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

To What Extent can Individuals be Credited with being Responsible for Revolutions?

Extracts from this document...


Year 12 History To What Extent can Individuals be Credited with being Responsible for Revolutions? Individuals can only be credited to a certain degree for being responsible for revolutions because there are many factors that lead to a revolution. Obviously some individuals can be credited more than others for being responsible for revolutions, but a single individual cannot be credited completely for a revolution. In pre-revolutionary Russia and China, factors such as famine played a major role in being responsible for revolutions, so it is not only people that can take credit for revolutions but world events, weather, disasters and war also. The revolution in February 1917 in Russia can be credited largely to one individual, the Tsar of Russia and also in China the Empress was largely responsible for the revolution in 1911. These leaders, through their incompetence, failed to expel unrest and discontent in their respective countries, which unfortunately led to revolution. Individuals outside of government can also be credited with starting revolutions. These individuals took advantage of current events to aid their own cause, which of course was a revolution. As Russia and China were ruled by an autocracy, the Tsar and Empress by divine right ruled the country with supreme power. Meaning they had the final say on everything and basically ruled the entire country by themselves. ...read more.


The war with Japan brought great unrest to Russia and sparked a wildfire of revolutionary ideas that flooded the country. The vast amount of resources and man power that WWI consumed from Russia was crippling. Food shortages were widespread enough, but now the soldiers needed to be supplied with food which meant less for everyone else, even worse, farmers and peasants were begin sent to war which meant less food production. Railway workers were also sent to fight, this meant an already inefficient railway system was brought to a snails pace. Worse still the Tsar decided that he would go to the front to lead his soldiers, this meant that any defeat could be blamed solely on the Tsar. Similarly in China the Empress was faced with a western invasion, China's military was unable to match the might of western firepower. Westerners won many battles and forced China to sign an unfair treaty which opened up her ports for trade. Westerners flooded China with cheap merchandise and opium, this led to great discontent amongst merchants and peasants. In both cases discontent and unrest was caused directly by the Tsar and Empress' inability to achieve military victory. Again blame can almost solely go to the Tsar and Empress, and with their inability to subdue the resultant unrest, they can almost solely take credit for causing the impending revolutions. ...read more.


On a larger scale, the majority of the population of both China and Russia can be credited with causing revolutions, that is the peasants, because without them no revolution would have had occurred in the first place. It was the peasants and proletariat that wanted changes, if they were happy with their government they would not have wanted change, and revolutionaries would have been laughed and scoffed at. So to some degree all the credit should go to the peasants, but of course if they were unhappy then there would need to be a cause of this discontent and credit would need to be given to the cause of discontent for the impending revolution. And also to those individuals that helped push the revolutions along (revolutionaries). Therefore the extent to which individuals can be credited with causing revolutions is entirely dependent on their involvement in causing discontent and unrest within the vast majority of the population. For example, the Tsar and Empress take most of the credit for the revolutions that occurred as a result of their incompetence as it was them that started it all, whereas revolutionaries can only take a small amount of credit in comparison to the Tsar and Empress as they are only helping the revolutions along basically taking advantage of the situation that the Tsar and Empress created to aid them in their cause, which lets face it was to put themselves in power. ?? ?? ?? ?? Kingsley Denton 12THOJ 20/04/07 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 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 GCSE Russia, USSR 1905-1941 essays

  1. Stalin man or monster

    Thus these sources illustrate Stalin's strong political influence which seemed to be superior to the judicial system in place. 6) Using the sources in this paper and your knowledge of Stalin explain whether or not you think he was a monster.

  2. CHINA UNDER MAO, 1945-C.1976

    In 1965, Lin Biao, the minister of defence, started supporting Mao and abolished all the ranks within the People's Liberation Army, therefore making all soldiers equal. Every soldier received a copy of a newly published book, "Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong," and were ordered to study it.

  1. Stalin: Man or Monster?

    Khrushev states that what Stalin had done were not the deeds of a madman I feel that Khrushchev in this speech is attempting to defend Stalin. We have to remember that he worked with the man and also recognise that he is communist.

  2. The blance sheet for russia.

    (Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed, p. 8.) Was the October Revolution a coup? In an attempt to discredit the Bolsheviks, no effort has been spared to falsify the historical record. The usual trick is to describe the October Revolution as a coup d'�tat, that is, a movement carried out by a

  1. Why were there two Revolutions in Russia in 1917.

    Rasputin was a monk and faith healer who had allegedly healed the Tsar's son of Haemophilia, and who offered advise to Nicholas II. Rasputin's presence was undesirable in the eyes of the people since he had a background of rebellion and bad rumours were always circulating about him.

  2. Why there were two Revolutions in Russia in 1917.

    The Russian Economy also had a major role into why there was the first revolution in Russia in 1917. Peasants were extremely poor and often did not own their own land. Despite this, the Tsar seemed to only be concentrating on the welfare the middle and upper classes of Russia, which was a very small percentage.

  1. Ukranian famine

    Yet one of Stalin's lieutenants in Ukraine stated in 1933 that the famine was a great success. It showed the peasants "who is the master here. It cost millions of lives, but the collective farm system is here to stay."

  2. Lenin's Importance in the 1917 Revolutions.

    and theorist that formed the Bolsheviks, in the first place Many believe that Lenin?s action of promoting the April Theses, helped lead to the October Revolution. It was so effective that ?his ability to rouse a crowd was such that adversaries recorded that he could make the hairs stand?.

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