How did the failure of the Provisional Government allow for the rise of the Bolsheviks?

4. The Liberal View

The primary reason of the failure of the Provisional Government lay in the inadequacy of the members of the government9. The ideas of the Provisional Government were to criticize the government, but the failure to use power to enforce the laws was a major shortcoming of the Provisional Government10. As they sought not to replicate any of the actions of the Tsarist regime, the Provisional Government reduced their influence incredibly. Also, the members of the government were only versed in the Duma (a former government with little power) and not in the workings of a real democratic government11. The failure of the government was also caused by indecisiveness between the members in how to implement democracy. This caused a waste of time, and allowed the Bolsheviks to seize power while the Provisional Government Members were still arguing.

5. The Soviet View

The success of the Bolsheviks was due to their ability to learn from the errors and miscalculation from the Tsarist regime. This allowed the Bolsheviks to learn what the public wanted, and attempted to handle their needs better than the Soviets could12.  The Bolsheviks success was due to fact that they were able to meet the needs of the proletariat, and rid themselves of maintaining the interests of the bourgeoisie13. The Soviets were able to promise land to the proletariat, promised nationality to all Russian citizens, promised better wages for the proletariat, and provided an answer to the social problems that the Provisional Government was incapable of doing.

3.  (368)Evaluation of sources

Two of the sources used were:

Acton, Edward, 1990. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. New York, Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. P.129

This book author is a Professor of Modern European History at the University of East Anglia. The book is therefore directed to college students for more in depth research. The purpose of the book, as stated specifically in the preface and prologue, is to provide the reader with a number of perspectives on the Russian Revolution. The book is intending to look at the Russian Revolution from a new perspective, because much newer information has been made available for the public’s use. The value of this book is that it provides multiple views on each aspect of the Russian Revolution. Each view is countered with an argument from the opposing view, allowing the reader to get an enhanced analysis. This book is also valuable because it is written very recently, thus making use of all the new information just released. The limitations of this book is that it is associated with one author, but multiple authors wrote each section of the book. This is a limitation because the views of each author might not be the same as the next, causing a disparity between the emphasis of each view.

Fitzpatrick, Sheila, Ed 1982.The Russian Revolution. New York, Oxford University Press.

The author of this book is a professor at the University of Chicago, and the book is therefore directed more towards college students, and people looking for more in depth research in the Russian Revolution. The second edition of this book was published right after the fall of communism and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Thus the purpose of the book is to inform readers of a new perspective of the Russian Revolution with newer information released by the Russian government. The values of this book is that it was written after the Russian Revolution, thus it gives a more retrospective analysis that incorporates the newer information. This helps give the reader a deeper understanding of all the factors that affected the Revolution.  The book is also valuable because it shows multiple viewpoints on each aspect of the revolution, and incorporates many primary sources into it’s arguments.

4.  (580)Analysis

                The rise of the Bolsheviks was a turning point in Russian history. The Bolshevik party struggled for power since the overthrow of the Tsar in the 1917 revolution. The success of the Bolsheviks was mainly due to the failures of the Provisional Government. The governmental policies and failure to use force was the main cause for the collapse of the Provisional Government

                The governmental policies of the Provisional Government were extremely ineffective in making decisions about the implementation of democracy. The liberal view shows that the lack of experience in the new government was the cause of the failure. An example of this is shown in the attempt to remove all the social constraints such as lack of social justice and censorship of the press14. This spontaneous emergence of freedom diminished the ability of the government to control the population effectively15. The Provisional Government was accepted as the government, but could only carry out decisions if the Soviet agreed, showing there was no real power within the government. The main downfall of the Government was their want to be opposite to anything that resembled the Tsarist Regime, and relied on methods of persuasion and emotional support from the peasant class. This caused the Government to lose control over the proletariat, as the lines of authority dissipated16. This lack of experience and action allowed the Bolsheviks to seize control of the situation, and provide the masses with answers that the Provisional Government was unable to provide. However, the revisionist views see the ideals of the government were justified, as they attempted to rid the society of the Tsar’s policies. The lack of decision is therefore due to the attempts to perfect the democratic system17.  The Bolsheviks also presented a more preferred system of government, allowing them to maintain huge pubic support while the Provisional Government kept losing support due to its liberal views. The Bolsheviks took advantage of the slow proceedings of the Provisional Government and implemented their own ideals for the working proletariat. Thus the lack of political direction in the Provisional Government allowed the Bolsheviks to rise to power.

        The collapse of the government was also due to their inability and possibly unwillingness to gather up a strong army to enforce their rules. Firstly, the army diminished in size because of the first World War18, and because many of the soldiers were now loyal to the Bolsheviks. This caused the Provisional Government to have virtually no means to enforce their rules, and showed a steady decline in power. The liberal view sees the lack of force as a lack of willpower. An example of this is shown in the statement made in the government that the military must be of “mutual relations of servicemen …must be based on the feeling of dignity of citizens of free Russia” 19, showing the Government valued respect more than a strong army. This does not put enough restraint and control over the government’s opposition. The revisionist views argue that the determination to use force developed early, and was used throughout the Kadet leadership. The Provisional Government’s failure to use force destroyed any figure of authority, and enabled the Bolsheviks to illustrate their ideology through strong leadership. However, when the first World War ended, the loyalty of the army was at stake because the Provisional Government was at stake20. This led the army to sway towards the Bolsheviks, because the Bolsheviks promised equal rights for the soldiers. The Bolsheviks were able to seize the inability of the Provisional Government to organize an effective army, and used the current army as well as the Red Army to stir up a proletariat revolution that overthrew the government. The Bolsheviks exploited the Provisional Governments lack of action into creating an authoritative figure for themselves through the control of the army.

         

5. (156)Conclusion

The failures of the Provisional Government were due to lack of organization and willpower to exert force over the peasants. The Bolsheviks recognized this weakness, and were able to create a strong authority for themselves through the use of the Red Army. The Provisional Government relied on the emotional support of the peasants, yet it was unable to solve any of the economic and social problems plaguing the peasants. The Provisional Government also sought to maintain the power of the bourgeoisie over the peasants, and therefore did not have much support in the peasant classes. This caused the peasants to turn to the Bolsheviks, who, with their authority and promise for a better future, were able to overpower the effectiveness and existence of the Provisional Government. The Bolsheviks were able to learn quickly form the failures of the Government, and established strong, promising economic, social and political reform that enabled them to overthrow the Provisional Government.

6. List of sources

        Footnotes

5. Fitzpatrick, Sheila, Ed 1982.The Russian Revolution. New York, Oxford University Press. P. 40
6. Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution, P. 40
7. Moorehead, Alan, Ed 1958. The Russian Revolution. New York, Carroll & Graf Publishers Inc. P.159
8. Moorehead, The Russian Revolution, P. 151
9. Moorehead, The Russian Revolution, P. 158
10. Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution, P. 40
11. Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution, P. 43
12. Acton, Edward, 1990. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. New York, Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. P.129
13. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 129
14. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 130
15. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 130
16. Deutscher, Isaac, Ed 1967. The Unfinished Revolution Russia 1917-1967. U.S.A. Oxford University Press. P. 9
17. Pipes, Richard, Ed 1995. Three “Whys” of the Russian Revolution. Toronto, Vintage Books, P. 33
18. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 132
19. Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution, P. 48
20. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 130
21. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 133
22. Moorehead, The Russian Revolution, P. 163
23. Acton, Rethinking the Russian Revolution. P. 134
24. Moorehead, The Russian Revolution, P. 163

Works Cited

Acton, Edward, 1990. Rethinking the Russian Revolution. New York, Replika Press Pvt. Ltd.

Deutscher, Isaac, Ed 1967. The Unfinished Revolution Russia 1917-1967. U.S.A. Oxford University Press.

Fitzpatrick, Sheila, Ed 1982.The Russian Revolution. New York, Oxford University Press.

Moorehead, Alan, Ed 1958. The Russian Revolution. New York, Carroll & Graf Publishers Inc.

Pipes, Richard, Ed 1995. Three “Whys” of the Russian Revolution. Toronto, Vintage Books,