How secure was the Tsar's powers up to 1904?
How secure was the Tsar's powers up to 1904? The Tsar was the greatest power in Russia nothing and no one had the same amount of power. The Tsar's rulings were final. Tsar Nicholas had inherited the throne from a dynasty which had held this 1613. Unlike his father Nicholas Tsar was dependant on what he was told by his ministers. He was not ready for the role of Tsar and knew very little on how to run a country. Nicholas Tsar was a family man, controlled by his wife who wanted him to spend time with his family. He was isolated from the public view due to this. Russians that opposed the Tsar and his government would be tracked by "The Okhrana". They were the secret police for the Tsar. This group of people spread across the country. Undercover agents were every where. Some made their way in to secret revolutionary societies and some times even organised them, and took part in political acts of violence. The Okhrana would assassinate people who opposed the Tsar. Two ministers of the interior, Plehve and Stopypin, who were normally in charge of the police, were assassinated by undercover agents of The Okhrana posing as revolutionaries. This shows the extent of which The Okhrana would go to secure the Tsarist power. To stop workers who were concerned about the wages, and working conditions falling in to revolutionary hands, the government decided to set up its own labour unions.
Both The Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent society created by the Bolshevik
Both The Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent society created by the Bolshevik, were communist. Asses the validation of this view. The Bolshevik revolution and the society made by it, were not communist. Yes there Revolution was communist, but the society that was created was not communist, This is due to the fact that a civil war started after Russia pulled out of the war, and had to change to War Communism. War communism is when the Bolshevik had to implement new laws in order to keep the country afloat, But on the other hand, the Bolshevik did try, as they gave more power to the people. Bolshevik was not communist due to the Laws that were changed, and the way that the country changed. Because the of War Communism, people became pushed aside again. Grain requisitioning, this is when the Bolshevik were sending units of the Red guard into the country side to find grain for the hard-pressed cities. The banning of private, All private trade were banned, but the state trading was very chaotic and was not producing enough products, so the black market started in order for people to survive, But on the other hand after the Civil war had ended all the War communism laws were either abolished or changed, and the Banning of private trade was abolished and trade restarted and the black marked closed and trade went back to normal. On the other hand they did try to be communist,
How Successful Was Roosevelt’s New Deal?
How Successful Was Roosevelt's New Deal? Roosevelt set out with clear views on what the New Deal was to do, but not so sure as to what measures this would involve. During the time in which he was campaigning for the election, it became clear the Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to use the full power of the United States' Government to relieve Americans from the great depression. His main priorities and characteristics are listed below: > Getting Americans back to work > Protecting their savings and property > Providing relief for the sick, old and unemployed > He believed strongly in an 'active Government' to improve the lives of ordinary Americans > He had plans to spend vast quantities of public money on getting people back to work. As Governor of New York he had already started doing this in his own state > He was not afraid to ask for advice on important issues from a wide variety f experts such as factory owners, union leaders or economists He succeeded to some extent in each of these tasks, but getting the American population back to work was a constant headache for him. When Franklin D. Roosevelt came to power the country was in the worst depression that America had ever had. The lack of confidence, by the American public, caused 659 banks to fail in 1929. AS the banks began closing, the people's confidence plummeted and in 1930, another 1352 banks were forced to
Was the defeat in the war the real cause of the Russian Revolution
History Essay Was the defeat in the war the real Cause of the Russian Revolution? I think that there would have still have been a revolution without the war, it would have just taken a lot longer. The war was like a catalyst for the revolution. This is because Lenin believed that there would be a revolution but he wrote that "We will not see a revolution in our lifetime". There were major flaws in Russia before this. Tsar Nicholas II was not a natural born leader, he had, had great tsar's before him in the form of his father and grandfather. He was unprepared for the throne because of the sudden death of Alexander III. He was 'charming but weak'. Nicholas was a firm believer in the autocracy and so were the people that he appointed, like Pobedonostev who in 1984 was chief advisor to Nicholas. This meant that he didn't like to give any of his rule away and so when he made the October Manifest and Peasant Manifest in 1905 which stated that there would be franchise to all classes, fundamental civil liberties and the all the future laws would require the approval of the State Duma, less than a year later, after this 'revolution' was over he took it all back with the fundamental laws and Article 87 which allowed the tsar to rule by decree in emergencies. The tsar did not learn any lessons from 1905. When the Dumas tried to demand reform, the tsar dismissed them, which
The 1905 revolution was primarily a result of the economic depression rather than the failings of the Tsar, how far do you agree with this statement?
"The 1905 revolution was primarily a result of the economic depression rather than the failings of the Tsar", how far do you agree with this statement? Russia's industry had grown at an enormous rate since 1890 but in 1899 Russia was hit with a huge depression that produced widespread unemployment and urban discontent. Towards the end of 1902 and through early 1903, there were widespread mass strikes throughout the major cities in the country. During the lead up to 1905 the economic depression in Russia played a large part in the attempted revolution. Clearly, however it must be remembered that it was not enough on its own to cause the events of 1905 but it is its inter-relationship with other elements in Russian society that explain why there was an attempt at revolution in 1905. The tsar instead of turning his attention to the growing domestic problems tried to shield by getting involved in a war with Japan. The idea was that it should be a "small victorious war", aimed at getting the people of Russia to support the government and avoid revolution through turning attention away from problems at home. Unfortunately, the Russian army sustained a series of devastating defeats. In 1905, Port Arthur fell to the Japanese, further proving the incompetence of the Tsar and his government. Even worse for the government was that the war meant that inflation rose rapidly causing
To what extent was the February 1917 Russian revolution inevitable after the 1905 revolution?
To what extent was the February 1917 revolution inevitable after the 1905 revolution? The February 1917 Revolution was one of the defining moments in Russian history, it was the culmination of years of class struggle and the forming of new ideals. The February Revolution was genuinely perceived as the start of a new Russia, this hope was in marked contrast to the subdued elevation of the results of the 1905 Revolution, which were seen as considerably watered-down in comparison to original expectations. The 1905 Revolution was, in essence, an economic revolution; those who marched on Bloody Sunday wanted better working conditions, not the end of Romanov Rule. It was just 12 years later that the mood had changed completely, from wanting better conditions to a concerted effort to rid Russia of an autocracy obsessed with self-preservation. Arguably, the 1905 Revolution added to the thirst for change, however it was other factors also which lead to a Revolution, which was always inevitable because those within the revolution had always sought a system without Tsarist rule. The 1905 Revolution was quintessentially an economic revolution; the people were demanding better working conditions from a Tsar who they believed was unaware of their real plight. The people who marched on Bloody Sunday, led by Father Gapon did not want a wholesale change to the leadership; they merely wanted
How far was military defeat responsible for the fall (abdication) of the Tsar in Feb 1917?
How Far Was Military Defeat Responsible For The Fall (Abdication) of the Tsar In Feb 1917? By 1917 Russia had been at War for three years and the strains on the both the army and the country itself were becoming more and more established as time went on and people were beginning to question the Tsar's rule. Previous to 1917 the Tsar had suffered many setbacks as ruler of Russia. The most significant of these were the economic and political problems prevalent in Russia, the prominence of revolutionary groups and their activities and the gradual loss of support for the Tsar. Further factors were the industrialisation of Russia, the 1905 revolution and the October Manifesto and creation of the State Duma. Some of these causes were long term, whilst others were fairly short term. However, it was the huge Military defeats suffered by Russia that set the 1917 Russian Revolution off. At the end of 1914 the Russian army had lost half a million men and they were running low on ammunition and arms. They also had problems with uniform and food. Desertion became more and more frequent and some soldiers even deliberately inflicted injury upon themselves so they could avoid military service. Nobody could understand why the Russian leaders had engaged the country in such a pointless war. In the summer of 1915 the Russians lost 3,400,000 men, 300,000 were killed and 1,500,000 were taken
Stalin - Source E and Source F are completely different to one another. One is biased in favour of Stalin and one is highly critical of him.
3. Study Sources E and F. Which of these two sources is the more reliable? Explain your answer. Source E and Source F are completely different to one another. One is biased in favour of Stalin and one is highly critical of him. Source E is a politically correct speech in to the Congress which fits the model thinking required to gain the approval of Stalin. For this reason it was published in Pravda which was not a free paper but the paper of the Communist Party in power. The content is mythical and portrays a cult worship of Stalin. The writer starts by thanking Stalin for making him so happy and for the inspirational meeting with the great leader. It is over the top. What baby would utter Stalin as its first word! It was written in 1935 which was a year after the purges had begun. It is utterly one sided and does not tell us anything about the meeting with Stalin or what was going on at that time. Source F talks about how unhappy Stalin was and how narrow minded, malicious and dangerous he was. Bukharin had first hand knowledge of Stalin as he knew Stalin since he was a little boy and he was the one who brought down Trotsky as Lenin's successor and enabled Stalin to rise to power by eliminating all his rivals. He was the architect of the revolution. But later on Stalin turned on him because he saw him as a threat to his leadership. Stalin also knew that Bukharin knew
How Did Tsar Nicholas 2nd Survive The 1905 Revolution
How Did Tsar Nicholas 2nd Survive The 1905 Revolution? There are several factors that help our understanding of how the tsar and his regime endured the turmoil of the 1905 revolution. However, one thing is for sure, after the uprising and swift, brutal suppression of the revolutionaries on the 22nd of January 1905 outside the gates of the Winter Palace, the Nicholas 2nd and his administration received a drastic wake up call. Even though the monarchy received a hard slap on this day, the tsar himself was in no immediate danger; the ignorance of the instigator, Father Gapon, ensured that he didn't even know that the tsar was not occupying the Palace at this time. There is much debate as to whether or not the events of 1905 constituted a revolution at all. Leon Trotsky, a famous and influential revolutionary writer stated that it was merely a 'dress rehearsal' for 1917, and he is not without support. The impact that it had was minimal compared to any other of history's great political upheavals. Many Marxist historians believe that 1905 only worsened matters, making full a scale revolt inevitable and simply acting as a stepping-stone to Lenin's seizure of power. The lack of co-ordination from tsarist opposition is arguably the most crucial means by which Nicholas 2nd kept his head. The spontaneity of the strikes and demonstrations that took place made sure they held no
Working Conditions in the Mines
Working Conditions in the Mines The early nineteenth century had a dramatic rise of activity in mining of the coalfields. This was due to the increased demand for fuel to power the new machinery that would revolutionise the world. Thousands of people were drawn off the land into the mines and as the need grew, more jobs were created. Coalmining technology had evolved from simple bell pits to huge shafts and tunnels. The mines were now so large that the conditions in them became worse. They were probably as bad as the conditions of the cotton mills. Miners had to work long hours in the dark and wet with many hazards to deal with which were not found in other work places. They were mainly problems to do with ventilation as mines became deeper. As fresh air could not be circulated round the tunnels gas was always problem. They included methane (firedamp), carbon monoxide (chokedamp) and carbon dioxide. There were many solutions, most being more dangerous than the gas itself. * Canaries were taken into the mine and if the canary died, gas was present and the miners needed to leave the pit. * Two shafts were cut and a fire was lit at the base of one of them, to take in fresh air down the other. This could explode the methane. * John Buddle invented an air pump, but it was very expensive and pit owners were reluctant to pay for it. No light penetrated the deep shafts so
