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

To what extent did Russia simply exchange one authoritarian regime for another in the 1855-1964 period?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent did Russia simply exchange one authoritarian regime for another in the 1855-1964 period? When the February revolution brought an end to Tsarist rule, there was a strong belief that the instatement of the Provisional Government would lead to a more democratic Russia. However in deposing the Provisional Government, the October Revolution had removed any such hope. The totalitarian Government of the Communist Party continued and intensified many aspects of the Tsarist regime including use of the secret police and an intolerance for opposition and democracy in general. The communist regime were just as authoritarian as the Tsars before them. In terms of ideology the fall of Tsarism in 1917 was a significant event as Tsarist belief in total control and centralisation of power was replaced by the Provisional Government, who had introduced liberal reforms and aimed for a democratic Russia. Ideology came to have a far more significant impact under the communists. It was not completely absent under Tsarist rule as the Russification policy of Alexander III shows, however it had virtually no effect in comparison to Stalin's purges. ...read more.


Nicholas II also took this approach in the October Manifesto, the Duma was in theory a step towards democracy but much like Lenin's NEP, was implemented in an authoritarian way to limit the effect on power. The Communists introduced reforms, and concessions where necessary, in order to maintain their authority, such as Lenin's abandonment of war communism for NEP, whereas the Tsars took the same approach by only introducing reform when pressurised as Alexander II's assassination, and his prior implementation of the Emancipation Act shows. The regimes displayed their authoritarian nature in different ways, Lenin saw that war communism was not working and replaced it with NEP, whereas Alexander III put his stamp on Russia by reversing all of his father's reforms. There was also continuity in the nature of Government with the Communists retaining a strong belief in personal authority, Lenin retained all key decisions as the Tsars did before him. Both Communist and Tsarist Governments developed into authoritarian regimes because their authority was largely unchallenged once established. The removal of Khrushchev by the Central Committee and the abdication of Nicholas II in 1917 by comparison were insignificant as neither event managed to have a significant impact on the nature of Russian Government. ...read more.


Lenin used it in the Civil War against the Green armies of the peasantry and Stalin used a similar style of brute force during the collectivisation process, albeit on a much grander scale. Tsars had also used military force in containing opponents, with Stolypin's necktie under Nicholas II and Alexander II continually employing military force prior to the Emancipation Act. The army was very important to the state, as the 1905 revolution demonstrated, and their continuing use of force against opponents is one way in which they successfully maintain their authoritarian regimes. When the February Revolution brought an end to Tsardom, the newly instated Provisional Government aimed to bring a new age of democracy Russia. However the instatement of the communists in the October Revolution ensured that in the long term, Russia simply exchanged one authoritarian regime for another. Lenin defended his revolution in the Civil War and went on to continue and intensify many aspects of Tsarist autocracy, which Stalin would continue. This ensured that the communist regime was just as authoritarian as the Tsars had been before them, and they were more effective in doing so. ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...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

    Assess the view that the lives of the peasants in Russia did not improve ...

    4 star(s)

    High taxes were commonplace under the Tsars despite the axing of redemption payments in 1905, however in contrast Lenin's NEP ensured that such a heavy burden would not be repeated. Despite this advancement, the most heavy restrictions were seen under Stalin where the relentless use of power, paranoia and hostility led to an unprecedented scale of death and destruction.

  2. Assess the reasons why opposition to Russian Governments was rarely successful in the period ...

    Domestic opponents such as the urban workers and revolutionary groups fared slightly better. Strikes may have been non-existent under communist regimes, however they were commonplace under Tsarist Governments. Even though the Putilov Works strike was argued by some to be the catalyst for the 1917 revolution this was an exception.

  1. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    * This is certainly true of the early Purges in 1930 to 1932. They were excuses for the failures of the First Five Year Plan. * Another explanation is that events were tied in with Stalin's personal battle over leadership.

  2. Assess the view that Russias communist leaders did less than the Tsars to improve ...

    pace as to how they worked, and therefore how much they produced. In most cases, this meant they had to work as hard as possible in order to provide food for their families, as well as the requisition squads which Lenin would later introduce in an attempt to improve productivity.

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

    reluctantly implementing the Emancipation Act show that this was a continual theme throughout the period. Stalin's hand had also been forced, as the driving force behind Russia's vast industrialisation process was his fear of Germany, as opposed to benefitting the Russian state.

  2. 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.

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

    Many of these countries still hold on to the Communist way. This shows how important Lenin?s introduction of Marxism-Leninism was to Russia and the entire world. The Bolshevik Party was the party of whom Lenin was the leader. They split away from the Mensheviks during Lenin?s first appearance in 1903.

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

    Rohl?s theory suggests that in an age of rapid industrialisation, urbanisation, mass politics and democratisation within Germany, aspects of pre-revolutionary, monarchical, aristocratic, and militaristic elements still existed. Simple evidence for this can be found in the line of Chancellors ? all of them were Vons and Prussian Protestant Junkers, which represents the latter description of Germany.

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