• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

It was the weakness of the Provisional Government that brought the October Revolution about rather than the strengths of the Bolsheviks

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"It was the weakness of the Provisional Government that brought the October Revolution about rather than the strengths of the Bolsheviks" The seizure of the power by the Bolsheviks in October 1917 has long been debated by historians. There are many reasons for the 'revolution' occurring with different schools of historical thought emphasising different ones as being the most significant. Although some would definitely argue that the Bolsheviks had many strengths by October 1917, others would argue that the party were 'pushing against an already open door' with the Provisional government being too weak to continue. The Provisional government had many weaknesses, from its' very creation following the Tsar's abdication in February. The very nature of the 'Provisional' government meant it was only seen as a temporary body until elections were held for the Constituent Assembly in November. This meant that people had little respect for the members and the decisions made by them. The make up of the government also damaged the potential it could have. The Petrograd Soviet and the government ruled under the 'Dual Authority' system. ...read more.

Middle

people like the Ukrainians and with no measures being taken to improve the economy or introduce social reform meant that the government appeared no better than previous groups, including the Tsar that went before them. As a result, people continued to show discontent through desertions, striking and looking to other political groups, such as the Bolsheviks who seemed to offer more. With Lenin's return in April and the publication of his Thesis, including the two slogans of 'Peace, Land, Bread' and 'All Power to the Soviets', it appeared that the Bolsheviks could accommodate a huge range of support in Russia. Hungry city workers, frustrated peasants and absconding soldiers from the frontline all felt the party were directly appealing to them and promising to solve these huge issues that the Provisional government had left untouched. The Bolsheviks were the only party that promised an immediate end to fighting and peasant land seizures to be legally recognised. These policies certainly increased the level of support that the party had and throughout the year the numbers choosing to openly back them in the Petrograd Soviet grew. ...read more.

Conclusion

As mentioned, Soviet views would focus mainly on Lenin, but others should be seen as significant. Trotsky was the practical organiser during the seizure of power and his role leading the MRC enabled telegraph offices and railways to be under Bolshevik control. As a 'true Leninist' he was unwilling to boast about his importance following October. Similarly, during Stalin's time in office Trotsky would have been left in the background, as he had been a leadership contender with Stalin after Lenin's death, so it was only after the fall of Communism that his key role would be shown. It is also during the revisionist post glasnost age that the Libertarian view has emerged. With access to more regional documents they would argue that it was the people who forced the revolution and it was people on the ground who forced the change rather that a professional group, such as the Bolsheviks. Libertarians would state that discontent was regularly shown by strikes and that soviets were becoming more and more radicalised. These historians would argue that this force of change would have inevitably lead to change, with or without the Bolsheviks. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Russia 1905-1941 'Explain how the unpopularity of the Provisional Government contributed to the Bolshevik ...

    Even before the First World War had begun there was severe discontent, which would be invaluable for a revolution at a later date. The belief that the Russian military would be able to 'steam roll' through the opposition and the war would be finished by Christmas, was a false and optimistic belief.

  2. Lenin and the Bolshevik revolution.

    Even the desire for retribution against the Tsar seems to have been fairly minimal, to judge from the fact that cries for his arrest in the first days of the revolution were remarkably few and far between. Some of the demands of the workers were of the most fundamental sort.

  1. Were the Bolsheviks a positive or negative force for change in Russia?

    Ironically the RSFSR was far from a republic and in that same year a terrible civil war broke out between the Bolsheviks and the Whites. The Whites were assisted by foreigners who were angry with Russia for pulling out of WWI and in the case of France, to collect the

  2. How important was Lenin to the success of the October 1917 Revolution?

    or hiding from the provisional government (in August and September in Finland after an uprising of workers). Although he was very influential during the time he was actually in the country, it is inevitable that he had less of an impact on the people than from 1918 to 1924 because he was simply not a physical presence in their lives.

  1. Was it the continuation of the First World War the main reason for the ...

    Unfortunately although Kerensky was able to persuade a lot of middle class civilians to volunteer through propaganda he was not successful with the soldiers who did not see the point in fighting for territory when everybody wanted peace. The led to many of them deserting even before the offensive began.

  2. Did Fascism come to power more through its own strengths or through the weakness ...

    The government, in accordance with its alliance with the Fascists, did little to prevent the violence, and instead saw it as a cheap way of curbing the rise of socialism. Even when in the spring of 1921 the clashes had reached riot proportions, the government nonetheless decided that they had succeeded in their aim of disrupting the progress of socialism.

  1. The Bolsheviks were able to seize power in October 1917 mainly because of the ...

    They wanted to see the end of war with Germany, and as a large bulk of the soldiers were made of the peasantry, they were also keen to see the end of war so they could gain land. When Lenin arrived in Petrograd, it was to these groups that the Bolsheviks targeted their propaganda.

  2. To what extent was the continuation of the First World War the main reason ...

    In addition, the growth of workers committees in the factories who were anti-government aided the Bolsheviks at a key time. The Bolsheviks gained this groups support by using the key slogan, ?Peace, bread and land.? This played on all the Provisional government's failures and included the peasants into their propaganda.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work