The Failure of the Provisional Government and the Rise of the Bolsheviks

From 1856 onwards the aim of turning Russia from a once agrarian, illiterate and backwards country and into a political superpower was set. A multitude of developments began with Nicholas II being a catalyst of change for the Russian people. Writers of Marxist Russia such as Joan Hasler1 however believe that the Tsars abdication merely prevented revolution happening for a few years. The significance of his abdication caused demands for a new and improved governmental structure to be in place in order to get Russia back on its feet after the devastating defeat in world war one. New political developments took place after the abdication of the Tsar including a new improved Duma who quickly realised they had little trust and loyalty to the tsar and decided to take it upon themselves to improves Russia on their own. Nearing the end of the Romanov dynasty there were 3 new political groups aiming to rule Russia, the duma, the Bolsheviks and the soviets which alone gives us significant evidence that the Tsars reign and abdication created a significant turning point in the political development 1856-1964.

When they were appointed the PG immediately: abolished the secret police; abolished censorship; introduced civil liberties; abolished the death penalty; granted civil rights to soldiers; abolished discrimination based on class or religion; and gave amnesty to political prisoners. All these things (contrary to the PG’s beliefs) were seen to be giving to much freedom to the population, to soon and this had a knock on effect throughout their reign. For example, when the state was threatened during April, July and October they were unwilling to use force. Orlando Figes sees this as a major reason for their downfall: “Intoxicated by their own self image as their heirs of 1789, they were deluded into believing that they could resolve the problems by 1917 by importing western constitutional practices and policies, for which there were no precedents, nor the necessary cultural base in Russia.”[6] The PG had destroyed the original bureaucracy under the Tsar and did not replace it with anything; this resulted in the population not really knowing what they were supporting.

From the initial seizure of power in 1917 until 1924, the Bolsheviks were confronted with a series of crises that threatened their ability to control and govern in Russia. The response and resolutions to these crises included Initial Reforms, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Civil War, Red terror, War Communism and the NEP. Under the leadership of Lenin, the execution of these responses were made possible and the Bolsheviks were able to maintain and expand their power. The Civil War however was the direct consequence of the Bolshevik’s actions as they tried to maintain their grasp on power. The victory in the Civil War was extremely pivotal for the Bolshevik consolidation of power as it brought control and power but more importantly it eliminated

tried to create a western style society. Nevertheless, this government led by Alexander Kerensky lasted for only seven months, by which at the end Lenin and the communist Bolsheviks seized power over Russia. When the peasants claimed land from the government the government refused which made the Bolsheviks extremely mad making them riot against the government. The Provisional Government lost to the

Bolsheviks was due to the failure of the Provisional Government in response to land policies; their failure to gain support from the masses; the lack of ‘real’ authority of the Provisional Government and the military failure of the army. Secondly, the failure of the

Within a few days in February 1917, Tsarist Russia came to an end. The Romanov family, who had ruled Russia since the 17th century, were overthrown and the monarchy crumbled. Traditional historian Bernard Pares argues that incompetent ministers and weaknesses of Nicholas II is to blame. While traditionalist historian Edmund Walsh blames the incompetence of the Tsarina and her mysticism beliefs. There are however many factors contributing to the Russian revolution of February 1917, such as: World War 1, political and economic failures. Therefore this essay will consider the impact of each factor in order to assess whether the winter of 1916-17 was the final straw for the people of Russia.

This essay shall address the issue of how the far the brutality of Bolshevik Regime ensured the maintaining of it’s power between the years of 1917-24. This essay shall explore topics concerning the ‘Dictatorship Of The Proletariat’, The Cheka, War Communism, The Red Terror and other potential reasons for the Bolsheviks remaining in power. This essay shall also explore the various views put forth by various Historians such as Robert Conquest and Richard Pipes.

On 24-26 October, the Bolshevik Party seized power from Kerensky’s Provisional Government. This was achieved with surprising ease. Retaining their newly acquired power, however, was to prove difficult. Nonetheless, the Bolsheviks proved successful in consolidating their power from 1917-1924, achieving this through a combination of pragmatic reforms and ruthless terror. This ultimately led the Bolsheviks far from their original goals and ideologies, and by 1924, the Soviet Union was a highly centralised one-party state.

In 1917 a great revolution would collapse Russia’s monarchy and extend the color of red throughout the world. During this time, Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin were instrumental in causing the grand collapse of the Russian government and the reformation into a communist state. The Russian revolution changed the world when it happened and I believe it changed the people of Europe after it occurred.

n March 2nd 1917, the rule of a 300-year-old dynasty was laid to rest as Tsar Nicholas II signed his warrant for abdication, officially sanctioning the end of the Romanov Dynasty. The immediate cause permitting this action was the success of the February Revolution however; this event evolved because of several internal and external factors, both long and short term in nature. Predominant among all we recognise the perpetuation of an outdated system of rule, the repercussions of rapid industrialisation, emerging doctrines of liberalism, political inflexibility and the vices imposed by the First World War. These factors progressively embellished societal discontent among the Russian people and inexorably stimulated the insurrection of the February Revolution.

The problem of what to do with the Romanovs was a topic that affected both the provisional government and the Bolsheviks

When the Provisional Government came into power Russia was in a state of major unrest. Russia had just overthrown the Tsarist regime, which had been in place for three hundred years and there were multiple groups who wanted to take power for themselves such as Lenin's Bolsheviks, they were fighting in an endless war and losing terribly, peasants where rebelling in the countryside and the people were angered over food shortages. On top of all these problems the Provisional Government was made up of members of the Duma who had no experience actually being in charge or having power over anything let alone the biggest and most culturally diverse country in the world. All these factors played a role in the downfall of the Provisional Government but overall it was the Provisional Government who played the biggest part in their own failure.

Following WWI, sever strain was placed on Russia's weak government and economy, resulting in mass shortages and hunger. The people and soldiers turned against the Tsar, losing faith in his authority and power due to the mismanagement and failure of the war, his decision to take personal command of the army seemed to make him responsible for the defeats. Discontent grew amongst the people where they In March, growing civil unrest and discontentment erupted into open revolt and strikes in Petrograd, forcing the abdication of Nicholas II (1868-1918), the last Russian czar. The Duma then assumed control and declared a provisional government.  Eight months later, the radical Bolshevik party seized power from the Provisional government.

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

The Russian Civil War raged from 1918 until the start of 1921. During this time the Bolsheviks faced massive opposition to their rule in the form of the White Armies, led by the former officers of the Tsarist state, and also from intervention by the forces of foreign countries. The Bolsheviks were surrounded, and often outnumbered by their opponents. At times, their situation seemed hopeless. Yet, by the start of 1921, the Bolsheviks had defeated their enemies and gained a complete victory. This victory can be attributed to the party’s aims, leadership, geography, and support.