The underlying causes of the 1905 Revolution in Russia were not political. Whatever else the revolutionaries wanted, it was not the overthrow of the Tsar. How far do you agree with this claim?

        Furthermore, the defective foreign policies had lessened the support for the Tsardom. In order to gain support and lessen opposition at home, Nicholas II sought after victories in war. The Russo-Japanese war was the biggest chance to rally the nationalism among Russian population. Nonetheless, due to miscalculation, Russia suffered humiliating defeat. Forces were too ill equipped and poorly trained. The Baltic fleet and the Potemkin mutiny revealed the incompetence of the armies, the navy and the Tsar himself as the ruler. Although military reforms had been undertaken after the loss in Crimean War, the incompetency of the Tsar had resulted in failure to bring significant changes in the military forces. This encouraged Russian to discredit autocracy. Without any doubt, loss in the war and the Baltic fleet had resulted in the spread of dissatisfaction among middle class and armies. Although these facts proved the weaknesses of the Tsar as a ruler, he had never lost the support from the armies during the 1905 revolution. In fact, the revolutionaries were suppressed by the troops themselves and the revolution ended.

        Additionally, the revolution was the result of the defect of the Tsardom. The deep-rooted socioeconomic and political problems made reforms the only way to save the dynasty, yet Nicholas II failed to bring the changes and reforms needed. Alexander III adopted the policy of “autocracy, orthodoxy and nationalism” and refused to make any concession to liberalism. Nicholas II, the successor, was proud of the continual of this policy. Zemstva, the Council of State was ineffective and the Tsar always ignored their opinions. They demanded constitution, yet Nicholas II dismissed this as senseless dream. The introduction of the anti-Semitism did not bring benefit to the society. The Jews were the regular victims of officially connived-at campaigns of mob violence, arson and rape – the notorious pogroms. Failure to quickly respond to the changing society became the focal attacking points for revolutionaries. The movements for national independence among non-Russian peoples were an emotionally charged and extremely potent factor. However, there was no sign that the revolutionaries wanted to overthrow the Tsar. The Zemstvo only wanted the restoration of their power while most people who were persecuted fled to other countries.

In addition, the rise of oppositions was uninfluential to bring about the revolution. There were various revolutionary groups during the eve of the 1905 revolution. On one hand, the group of Liberals including the populists and the Menshevik had no intention to overthrow the Tsar. They only wanted the establishment of constitutional monarchy. On the other hand, the radicals consisting of Nihilists, Marxist, Social Revolutionary Party and the Bolshevik wanted the revolution. They believe in the efficacy of political terror and spectacular political assassinations; their victims including two ministers and one prime minister. Political opposition to autocracy was not, however, the monopoly of the extreme left. Majority of the population – the peasants and the workers – did not even care about the political concerns. What is more, the demonstrators were led by a priest, who believed in the principle of orthodoxy, supporter of the autocracy; he would never have the intention or thought of overthrowing the Tsar. It was merely a demonstration demanding for reforms.

Without any doubt, the October Manifesto did prove the existence of the political pressures on the Tsardom, yet the socioeconomic issues were the major reasons that drove people to revolt against the government. Therefore, I largely believe that the underlying causes of the 1905 revolution were not political.