The October revolution is established to be a social revolution that was enacted through the leadership of Vladimir Lenin. It has evidently proven to be a voluntarist revolution through the methods used to gain power. In this essay, the following will be looked upon, first, the comparative aspect and critical analysis of structural theory, and how it does not fit the components of the October revolution. The essay will look at both the voluntarist and structural theory, however, it will emphasize the importance and relevance of the voluntarist perspective. Second, the essay will focus on the argument proving that the October revolution is voluntarist. The October revolution demonstrates a voluntarist structure through the leadership of Lenin …show more content…
First, the October revolution has a few qualities that can prove it to be a structuralist revolution. Structuralism is a concept that is based on planned and expected events, it is often a prearranged situation that has a notable and predictable reaction. Although it is evident that the October revolution possesses larger qualities of voluntarism there are a few instances where the concept of structuralism can be proven. First, the revolution was a planned event with the leadership and guidance of Vladimir Lenin, the shift of power between the Bolsheviks and the Soviet Union was made possible through the work of Lenin specifically, his witting in the April Theses. The public declaration of support to the Soviet Union was an ongoing planned and expected shift in political ideologies for Lenin. Although, the change caused a rift between the Bolsheviks it was predetermined hence the preparation for the speech and now famous phrase “All power to the Soviets”, this …show more content…
The revolution was an event that was constructed on a small scale of people that were made up of the Bolshevik party, for overturning the Provisional government into the Soviet Union. The revolution was a voluntarist revolution, as it explored the idea of individual agencies and the concept that the cause of an event is based on the actions of those participating themselves. For instance, in the October revolution, the uprising of the political change was due to the action of Lenin and the Bolshevik party. Without the participation of the party and the leadership of Lenin, the revolution would not have been executed in such magnitude. The October revolution is a voluntarist revolution for the following reasons, first, the leadership from Lenin, proved to be more progressive, compared to the traditional leaders at that time. Lenin instructed the affairs of the revolution in public, after writing the April These a speech that criticized the Provisional government and promoted that the Russian government falls under the Soviet Union. Lenin’s charismatic traits are essentially the reason behind the large amount of support that the Bolshevik party and the Soviet Union received, a famous line from the April These: “All Power to the Soviets”, was used in propaganda during the time of the revolution, it was a phrase that changed the course of
The Bolshevik October Revolution brought Vladimir Lenin to power. Lenin’s vow to end the war and open negotiations with the Germans provoked the Allies and led to the detachment of a military excursion to oppose the newly established government and aid rebels who had begun a civil war to oust the Bolsheviks.
For many revolutions people may argue different reasons why that particular revolution was caused, but there often one that is the primary cause. The Russian Revolution began February 1917, many people in Russia lost faith in their government, especially since they had not done so well to begin with when they participated in World War I. Which resulted in a lot of expenses. Others may argue that since Tsar was an unproductive leader and because of the decisions he made when he was in power that influenced the Russian Revolution. Although Tsar’s weak leadership may have influenced the Russian Revolution, World War I was the main cause of the Russian Revolution because it destroyed the economy, which led to riots and many people
“The revolution is not an open field of maneuver of the proletariat, even if the proletariat was social democracy at its head plays the leading role, but it is a struggle in the middle of incessant movement, the creaking, crumbling and displacement of all social foundations. In short, the element of spontaneity plays such a supreme role in the mass strikes in Russia, not because the Russian proletariat is “unschooled,” but because revolutions are not subject to schoolmastering.”[2]
The October Manifesto 1905 gained the Tsar back some of his support by promising reform; however the Tsar failed to abide by his promises and did not satisfactorily address the problems of Russia. To ensure his long-term survival the Tsar needed to address the problems that had caused the 1905 revolution. The action of Nicholas II to introduce reform saved his position in the throne s, though not for long as he took the wrong approach and chose to please some groups in Russian society and ignored the demands of others. Some changes were made that did temporarily satisfy his people such as the creation of a duma and the cancellation of the redemption payments. The creation of a duma meant the Tsar now had to delegate authority to parliament and could no longer consider himself an autocrat, however although it may of appeared that the Tsar now did not have ‘absolute’ power he didn’t really give the duma much power at all and he restricted their influence on the Russian government.
Analyze the extent to which these values and purposes were transformed and challenged over time.
While many historians might argue that the American Revolution was not so revolutionary in its nature, there is no denying the lasting effects that it has had not only on the continent, but the world. Through an analysis of documents from this period and the social, political, and economic changes that occurred in the colonies, it is clear that the colonial governmental system was radically changed during this time period. The political ideas that emerged from this revolution have shaped modern democratic governments for years, coupled with the advancement of other Enlightenment ideals.
The October 1917 Revolution is undoubtedly a momentous and extremely important event in Russia’s history, one that ousted the centuries-old Tsardom that ruled over the empire, in favour of the radical communist movement in the form of the Bolsheviks, headed by one Vladimir Iliych Lenin. However, did this sudden move from autocracy to a supposedly more progressive democracy actually bring about the modernisation of Russia industrially, agriculturally and culturally, or was it simply a rebranding of a totalitarian state that would continue to oppress the
Leon Trotsky was the chairman of the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet. The organization was that, under Lenin’s direction, that shown the overthrow of the state which is called or known “The October Revolution”
The Russian Revolution of 1917 set the country on a course that few other countries took in the 20th century. The shift from the direction of a democratic, parliamentary-style government to a one party communist rule was a drastic change that many did not and could not predict. Looking back on this key moment in Russian history, many historians ask the question ‘why did the political power in Russia shift to the Bolsheviks’? Since the revolution in 1905 Russia was becoming progressively more democratic, distributing power throughout the political sphere. This came to an abrupt halt when Vladimir Lenin was put into power by the Bolshevik takeover of the Provisional Government. Many authors have had different takes on this event. Two particularly interesting ones were Arthur Mendel and John D. Basil. Their pieces On Interpreting the Fate of Imperial Russia and Russia and the Bolshevik Revolution give various perspectives on the Russian Revolution and attempt to answer the question of the power shift. This key point in Russia’s history sets the tone for the next 100 years. Russia became a superpower, an enemy of the United States, started multiple wars directly and indirectly, and started using an economic system used by various countries around the world. Today we still see the effects of the 1917 Revolution. Looking at both Mendel’s and Basil’s attempt to answer why the power shifted to the Bolsheviks. Since both historian 's account of the events is different they cannot
Revolution is a concept that is very hard to master in itself, and pulling it off is even harder. Vladimir Lenin was a man who’s mastered this art. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, Lenin spent the majority of his time planning and leading the Russian revolution in which the Bolsheviks took down the Provisional Government. According to Lenin’s Biographical Information, one Menshevik opponent described Lenin saying how “There is no other man who is absorbed by the revolution twenty-four hours a day, who has no other thoughts but the thought of revolution, and who even when he sleeps, dreams of nothing but revolution.” Motivated by bringing freedoms and rights to the people of Russia along with his relentless passion for change, Lenin was successful with his goals as he was able to lead the Bolsheviks to victory. Ordinarily, his ideas are prominent in other revolutions that followed suit, including the Arab Spring of 2011. These protests, which took place in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya and Syria, followed many of the ideas that Lenin had during his lead in the revolution in
The Russian Revolution is a widely studied and seemingly well understood time in modern, European history, boasting a vast wealth of texts and information from those of the likes of Robert Service, Simon Sebag Montefiore, Allan Bullock, Robert Conquest and Jonathan Reed, to name a few, but none is so widely sourced and so heavily relied upon than that of the account of Leon Trotsky, his book “History of the Russian Revolution” a somewhat firsthand account of the events leading up to the formation of the Soviet Union. There is no doubt that Trotsky’s book, among others, has played a pivotal role in shaping our understanding of the events of The Revolution; but have his personal predilections altered how he portrayed such paramount
“The story of post-revolutionary America,” writes Rosemarie Zagarri, “is the story of how American women and men sought to define – and ultimately to limit and restrict – the expansive ideals they had so successfully deployed against Britain.” In this excerpt from Revolutionary Backlash, Zagarri depicts the extreme radicalism of the American Revolution, while also suggesting that there were some constraints to its extremism. Unlike the normal way of life in European government and society, Americans desired a nation in which the inherent rights and freedoms of individuals were recognized and respected. While these rights and freedoms were ultimately achieved, many groups of people were still left out. Women of all kinds, people of color,
Some say the glorious revolution was one of the greatest landmarks in the history of England. The glorious revolution is a very important event in history for multiple reasons. It wasn’t exactly a peaceful occasion but it was one in which no war of fight occurred. This was a pleasant change for England at the time because they had been experiencing plenty of fights over the throne and for once it was a relatively smooth transaction.
In 1917, in the midst of the Great War, Russia faced one of the biggest political shifts that the Tsarist-ruled country had ever known-the Bolshevik Revolution. There are two significant time frames associated with the Bolshevik Revolution. In the February revolution Tsar Nicholas II abdicated his throne and a Provisional Government took control. In the October revolution the Bolsheviks took power by overthrowing the Provisional Government. How did the October revolution become a reality? What factors facilitated the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917? Two important factors were the July event at Taurida Palace, and the Kornilov Affair. Richard Pipes describes in detail how Lenin influenced the Bolshevik party throughout the
Because are so many different kinds of revolutions with their own theoretical frameworks, I will analyze the merits of Marxism as it unfolds in the various authors. Because the writers speak of a particular time and place, all examinations will limit itself to the Europe in the lifetimes of the authors, drawing from V for Vendetta and modernity mostly as counterexamples. Therefore, this paper will focus on Marxist revolutions in mid-19th century to early 20th century Europe.