• 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...

Introduction

´╗┐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.

Middle

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.

Conclusion

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)

    Similarities between the Tsars and Stalin can also be drawn between the bad temper and brutal natures of both rulers. This is illustrated by when servants discovered Stalin's wife's death they were reluctant to tell him, these 'Little People' had a reasonable aversion to breaking bad news to the Tsars and Stalin, and they fell "faint with fear"10.

  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 ...

    Similarly in 1932 when collectivisation under Stalin did not have the desired impact, the Kulak's were accused of hoarding supplies as they had been under Lenin, who chose to send in the requisition squads. In contrast to the lack of interest regarding living conditions, sweeping reforms were introduced under the communists that aimed to improve working conditions for the peasantry.

  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 ...

    In accordance with Marxist theory, the urban workers received a greater priority in contrast to the Tsars who preferred to focus on the peasantry. The two regimes were equally authoritarian, as one form of autocracy was simply exchanged for another.

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

    They even slaughtered their own resources to spite Stalin, with the number of horses declining from 34 to 16.6 million between 1929 and 1933. However, collectivization could not be averted and this time peasant revolts was not enough to direct government policy in their favour.

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

    This formed part fo the reason for widespread dissatisfaction with the Provisional Government meaning that opposition had been effective. Lenin?s decision to pull out of the war once the Bolsheviks had seized power meant that foreign affairs weren?t really an issue.

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