Was the fall of Imperial Russia Inevitable?
The fall of the Russian Empire was a cause of many events, but was it inevitable? In short yes. I believe that Nicholas II was kindling to the fall of Imperial Russia and World War 1 was the spark that lit it. On the optimist’s side, there were signs of Russia slowly becoming more stable before the war ruined all the progress made. Their economy was rapidly growing in Europe. Russia would have had an industrial economy in less than a decade. Therefore, employment and living standards would have improved. This would have calmed political opposition, reduced the number of strikes and strengthened the security of the monarchy. Thus, Tsarism had a good chance of survival if the industrial boom continued. …show more content…
His incompetence was characterized by a proud tyranny that damaged his status and provoked both his opponents and supporters. Throughout his reign, Tsar Nicholas II had increasingly lost connection with his people. On his orders, Cossack guards brutally repressed the 1905 revolution, memorialized as ‘Bloody Sunday’, and the 1912 Lena goldfields protests. Suddenly, people discovered that their leader was not the caring idol they had previously idolized, but a ruthless official determined to keep order. His most grave mistake was when he took over full control of the armed forces in August 1915. When the army continued to be defeated, Russians lost all sense of a protective and wise Tsar and it gave them an excuse to criticize him. By the time rumors of Rasputin’s sexual scandals in the royal court started spreading, along with rumors of the unpopular Alexandra’s interference in royal affairs, it simply confirmed people’s disbelief in the Tsar. Loss of esteem was important because it was something relied heavily upon by such out of date regimes to keep largely illiterate populations under control. Its loss played straight into the hands of the political opposition such as the Bolsheviks, an alarming trend that was already strong before war was …show more content…
In 1905 he was forced, unwillingly, to introduce a limited constitution, a parliament and legalize trade unions. This attracted liberals, who unsuccessfully demanded more. However, over the following ten years he tried to reverse these enterprises. The Fundamental Laws immediately rebuffed the October Manifesto and Order No. 1 gave the Tsar power to veto the Duma, it blocked by Tsarist conservatives. This conservative reaction drew the anger of the left and offered them ammunition to argue with. Sooner or later the issues would have been raised again regardless of whether war broke out or
The fall of the Russian Empire was a cause of many events, but was it inevitable? In short yes. I believe that Nicholas II was kindling to the fall of Imperial Russia and World War 1 was the spark that lit it. On the optimist’s side, there were signs of Russia slowly becoming more stable before the war ruined all the progress made. Their economy was rapidly growing in Europe. Russia would have had an industrial economy in less than a decade. Therefore, employment and living standards would have improved. This would have calmed political opposition, reduced the number of strikes and strengthened the security of the monarchy. Thus, Tsarism had a good chance of survival if the industrial boom continued. …show more content…
His incompetence was characterized by a proud tyranny that damaged his status and provoked both his opponents and supporters. Throughout his reign, Tsar Nicholas II had increasingly lost connection with his people. On his orders, Cossack guards brutally repressed the 1905 revolution, memorialized as ‘Bloody Sunday’, and the 1912 Lena goldfields protests. Suddenly, people discovered that their leader was not the caring idol they had previously idolized, but a ruthless official determined to keep order. His most grave mistake was when he took over full control of the armed forces in August 1915. When the army continued to be defeated, Russians lost all sense of a protective and wise Tsar and it gave them an excuse to criticize him. By the time rumors of Rasputin’s sexual scandals in the royal court started spreading, along with rumors of the unpopular Alexandra’s interference in royal affairs, it simply confirmed people’s disbelief in the Tsar. Loss of esteem was important because it was something relied heavily upon by such out of date regimes to keep largely illiterate populations under control. Its loss played straight into the hands of the political opposition such as the Bolsheviks, an alarming trend that was already strong before war was …show more content…
In 1905 he was forced, unwillingly, to introduce a limited constitution, a parliament and legalize trade unions. This attracted liberals, who unsuccessfully demanded more. However, over the following ten years he tried to reverse these enterprises. The Fundamental Laws immediately rebuffed the October Manifesto and Order No. 1 gave the Tsar power to veto the Duma, it blocked by Tsarist conservatives. This conservative reaction drew the anger of the left and offered them ammunition to argue with. Sooner or later the issues would have been raised again regardless of whether war broke out or