• 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. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent does Stalin deserve the title of Red Tsar when assessing his ...

    5 star(s)

    regime were allowed and media from outside Russia were prohibited for fear of radicalisation. Therefore concerning the type and running of government Stalin appears more similar to his Tsarist predecessors than any of his Communist comrades, as he relied on ´┐Żlites, bureaucracy, elitism and a tightly controlled government, therefore this makes him a Red Tsar.

  2. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    * Or was it a result of Party bureaucrats trying hard to protect their own skins? * Or the justifiable removal of those Trotsky called 'radishes'? (Red on the outside but White in the middle.) * Whatever the reason, it is an area of great debate.

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

    In a disaster for the Bolsheviks, the army killed many demonstrators, arrested many leaders and forced Lenin to flee the country and go into hiding in Finland on the 6th July. The July Days were a major setback for Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

  2. Stalin's Impact On Russia And The Russian People.

    There is much that could be and was criticised in the Five-Year Plans. Certainly there was a great deal of inefficiency, duplication of effort and waste, although the evidence shows that the Soviets did learn from their mistakes in the second and third Five-Year Plans.

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

    Nicholas II attempted to do the same but had a much weaker than the other rulers. Despite some undoubted successes such as Lena Goldfields, the actions of Nicholas II show that the communists and tsars both ruled Russia in the same way with regards to repression.

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

    Lenin said this killing and these short-term problems e.g. food shortages, and many starving people who were even having to turn to cannibalism, was justified if Communism was to survive. People were beginning to question Lenin because of the effect of the civil war.

  1. How far did government policies change towards agriculture in Russia in the period 1856-1964? ...

    We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or we will be crushed.?[26] In order to raise the capital needed to develop Soviet industry, Stalin saw that the necessary first step was to collectivise Russian agriculture ? defined by him as ?the setting up of

  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