest of the guards, he was ordered to exit the room where the family had been brought to and keep watch on the streets and keep order if anyone asked about the shots. The execution was swift and Medvedev returned to see the final blows to the heir to the throne but not emotion was conveyed through Medvedev’s account. But being a part of the revolution, I believe he saw the execution of the the royal family to be a victory, with all heirs to the throne deceased, this opened opportunities for a new government and new ideas to form for the people of
Both monarchs had a royal background and were put in power with high expectations to continue the stability that the country possessed. Citizens aspire for all government officials to keep the peoples best interest in mind. But sadly, due to Ivan’s brutal childhood, he grew up observing and learning from the mannerisms of the corrupt elite. Ivan predominately gained power through fear and with this tactic was the first to exercise a despotism in Russia. One example of this is the story of the peasants who disturbed Ivan during one of his retreats. They came to him to complain of their governor who they believed was unjust but Ivan was so upset that they had troubled him with such a petty matter that he punished them. The men had their hands tied behind their backs, boiling hot alcohol poured on their heads and then their beards lit on fire with a candle. Apprehension and terror were Ivan’s main tools for keeping his people under control. Despite his totalitarian state of mind, Ivan believed that his decisions were still best for the country and the only way to keep it safe was by leaving it in constant fear. Although not always the most rational, the czar still made the suitable choices to keep the kingdom together. Similar to Ivan, Charles was not always under the influence of his mental disability. During his 42
The October revolution of 1917 in Russia was a turning point that defined Russia as a nation. It was one of the most dramatic events in the history of the Russia that had completely changed the lives of the people at that time. The Russlander by Sandra Birdsell describes the live of a girl who was raised on a wealthy Mennonite estate. It seemed like her parents were ignoring all the troubles in the outside world, living a happy life together. But nothing lasts forever, and their happiness ended with the start of the revolution. At that time Katya was only 16 years old. Just like many people at that time she lost her family and friends, who were killed by the Bolsheviks. The conflict with the new leaders of the country started when her father refused to pay taxes and support his country, and ended with this horrible tragedy.
Not only did the Romanov family have to go through a terrible death sentence, but they were ridiculed and belittled at almost every possible chance along the way by the Bolsheviks. They were forced to live in awful conditions, to be tormented because of vicious gossip and rumors, and to find a way to keep their faith when they had no opportunity. The Russian Imperial family had to endure all of this and more, just because of their bad luck and poor judgment.
Most popular uprisings in recent history have been characterized by a brief period of incredible potential and hope, only to collapse in failure and despair. Even the supposedly 'successful' Russian Revolution of 1917 followed this pattern. Revolutionaries threw off centuries of imperial rule and oppression in order to create a new world of freedom, peace and equality... only to end up with Stalin, purges, gulags, dekulakization - and ultimately decades of Bolshevik1 rule and oppression. Although it can sometimes be disheartening to review this long history of failure and oppression, valuable insights can be gained by investigating these past revolutions. The achievements and promise of the revolutionaries can be studied and their strengths marked. The weaknesses that led to their eventual defeat and decay must also be understood, so that the same mistakes are not made again. This article will address these themes in the context of the Russian Revolution at the Kronstadt navel base.2
Trotsky was hugely significant in the build up to and during the October Revolution. The first reason was his ability to convince many of the Social Democrats that the revolution was a real possibility, not just a theoretical concept. This is evident through much of Trotsky’s work as the leader of the Petrograd Soviet in September 1917, which saw Trotsky re-invent the Bolshevik plan to seize power, curbing Lenin’s ruthless ambition as he aimed for the swift overthrow of Kerensky . ‘The provisional government was brought down with barely a shot fired… they looked to undermine his government through those of the Petrograd Soviet.’ This passage suggests Trotsky was hugel...
They are surprised by his death, but immediately think of how his death will affect their own lives, but more importantly, their careers. “The first thought that occurred to each of the gentlemen in the office, learning of Ivan Ilyich’s death, was what effect it would have on their own transfers and promotions.” (pg 32) As a reader, you have to wonder how Ivan must have had to live in order for people close to him to feel no sadness towards the loss or even pity for his wife. In fact, these gentlemen are exactly like Ivan. The purpose of their lives was to gain as much power as possible, with no regard for the harm that was caused by their selfish endeavor.... ...
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.
With these figures imposing upon the American people a certain kind of pressure to rise up the American government found it to be of good retaliation to release a kind of reverse propaganda arguing that the Bolshevik’s movements encouraged chaos and anarchy. This proved to be very true as Americans experienced riots and strikes by working class laborers in the Steel and Coal Strikes of 1919 as well as the Boston Police Strike. These occurrences exposed and provided an apparently terrifying insight into the influences of the now Soviet Russia. It was with these that America found it even more necessary to release more propaganda; it was with this new propaganda that targeted children and make them aware of the problem with very little alarm. ...
There was a shift from discontent regarding the monarchy, to anger and violence. The success of the 1917 revolution was in part attributable to how united the people were now. The flawed Duma united all of the opposition to the Czar, and then gave them a place to debate and discuss the ways in which they would change the system. As the Czar did not allow to Duma to accomplish anything or pass significant legislation that would change the social life, the members of the Duma were left unhappy and angry. The next day another telegram was sent by the same general on the state of the strikes and uprisings. “I report that during the afternoon of February 25th, crowds of workers who had assembled at Znamenskaia Square and near the Kazan’ Cathedral were repeatedly dispersed by the police and the military. About 5pm demonstrators near the Gostinyi Dvor began to sing revolutionary songs and hoisted red flags with the inscriptions “Down with War!” In response to the warning that arms would be used against them, there came from the crowd several revolver shots, one of which wounded a soldier of the Ninth Reserve Cavalry Regiment in the head. A troop of dragoons dismounted and opened fire on the crowd, killing three and wounding ten men. The crowd dispersed immediately. Around 6pm a grenade was thrown at a detail of mounted gendarmes, wounding one gendarme and his horse. The
Lenin’s pragmatic leadership was the most considerable factor in helping to fortify Bolshevik power. His willingness to take power in October/November 1917 and the successes of the move, through his right-hand man, Trotsky, was critical as it helped give him unquestioned authority within the party despite members of the Central Committee i.e. Zinoviev and Kamenev who suggested industrialisation needed to occur first. This highlighted Lenin’s communist ideology in practice which was essential to the Bolsheviks maintaining power. Following the failure of the Provisional Government, Lenin recognised that it was the Bolshevik’s priority to legitimise their government. As a result, issues of ‘Peace, Bread and Land’ were addressed through the issuing of a number of decrees in late 1917 including decrees on land, peace, Workers’ Rights as well as reforms to marriage and religion. ...
In February of 1917 a group of female factory workers and led a revolt in which the Tsar was dethroned, only to be replaced by a provisionary government composed of the Russian elite. When this government did not live up to its promises of an end to Russian involvement in World War I, the Bolsheviks (“majority”), a revolutionary movement led by Vladimir Lenin, overthrew the provisionary government in what bacame known as the October revolution.
1) Adams, Arthur E. The Russian Revolution and Bolshevik Victory: Why and How? Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1960.
Inspired by the works of Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin nonetheless drew his ideology from many other great 19th century philosophers. However, Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” was immensely important to the success of Russia under Leninist rule as it started a new era in history. Viewed as taboo in a capitalist society, Karl Marx started a movement that would permanently change the history of the entire world. Also, around this time, the Populist promoted a doctrine of social and economic equality, although weak in its ideology and method, overall. Lenin was also inspired by the anarchists who sought revolution as an ultimate means to the end of old regimes, in the hope of a new, better society. To his core, a revolutionary, V.I. Lenin was driven to evoke the class struggle that would ultimately transform Russia into a Socialist powerhouse. Through following primarily in the footsteps of Karl Marx, Lenin was to a lesser extent inspired by the Populists, the Anarchists, and the Social Democrats.
In the years leading up to the revolution, Russia had been involved in a series of wars. The Crimean war, The Russo-Turkish war, The Russo-Japanese war and the First World War. 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. Rents and taxes were often unaffordable, while the gulf between workers and the ruling elite grew ever wider.
... a change in this image to a realization that Stalin’s suppression of dissidents and opposition had real effects on soviet society and can not be justified by Marxist and Leninist Ideology instead they were just Stalin looking to maintain his autocracy.