Differences Of Tsar And Lenin's Government In Russia

Improved Essays
As World War 1 goes to the end, Russia gets to an informal situation. The leader of Russia who was Tsar was ruling the country in a wrong way. After the corruption of Tsar, Lenin who is part of the Bolsheviks comes up and rules the country. He comes up with a government that will give land and takes care of the country. As a result, Lenin became a leader who made Russia a stable country. Lenin’s government was overall more different than Tsar’s government for many important reasons. The main differences were the living conditions between the peasants and the workers, rights that people had, and how they deal with the oppositions.

The peasants and workers living conditions during Lenin’s government were different comparing to Tsar’s government.
…show more content…
The most basic way both Tsar and Lenin used to punish the opposites was to get them out of the country or hang them. During Tsar's government, there were three particular groups that were opposite Tsar. The ‘Cadets’ who were the middle-class people, Socialist Revolutionaries, and Bolsheviks Mensheviks which were the Social Democratic Party. They were big and unstoppable so Tsar made a secret police called ‘Okhrana’. They were the spies who murdered and exiled the oppositions. A few years later, revolution finally happened and the Winter Palace got surrounded. On the Sunday 22 January 1905, a huge amount of protesters came to the Winter Palace to say their hopes to Tsar. But the only thing the soldiers did was to fire without any warning or sign. So from this reaction, Tsar was very decisive and clear with punishing and controlling the opposite. Lenin also had opposite who he had to control of. He also exiled people and hang some people who were hating Lenin. As he wants peace in the country and gives equal chances, he controls the opposite in a peaceful condition. “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”(Lenin) This quote from Lenin shows that he controlled the opposition by controlling their government by plan and not be bothered any of these attacks. So the way the Lenin’s government controlled opposites are also different to Tsar.

By looking at the three main points on the differences and similarities the Tsar’s government and the Lenin’s government had, Lenin’s governments is overall more different than Tsar’s government. Lenin was more caring the people and changing the rules while Tsar did not. Also, how they controlled the human rights and the oppositions were different. In overall, Lenin’s government was different to Tsar’s government and this made Russia able to become a better country out of

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The question of why the autocratic tsarist state of Russia fell is complex and has been interpreted in a variety of ways by historians. The fall began with the 1905 Revolution, on January 9th, or “Bloody Sunday” when a group of demonstrating workers with grievances for the Tsar were fired on by troops. Tsar Nicholas II agreed to concessions including the establishment of a State Duma. Despite these concessions, conflict and pressure continued leading to the final collapse of the tsarist system with the Revolution of 1917. Historians have answered the question of why tsarism fell in different ways.…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the year 1917, multiple revolutions took place including the october revolution and the february revolution. The cause for these revolutions is to end imperial rule from other interfering countries. The reason why the russian revolution started was because people were unhappy with their king, Nicholas 2 who believed in government corruption. Once the Russian Revolution started people started to gain more support and more benefits from the government. One reason why the russian revolution of 1917 have the support of the people because the revolution mostly benefited the working class.…

    • 431 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Both men viewed democracy as a way for bias to occur towards one side of their country, so they decided to control it themselves. In Lenin’s case, Russia had “Almost three years of civil war that followed, and The Bolsheviks were victorious and assumed total control of the country” (“Vladimir Lenin, BBC). Once this happened, as leader of the Bolsheviks Lenin made himself leader of Russia. While in control, Lenin was a cruel leader often punishing or taking goods from people for no real reason. For example, when the government was “Lacking funds or goods to exchange against grain needed to feed the Red Army and the towns, Lenin instituted a system of requisitioning grain surpluses without compensation” (Britannica).…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In November 1917, the Bolsheviks, a group looking for power in Russia, stormed the Winter Palace and arrested members of the provisional government. Eventually, the Bolsheviks gained complete control in Russia, especially after their Red Army won the Russian Civil War. Lenin was the original leader of the Bolsheviks, and he established the Soviet Union. This union was comprised of individual “soviets”-communist governments that ruled over certain areas of Russia. But, in 1928, Josef Stalin seized total…

    • 1750 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Lenin, albeit due to a forced hand, seeks to bring agricultural industrialization by re-introducing capitalistic practices, while Stalin wants to increase the State influence in the agricultural sector by using the model of large State-run farms to encourage peasants to join them to share in the profits brought by economies of…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    No policies were put in place to help the workers and a growing resentment amongst the people became apparent and this ultimately led to the 1905 uprising. There were still low levels of literacy and productivity as a survey had revealed and foreign expertise still dominated. A provisional government succeeded the rule of Nicholas II. Unlike the Tsars the government didn’t come to power with any legitimacy. The…

    • 2047 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Russia was and still is a vast empire, covering ⅙ of the planet's total surface area. Over a hundred years ago, Russia was ruled by the Tsar, who was the absolute ruler of Russia. At this time Nicholas II was the Tsar of Russia and he did not want anyone to tell him how to rule To begin with, Tsardom collapsed in February was because Nicholas II was not the “little father” that the russians expected him to be (the big father was referred to God. People expected Nicholas to protect them and care for them if they were in need.…

    • 698 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    1700s The Enlightenment

    • 1718 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The Tsar in Russia, Tsar Nicholas II, was very unpopular because of corruption and the long war of World War II that was draining the country . In the revolution, a revolt that starts on February 23, overthrows the Tsar and only leaves the provisional government . The other group left are the soviets which were socialists, and the branch of socialists known as Bolsheviks, take control and end the war by signing the Brest Litovsk treaty . They award nobles land to the poor, nationalize banks, and give factory workers the rights to the factories . The Russian revolution and the Bolsheviks rise in Russia was significant because it led to a one party dictatorship, communist led Soviet Union arising in 1922 .…

    • 1718 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The political shift that occurred during the early twentieth century in Russia remains one of the most successful anti-monarchal revolutions in history. The political and social climate leading up to the February and October Revolutions of 1917 was unique, fueled by tense relations between the Russian working class and the royal family. It was the detrimental political missteps by Tsar Nicholas II, as well as his inability to compromise and unwavering desire to retain autocratic control of the nation, which led to the overwrought bond between the monarchy and the common-folk. The removal of the Romanov family from their prestigious throne was a direct result of the divide that Tsar Nicholas II created between the monarchy and the working class.…

    • 1216 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The October Revolution: Coup or Social Uprising? Historians along the century have questioned the veracity of the narrative the Bolsheviks fed to the people of Russia and the rest of the world. These historians claim that the communist party has distorted the facts of said revolution to control masses during the Soviet reign. The overthrow of the Provisional Government in October 1917 was both a Bolshevik-engineered coup d’état and a popular revolution. Chroniclers have debated this statement owing to the fact that said people come from different socio-political backgrounds and the varying historiographies of individual authors.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Nationalism In Russia

    • 1155 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In1917 Russia a rocky country and not very stable. They were unable to accommodate with Tsar Nicholas II having just been over thrown and were in desperate need of help. The second revolution developed the Marxist Bolsheviks who were a communist party that looked to gain more freedom and justice for themselves. The Russians exhibited many internal problems while trying to establish the country. Russia was also struggling to find a strong political leader and government system that could provide guidance and bring the country together.…

    • 1155 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Politically changes in attitudes threatened the autocratic rule of Tsar, many had heard of democracy and civil liberties from their appearances in Western Europe, thus leading to the formation of several political parties with various anti-autocratic ideologies, including the Socialist Democratic Party (of which a faction later become the Bolsheviks (Source B). The Bolsheviks in particular played a big role in the revolution and Russia society in the early 20th century, with ideology rooted in socialism and the belief that revolution was the only way to overthrow the tsarist rule, the Bolsheviks spent much of the years prior to the Tsars abdication working to undermine his rule. It is these changes which many historians attribute to reasons for the fall of the dynasty, suggesting that Russian political attitudes were no longer compatible with an autocratic political…

    • 1558 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    How far was Rasputin responsible for the collapse of the Tsarist regime? The Tsarist regime collapsed in March 1917 when Nicholas II abdicated. By the time of the abdication the Tsarist regime had already been damaged by a number of factors that could be held responsible for the overall downfall of Tsar Nicholas II. One of these factors is the influence that Rasputin, a monk who convinced the Tsarina that he could cure her son of his haemophilia.…

    • 1601 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As the first socialist country in the world, Russia had a lengthy and tough time to change and develop the country in 1917. The Russian Revolution of 1917 covers the major events such as the February Revolution and the October Revolution that result in the established of the Soviet Union. The Russian Revolution caused the encounter of labors and people. Their sacrifices and protests eventually made the revolution come true. Since the socialist government overthrew the czarist government, there were both political and economic exchanges occurred in the revolution.…

    • 1651 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Political: Russia was being ruled by an absolute and despotic monarchy , where the will of the sovereign (great King) considered the law as it was. The king thus had unlimited power; ruled arbitrarily, without giving anyone their acts of sin and respect the freedoms and rights of…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays