The Russian Mandate System: A Case Study

A revolution, by definition, is the overthrow of one government followed by replacement with another. The American Revolution against the British during 1775 to 1783 and the French Revolution pitting the French people against their own government during 1789 to 1799 were both very important political and social turnovers. This movement towards the establishment of a constitutional government influenced political thought throughout the world. By closely examining three of the main causes of these revolutions, it is clear that although the two revolutions have their differences, the basis of cause for the revolutions have, overall, much stronger similarities.

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.

This demonstrates that since the stress of waging war was tremendous, it should be no surprise that the first war could be a primary cause of the Russian Revolution. Moreover, the major powers of Europe hurt Russia in World War I; yet, by 1917, all the combatants horrifically suffered from the strains of war economically, proving this to be a long-term cause. This was, to a great extent, considerable because the military defeats and social strains of World War I had created a crisis in Imperial Russia. Before, Russia had some military accomplishments and they were on their way to being successful. Nevertheless, their triumphs were not long-standing; hence, Russia was not able to be victorious due to the fact that Russia decreased in economy because of the limitations in Russia. Similarly, restraints included the shortage of food and the huge problems with getting the obligatory materials for the army during World War I, which shows that this was momentous. Along with Russia being defeated and having a scarcity of supplies, Russia also showed economic oppression due to the pressure in jobs workers faced.

The last Tsar Nicholas II ascended the throne in 1894 and was faced with a country that was trying to free itself from its autocratic regime. The serfs had recently been emancipated, the industry and economy was just starting to develop and opposition to the Tsar was building up. Russia was still behind Europe in terms of the political regime, the social conditions and the economy. Nicholas II who was a weak and very influenced by his mother and his wife had to deal with Russia’s troubles during his reign. In order to ascertain how successfully Russia dealt with its problems by 1914, this essay will examine the October Manifesto and the split of the opposition, how the Tsar became more reactionary after the 1905 revolution, Stolypin’s

Why was the territory of the Ottoman Empire divided into mandates while the territory of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was divided into Nation states?

In 1905 and 1917 Russia was tormented by chaotic revolutions. The workers and the intelligentsia had arrived at the point of hating the autocracy because they could no longer endure the suffering, hunger and repression that the tsarist policies brought with them. Years later Lenin referred to the revolution of 1905 as a “dress rehearsal for the October Revolution” of 1917. In 1905 tsardom nearly fell. Nicholas II succeeded in remaining in power, stabilizing the situation, only thanks to various concessions. However, his continuing to rule harshly and unwisely brought him to be forced to abdicate in the February of 1917, signing the end of the Russian monarchy.

Compare and contrast the extent to which the French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Russian Revolution (1917-1924) changed the status of women.

Unlike Absolutist governments, which allowed for Kings like Louis XIV to spend on their own lavish lifestyles and palaces, constitutionalism ensured the no one leader in government was too powerful. In his The Spirit of Laws, Montesquieu advocated for a government where “the executive, legislative, and judicial powers” were separated from one another (Document 6). This idea, which is one of the building blocks of constitutionalism, ensured the interest of all citizens were being represented. In the English Revolution, the once Absolutist government gained a greater separation of powers. Parliament was given sovereignty over annual taxation, in addition to the implementation of national elections every two years. Unlike absolutist governments in France and Russia, This new distribution of responsibilities helped to keep the English Monarch from making decisions that didn’t best serve the interest of his people. Ultimately, in a societally imbalanced Europe, constitutionalism ensured a separation of powers in government that prevented corruption and ensured that citizens had greater representation within their

The Russian revolution was going on in 1917, during the final phase of World War 1. Russia had bean in the war , and transformed into the union of soviet socialist republicans(USSR). During the war tzarism was overruled and taken over by a democracy. The russian Revolution generally took out powerful leader and spread power throuhgout the country and the government. Russia was probably changed the most but also for the better during WW1.

This new system had a profound impact, it was “considered to embody the administrative precepts and notions of modern politics and thus guiding Russian bureaucratic practice.” Additionally, the Great Embassy and Peter’s desire for reform brought about closer Anglo-Russian ties as Britain’s recognition for Russia’s imperial ambitions with “King William's de facto recognition of Peter's desire of 'Enlarging' his 'Dominions'” brought about an important validation for Russia’s reforms and international actions. Furthermore, this closer relationship brought about economic benefits as the establishment of Anglo-Russian trade allowing duty-free imports of tobacco and the exchange of mainly raw materials from Russia in return for manufactured and luxury goods. This resulted in Russia trebling the volume of trade between 1698 and 1708 and a continued increase throughout the eighteenth century with some figures stating a fifteen-fold increase in foreign trade from Peter’s time until the end of the eighteenth

In the nineteenth century, leaders of Russia, Egypt and the Ottoman Empire looked to the seventeenth and eighteenth century philosophies of the European Enlightenment and Napoleonic France as guides for building a modern state. They emulated military strength and thriving academic and agricultural institutions, as well as a direct relationship between the general population and national authority figures. In Russia, Tsar Nicholas looked to the principle of democracy which pervaded the French revolution, as it was characterized by a direct relationship between the government and its constituents. In order to appeal to a Russian population that was moved by the prospect of democracy, the Tsar

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 French Revolution (1789-1814) was a period that affected the outcome of world history tremendously. This is considered a major turning point in European history which has led to dramatic changes in France and other regions of the world. Various social and political issues led to the start of the revolution. Politically, France suffered under the rule of Louis XVI, who ruled by absolute monarchy. Many people had their natural rights renounced and weren’t able to have a political voice. Socially, France had divided its population within 3 estates (classes). French citizens took it upon themselves to remodel their country 's’ political structure. The French Revolution had encountered both positive and negative effects. However, many Europeans viewed the Revolution as much more than just a bloody massacre. The French Revolution was used to demonstrate new ideology that would emphasize the principles of liberty and equality throughout Europe.

After the Revolution in France, the old absolutist monarchy was replaced by the Constitution of 1791, and King Louis XVI was forced to share power with an elected legislative body in the new constitutional monarchy. In a rather

The most powerful entities of Russia (one of the main Soviet Union creators) took control when they began to spread the motto "all power to the soviets." It is at this time that the monarchy of Tsar Nicholas II was threatened and finally destroyed in 1917. From this year, began the establishment of a social state and free of exploiters was consolidated until more than a dozen countries were they joined him.