Preview

Before 1905 the opposition to the government of Tsar Nicholas II was of no consequence

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
795 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Before 1905 the opposition to the government of Tsar Nicholas II was of no consequence
The Tsar was not in serious Jeopardy in 1905 Throughout his time as Tsar, Nicholas II was faced with constant threats due to terrorist groups such as the peoples will. Many of these groups were oppressed by ‘The reaction’ that began under the reign of Alexander III, however not all opposition was destroyed. This meant that Nicholas was in constant Jeopardy. This essay will discuss whether or not Tsar Nicholas II was truly in serious Jeopardy during the events of 1905.
The Russian revolution which began in 1905 was a wave of mass political and social unrest that spread through vast areas of the Russian empire.
Factors such as industrialisation, urbanisation, bouts of economic depression and a rapidly increasing population all contributed to undermine the order and stability of the regime.
In light of the opposition he received, Nicholas created a Duma as a result of the October Manifesto in order to appease the masses. Before the creation of the Duma in 1905 however, political parties were illegal in Russia because Nicholas was a strict autocrat. There were three main groups which opposed tsardom during the period 1881-1905: the Populists, the Social revolutionaries and the Social Democrats. This essay will discuss whether these three groups were of any consequence to the government of Nicholas II before 1905.
Populism began in the 1870’s. It was a revolutionary movement that thought the future of Russia was in the hands of the peasantry. The Populist’s were not peasants themselves, but members of the middle and upper classes. The Populist’s began to try and teach the peasantry about how they were going to lead the revolution by beginning a scheme called “going to the people”, however this did not work as well as they thought as many of the peasants did not understand or accept the revolutionary message being preached to them. This caused, in desperation, some members of the populist’s to turn to terrorism. In 1879 members of the Populist’s broke off and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The question is focused on the challenges mounted to Tsarist rule in the given period, and the extent to which divisions among opposition groups contributed to their failure. Answers may consider the four main strands of opposition, their internal divisions and their intolerance of each other. A tradition of revolutionary activity was established by the Populists and their appeal to the peasants, though they were weakened by the assassination of Alexander II and the repression established by Alexander III. The Social Revolutionaries tried to gain support among both peasants and townspeople, but were divided between anarchists and revolutionaries. The Social Democrats split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks at the 1903 Congress, while the Liberals did not establish distinctive parties until after the 1905 Revolution. A simple description of some of the revolutionary parties will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on the range and depth of relevant material.…

    • 555 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Under Nicholas, the people suffered from his draconian policies, inciting a series of revolts. The Czar’s significance comes from his role in starting the Russian Revolution, which ended a backwards Russian Empire and created the Soviet Union, a state that influenced the world today. A person today can learn from the Czar’s mistakes and use them in daily life; for example, one can learn to listen to the problems of others before making a major…

    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    All state leaders across the whole period held qualities that didn’t please the whole of the population in Russia. During the reign of Alex II, the government showed some strength with controlling opposition from the peasantry through the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It was thought that to prevent revolt from below, this was a key movement that had to be made, and therefore prevented future unrest and opposition. However, the new liberated serfs had to deal with more laws concerning land ownership with led to further unrest and repression in the peasantry by the state. The state moreover, appeased the most vocal critics but in such a way that allowed dissenters to express themselves in the knowledge that Tsar’s decision would be final. Compared to Nicholas II’s reign, this showed a decisive leading technique, as Nicholas’s style was more conservative, and showed weakness, relying on others’ advice to fuel his decisions. A key failure throughout his period was the mixed rule attempt with the Duma introduced from 1906 to 1917, it is arguable that Nicholas II made concessions only to keep opposition temporarily at bay and that his aim was to uphold the principle of autocracy.…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Undeniably, Nicholas II had an enormous role in bringing about the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty in March 1917. Whilst many historians argue the fall of the Tsarist regime to be the direct response and product of World War I, it is quite evident that it was Nicholas’ inefficient and fatal autocratic ruling which led to the March Revolution of 1917. The effects of Russia’s involvement in numerous wars only heightened and highlighted Nicholas’ unsuitability for the role of Tsar, and his absolute and stubborn belief in autocracy. Had Nicholas’ various choices throughout his reign differed, the Romanov Dynasty could in fact, have existed…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1883, the first Russian Marxist group formed in St. Petersburg in opposition to Alexander’s rule. Many attempts to overthrow Alexander were made by the proletariat who gradually grew in number throughout Alexander’s reign in response to the economic reforms that he continued to make. These workers eventually made up the group of people who revolted in the 1905 Revolution and this proves that Alexander III was not successful in suppressing opposition long term, as his attempts meant that a revolution would occur in the reign of the next Tsar.…

    • 594 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    After the October Coup in 1917, the Bolshevik’s power as the government of Russia was not completely solidified. This was mainly due to the vast opposition that the Bolsheviks experienced from all over Russia along with other pressing issues such as food shortages, an exhausting war, and a crippled economy. Yet the Bolsheviks not only survived the early day‘s of empowerment but went on to rule Russia for the next 70 years. This essay will examine the factors that allowed the Bolsheviks to have such a sweeping success in ruling Russia.…

    • 1312 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    There was a great deal of opposition to the tsarist regime between 1861 and 1881 and many were successful. The opposition came from the liberal minded intelligentsia who were determined to change what they believed to be outmoded and inhibiting Russian ways. The Populists, who aimed to win over the peasantry to their socialist ideas by stirring up their resentment of the Tsarist Autocracy.…

    • 751 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the main factors for the survival of Tsarist state in 1881 to 1905 is the division of the groups. The groups were the SD, the SRs and the liberals who had very different views and methods to get their word across and these were very useful to the Tsar. The inability of these groups to unite together against Tsar as a powerful unit meant that the tsar was easily able to squish out any talk of revolution or reform. The people against those are could've worked together like army ants who are only powerful together but they isolated themselves which made any threat to the system an empty gesture. Most divisions were due to a lack of common ideas but their methods such as the SRs who would use violence, against the moral thought of the liberals who would be more peaceful and less threatening. This fact meant that the union between the groups was made impossible. This caused no problem for the Tsar and made his system impregnable.…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Romanov Dynasty

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages

    When discussing why public opinion of the tsar was so easily pliable in the lead up to revolution in 1917, we must acknowledge that Russia was evolving rapidly. As modern historians and public spectators, it is simple to map out how Russian society became a pressure cooker of discontent and anger. Mass industrialisation made living for a working, urban class almost unbearable, the class divide was still rigid, revolutionary ideas from the West offered a foundation to base claims for the removal of the autocratic system, and the pressures of World War 1 served to unite the people in one cause to end hardship. These factors stoked a population already vying for change and such an environment made revolution in Petrograd (St Petersburg) in the February of 1917 almost inevitable, foreshadowing the end of the…

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A Nationwide Revolution

    • 1615 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In 1905 the massacre of innocent people during a peaceful protest outside the winter palace in St Petersburg sparked the start of a nationwide revolution. This mass murder of the innocent protestors became known as ‘Bloody Sunday’. During the revolution strikes occurred across the nation involving more than 400,000 people, peasants attacked and raided the homes of their landlords and the Tsar’s uncle, the Grand Duke Sergei, was assassinated. Although Bloody Sunday was the immediate reason for the revolution, there were several causes which had caused long term grievances towards the Tsarist regime among the population of Russia leading up to 1905. These include the developments in the countryside and the lives of the peasants, the treatment of the inner-city working class and ethnic minorities, the repression and growth of the political opposition and the impact of the Russo Japanese war. Although all these factors contributed to the initiation of a revolution in Russia, I believe that the attitudes towards and treatment of the working class and the peasants was the most prominent reason for the uprising in 1905.…

    • 1615 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    During 1917 the political system of Russia, and the political opinions of its public, began to change. The First World War was deeply taking its toll, with the casualties running into millions, and food shortages were reaching crisis levels across Russia. Presided over by the Provisional Government, who had little support and even less real power, the people of Russia became restless. In October, the animosity between Government and populace came to a head, and a revolution put Lenin’s socialist Bolshevik party in power. This essay will show that, while the Bolshevik party was dedicated and driven in the values they believed in, it was only the seizing of opportunity, and a lot of luck, that they succeeded in taking power.…

    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Russian Revolution Causes

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages

    By 1917, Russia was chaotic, the government had been thoroughly corrupted, strikes were rampant and all happening at once. The World War I had begun and Russia was having many casualties due to being ill - equipped against industrialized Germany, and amidst the countries it was the one to receive most damage. Due to the german attacks the Russian economy had been falling apart, and such a situation was only useful to the radicals, as they used it as an opportunity to join with the moderates among other forces, in order to overthrow the Czar and achieve their revolutionary goals. As time passed Russia’s situation only deteriorated, demonstrators and protestants took over the streets, the king’s armies killed many of them, but they still continued to attack full force. Then when an army took the protestants side, the tables flipped, Nicholas II, the Czar at the time was forced to abdicate his throne and so freed Russia of over four centuries of Czarist…

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Russian Populism Essay

    • 659 Words
    • 3 Pages

    I shall now attempt to apply the theory delineated above to analyze the political terrorism of the Russian Populist movement in the 1870s. Despite the abolishment of serfdom in 1861 and the Great Reform launched together, the Russian Empire was still in essence an autocratic regime ruled by absolutism and patrimonialism, where all power of the state belonged to the tsar. The authority of the tsar derived directly from the divine source of Russian Orthodox and his supreme power was institutionalized into numerous hierarchical traditions—the Tsardom is the epitome of hierarchical legitimation. The hierarchical value systems underlying the sanctity of such traditions were internalized by the subjects of the tsar's ruling; the tsar was viewed both as a intermediary between the divine and the worldly with inviolable power, and a…

    • 659 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A certain amount of stability was brought to Russia in the form of political concessions, enforced by Nicholas 2nd, which at the time seemed a huge potential for much desired freedom and democracy for the people. Concessions giving the people the rights of freedom of speech, conscience, assembly and union were introduced, and a State Duma allowed, which was to behold legislative powers thus introducing some sort of a democracy into the current political system. Although these concessions were intended to put an end to the disruption from the people of Russia, the mixed responses from individual groups limited its effectiveness. However, some groups who had once opposed him, became indecisive about what methods would be most effective for Russia’s stability, and thusly split off into smaller groups, such as the Kadets and the Octobrists. The Kadets (originally called Constitutional Democrats) criticised the Manifesto for its failure to provide an elected constitutional assembly with its own constitution. Although they had no desire for a revolution, and accepted the concessions as a starting point, they ultimately wanted it to go a lot further, for example a law written enforcing a secure democracy, where the Tsar could not reject desired changes. This showed a level of stability expressed by the Kadets, however there was still potential for an uprising if change was not made.…

    • 2751 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The October Manifesto

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages

    'Bloody Sunday' in 1905 had severely weakened any hope Nicholas II had of calling himself the ‘father of his people’. By the end of the year, St Petersburg had been affected by many strikes and political agitation in the factories was rife. On the first Sunday in March, an estimated 300,000 people had taken to the streets of the capital shouting out a variety of slogans. The most worrying for the authorities must have been “All power to the Soviets” while “God save the tsar and open his eyes to our wants” would have given the glimmer of hope that some of the people still demonstrated loyalty to Nicholas II. Even more worrying for the government was the fact that the demonstrations were spontaneous and not pre-planned and involved a curious mix of political aspirants. They called for a general change in how Russia should be governed but were not specific with details…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays