One area where the Provisional Government could have gained support was through the calling of a constituent assembly or parliament to legitimise its powers and to introduce land reforms, but Kerensky delayed the summoning of a constituent assembly. Although the rights of peasants to the great landed estates were recognised in principle the Government was in no position to implement this.
The grievances over land had long been a concern to peasants and many were unwilling to wait any longer. Many peasants who had deserted the army and returned home had done so in order to seize some land for themselves. The Government’s failure to take a lead on reform lost it valuable support from the peasantry. Disorder spread throughout the countryside with many landowners finding themselves on the receiving end of the peasants’ anger. The Government was clearly unable to control what was happening in the country.
More than anything else the summer offensive swung many people to the Bolsheviks, the only major party which stood uncompromisingly for an immediate end to the war, and who had adopted the slogan, “ Peace, Bread and Land”. Had the Provisional Government adopted a similar policy it would not have led to its downfall and the Bolshevik seizure of power in October.
What part did the revolutionary movement play in the collapse of the autocracy?
The work of revolutionary parties had little effect on the collapse of autocracy as the outbreak of the war had initially cut across a revolutionary movement, which was developing in Russia in July/August 1914. From having the support of 80 percent of the active workers, the revolutionary group, the Bolsheviks, who opposed the imperialist war, were driven underground, as backward layers of the working class, mobilized by the war, embraced the ideas of patriotism.
However, the war would soon enough be the very poison that would contribute to the collapse of the tsarist regime in Russia. The regime was put under severe pressure by the challenges imposed by the First World War. The stresses and strains evident in Russia before 1914 were deepened by the enormous demands placed on the country by its involvement. The start of the war saw a lot of support for the tsar but as military defeats occurred and economic dislocation caused shortages in the cities, the survival of the regime was undermined. Food shortages and lack of fuel in the cruel winter of 1916-1917 caused many strikes, unrest and disruption.
Nevertheless the war and revolutionary parties were not the only factors that contributed to the collapse of autocracy as the tsar himself is partly to blame. He was very weak and indecisive and it reflected in the way he tried to govern Russia, as he relied heavily upon his family for support. He tried hard to change Russia to make it powerful but was not prepared to make political change, delegate power to the duma or share power with them.
The tsar was politically inept and his decision to take command of the armed forces proved to worsen his reputation amongst the Russian people, as he was seen as being responsible for Russia’s military defeats.
By the beginning of 1917 there were demonstrations in Petrograd over food shortages, which were increasingly aimed against the tsar, and the radicalisation of the industrial workers and peasants became more significant. Demonstrations later rose to quarter of a million and the army were asked to put them down by opening fire on the crowds. Army leaders refused to do so as they were not content with the progress Russia was making in the war. This decision put a lot of pressure on the tsar who soon found that his supporters were no longer willing to save the government as they had lost their faith in it.
In conclusion the end on the tsarist regime had not been brought about by the actions of revolutionary groups, as it had collapsed rather than been overthrown.
