french essay

The instant consequences to the emancipation of the serfs left Russia crippled, ironic, when alleged that it intended to advance Russia’s status. Many historians argue that despite abolishing serfdom, the means in which it was carried out didn’t coincide with reality. Subsequently, there were many riots which caused a rise of political groups such as Narodnik movement whose existence proves that Russian society was changing. Disorder spread with calls for change within Russia like In May 1862 where a number of pamphlets were issued including the radical Young Russia. Such propaganda aimed to gain support and create challenging individuals which would pressure the Tsar to make further changes. One could argue that as a result this led to the 1905 revolution and the end of Tsardom.

Some may argue Tsar Nicholas weak leadership help contributes to the Russian Revolution but World War I was be the primary cause. Tsar Nicholas was not the best leader but that did not have a big enough impact to cause the Russia Revolution because his actions did not lead to as many problems that World War I had caused. World War I had a greater impact because it led to many problems within Russia that caused the citizens to be furious.

The workers began rioting for better conditions and the police could not contain the chaos. At this stage it seemed patent that the Tsar and his government would be overthrown by the revolutionary forces unless serious changes were made. Hence, the 1905 revolution may not have achieved its objective of other throwing the Tsar however did contribute as an affect of what later brought the Tsarist regime to a collapse.

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.

In 1905, the social and economic tensions building up within Russia boiled over into Revolution. It was described by Lenin as the “Great Dress Rehearsal” for the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and may give us clues as to why the 1917 revolution started. The suggestion that Tsar Nicholas II and his actions were to blame for this revolution is debatable and there are many factors such as the repressive Tsarist system, the growth of opposition from the time of Alexander II and the defeat in the war with Japan to consider. These events can be separated into short and long term effects on the revolution. Bloody Sunday and defeat to Japan would be short term effects whereas the

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.

During the 1900’s the Russian Government made it extremely hard for the Bolsheviks to progress which made them revolt against the government making this a prime matter for the start of the Revolution. The Czarist government was ostracized by the common people of Russia so Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown by the Provisional Government, whom later on were overthrown by Lenin and shortly after the Bolsheviks took control over Russia. Russia was hard to develop because of the major leaders who had control; Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky. Almost overnight an entire society was destroyed and replaced with one of the most radical social experiments ever seen. Poverty, crime, privileged and class-divisions were to be eliminated, a new era of socialism

In the period from 1906-1914 Russia had appeared to have stabilised due to the social reforms brought in by Stolypin. However this only really created the illusion of stability due to many underlying problems that led to the 1905 revolution not being dealt with, therefore Russia had stabilised very little in this period which in turn would lead to further unrest in the future.

Another key reformist group was the social democrats they were created in 1898 and believed strongly in western ideas and Marxism. The group also wanted a society that gave power to workers and peasants. Which was the opposite of the Tsar’s views. Therefore in order to achieve this they would need a revolution in Russia and a change in the government. Similar to the socialist revolutionists they believed that creating violence was the best way to achieve this. But in 1905 it split into two groups these were known as the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. These groups created large widespread unrest to created political change. As we can see the violence and unrest caused by these groups would’ve pressured the Tsar and therefore are a main cause of the revolution.

Japan’s industrialization was more rapid and united than Russia’s because Japan was a smaller, more unified nation with a homogenous culture and thus could more rapidly modernize. Although some samurai rebelled against the Meiji, overall there was less pushback against the emperor’s policies of Westernization. Japan’s nationalism in its desire to better itself and compete on the world stage with the European powers was representative in its culture and helped push industrialization along. Russia, in contrast, was a multiethnic, sprawling empire with multiple peoples and cultures, ones that were much more inclined toward discontent. For example, the serfs, although they were later emancipated, were largely unhappy with poor working conditions in factories and living conditions. As a result, they rebelled and the Russian government was forced to enact a program of repression to put down the rebellions. Because Russia was so large and spread out, disunified, modernization took longer to take hold. Thus, when both countries tried to expand into Korea and Manchuria for natural resources and fresh markets, Japan won. The Russo-Japanese War was one of the first tests of the newly industrialized militaries, and Japan’s victory not only set it on the world stage with the respect of the Europeans, but

The 1905 revolution can be considered as the pinnacle event that accelerated the downward spiral of Tsar Nicholas’s rule and Russia’s adherence to their “little father”. From this point onwards Nicholas was referred to by the people as not their “little father” but “Nicholas the Bloody”. "The present ruler has lost absolutely the affection of the Russian people, and whatever the future may have in store for the dynasty, the present tsar will never again be safe in the midst of his people." (The American consul in Odessa). This revolution was an uprising of people from all levels of society and was not an uprising organised by any group in particular. The Bolsheviks played a minimal role in the 1905 revolution as most of their leaders were living in exile and their impact and influence on the workers in that year was weak as well as having no Duma faction. This demonstrates that the Bolsheviks had a minor role in the pinnacle events that led to the downfall of the Romanov dynasty but rather gained support after Nicholas’ abdication.

These were called liberals or ‘Cadets.’ The two other groups were more passionately opposed to the Tsar and believed revolution was the key to Russia’s problems. The Socialist Revolutionaries were a radical movement that believed violence was the only way to revolution, and support for them was wide spread. Their aims were to divide the huge estates from the nobility and hand them over to the peasants.

For three centuries before the revolution, life in Russia was not peaceful. It was cold, hard, and bitter instead. “The end of serfdom was a major event in Russia; yet it just wasn 't enough.”, in 1861. Serfdom, under feudalism, is the the status of peasants in which they are bound to a lord, or master, works on their land, and can be sold like property. Despite serfs being given ‘freedom’, Russia was mostly ruled by the czar and nobles. The average person was, and stayed, poor. Therefore, World War I was not the main cause of the Russian revolution. This outdated feudal class structure, inability to modernize, lack of peace, and czars’ inept leaderships lead to the Russian Revolution.

It is clear that a lot of people did not want to put up with the constant down spiralling because of the autocracy, many people decided to rise against the situation. These people were split between the reformers and a smaller group of revolutionaries. The reformers, or Liberals, wanted to modernise Russia gradually.They wanted free elections, more education for the people and no censorship. The revolutionaries, on the other hand, wanted to throw out the whole tsarist system and build a different one.Revolutionaries were the ones waiting for the perfect moment to strike the match since the autocratic regime had caused a long term fatigue in the society - the long term situation let them was highly in favour of this group in terms of revolution, only a slight push to the angered people was needed to proceed.

Therefore, morale in Russia was not a reason why there was an outbreak of revolution in 1917. Nevertheless, the few military successes could not make up for the shocking casualty list revealed later on in wartime. Also, when the economic and military problems arose they could have been tolerable for the general public if they were encouraged by the people at the top such as the Tsar but no leadership was shown. Though this was a problem in Russia the morale in Russia was not too bad although people did begin to focus more on taking care of themselves because of the effects of the war on everyday life. On the other hand, the fact that central leadership was not being provided to the Russian public, criticisms began to be pointed directly at the Tsar. Nicholas failed in being commander-in-chief of the Russian armed services. He did not encourage war effort and did not prove to be the appropriate representative for the Russian people. In addition, the fact that he took on this important role meant that he was responsible for the wars consequences and the survival of Tsardom depended on military success. Due to the lack of success, Nicholas II was blamed and not his generals. This was a reason for the revolution in February 1917 to happen as it appeared to the citizens of Russia that they did not have a strong leader, also the tsarist system’s claim to the loyalty of the Russian people had been forfeited thus