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

'Despite revolutions and attempts to achieve reforms, autocratic rule was strengthened in both Russia and Germany in the years 1825 to 1939.' Assess the validity of this view.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

'Despite revolutions and attempts to achieve reforms, autocratic rule was strengthened in both Russia and Germany in the years 1825 to 1939.' Assess the validity of this view. The years 1825 1o 1939 in both Russia and Germany were characterised by the existence of authoritarian and autocratic government. Germany at this time did not exist, the areas which would become Germany in a loose confederation which included Austria. These states were however largely autocratic, and the unification of Germany culminated in an establishment dominated by oppressive Prussian elites and the authority of the Kaiser and his Chancellor. Little similar constitutional wrangling took place in Russia during this era, in which the century began much as it ended politically, with the Tsar and his advisers directing a slow and bloated bureaucracy with the vast majority of Russians excluded completely from political influence or expression. It is possible to argue, however, that the reforms and revolutions that took place in both Russia and Germany created genuine opportunities for political participation and a more equitable distribution of power. For example, the 1848 revolution in Prussia gave way to an elected assembly - although the electorate and seats were organised so as to give Junkers and the bourgeois massive overrepresentation. ...read more.

Middle

progressive trend of increasing "authoritarianisation" or strengthening of autocratic rule during the period: while the fundaments of the system were largely unchanged for most of the period there were significant events which did result in a bucking of the period of autocratic rule. The revolutions of 1917 in Russia and 1918 in Germany both succeeded in ending the autocratic rule of the Tsar and Kaiser respectively. They both resulted in short-lived periods of comparatively very free societies (although the period after the February revolution and before the civil war in Russia cannot be said to have been at all socially stable), somewhat shorter-lived on Russia's part. Source C points out: "Russia had become the country in the world with the greatest freedom". Weimar Germany, similarly, had a degree of participatory democracy and constitutional freedom beyond anything previously (it granted universal suffrage, for example), and which continued for around a decade. In neither country did it last, however: the freedom under the provisional government eventually gave way to collective dictatorship under the Bolshevik party, which gave way to autocratic dictatorship under Stalin. ...read more.

Conclusion

Yagoda suggested that no one in the leadership was safe from the machine of oppression, except probably Stalin). It is however the case that the NSDAP managed to exert control over the state and people to a greater extent than had been seen before in Germany (Gleichshaltung, it seemed, was highly successful). Overall, it is fair to say that revolutions and attempts to achieve reform did, in some instances, have significant success (in the case of the 1918 revolution and subsequent consitution), and did disrupt, dilute or destroy autocratic systems of government in both Russia and Germany. However, it is the case that those reforms were ultimately ineffective and creating lasting and stable free societies, and that in some cases the reforms in question were either aimed at preserving the status quo (as in Bismarck's Germany) or at a "dictatorship" of a different kind (in the Bolshevik's case, "of the proletariat", or in practice, of the Bolsheviks). So in terms of the entire period, the statement does have a large degree of validity in that neither country succeeded in destroying authoritarian and autocratic tendency completely and both ended the period in question with a greater degree of totalitarian rule than at any previous point in their histories. ...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. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    C: Persecution and Control The Origins and Course of the Purges Totalitarianism * Historians talk about Stalin's Russia being a totalitarian state, where the Party set out to control every aspect of life. * There is increasing evidence that however much it might have liked to give the impression of being totalitarian, that Stalin's government did not quite succeed.

  2. What were the obstacles to German Unification immediatly before the 1848 Revolutions

    The Hohenzollens, rulers of Prussia, worked with Austria in "peaceful dualism" and they had the same approach to Nationalism as Austria. The Hohenzollens had built up a powerful power base, economically and militarily, Prussia controlled the Rhineland and Silesia and next to Britain and France had one of the finest

  1. To What Extent Were the Reforms of Alexander II Intended to Preserve and Strengthen ...

    was still and absolute monarch, and therefore still retain a strong grasp on power. A very successful reform that Alexander II implemented was the reform of legal system. Alexander set up trails by jury, open court proceedings and defence by qualified lawyers was introduced.

  2. Why did the Revolutions of 1848 did not lead to a united Germany?

    There goal was not unification because in fact unification was less appealing than in other states but the formation of a peoples assembly for the Habsburg Empire, they wanted the Austrian Empire to become a constitutional monarchy and every male citizen would vote for an assembly.

  1. Compare and Contrast the February and October Revolutions in Russia.

    However, Lenin didn?t spend these ten years doing nothing. He was a busy man, and had used the time to build relationships with the Germans. He lived in Dresden, and there he thought of a plan with how he could finally complete his vision of ruling Russia.

  2. To what extent was Wilhelmine Germany an entrenched authoritarian state?

    simply because there were five other groups wanting power ? the Junkers, the officer class of the army, the civil service, members of the diplomatic service, and the judiciary. It was these groups who exerted a major influence over German affairs ? they were able to exercise power as they

  1. Assess the importance of the individual in influencing key developments in Russia between 1825 ...

    control of the Nicholas system, the ?Superfluous men? were bound to the court by a suspicious Tsar and although they wrote of their experiences they preferred words to actions, achieving no substantial reform. One key member of opposition to Russia?s pan-slavism was Chaadayev who published his ?First Philosophical Letter? in

  2. Assess the view that the Bolshevik rule from 1917 to 1924 was shaped more ...

    support of the people? Pipes make?s some relevant points that Lenin had lost support and more importantly his own party was stabbing him in the back as Laver points out with the example of Stalin and a point Acton make?s that the party would oppose Lenin because they wanted power above all else.

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