For a ruler to maintain in power, the most important action he should take is to let the counter-elite circulate and get some power for them not to rebel against his government. When this does not happen, the counter-elite is not happy and this can lead them to organize the non-elite and start a revolution. A revolution is a radical change lead by violence.
The Mexican Revolution ended with a the 30 year dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and since then there has not been a dictator. The 1917 Constitution was created; it defined the 3 powers of the nation and many things are still in our actual constitution.
Zapata and Villa made it possible for giving power to the people, made a fair government giving the lower classes a voice and establishing their ideas in plans.
Plutarco Elias …show more content…
After it ended, Lenin wanted to expand the communist/socialist ideas throughout Europe but Stalin, after taking power, industrialized the country.
The government that he established after the revolution was great for economics and politics and leads to a powerful and economically strong country, with just leaders. But it also lead to the Cold War and many other internal conflicts.
Both, the Mexican and the Russian Revolution had many evident differences. I believe that both revolutions had many similarities in its process and development but the way they ended was different.
These two nations, were similar in the part that the lower class lived awfully, and had terrible working conditions, they were tired of the government and wanted a change, which lead them to rebel. The people were the ones who really made this possible, as Alan Wood mentioned in his book The Origins of the Russian Revolution: “Russian intellectuals constantly wrote and talked about it; activists organized for it; the government legislated against it (...) But it was the masses, the Russian people, who eventually made
The Mexican Revolution ended with a the 30 year dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and since then there has not been a dictator. The 1917 Constitution was created; it defined the 3 powers of the nation and many things are still in our actual constitution.
Zapata and Villa made it possible for giving power to the people, made a fair government giving the lower classes a voice and establishing their ideas in plans.
Plutarco Elias …show more content…
After it ended, Lenin wanted to expand the communist/socialist ideas throughout Europe but Stalin, after taking power, industrialized the country.
The government that he established after the revolution was great for economics and politics and leads to a powerful and economically strong country, with just leaders. But it also lead to the Cold War and many other internal conflicts.
Both, the Mexican and the Russian Revolution had many evident differences. I believe that both revolutions had many similarities in its process and development but the way they ended was different.
These two nations, were similar in the part that the lower class lived awfully, and had terrible working conditions, they were tired of the government and wanted a change, which lead them to rebel. The people were the ones who really made this possible, as Alan Wood mentioned in his book The Origins of the Russian Revolution: “Russian intellectuals constantly wrote and talked about it; activists organized for it; the government legislated against it (...) But it was the masses, the Russian people, who eventually made