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

How far do you agree that a study of Russian government in the period 1855 to 1956 suggests that Russia did little more than exchange Romanov Tsars for Red Tsars(TM) from 1917?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How far do you agree that a study of Russian government in the period 1855 to 1956 suggests that Russia did little more than exchange Romanov Tsars for 'Red Tsars' from 1917? This is a debate that many historians participate in on Russia's government. There are two sides to the argument either that Lenin and Stalin had in fact created a new, radical communist party or whether they had both just continued the previous Romanov Tsars' ideologies. One of the major differences between both Lenin and his predecessor Stalin, and the Romanov Tsars is that the first had to 'take' power. The Tsars claimed that they had been chosen by God to rule Russia so they, in effect, inherited there power. It was much harder for Lenin as he had to lead several uprisings such as the November Massacre. It was not until 25th October that Lenin and the Bolsheviks seized Petrograd and in turn took power for themselves. This is a key difference between the two powers as it shows how much Lenin was willing to go through in order to gain control. ...read more.

Middle

in order to get rid of any opposition standing in his way. Although the Cheka was supposedly only meant to be a short term group it still stands today as the KGB. This use of repression by the 'communists' was known as the 'Red Terror' and was carried out by the Cheka and the Red army. The use of repression by both the communists and the Tsars shows another strong link between the two, because neither didn't mind using force and terror in order to maintain power over Russia. However, when Lenin came into power he made new reforms which weren't conservative like the previous reforms made by the Tsars. One of the reforms made by Lenin was to try and make the government democratic as this was seen as a large section of Marxism. He created the reform that Russians could elect their own local constituents. Although on paper this sounds democratic, this is in fact not so as the people could only vote for other Bolshevik party members as Russia was at this time a one-party state. ...read more.

Conclusion

On one day alone he sentenced 6,000 of his own people to death. This number of murders in one day was more than the whole 100 year Romanov dynasty had accumulated. This gives us a very dark image of Stalin and shows that he was probably the most ruthless leader for Russia to have. This allows us to compare Stalin to the Tsars and shows that there were definite similarities between the two and it also allows us to see to what extend Stalin went in order to keep his power. True communism can never really occur in the world unless every single person agrees with it and work towards it, which is impossible as everyone has different opinions on different matters. It is due to this that Lenin and Stalin were in fact just continuing the work of the Romanovs by becoming Red Tsars themselves. The reason being that many of their reforms and 'creations', e.g. the Cheka, were in fact anti-communist. Many historians believe that both Leninism and Stalinism were at times on the brink of fascism which is the complete opposite to their 'supposed' Marxist views. Overall it was only until recently that Russia finally managed to boost democracy and improve the way the government is run. Tom Gunhouse ...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

    After all historians can't even agree on the numbers killed or arrested, let alone why the Terror happened! * There is no doubt that Stalin, along with all Bolsheviks, wanted to use every means in his power to turn Russia into a strong industrial power.

  2. Why Were There Two Revolutions in Russia in 1917?

    Although the party continued to work away to local working-class organisations, gain the support of increasing members of the public and some key individuals who were disillusioned with the Provisional Government's actions (including former Menshevik, Leon Trotsky), they might never have recovered from the July Days were it not for the events in the Provisional Government soon after.

  1. Leni Riefenstahl The Propagandist or Artist? A Historiographical Debate.

    * The assessment of Riefenstahl's films as propaganda had its origins in the United States and France, after KristallNacht and the Sudetenland Crisis altered the Americans and the French to the racist and militaristic nature of the Nazi Regime. * Hitler saw the two major films as propaganda "a totally

  2. 'Communists and Tsars ruled Russia in the same way.' How far do you agree ...

    There is also considerable continuity in the use of the secret police throughout the period, as the 3rd section under Alexander II right up to the KGB under Khrushchev shows. Similarly to Alexander II easing censorship, Khrushchev relaxed many aspects of Stalinist repression, briefly abolishing the death penalty and treating opponents more leniently.

  1. How far does a study of the period 1855 to 1956 suggest that, following ...

    This led to a series of events which would ultimately result in Stalin's totalitarian dictatorship. Although initially when the Bolsheviks took power there was a moderate amount of internal democracy within the party, under Lenin in the years 1917-22 this gradually eroded and the concentration of power shifted into an increasingly small number of hands.

  2. How far was the First World War the main cause of the fall of ...

    seemingly intensified during the war because it highlighted his weaknesses even more, creating more unhappiness and restlessness within Russia. One of the most prominent long term causes of February 1917 was the years of humiliation and defeat for the army, starting with the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-5, which produced a

  1. Assess the impact that Lenin had on Russia and the Russian people.

    Stalin wanted to transform Russia into an industrial super power, by dramatically increasing production of heavy industry. He succeeded in doing this, by introducing collectivization and the '5 year plans', but all this was at a cost to many people.

  2. How far could the fall of the Tsars be considered the most significant turning ...

    However, Russian historians Aleksandr Fursenko and Timothy Naftali do not believe that Khrushchev was a key turning point in Russia?s modernisation as they wrote that during the negotiations with Kennedy, Khrushchev was ?desperately trying to save face by achieving at least a small shift in the nuclear balance of power?14,

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