c) I agree that the main reason for the Bolshevik seizure of power was the mistakes of the Provisional Government.
In source ‘A’ it is suggested that the provisional government did nothing to change what Russia had been like before the February revolution and that ‘it’s all the same.’ If the provisional government had made the effort to change the situation in Russia then the Bolsheviks would have had less support from the public because the public wouldn’t have been as anti- provisional government.
Source ‘D’ also heavily supports this by reminding us that ‘there was little support for Kerensky and his government, who had continued the war against Germany and failed to introduce much needed reforms.’ The much needed reforms included failure …show more content…
As proved by Source ‘B’ Lenin had support of ‘fifteen out of twenty-five committee members.’ Trotsky was also a brilliant leader of the Petrograd Soviets, and combined with Lenin this created an aura of superiority for the party and also created more public support. Although the Bolsheviks didn’t have a lot of public support they had much more than the Provisional Government because even if people didn’t like their ideology they liked how strong they appeared in comparison the weak Provisional Government. The Provisional Government was very unstable and couldn’t do very much until the elections in November-, which put them in a useless position for their brief period in power.
Arguably the government’s biggest mistake is shown in Source ‘D.’ They were so weak that ‘Kerensky even had to call upon the support of the Bolsheviks against the Kornilov revolt.’ This reminded the public of Kerensky’s weaknesses and allowed the Bolsheviks to get more powerful. By letting them get so powerful in the first place Kerensky put himself in a difficult place to recover from.
Overall I think that the weaknesses of Kerensky and his government were more important than
In source ‘A’ it is suggested that the provisional government did nothing to change what Russia had been like before the February revolution and that ‘it’s all the same.’ If the provisional government had made the effort to change the situation in Russia then the Bolsheviks would have had less support from the public because the public wouldn’t have been as anti- provisional government.
Source ‘D’ also heavily supports this by reminding us that ‘there was little support for Kerensky and his government, who had continued the war against Germany and failed to introduce much needed reforms.’ The much needed reforms included failure …show more content…
As proved by Source ‘B’ Lenin had support of ‘fifteen out of twenty-five committee members.’ Trotsky was also a brilliant leader of the Petrograd Soviets, and combined with Lenin this created an aura of superiority for the party and also created more public support. Although the Bolsheviks didn’t have a lot of public support they had much more than the Provisional Government because even if people didn’t like their ideology they liked how strong they appeared in comparison the weak Provisional Government. The Provisional Government was very unstable and couldn’t do very much until the elections in November-, which put them in a useless position for their brief period in power.
Arguably the government’s biggest mistake is shown in Source ‘D.’ They were so weak that ‘Kerensky even had to call upon the support of the Bolsheviks against the Kornilov revolt.’ This reminded the public of Kerensky’s weaknesses and allowed the Bolsheviks to get more powerful. By letting them get so powerful in the first place Kerensky put himself in a difficult place to recover from.
Overall I think that the weaknesses of Kerensky and his government were more important than