Preview

Comparison and Contrast of the Russian Monarchy and Chinese Dynasties and Communism Essay Example

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
975 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Comparison and Contrast of the Russian Monarchy and Chinese Dynasties and Communism Essay Example
World Governments/Compare and Contrast of Transitions from Russian Monarchy and Chinese Dynasty to Communism

Russia and China, both at different times in history, transitioned the way their countries were ruled into communism. Early in the 20th Century, Russia was one of few countries left governed by a Monarchy. Although ideas and theories on governments had changed throughout Europe, Russia had remained to change. The Romanov Dynasty was in power over Russia until start of the Russian Revolution in 1917. The people of Russia were unhappy and discontented by how their country was run, which led to the revolution. Chinese dynasties ruled over China dating back to 2100 BC beginning with the Xia Dynasty and ending with the Xing Dynasty. Although there were similarities in the two countries, there were also many differences which were key to the success and failure to the countries change over to communist rule.
In 1547, the first Czar to take control of Russia was Ivan the Terrible. Many Czars ruled in between the time of the first Czar until the last Czar, Nicholas II. During the Romanov Dynasty, the Czar’s held complete control of the Russian city-states. The people of Russia along with the Czar’s believed they were appointed by God to rule Russia by the Holy Russian Empire. However, by 1894, the people of Russia started talking about change and ideas of a new government started to be the topic. The pheasants in Russia became disenchanted on the serfdom imposed upon them and looked for change to better their lives as well as their city-states.
In addition to the people of Russia’s disdain for how Russia was ruled, disastrous decisions were made by Nicholas II to turn the people against him even more. He refused in implement any reforms that the people yearned for to help them. He made the irreparable mistake of going to war with Japan. Their defeat to Japan pushed the people further away from the Czar. Nicholas also made the mistake of welcoming a monk

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Tsar Nicholas II succeeded in making a bad situation in Russia even worse. He became a leader at a difficult time, and could never stop the process of revolution. The Tsar was not a good leader, and was out of touch with the Russian people. He was also weak and indecisive, and extremely stubborn. Nicholas II was not equipped to effectively rule a country the size of Russia, and with a vast variety of people with different language, religion, race and culture. Additionally, Nicholas II was mainly concerned with family issues, instead of being concerned with political issues. It was these traits in Nicholas II?s personality that hindered him in being able to attempt to steer Russia away from revolution.…

    • 1455 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summary: Romanov Dynasty

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages

    Nicholas II, the last tsar of Russia, had neither the qualities nor the desire to rule imperial Russia. Born in Tsarskoye Selo in 1868, Nicholas was the eldest son of Alexander III, the fearsome tsar who had reimposed autocracy and oppression on the Russian empire after the murder of Alexander II. Those who met the young tsarevich, described him as pleasant and likeable, but otherwise unremarkable – hardly the traits of a man ordained by God to rule Russia. Nicholas famously expressed reluctance about taking the throne, declaring that he “never wanted to rule”. But tradition…

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Czar Nicholas was famous for his autocratic ideas, meaning that he theoretically had total power. His autocratic belief led to an ineffective rule. Nicholas II was the leader of the Russian Empire; however, he was not prepared for the tremendous obligations of administration. The Britannica article, “Nicholas II” claims, “Neither by upbringing nor by temperament was Nicholas fitted for the complex tasks that awaited him as autocratic ruler of a vast empire.” This suggests that Czar Nicholas’s rule was doomed from the start of his czarship. Nicholas’s inexperience explained his ineffectiveness as a ruler. In addition, Czar Nicholas’s absolutist beliefs blinded him from change. Nicholas II’s belief that he had absolute power and stubbornness clouded his view of change. According to Encyclopedia.com’s “Nicholas II,” “[Nicholas] was too stubborn and very slow to recognize the need for change. Nicholas found it…

    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsarism thrived for hundreds of years but as Russians became more educated they decided that communism and a dictatorship was too harsh and after a few revolutions Tsarism was a thing from the past. In the years 1881 to 1905 many things changed in Russia for the better and for the worse.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 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

    The autocratic rule that dominated the 300 year old dynasty was also a key factor in its destruction; the social unrest, clamour for political reform, backwardness of the Russian economy and the lack of reforms were all created by the Tsarist regime. The Romanov family ruled with an iron fist and used brutal violence to control its subjects. The repressive policies such as Russification and lack of effective reforms prevented the modernisation of the social and political aspects of the nation. Autocratic rulers promoted the feudalistic style class system which created extreme poverty in the lower classes and gave the people no political power. The introduction of ideas of liberty and an elected government into Russian society, contributed to the creation of revolutionary groups that aimed to overthrow the autocratic rulers and establish more liberal governments. This was first seen with the attempted political coup of the Decembrists that ultimately failed, however they were significant as the introduced a revolutionary trend and liberal views to the people. With the introduction of liberal views and equality, the people began to show their anger and frustration, caused by the Romanovs, through protests and revolutions, of which ultimately ended the Romanov Dynasty. The style of autocratic rulership is a key factor that impacted the fall of the Romanovs primarily because of the social issues it created.…

    • 1611 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Prompt: Compare and contrast the political and economic effects of Mongol rule on China and Russia.…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Nicholas II ascended the throne in 1894 he wasn’t facing any single issue left by a single Tsar he was facing the culmination of the three previous rulers’ mistakes that they had left behind or inherited and made worse. However the biggest problems had arguably been left by Russia’s most “liberal” Tsar, Alexander I.…

    • 958 Words
    • 4 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

    Nicholas Romanov

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Nicholas II was the last of the Romanov dynasty rule as the Czar of Russia. His rule began on 1st of November and finished on the 15th of 1917. During the time of Nicholas’s reign Russia saw him go from the great and powerful “little father” to a much more dishonorable and weak “bloody Nicholas”. Nicholas II was unsuccessful and the reason behind all of Russia’s many downfalls such as WW1 and the Russo-Japanese war. Bloody Sunday, The October Manifesto and the Russo-Japanese war were all events that support how unsuccessful he was as Czar and prove that he was the worst ruler of his time.…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Many Russians were infuriated by the government because the Tsar did not take action when the country was deteriorating. In addition, he failed to carry his people during the war. With this catastrophe, the Russians demanded for their voices to be heard and for a change in the government and as a result, war occurred within the country. Selfish people, like Nicholas II who kept all the power to himself, often affect others deeply, or foster terrible consequences. For example, one may take all the credit for working on a group project. Other group members will feel injustice and demand for credit to be given to them since they worked as hard as all the others did. Likewise, the Tsar’s decision to maintain power led to citizens rioting and the fall of his power. People should always think about their actions before executing them, or else the aftermath would be…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He worried that what he had worked so hard to accomplish would be destroyed by his son who had no lessons in how to rule a country. Nicholas II, as a child, was sheltered from his parents; and the Russian people’s point of views, or beliefs, and he developed an outlook toward his future with “honor, service and tradition” (Atchison). Nicholas enjoyed the military field and had an “excellent education and was perhaps the best educated European monarch of his time.” Nicholas II wanted to please…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Last of the Romanovs

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    The first person to impact the fall of Imperial Russia was Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor. In particular, Nicholas’ coronation marked the beginning of a downward spiral for the Romanov family. Tsar Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868 and was the eldest son of Alexander III (Levykin, 1999). Nicholas II had to assume the throne earlier than the Russian population would have liked. Nicholas’ father fell ill in the spring of 1894 and his health never fully recovered. On October 20th, 1894, Alexander III died of nephritis, forcing Nicholas to become the next Tsar of Russia at a young age (Lincoln, 1976). After the untimely death of his father, Nicholas was in dismay about becoming Tsar of Russia, a position he never really wanted. This is exemplified when Nicholas II refers to being the Tsar as, “the awful job I have feared all my life” (Massie, 1967, p. 59). To further Nicholas’ fears, the Russian people and government believed he didn’t have enough political training to rule Russia effectively (Harcave, 1968).…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    While in theory , the manner in which Russia was ruled undertook a considerable overhaul following the 1917 revolution . In reality the Country was governed with the Tsar and general security remaining as the ultimate authority with no real development occurring. Methods of oppression , propaganda and abusing civil rights were paramount in the rulings of all of the leaders be it Tsar or Communist. The largest change in the way in which Russia was ruled can be seen in the changing economy moving from open trade in the 1800's to the strict state capitalism of the 1900's. However few reforms had a direct impact in the way Russia was ruled thus meaning there was more continuity than change in the period 1855 to 1964.…

    • 1188 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    30.1 Revolutions in Russia * Russian Revolution: long time in coming * Oppression of 19th century czarssocial unrest * Revolts: army officers in 1825, peasants, secret groups plotted * 1881 students assassinated Alexander II (reformer) Alexander III Upholds the Autocracy * Autocracy: gov’t with total power…

    • 644 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays