Essay Compare And Contrast The Cause And Nature Of The 1917 Revolution

836 Words2 Pages

Unit 3: Compare and contrast the causes and nature of the two 1917 Russian Revolutions.
The country of Russian experienced two separate revolutions in the course of a year: the first occurred in February of 1917 and the second in October of the same year. The February Revolution concluded in the annulment of Russia’s tsarist regime led by Nicholas II and the creation of the short-lived Provisional Government. The forthcoming October Revolution terminated the temporary government and unknowingly empowered the Bolshevik party. The two revolutions sought for different forms of government making them political revolutions by definition, but they also were social revolutions because of the suppression made toward masses by their governmental bodies. …show more content…

Politically, the more educated class of Russia resented the autocracy of the Tsar and with Russia having been defeated in the First World War, the more educated and the less educated had now undermined the standing of the Tsar. The educated elite and the masses of Russian society had certainly linked together in their mutual dissatisfaction of Nicholas II. In social and economic terms, the aftermath of the First World War in Russia angered its people: “the life toll accumulated to over 15 million hostilities, the military interference with the railway network, which contributed to the breakdown of communication and distribution systems that was the main cause of urban food shortages.” These misfortunes kindled the discontent amongst the Russian crowds which influenced the surge of strikes. It also inclined peasant unrest driven by appeals for land distribution. The Tsar’s government collapsed in February of 1917 due to the “indecision and fatalism of the Tsar himself. Nicholas II couldn’t compromise his own autocracy and his brother refused the crown.” Thus, the sudden creation of the Provisional Government, in which total political and religious freedom was permitted, complete amnesty for all political prisoners, and the promise of elections to a constituent assembly were all policies adopted by this government. The growth of liberal …show more content…

Miliukov saw no reason to abandon the original aims of annexations in eastern Europe and in the Turkish empire, but was so far out of touch with popular opinion that he was forced to resign.” The Provisional Government was pressured by popular demand whilst compromising the obligations to Russia’s allies only set itself up for failure. Then, the establishment of the main war aim was to institute peace on the basis of the self-determination of nations. The war effort formally collapsed, thus proving a major failure for the new government. By October 1917, the Provisional Government was politically bankrupt, having failed in all its main policy aims and their lack of aid towards the peasantry. The failure of the Provisional Government granted the Bolsheviks to “seize power and hijack what had had become a large popular revolution.” Derby argues that the Provisional Government was set to very high standards in too little of a time frame once the tsar abdicated; the conditions it was to meet by the soldiers, workers, peasants, politically articulate, and even different nationalities of Russia were seemingly impossible tasks. Not only this but the government failed because they wasted time over legal niceties, they themselves were

Open Document