The Fall Of Tsarism Essay Research Paper — страница 2

  • Просмотров 171
  • Скачиваний 5
  • Размер файла 16
    Кб

war may well have had an impact on the Russian system of government. ????? However, one can also attribute Alexander II?s reforms to his intelligent perception of the situation.? Unlike other Tsars, he realised Russia?s backwardness (possibly partially through the war in the Crimea) and consequently, he realised that in order to preserve the Tsarist system of government and prevent revolutions such as those in throughout the rest? of Europe in 1848, he must reform.? However, in order to improve conditions in Russia, he had to remove some of the repression implemented by the previous Tsars.? This was the reason for the increased opposition during the reign of Alexander II.? It must be noted, though, that it is clear that Alexander was reforming to preserve.? He did not have any

overwhelming reforming zeal.? His reforms did not alter the absolute power of the Tsar, nor did they alter the position of the Autocracy in Russia, and it can be noted that the Russian autocracy benefited from reforms such as the emancipation of the serfs by huge redemption payments.? Alexander II reformed because he felt reform was what was needed at the time.? It is true to say, therefore, that Alexander II was influenced by foreign war demonstrating Russia?s backwardness, and also fear of revolution in bringing in his reforms.? In this respect therefore, it can be said that it was due to war or the threat of war that these reforms took place. ????? Also, if it is possible to say that Alexander II reformed due to a genuine want to improve the lives of the serfs, and as a human

being it is certain that the possible humanitarian benefits had occurred to him.? It must also be remembered that when compared to previous Tsars, indeed, Alexander II accomplished much in the way of reform. On the other hand, when one compares Alexander II to the rest of Europe, the reforms he introduced were extremely limited in scope and vision and certainly did not remove Russia?s backward nature. ????? The final Tsar in Russian history is perhaps the best illustration of force being required to provoke action.? Nicholas II was considered by his father Alexander III to be a joke, and as a consequence he was never trained to be a Tsar. Alexander III had continued in the vain of Nicholas I and Alexander I.? He had taken the assasiniation of Alexander II as a lesson that reforms

lead to problems, discontentment and eventually one?s own downfall.? Consequently, he embarked upon a course of repression.? Nicholas II, with no ideas of his own, and without the intellect to be decisive, continued with his father?s repressive policies.? However, the repression was ineffective, and by this stage, the Russian industrial revolution under the effective guidance of Sergei Witte had begun.? This was significant in that the peasants were now crowded together in the cities.? This disgusting conditions led to the realisation of their own exploitation and dissatisfaction with the government who seemed to be doing nothing to help.? This led to peaceful demonstrations asking for better conditions.? These were the beginnings of the 1905 revolutions.? Nicholas II is perhaps

the best example we have of a Tsar, totally obessed with clinging to absolute power and giving no concessions whatsoever, until he is compelled to do so by war and revolution.? ????? Even when Nicholas II is forced to come up with the consitutional monarchy that he eventually offers in the October manifesto, it is clear that his objective is to appease and not to reform.? Even the state Duma which is implemented is limited in power, can be ignored by the Tsar and dissolved after 2 months.? The Tsar could also change the electoral law in order to obtain the Duma which he wanted.? This conditions effectively meant that there was no change to the Tsar?s absolute autocratic power.? Indeed, even in the Fundamental law of April 1906, it was clearly stated that: ?Supreme autocratic

power belongs to the emporer of all Russia?.? ????? Even the First World War could not alter the Tsar?s autocratic, non-reforming ideas.? Although it was clear through Germany?s thrashing of Russia, Russia still required much reform and improvement, these signs were ignored by Nicholas in the eventual outcome of the war.? It was clear by this stage, that it needed a revolution in order to reform the Russian autocratic Tsarist system.? ??????????? I would therefore conclude that it is extremely clear that the autocratic system of government would not change despite any amount of pressure from the middle classes or the peasant masses.? In short it is clear from my examination of the previous Tsars, who have been disinterested in reforming to improve, only in reforming to preserve