• 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 the 1917 October revolution completely change the nature and function of government in the period 1855-1964?

Extracts from this document...


´╗┐To what extent did the 1917 October revolution completely change the nature and function of government in the period 1855-1964? Before 1917, Russia was ruled by the tsars where by 1864 the government would consist of Dumas - ruling urban areas- and Zemtsvas - ruling rural areas. In February1917 the Tsars where replaced by liberal who in October 1917 where replaced by the communist rulers. With this change in government rule came a change in ideology and structure as well as changes in the way reform and repression was used, these are changes which I will be discussing. On one hand you can imply that the nature of Russian government changes due to the October revolution in 1917. Pre October 1917 Russian governments had, in some ways, a different ideology in comparison to post 1917 with communist governments. ...read more.


pre October 1917 the government, when ruled by the provisional government, consisted of two organs which was the Provisional government and Petrograd Soviet whereas after October 1917 it consisted of many organs and not just two. The government structure however, was also same in some ways; for example, before the October revolution the government worked with a hierarchy within it similar to after the October revolution. This continuity suggests that there was not complete change in nature of government. You could also suggest that the function of government showed continuity rather than change after the 1917 October revolution. This is as in regard to reform both the tsars and the communist government acted on reform with a nod to democracy, the tsars with the introduction of the Duma and the communists with the introduction of the Supreme Soviet. ...read more.


Overall I believe that the 1917 October revolution changed the nature and function of government in the period 1855-1964 but not completely. This is because evidence has shown that in regards to nature there is change in ideology between pre 1917 and post 1917 and continuity is little with the similarity of paternalistic figures. The function of the government also shows continuity as their reform within the government was very similar with both heading to democracy. However there is also evidence regarding function of the government which shows change as some of the tsar leaders showed very low levels of repression regarding their function whereas the communist government showed high levels of repression, therefore suggesting that the October revolution presented both change and continuity with the nature and function of government. ...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. Explain why the opponents of the Tsars from 1855 to 1917 were more successful ...

    The heavy increase in terror under the communist regime is another reason why opponents to the Tsars enjoyed a far greater degree of success. Throughout the period, opponents to Russian Governments lacked a shared ideology or common goal to seriously threaten the regimes.

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

    Despite these atrocities from the Tsarist regime continuing, the communists were not oblivious to the poor quality of life the urban workers were suffering from. Vast improvements in healthcare were made under the communists. The universal plan introduced by Stalin made medical care much more widely available, in contrast to

  2. Assess the view that Russias rulers were opposed to change during the period from ...

    In contrast to the Tsarist period, where for the vast majority the Russian people were unable to vote, the Soviet Constitution introduced by the communist regime of Lenin did provide the vote. However, as all other parties had been banned in 1920 there was no choice other than the communists,

  1. Opposition to Russian governments was ineffective in the period from 1855 to 1964. ...

    When Stalin chose to introduce collectivisation this was met with much more opposition by the prosperous Kulaks than the remainder of the peasantry, which contributed to the Kulak purges. Despite failure being a consistent feature in peasant opposition throughout the period it does not mean that the peasantry failed to experience any success.

  2. To what extent did Russia simply exchange one authoritarian regime for another in the ...

    to his vision of Russia no matter what the cost as the Tsars had previously been devoted to maintaining autocratic rule. However in terms of ideology, the Bolshevik seizure of power in the October Revolution lead to a shift from one diametrically opposed ideology to another.

  1. How effective was opposition to Russian government during the period 1855-1964?

    was clearly a contributory factor. The result was the abolition of human bondage which was, if nothing else, an increase in status for Russian peasants. The effectiveness of peasant opposition to serfdom can be contrasted with their reluctance under Stalin to become part of collective farms or kolkhoz which had to deliver an assigned amount of grain to the state.

  2. Opposition to Russian governments was ineffective in the period from 1855 to 1964. How ...

    However, opposition from the Western allies did prevent him from taking influence in places such as Berlin and Greece. Opposition abroad was a much more important issue for Khrushchev. Events in the 1950?s such as the Hungarian Uprising and the Polish Crisis directly opposed USSR?s control over them.

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