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

Tsarist rule in the years 1856 - 1917 and Communist rule from the death of Lenin to the death of Stalin both depended on high degrees of central power and control by the state. The similarities between the two forms of government were therefore much g...

Extracts from this document...


Tsarist rule in the years 1856 - 1917 and Communist rule from the death of Lenin to the death of Stalin both depended on high degrees of central power and control by the state. The similarities between the two forms of government were therefore much greater than were the differences. How far do you agree with this judgement? It cannot be denied that both Tsarist and Soviet government did indeed rely on a high degree of central power and state control. However, the statement incorrectly follows that "therefore" the two regimes had more similarities than differences. The fact that the period 1856 - 1917 involved the rule of Alexander II, Alexander III and Nicholas II meant three different styles of rule, and ultimately different levels of state repression. However, since both the communist and Tsarist regimes faced similar difficulties, the sheer size of Russia and the ever present problems with agriculture, for example, they both inevitably had similar aims. Both regimes wished to modernize Russia, while preserving their own position of authority and prevent Western intervention. However, the methods each regime used to do this and the results of these methods differed between them. The motives of their aims also varied - Stalin had a political motivation for isolation from the West (communism versus capitalism), whilst the Tsar wished to preserve Russian tradition and symbolism. ...read more.


This certainly does not explain the irrelevance of the Soviets during his reign, but his attitude varies with the Tsar, who probably simply resented handing any of his God-given power to other authorities. The fact that Stalin personally signed every order of execution issued during the purges outlines the level of his involvement. It should also be remembered that despite the reforms and slight de-centralisation of power that can be seen under Alexander II, 1882 84 saw counter - reforms, and after his assassination in 1881, temporary regulations gave the police extra power to crush revolutionary activity - displaying similar attitudes to Communism - that ultimately the people needed to be repressed, not encouraged in order to ensure compliance. This is seen in Stalin's reaction to the peasant's stubbornness in response to Collectivisation, for example. The Orthodox Church was undoubtedly very important for the Tsar. It almost helped legitimize his claim that the Tsar possessed a God-given right to rule the country, and justified the autocratic nature of Tsarist rule. Particularly by the peasants, the Tsar was seen as a "father figure." However, by the early twentieth century, the overall opinion of the Russian people, now becoming increasingly educated, was that this claim was no longer as legitimate as it had once been considered. ...read more.


The use of press censorship, the military and general oppression by both regimes are strikingly similar, despite different motives. Neither the Soviets, nor the Zemstvos had any sort of power or influence, and the fact that the regimes were running such a massive country from either Moscow or St. Petersburg itself suggests a central state control. Both the Tsar, as a result of his divine right, and Stalin, due to self interest and paranoia, totally ruled everything in Russia, and any power designated elsewhere was never a significant amount. Although Stalin ensured that the following was not the case, the role of the leader was not integral to the ideology of Marxism, unlike in Tsarism. After the fall of Khrushchev, there was collective leadership, suggesting the central control exercised by Stalin within the Communist Party was indeed a part of his cult of personality. It can also be said that overwhelmingly the similarities between the two forms of government do outweigh the differences. Differences are often subtle or arise due to a variation of motivation. However, the question focuses on the degree of dependence of central control and power by the state, thus any other differences focusing on other subjects have not been examined, and so a response to the second part of this statement can only be based on the subjects referred to in the question. Words - 2181 ...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. 'The Five Year Plans brought glory to Stalin and misery to his people.' How ...

    The Five Year Plans created many amazing sites for the Russian people. There were many brilliant achievements including the colossal new industrial centres, which were constructed from nothing in Magnitogorsk and Kuznetz. Stalin was very ingenious in planning that the cities were situated on the West of the country so

  2. Stalin and Lenin

    in the west further east in order to be protect from the vast land of Russia if the west ever attacked, the plans set by the five year plan were extremely unrealistic for example there was to be a 250% increase in total industrial output and a 350% increase in

  1. "The Governments of both late Tsarist Russia and early Communist Soviet Union were essentially ...

    the Russian people, and thus autocracy and almost dictatorial power were their god-given rights. It is questionable whether either regime was truly dictatorial anyway. Perhaps there was a dictatorship of Party Leadership by Lenin within the Communist party. The Tsar wasn't able to rule Russia on his own, due to its sheer scale and diversity of people.


    Industry grew rapidly at first due to the success in iron, steel and the railways. In 1902 depression hit Russia and there was an industrial slump and thousands of people lost their jobs. Demonstrations and strikes were a regular occurrence and many peasants were starving.

  1. How did Stalin control Russia from 1924-1953?

    larger farms, and had to provide a fixed amount of food to the government, which was to be given to people working in the cities producing materials. Like the ambitious targets in the Five Year Plans, if targets were not met, harsh punishments were issued.

  2. Use source A and your knowledge of the period to explain why some people ...

    The source just tells us about what has been sold on the black market, 'The best grand piano sells for half the price.' This also tells the reader that at the time inflation must have been bad it must have been hard to get money and food that is why

  1. Why was Lenin able to seize power in October 1917?

    These soldiers were the newest recruits; they were mostly peasants in uniform. These soldiers where newly trained and inexperienced or unable to serve at the front because of war injuries. The soldiers were not disciplined in the Russian army. They were often cold or hungry.

  2. How significant a figure in the revolution of 1917 Russia was Lenin?

    Lenin had no impact on these factors and throughout the revolution was a distant disconnected voice with no more than a peripheral role of influence on the people; on the whole his prevalence was marginal. The Bolshevik revolution in October is commonly known now as ?Lenin?s Revolution? or the ?Bolshevik

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