Why Is Tsar Nicholas II A Bad Government

Ivan IV, also known as “Ivan the Terrible,” lived from 1530 to 1584 and was the first Tsar of Russia. He officially reigned from the age of three; however, he did not have any real power until he crowned himself “Tsar” of Russia in 1547. He went on to conquer vast amounts of neighboring territories, eventually controlling the largest empire in the world at the time. In addition to increasing the Russian Tsardom’s size, he also completely restructured the political system. He took away all power from the noble boyar elite, and became an absolute monarch. This was good because the boyars at the time had been corrupt, and more interested in their personal interests than the interests of the state (Ivan the Terrible).

The system that was in place for over 500 years was starting to decay due to the independence of other nations and how developed their societies were. The Russian population wanted to be free of monarchs and having a weak leader was easy to do so. Nicholas II was one of the weakest leaders of the dynasty due to all of the things that slid past him. “He allowed his country to go to two wars, the Russo-Japanese and World War I, despite his country being terribly ill prepared. His vacillation on the idea of forming a constitutional monarchy because of his steadfast belief in his God

At the beginning of the twentieth century, Russia, unlike other European countries, was still being ruled by an absolute monarch known as a czar. In Czarist Russia, these rulers had complete authority over their country and often denied lower class citizens equal rights and say in political matters. Czar Nicholas II, however, who ruled Russia in the early 1900s, attempted to appease the peasants by establishing certain reforms, including the formation of the Duma, a political legislature that claimed to represent the people. Nevertheless, Nicholas II eventually restricted voting rights in the Duma to the upper class, giving landowners and nobles a greater voice. Dissatisfied with their limited political influence and poor living conditions,

Nicholas the Second was a large contributing cause to his own abdication. Nicholas the Second continued to make countless amounts of unreasonable decisions throughout his reign. His bad decisions drove many of his original supporters away. For example, even on the day of his coronation he managed to start off his reign on a bad foot. This was due to the fact that when many celebratory mugs were being gifted to the people of St Petersburg to celebrate the coronation of the Tsar there was not enough to go around and in an effort to acquire one of these limited mugs many citizens were brutally killed. In the interim, Nicholas showed no consideration or sympathy towards the dead or those affected and continued with the coronation. Consequently

the people’” but many others disagreed . They felt that he was manipulating the family. This only added to the discontent and secrecy surrounding the family. Many people did not like how isolated the family was, not only from everyday Russians, but also the aristocracy. This made Nicholas an incapable leader because he separated himself to a large extent from Russian society. His shyness added to the list of reasons why he was a bad leader for Russia which lead to the end of the Old Regime.

On the 20th October 1894 Nicholas II ascended the throne as tsar of Russia. He idolised the concept of continuing to rule Russia under the autocratic system, in the same way his father and predecessor Alexander III had done so. However, Nicholas lacked the qualities and characters of the autocratic style of leadership. The

Nicholas I was emperor of Russia from 1825 to 1855. As ruler of the Russian Empire, Nicholas I partially succeeded in restoring the historic power and position of the autocracy, which is absolute rule by a king (in his case) in Russian life and European affairs. His rule marks the highpoint of Russian conservative reaction to the French Revolution, Napoleonic Europe, and the Decembrist Revolt. Not only did the Decembrist Revolt strengthen Nicholas’s conservative resolve, but also it forced him to rebuild the historic power of the Russian autocracy and concentrate on internal affairs over foreign relations throughout most of his rule. Nicholas I was the last Russian powerful emperor to clearly show the historical definition of the autocrat, which

Tsar Nicholas II was one of the central figures to the Russian February Revolution of 1917 and secured the downfall of the Romanov dynasty. Nicholas II continued the regressive reforms of his father Tsar Alexander III, ultimately disenchanting the constituents from the neglect of longstanding grievances; he epitomised the fundamental problem of absolute rule, as years of suffering would eventually lead to revolution. His mismanagement and direct involvement in World War I undermined the already unstable government, causing his subjects to join radical movements to overthrow the tsarist regime.

As tsar, Alexander III believed in using the Okhrana to put many citizens in prison. The Okhrana was the Tsar’s secret police. Tsar Alexander III married a Danish princess and had six children, of which Nicholas II was the oldest. Nicholas II was the tsar of Russia, when he was twenty six years old. His father died from kidney disease.

Nicholas II was known, not only for being the Emperor of Russia but also for his character and personality which undoubtably led him to his own downfall. Nicholas was often referred to as not being ready to become Tsar as well as being a weak leader. Firstly, Nicholas II himself, amongst a very large proportion of Russian society, believed that he was not prepared to be coronated Emperor. Nicholas himself stated “What is going to happen to me and all of Russia? I am not prepared to be a Tsar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling.”. (Russian Revolution Quotations 2015). Nicholas was aware of what he was getting himself into and that he was not prepared for such a role. This is further corroborated by the

Introduction: Unlike other countries having a democratic government, Russia was ruled by a monarchy, therefore Nicholas II inherited the role of Tsar after his father passed away from kidney inflammation in 1894. There were many reasons behind why Russia was considered as having a backwards economy and the Russo-Japanese War was a major setback for Russia. Bloody Sunday took place and shortly afterwards Nicholas II was compelled to introduce the October Manifesto … . Nicholas II Tsar Nicholas II was a problem for the social, political and economic well being of the early Twentieth Century Russia.

Various aspects of Nicholas II’s political decisions reflected his clear unsuitability for the role of Tsar, and these decisions form a preliminary basis for both his own legacy of incompetency & the eventual undoing of the Romanovs. In comparison to rulers preceding, Nicholas was ill-prepared for the role: his father, Alexander III, failed to adequately develop his son’s understanding of civil & state responsibilities before his death in 1894, under the guise that he would live long enough to teach Nicholas of these affairs. Upon his consecration as Tsar, Nicholas spoke in his diary of his apprehensiveness

It all began in 1894 when a man named Alexander III (Tsar of Russia), died leaving his son Nicholas II to become the tsar of Russia at the age of 26. In 1894 Nicholas married Alexander the princess of Germany; they had 5 children, 4 girls and a boy. There only son Alexei was born with hemophilia.

Nicholas II saw himself as a bulwark against democratic progress, emphasizing the tradition of the Russian Monarchy. This is evident in the image he tried to uphold through his clothing along with the extravagant 1913 tricentenary celebration of the Romanov Dynasty in the midst of dissent. The working class were growing tired of the conservative “traditional” Russian policymaking, and the Tsar denied them any forms of democratic reform, further alienating himself from his people. The people of Russia also saw Nicholas II as a weak leader, which was emphasized by the imminent collapse of his dynasty as the only male heir he had produced was a sickly boy with hemophilia. It was easy for the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks to exploit this weak

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.