The Impact of Industrialization and Collectivization: <40

The Impact Of Industrialization And Collectivization
Industrialization and Collectivization from late 19th century to 1939
Soon after Lenin's death, in 1924, the Communist Central Committee launched the first five–year plan attempting to position the new Soviet state into
the club of Western developed nations. The Bolsheviks wanted first to demonstrate that the communist ideology could match the achievements of those
countries and do so by uplifting standards of living of workers and peasants.
Though a true economy needs a multitude of interrelated skills and business flows to achieve efficiency, the Bolsheviks had simplified the masses
into two major classes, the "Workers" and "Peasants" (this is well exemplified by the hammer and sickle on the Soviet flag).
How did the Bolsheviks get organized
It is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This all–important political reform could have defused the violent revolution that took place in 1917.
The next Tsar, Alexander III was just happy to maintain a status–quo while much needed reforms were ignored.
Stolypin Reforms under Tsar Nicholas II
The last Tsar Nicholas II had to react to a first revolution in 1905 that threatened the Imperial regime, therefore he rapidly passed laws to form a house
of representatives in charge of shaping reforms. Nicholas II institutionalized as Imperial Russia executive body, a government consisting of a group of
Ministers.
In 1907, Stolypin became Prime Minister and immediately initiated comprehensive reforms in the Agricultural sector. Among the long suite of
measures he made available to peasants were:
Allowance for large–scale farming on family

... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

What Factors Led To The Russian Revolution In 1918
What factors could have led to the Russian Revolution that began in 1918.
The Russian Revolution occurred in 1917, it was after the world war and it was attempt to overthrow the Tsarist autocracy and replace it with the Union
of Soviet Socialist Republic, which is known as the USSR. The Russian Revolution was divided into a series of small revolutions, the October and
February revolutions being the two main ones. The revolution would replace the Russian monarchy with the world's first known communist state once
the civil war ended in 1920. Vladimir Lenin was a young man who gained his attention through his ideas. When Vladimir Lenin was still going to
university, he begun anti Tsarist protests that ended up causing the execution of his brother. Both of the brothers would constantly participate in
protests and have illegal meetings that would talk about having a revolution and change the Tsarist monarchy. Because of this Vladimir was expelled
from his university for his non patriotic thoughts and he begun protesting in the streets. After the Tsarist empire losing control, Vladimir's ideas and
thoughts sounded better and better and soon he was more favored ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After World War I, Russia's loss in their troops and forces caused an immense social problem for Russia. This made Russia look weak and made the
Russian people believe that Nicholas II was not strong enough of a leader. Since Nicholas II personally took control of his armies during the battles,
his defeat was only him to blame. After the war and his continuing thoughts of strict manners in Russia, his social reputation was ruined by the events
that occurred. Bloody Sunday was another matter that brought social chatter to blame Nicholas II, and the protests that owned the streets and
convinced his soldiers to turn on him made the rest of Russia turn on him too. After a while, Nicholas II's fame was replaced with Vladimir

Tsars Downfall Research Paper
How far was Tsar Nicholas responsible for his own downfall?
Within this essay I will be analysing the different factors which contributed to the Tsars downfall and asses how far he is responsible for his own
downfall.
One way we can blame the Tsar for his own downfall was that he made many mistakes, for example Bloody Sunday in January 1905 the Tsar gave
orders to open fire on 200,000 peaceful protesters, killing between 500 and 2000 people. Leading this protest was a priest with a petition only asking
for minor changes. This is a big factor as it led to increased distrust and hatred for the Tsar and major unrest which lasted for 12 months. This was a
mistake because the Russian people didn't believe that he could deal with situations peacefully, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Russia is the world's largest county in land mass; it spans the whole of Europe and Asia, and its 17,098,242 square kilometres. Also 84% of the
population of the country are peasants and it was very multicultural, this is a problem because they are uneducated and only have a small skill set
meaning they generally work on farms. Also there are many different beliefs so everyone wanted different things which mean that any decisions
made would only make a small group of people happy and all the rest wouldn't be content. In source 4 it clearly shows just how nationally diverse
Russia was at this time at it is also displayed in source 1 where it says "if it were a country it would have had a dominant ethnic group of Russians
and would have a single language, religion and culture. It had no such thing". This is not good as the monarchy would never be able to please
everyone; in fact they managed to displease most people. These sources 1 and 4 are trustworthy as one is written by a census and the other is written
by a professor who would generally write on facts and not about his feelings on the matter. In conclusion I think this is another major factor which
made Tsardom difficult for Nicholas, so that another reason why his downfall wasn't his fault. However he did know how big the country was that he
had to rule and failed to

The Murder of Rasputin Essay
Rasputin was an important figure in the Russian Revolution. His acclaimed magical powers helped lessen the symptoms of poor Alexei's hemophilia,
an awful condition in which the blood doesn't clot. Because Alexei was the heir to the Romanof throne, Tsar Nicholas II and Alexandra were in a
stressful situation. They gave Rasputin certain powers that people were jealous of. The aristocrats could not stand a peasant in such a high position.
Peasants could not stand the rumors that the tsarina was sleeping with such a weirdo because he had a reputation for being a pervert. Rasputin was
seen as a pest who was ruining Russia. To save the monarchy from revolutions, assassins were assigned to murder Rasputin. On the night of... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Two hours after he consumed the poison, Felix was worried that the poison was never going to kill Rasputin and he would not die. Felix went
upstairs, got a gun and went back downstairs. Rasputin didn't notice that Felix had a gun behind his back. While Rasputin was looking at a
cabinet, Felix said, "Grigory Efimovich, you would do better to look at the Crucifix and pray to It." Felix raised the pistol and shot. Felix and his
buddies celebrated for about an hour. After celebration, Felix felt a need to go check on the body. He went back downstairs and felt the body. It
oddly still felt warm. He shook the body. There was no reaction. When Felix starting turning away, he noticed Rasputin's left eye twitch and open
wide. He was still alive!!! Rasputin sprang to his feet and rushed at Felix, grabbing his shoulders and neck. Felix struggled to get free and finally
did so. He bolted upstairs shouting, "He's still alive!!!" Rasputin tried to run across the courtyard and escape, but a man with a revolver shot at him,
missing twice and hitting once, Rasputin fell. They took the corpse inside. Felix saw Rasputin dead, but he was still angered, and he bashed him in
the head with a weight. It was amazing and impossible, but after being poisoned, shot three times, and having been beaten with a dumbbell, Rasputin
was still alive. They bound his arms and legs with rope and wrapped his body in a heavy cloth. They were in a hurry to dispose of the

Was Tsar Nicholas Emperor Unfit
Tsar Nicholas II of Russia: An Emperor Unfit to Rule Ravaged Russia At the end of the nineteenth century, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia reluctantly took
command of an empire overflowing with revolutionaries who were seeking change in response to hardships that their nation was facing. His timid
personality, coupled with his lack of political education and military experience, made him unfit to calm the war–fueled chaos that would soon envelop
Russia. Nicholas' series of unfortunate, unprepared and uninformed decisions began with his marriage and eventually ended with his decision to
abandon the capital to lead his armies, ultimately leading to the demise of his imperial family's three–hundred–year dynastic tradition. The turn of the
century illuminated Russia, commonly labeled as "backwards" by the other European powers, as the last remaining European autocracy. Russian
society still operated on the estate system, which was characterized by an enormous gap between the upper class nobility and the lower class
peasantry. Peasants comprised eighty percent of the population and only a fraction were educated. They had little understanding of government and
were highly patriarchal. Many served as serfs. It was not until the 1860s that these serfs were freed from legal bondage by Nicholas' grandfather,
Alexander II. However, this was not enough to satisfy Russian citizens' newfound taste of freedom. In the years following, they demanded he establish
an elected parliament,

1917 Russian Revolution Research Paper
The Cause of the 1917 Russian Revolutions
Picture this: an enormous country completely filled with mayhem. The subjects rebel against the governing authorities, demanding reform. The
governing authorities are betrayed when the soldiers commit mutiny in order to join the ongoing riots. The protestors themselves are divided, fighting
against one another to come out on top. Almost everyone is against the leader of the nation, and eventually, through the mass of chaos, someone puts an
end to the ruling monarch and his entire family.
This picture describes the bloody wars against the autocracy of Russia; the Russian Revolution of 1917. These events shook not only Russia but also
the entire world. Over the past few decades, many researchers have ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There was an extraordinary amount of tragedies and disasters that occurred just during his reign alone. The people needed a strong leader to guide them
through hard times, but Nicholas was not the right person, and his actions in each of these events promoted unrest throughout the nation, leading to the
1917 Russian revolutions. There were bloody messes that impacted the whole world. Perhaps they might have been avoided if Nicholas II was never
made the tsar of Russia.
Works Cited
Chubarov, Alexander. The Fragile Empire: A History of Imperial Russia. The Continuum Publishing Company, 15 March, 2001
Kurth, Peter. Tsar: The Lost World of Nicholas and Alexandra. Back Bay Books, 01 Nov.1998
"Nicholas II of Russia Quotes" Quotes.net. STANDS4 LLC, 2017. Web. 23 Mar. 2017. .
Smitha, Frank. "The Russian Revolution Begins." The Russian Revolution. 2000– 2014 http://www.fsmitha.com/h2//ch07.htm Accessed 22 March,
2017
Bibliography
Chubarov, Alexander. The Fragile Empire: A History of Imperial Russia. The Continuum Publishing Company, 15 March, 2001
Kurth, Peter. Tsar: The Lost World of Nicholas and Alexandra. Back Bay Books, 01

Tsar Nicholas II: The Failure Of The Romanov Regime
In Tsar Nicholas II's early rule, his main objective was to uphold the European status quo. In the 1890s they began to expand their industries and the
following year the Trans–Siberian railways were under construction. The strength of the Romanov rule was the church, army, political parties, and the
secret police. Although they supported Tsar Nicholas II, soldiers joined riots against him and church's supported him, but did not approve of his ways.
The weakness of Tsar Nicholas II outweighs his strengths, being his incompetence of problems, economic and social, in Russia at the time. Opposition
to the Tsar because of his failure to address problems kept increasing and inevitably led to him being overthrown.
The Tsar and Tsarina's only son,

Tsar Nicholas II Research Paper
Nicholas II, the last of the Romanov Tsars, was a man with good intentions for his country, however, he lacked many of the crucial attributes
necessary in being a proficient ruler. He was a weak and indecisive leader; too gentle and too uneducated to take on the role of an autocrat. Moreover,
Nicholas was heavily influenced by his wife, Tsarina Alexandra, to follow in his father's footsteps and preserve autocracy, leading to the downfall of
the 304–year reign of the Romanov family. The Tsar refused to move on with the times and his inability to rule effectively was compounded by the
burdensome events that occurred during his reign.
The initial and fundamental mistake of the Tsar was his failure to comprehend thatRussia had undergone major changes over the period of Tsarist
rule.The Empire had expanded vastly, with populations rising over 160 million, and thus, the nation's aspirations grew alongside it. Furthermore, as
quoted by Sir George Buchanan in his memoir, My mission to Russia and Other Diplomatic Memories, Russia "...had witnessed the birth of industries,
the consequent increase in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A large crowd of unarmed demonstrators led by a priest, Father Georgy Gapon, was fired upon by soldiers of the Imperial Guard as they marched
towards the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg to present a petition to the Tsar, regarding the exploitation of the working class and their demands for
compensation and improved conditions. Although the Tsar did not order the troops to act in this way, as he was not in the Winter Palace at the time,
this action lost the affection of the Russian people on their Emperor and called into question the Tsarist system for the first time. The 1905 Massacre
eventually provoked public outrage, and strikes soon spread throughout the industrial centres of Russia, crippling the

Alexander II And The Russian Revolution
In the 1800's Russia was facing a very difficult time. Russia's recent defeat in the Crimean war was a wake up call to the autocracy. This defeat
proved to the autocracy that Russia had fallen dangerously behind their western neighbors, ultimately making it easy for other countries to attach
and invade. At that point, Russia knew it was time for a change and it started with Tsar Alexander II. Alexander II took over as emperor due to his
fathers (Nicholas I) death in St. Petersburg. Some say the reason for Russia's backward spiral was because of him. However, in 1855 the reign of
Alexander II in Russia began and during his time he directed a period of political and social reforms. Some of the reforms Alexander II thought had
to be changed included: education, military, government, and judicial. Even after trying to make multiple changes and reforms to better the
government, someone was still not clicking in the Russian government. The main reason the society had so many problems dealt with the peasants.
As many soviet historians have claimed, these reforms were put in place to pacify the peasantry in order to ward off revolution. During this time the
peasants had to work on their lord owners land and didn't have many other options. While under the new Tsar Alexander II the government ran into a
dry wall and needed a way out. Alexander II did something that to this day goes down as two perspectives. The first one can be seen as a charter of
freedom

Comparing Nicholas I And Yertle The Turtle
Nicholas I can easily be compared to the story of Yertle the Turtle. Both Yertle and Nicholas have similar qualities that can be exemplified.
Nicholas I and Yertle are power hungry and in their very different environments, show greed, a bit of arrogance, intolerance and corruption. Yertle
the Turtle began his life as a very happy little turtle. He was king of a nice clean pond , where everyone had plenty of warm water and enough food
to eat.. However, he decided this was not enough. Whether it be greed or a need to command more power, he wanted to see more than just his one
small pond. "But I don't see enough. (stanza 2, line 4)" Yertle would do anything to see beyond his one small pond. Similarly, Nicholas I wanted to
control more under his reign in Russia. Both rulers were willing to do whatever they had to in order to gain the power they craved.... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
He would stack one turtle on top of another, with no consideration for how any other turtle felt. As long as Yertle got to see all that he desired, then
all was fine with him. Well, not all was fine with the turtles that were stacked one upon the other. This was very uncomfortable and painful for all the
turtles down on bottom. Nicholas I was similarly intolerant with his army. He was intent on acquiring a large army, in fact his army grew to
approximately one million men. However, the men in Nicholas I's army were weak, poorly equipped to fight in the battlefield and had no structural

Importance of Events Between 1894 and the Decline of the...
Importance of Events Between 1894 and the Decline of the Romanov Dynasty
The execution of Tsar Nicholas II and his family in July 1918 signalled the brutal end of a Romanov Dynasty that had survived for hundreds of years
in Russia. Such a dynasty had relied on a system known as 'Tsarism'– that is, having a single man ruling the entire Russian empire. Whilst the
revolution of 1918 is often seen as being the sole, definitive end to this dictatorial system it was in truth, the final blow in a long sequence of ill–fated
events. The Romanov Dynasty had been in rapid decline for a number of years, with inopportune events first beginning to accumulate between the years
1894–1905. The ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As the Russian Nation advanced and progressed over time, a change in opinion about the role of the Tsar was inevitable. A changed perception about
the Tsar's role by the people in contrast to Nicholas' personal view of his role remaining the same ultimately made for a factor that can be attributed to
the decline.
Nicholas' personal qualities and attributes can account for the decline of the Romanov Dynasty. Whilst we cannot blame him for this, one of Nicholas'
great faults was that he simply did not possess the qualities required to govern Russia. He was completely oblivious to the state of affairs in Russia at
the time and his ignorance of the conditions faced by the peasants was almost astonishing. Once again, Nicholas' personal characteristics play quite an
important role in the decline of the dynasty as he had the power to basically do what we wished – whether that was issuing orders or introducing new
laws, taxes etc.. Had Nicholas the vision, or perhaps intelligence, to foresee that the role of a 20th Century Tsar would need some alterations, the
whole scenario could have been reversed and the dynasty would have never even begun to decline. The people would have still loved him and his
position would not be at risk. What Nicholas did not realize was that in order for the dynasty to survive and flourish, it was him who needed to change
and become

Why Is Tsar Nicholas II A Bad Government
Bad Government – Tsar Nicholas II
The ruler of Russia in 1905 was Tsar Nicholas II. He wanted to rule his country as an absolute Monarch. He did not want to share his power with the
parliament. Russian Kings called themselves Tsar, which means 'Emperor'. The Tsar would run on his own, assisted by a few ministers that he chooses
on his own. There was no parliament and the other people did not have any right to vote in elections. Tsars ruled in harsh manner, ruining everyone
who dared to complain.
Nicholas II was born on May 18, 1868 in Pushkin, Russia. He 'inherited' the throne from his father, Alexander III who died in 1894 due to kidney
disease at the age of 49 He was his parent's firstborn child. Nicholas II was 19 years old when he joined

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov: The Last Tsar of Russia
:Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov, the last standing Tsar of Russia officially known as Tsar Nicholas II, autocrat of Russia. Nicholas II was born
on 18th May, 1868 in Tsarskoe Selo, Russia. Nicholas II was the eldest son of Alexander III and his Empress Marie Romanova. Nicholas was eldest
of six children. He had three younger brothers, Alexander, George, Michael and two younger sisters, Xenia and Olga. Nicholas II ruled from 1894
until his abdication on 15 March 1917, his reign saw imperial Russia go from being one of the foremost great powers of the world to an economic and
military catastrophe. Tsar Nicholas II influenced and sought change in the historical events of Russo– Jap War, Bloody Sunday, October Manifesto,
The First Russian ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Russo–Jap War was heavily influenced by the lack of knowledge that Nicholas II obtained, he was easily influenced by others in his ministry.
This huge defeat of Russia lead to a weak government, causing people to question the power of Tsarist government. The evidence of Russia's military
weakness increased the people's discontent and demands for reform, change did not come about until 1905.
With the defeat against Japan during 1904 – 1905, poor harvest, higher rates of poverty amongst the peasants and strikes within the oil industry, the
people of Russia grew discontent with the Tsar, which led to a strike in St Petersburg on January 16th, 1905. The historical blood shed, otherwise
known as 'Bloody Sunday', which was an incident that occurred on January 22nd 1905, St. Petersburg. An event where unarmed, peaceful
demonstrators marched to present a petition to Tsar Nicholas II, hoping he would respond but in stead were gunned down by imperial guards outside
the Narva Gate. As the primary source, 'The Aftermath', 4th February 1905 represented the many Russian civilians shot down at Narva Gate, although
the deaths and casualties are not accurate. This significant event was a turning point for Nicholas II and his time as a monarchy. To the people of
Russia he was before known as 'Little Father' and soon became, after the mass blood shed, 'Nicholas the Bloody'. At this point in time Nicholas retained
his influential, autocratic

How Did Czar Nicholas II Change The Life Of Russia
Czar Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna of the Romanov family ruled from when he was crowned in 1896, to their forced abdication in 1917.
Russia's economy was outmoded and relied on independent peasants that did not use modern machinery. Their farming season was limited because of
their natural cold climate. The political condition of Russia was that everyone was annoyed with the autocratic system, it had no representation in
government and the Tsar was out of touch with the people's demands. Nicholas and his family were executed since Nicholas was overthrown due to
his poor handling of Russia. The Bolsheviks took control over Russia and abolished the government he had created. Vladimir Lenin, leader of
Bolsheviks, ordered a death sentence ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Riots were commencing in St. Petersburg and Nicholas's subjects were in an uproar. Russia was exposed to severe poverty and prices of goods
skyrocketed. The Duma formed their own temporary committee and send soldiers to control all the riots. This left Nicholas with no choice but to
surrender the throne. On March 15, 1917, Nicholas abdicated the throne and his family was transported to the Ural Mountains and put under house
arrest. They were later transferred to Yekaterinburg Palace because of counter revolutionary forces movement the Yekaterinburg forces worried the
Romanov family would be rescued. A death sentence was placed on the family after the Bolsheviks commenced a secret meeting and on July 16,
1917, the Romanov family and their servants were gunned down by a firing squad in the palace's basement. In the late 1970's, archeologists found the
grave of the murdered family, but two bodies were missing. There has been rumors of Anastasia and Alexei surviving the execution, saying that the
family jewels on their clothing ricochet the bullets and they escaped. Many people tried to claim they were Anastasia and Alexei, but DNA tests
proved them wrong and the mystery remained unsolved. But in 2007, another grave was found near the first one, containing two bodies. After DNA
tests, the mystery was solved and the bodies of Anastasia and Alexei were

How Did Nicholas II Contribute To The Russian Revolution
Nicholas II was the last tsar of Russia under Romanov rule. Nicolas II was to inherit the throne after his father died, but he was not prepared to. You
will soon read that if he was properly prepared then he would've had a magic life. Tsar Nicholas II aroused the Russian Revolution.
Alexander III died at the age of 49 in 1894; Nicholas II did not feel he was up to take the throne. Nicholas had to take the throne, get marry and have
children to secure the future heir. He married Princess Alix of Hesse–Darmstadt. The coronation was hugely celebrated by Russia that thousands were
stampeded to death, but Nicholas II and his wife did not notice, nor did they care. His wife, Empress Alexandra, gave birth to four girls. He needed a
boy and he finally

Tsar Nicholas 's The Great War
Introduction Tsar Nicholas II's reign was turbulent, seeing wars, revolutions, and a general sense of displeasure from the people and the
government. Intellectuals were no longer content with living under an autocracy and believed that the Russian government was archaic and
inefficient. Peasants spoke out against their poor living and working conditions. By 1917, Nicholas' reign was over and the Romanov family was
no longer in power. One of the leading causes of the Romanov downfall was Nicholas himself. Although the situation in which he inherited the
throne were not ideal, his character and method of dealing with state affairs did not help. His personality affected his leadership style, making his
leadership style an unpopular one. Even his most trusted advisors and friends came second to Nicholas' desire to uphold autocracy in Russia. The
influence of Pyotr Stolypin and Sergei Witte, two of Nicholas' senior officials, faded as Nicholas thought they hindered his supreme autocracy.
Nicholas' character was also evident in the Great War. His many stubborn decisions, despite being constantly advised against them, caused Russia
much grief during and after the war. Nicholas' wife Alexandra influenced many of these decisions and other decisions on state affairs. Nicholas'
personality allowed Alexandra to have a large impact on his reign. This further gave Grigori Rasputin a large political presence in Russia as well.
Nicholas 's personality was one of the factors that

Nicholas II Biography
Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868, in Pushkin, Russia. He was the son of Tsar Alexander III and Maria Feodorovna. Nicholas II was the oldest
son of Alexander III, which later made him the ruler of the Russian Empire. Nicholas II was taught by Russian academics at home by private
tutors. He knew several languages and had a wide knowledge of history, he also grasped military science. Nicholas II took the throne at age 26 after
his father's unexpected death because of Kidney disease in 1894. Nicholas later married a German Princess Alix of Hesse, who later then took the
name of Alexandra Feodorovna. Nicholas II and Alexandra ended up having five children: Olga, Tatyana, Maria, Anastasia, and Aleksey. It is known
that Aleksey was the only boy... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nicholas II stated "I am not prepared to be a tsar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling" That greatly showed once
he took the throne. Nicholas II's handling of Bloody Sunday and World War I incensed his subjects and led to his abdication. The Bolsheviks executed
him and his family on the night of July 16–17, 1918, in Yekaterinburg, Russia, under Vladimir Lenin. In 1904 Japan attacked Russia. In December of
that year, Nicholas II's army was forced to surrender at Port Arthur. At the start of World War I, Russia performed terribly. Nicholas II decided to make
himself commander–in–chief, so he could take personal control of the military from Grand Duke Nicholas. Russia underwent major losses and was
put in poverty and high inflation. The Russian public blamed Nicholas II for poor military decisions. Nicholas had to quit the throne on March 15,
1917. According to the article "Tsar/Tsarina (1868
–1918)" "Historians have long speculated as to whether Nicholas II's daughter, Anastasia, might
have survived the shooting but in 2007, a DNA analysis conclusively identified her body." Nicholas II was the last Emperor of Russia. (Tsar/Tsarina
(1868–1918)). It seemed that Nicholas II wasn't liked by the people in Russia. He didn't fulfill his duties as Emperor and led his military to a loss.
Nicholas II was the last emperor of

The Russian Revolution Of 1917
World War I was a direct catalyst, though arguably not the sole cause of the Russian Revolution of 1917. Even before the outbreak of war, the Russian
population were largely dissatisfied with the government under the Tsarist regime. Though the Great War played a role in sparking the Russian
Revolution, with much of the unstable faith in the Tsar collapsing in MilitaryRussia, it would be naГЇve to discredit the mounting economic and social
pressures that contributed to the fall of the Tsarist Regime, and the beginning of the Revolution.
Leading up to the outbreak of World War Iin 1914, tensions in Russia were already starting to rise as Tsar Nicholas II proved he was inexperienced
and ruinous at most every turn. 1894 saw the wholly unprepared 26 year old Nicholas rise to the position of Tsar of Russia after the death of his father,
though he wrote to his brother–in–law that he was "not prepared to be a Tsar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of
ruling." Under the autocratic rule of Nicholas' father, Russia had seen famine in the hands of the all–powerful Tsar and had placed their hopes on
Nicholas for the reinstatement of the liberalization that his father had revoked. These hopes were quickly dashed when Nicholas made it very clear
that he wished to wield the same power that his father had, and that he had every intention of continuing the autocratic rule of Russia. While Nicholas
"indulged in a fantasy of absolute power" his poorest people grew

How Did Tsar Alexander II Build Russia In 1905
Russia has a very colorful history that consisted of many revolutions and rulers. Tsar Alexander II Romanov died in 1881. Tsar Alexander II had a
son named Alexander III.Tsar Alexander II freed the serfs in 1862. The serfs were the farmers that had to pay harsh taxes.When he died in 1881
Alexander III was tsar. As tsar, Alexander III believed in using the Okhrana to put many citizens in prison. The Okhrana was the Tsar's secret police.
Tsar Alexander III married a Danish princess and had six children, of which Nicholas II was the oldest. Nicholas II was the tsar ofRussia, when he was
twenty six years old. His father died from kidney disease. Tsar Nicholas was trained by his father, Alexander III. Alexander III was ashamed of
Nicholas II, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Tsar Nicholas II approved the Great Army Program. The army grew by five–hundred thousand men and eleven thousand eight hundred officers. This
time Russia had the largest army. Russia's man power was estimated to be twenty five million men in combat. In the year 1914, the prime minister of
Russia was Sergei Witte. Witte joined forces with Rasputin in convincing the Tsar not to enter the war. Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria
–Hungary
was recently assassinated, which was one of the reasons World War I began. Tsar Nicholas took the advice and joined the Triple Entente, which
consisted of Great Britain and France. In the beginning of the first World War, Russia commanded to invade East Prussia. At the time east Germany
was known as Prussia.Many of Russia's soldiers died from wounds, because Russia had only one surgeon for every ten thousand soldiers. Many
soldiers in Russia's army were not experienced, and not trained to fight in this battle,resulting in many deaths. Russia entered World War I in the year
1914. Russia entered as an ally. Russia was not prepared to be faced with the war. Millions of Russians had already died in previous battles, and there
was more to

Mark Steinberg And Vladimir Khrustalev 's The Fall Of The...
Mark Steinberg and Vladimir Khrustalev's The Fall of the Romanovs: Political Dreams and Personal Struggles in a Time of Revolution presents
hundreds of annotated primary documents, introduced by dry descriptions of the major contemporary events. This dense document collection offers a
detailed account of the downfall of the Romanov family, divided across four chapters. Steinberg and Khrustalev worked to avoid bias in this piece, and
offer a wide range of documents for the reader to analyze. Unfortunately, some bias is intrinsic to historical writings, especially in translated primary
documents. With pre– and post–revolutionary government documents and private correspondence included, readers are shown competing views on the
family's actions. This remarkably unbiased piece balances explanations and intimate letters to provide a complex description of the "moral contradiction
and fatal certainties" that led to the former royal family's demise. Vladimir Khrustalev began collecting and annotating documents for this collection
during his employment with the Central State Archive of the October Revolution. This organization became the State Archive of the Russian
Federation just before Steinberg joined the project in 1993, revising Khrustalev's notes and penning the "explanatory materials". The volume was
published as part of the Yale University Press' Annals of Communism series in 1995, which used recently declassified documents to present new
research on Russian history. The

The Decembrist Uprising
Constantine and people swore an oath to him. Later it was revealed that in some secret pact signed in 1822 by Alexander, he stated that Nicholas
would take upon the throne after his death. This further gave the Decembrists an opportunity to lead a revolt and they guessed that all soldiers and
people too would be confused in such a situation. They decided not to swear an oath and refuse Nicholas as Tsar on December 14, 1825 and call a
revolt at the same day. The Decembrists Revolt at The Senate Square The conspirators planned to gather their troops and march them to Senate Square.
The Decembrist called the revolt on the morning of December14, 1825 and approximately a force of 3000 stood strong at the square, ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
This movement was the outgrowth of a national condition which can be traced back into eighteenth century. "Decembrism" itself was not only a short–
lived revolutionary idea but it was an attitude held by at least two generations, a philosophy of political rebellion which came to climax on December
14, 1825. Though defeated, the Decembrists left an indelible impression upon Nicholas and throughout his reign, he always considered developments
from a viewpoint determined by his sad memories of December 14. In spite of the fact that it failed to achieve immediate positive results, the revolt
bore healthy seeds and it has been considered as the first revolutionary movement. The testimonies of the Decembrists directed the government's
attention to the gravity of general condition in the state, to increasing discontent and necessity for economic improvements. The government took
definite measures and reforms were also introduced. Serfdom was also abolished in 1861. Although the revolt remained a neglected and suppressed
topic during Nicholas's reign but Alexander Herzen placed profiles of executed Decembrists on the cover of his periodical Polar Star. In spite of all
the shortcomings of The Decembrist Revolt, this was the first ever open breach between the government and liberal elements, and it subsequently in
some way helped Russia

Nicholas II Research Paper
Nicholas II was born on May 6th, 1868 in Pushkin, Russia. He was born Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov. He was the first born of Alexander
Alexandrovich and Maria Feodorovna. Maria gave Nicholas a nurturing family environment to grow up in. While Alexander had a strong influence on
Nicholas. That is where Nicholas got her conservative, religious values and his strong belief in an autocratic government. He received his education
from private tutors which included high–ranking government officials. He excelled in history, foreign languages, but he struggled with economics and
subtleties of politics. Alexander also failed to give Nicholas training in state affairs. In 1881 Nicholas became the heir apparent to Russia after his
grandfather was ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A daughter Olga, born in 1895. Tatiana another daughter born in 1897. Maria their third daughter born in 1899, and their final daughter Anastasia born
in 1901.They finally had a son in 19014 who they named Alexei. But their joy over his birth soon turned in to worry because Alexei had hemophilia.
Their worry over Alexei and search for a treatment that worked introduced them to Gregory Rasputin. Rasputin would cause the Russia people to doubt
the Tsar and one of the reasons why the royal family met their end.
The worst thing that happened during Nicholas rule that led to the end of the monarchy was Bloody Sunday on January 5th, 1905. Bloody Sunday
was when peaceful protestors made up of workers in St. Petersburg protested about the working conditions and for the establishment of a popular
assembly. Those protestors we fired upon and many were killed.
Nicholas was the forced to create an elected legislature. It was called DUMA. Nicholas still resisted government reform. He felt that he was ordained
by god and he was born to rule.
When World War One came around Nicholas took control of the army. Because of this he spent a lot of time away from his family and duties in St.
Petersburg. While Nicholas was gone, Alexandra fell under the spell of Rasputin, she depended on

Tsar Nicholas II Research Paper
Nicholas II was the Last Tsar in a long line of Russian rulers. Nicholas II's grandfather, Alexander II, was a very liberal Tsar. During his reign,
Alexander II's most notable achievements were that he liberated the serfs, and his Emancipation Edict, which gave twenty million peasants freedom
and one third of their landlords' land. However, when Nicholas was a young boy, Alexander II was assassinated. This made Nicholas's father,
Alexander III, furious. Alexander III figured that since Alexander II had been a liberal Tsar and was assassinated, the only way to keep control was
to rule with an iron fist. And so he did. However, Nicholas II was very meek. WouldRussia fare well with such a meek Tsar after Alexander III's harsh
rule? Inept leadership ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nicholas was pushed into invading Manchuria because people underestimated Japan's power. The indecisive Tsar "was pushed into seizing lands in
Manchuria, having been assured that little Japan would not dare attack Russia.... He was assured that the Japanese did not know how to fight. His
ministers argued over how many Japanese soldiers it took to equal one Russian soldier–two or one and a half." Nicholas and his government's
overconfidence in their ability to defeat Japan showed their lack of understanding of the world. Nicholas blindly followed whatever people told him
without thinking for himself. Nicholas was told that Japan was incapable of defeating Russia, but that turned out to be false. After seizing lands in
Manchuria, "Japanese forces in Manchuria defeated the Russians in the largest land battle of the war, a bitter 12–day struggle that cost Russia 60,000
dead and wounded, 8,000 missing, and 21,000 prisoners." These tremendous losses in such a short period of time showed Nicholas's inability to
lead. The Russian people followed Nicholas into a war that they were led to believe would be short and easy. This war cost Russia its pride, Nicholas
his people's faith, and many people their lives. The Minister of Internal Affairs pushed Nicholas into invading Manchuria in order to keep the Russian
people from revolting.

Nicholas II And Rasputin's Role In Imperial Russia During...
During World War I Nicholas II assumed supreme command of the Russian Army in September 1915. Nicholas II's personal expectation of command
grew out of one of the critical weaknesses of his reign: his own incompetence as a ruler and as an individual. In addition to his naive belief that he
shared a personal communion with the Russian people, he ruled over a political system that could not function without his immediate presence. This
fact was not merely perceived in hindsight. When the Emperor announced his decision to his cabinet, ten of the twelve ministers of state objected and
tried to convince him to reconsider. Tellingly, ministers in ImperialRussia served only at the pleasure of the tsar and had no responsibility to the Duma,
which ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
But it was the desperate inability of Russia to mobilize its industry to a war footing, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of casualties, that gutted the
morale and ability of the army and ultimately broke its loyalty to the throne.
Russian soldiers marched into combat in 1914–1915 blind, dismounted, and, incredibly, often unarmed. Aerial reconnaissance, so vital given the vast
distances and rapid pace of operations on the Eastern Front, was nearly impossible. Cavalry could no longer perform this traditional function rapidly
enough. Even though Russia had 250 airplanes at the start of the war, lack of spare parts (and frequent shootdowns by Russian troops, who believed
that only Germans could use such infernal contraptions) kept most aircraft grounded and Russian commanders

Legal Issues Involved In Dating-Personal Narrative
I asked Kristine if she and Nicholas were in a dating relationship and she replied "yes" and stated they had been dating for the past four months. I asked
Kristine what her and Nicholas were doing in the area. It should be noted the area they were in was a dead end and only lead to a remote farm house
and it is not common for people to drive to the location.
Kristine told me she and Nicholas had gone to Spunky Monkey, which is a bar located in downtown Auburn, earlier the night before, 09/16/16.
Kristine told me while there, she and Nicholas began arguing about Nicholas drinking. Kristine went on to explain that Nicholas usually becomes
angry for no reason when he drinks. Kristine said because they were arguing, they drove to a remote area to talk about things, but she ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
I asked Nicholas what lead up to the incident and he replied he and Kristine had a couple drinks and Spunky Monkey and began arguing about his
drinking. Nicholas said while there, Kristine slapped him twice in the face with an open hand. Nicholas said he and Kristine went to the
Rainbow Cafe, which is also in downtown Auburn, and Kristine slapped him once more while they were there. Nicholas said he and Kristine drove to
29th and M ST
NW and continued to argue. Nicholas said Kristine slapped him two more times, and he was sick of it, so he tripped her and caused her to fall face first.
It should be noted, while I was speaking with Nicholas I observed his clothing was very dirty if he had fallen on the ground and his right ankle was
swollen. I asked Nicholas if he had fallen on the ground, he said he had and he injured his ankle in the process. Nicholas went on to say he had fallen
because he was intoxicated and had nothing to do with Kristine.
I ended my contact with Nicholas and recontacted Officer Bateman. I asked
Officer Bateman if Nicholas stated he tripped Kristine or threw her to the ground, and he said Nicholas told him he threw Kristine to the ground. I

How Did Industrialization And Collectivization
Industrialization and Collectivization from late 19th century to 1939
Soon after Lenin's death, in 1924, the Communist Central Committee launched the first five–year plan attempting to position the new Soviet state into
the club of Western developed nations. The Bolsheviks wanted first to demonstrate that the communist ideology could match the achievements of those
countries and do so by uplifting the standards of living of workers and peasants.
Though a true economy needs a multitude of interrelated skills and business flows to achieve efficiency, the Bolsheviks had simplified the masses
into two major classes, the "Workers" and "Peasants" (this is well exemplified by the hammer and sickle on the Soviet flag).
How did the Bolsheviks get organized
It is clear that by not benefitting of capitalistic ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After Lenin's death, the NEP was discontinued (with the corollary of executions and deportations for the 'New Capitalists" who had dared to
participate in it). Between 1928 and 1932, Stalin fearing invasions from Western nations in a fragile Soviet state, created massive industrial centers
requiring thousands of male workers, a group that had been already much afflicted by huge losses during WW I, the civil war and organized famines.
It is worth noting that from 1860 till 1914, Russia made very significant progress to become a modern state, catching up fast in the Western industrial
world (large metallurgic plants in St. Petersburg, Moscow and in the Urals, coal extraction in Ukraine, Oil drilling in Bakou, production of cereals in
the South–East, ...).
Nevertheless, the new wealth was not evenly distributed and led to widespread frustration among the population. Similarly, living conditions for
workers migrating to industrial sites were poorly built, creating an ideal hotbed for the nascent Soviet

What Are The Differences Between Julius Caesar And Czar...
TJulius Caesar and Czar Nicholas of Russia are two famous men in history who made outstanding contributions through their leadership. Both of
them can be compared with their differences and similarities. Many people opposed their power and views which later led to their assassination.
The thirst for power can cause you to become destructive. Nicholas 2 of Russia was Russia Emperor where he is commonly known as a Tsar. During
the first years of his region, he continue and develop a policy started by his late father. He allowed money for the All–Russia Exhibition of 1896. In
foreign relations, Nicholas also implemented his father's policies, strengthening the Franco–Russia Alliance. Later, the Hague peace conference
promoted by Nicholas 2 was convened with view of terminating the arm race, and setting up machinery for a peaceful settlement. During the 20th
century, a clash between Russia and the and the Empire of Japan led to the Russo–Japanese War. Nicholas approached the war with confidence and saw
it as an opportunity to raise Russian morale and patriotism. Many people were baffled. Nicholas belief was that it wouldn't be a war. Despite the
onset of the war, Nicholas still believed and expected a final victory based on racial inferiority and military weakness of the Japanese. As Russia
continued to be defeated by the Japanese, the call for drew. Russia was later defeated. Many contributions were made under the leadership of Nicholas
2 even through some of the people

Why Is Czar Nicholas The Great Emancipator In Animal Farm
The Czar family has been dead for almost 100 years. Nicholas and his whole family were assassinated due to him not being well admired per say.
Also, the Czar didn't have any previous experience or training before he received his throne. Much like Czar Nicholas II, Mr. Jones was also the
leader of some things and had many similar battles and problems. Mr. Jones is the farmer in the book Animal Farm, which was a representation of
Czar Nicholas II.
Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868 in Pashikin, Russia. His father is Alexander III, whom he inherited his throne from, but Nicholas II was not
ready. He was crowned on May 26,1894, after his father's death, without having any experience or training to help him rule. "There was discontent in
Russia as food became scarce, soldiers became war–weary, and devastating defects demonstrated the Czar's ineffectual leadership" (Czar Nicholas II
abdicates). In addition, Nicholas' faulty actions during the Bloody Sunday and WW1 all of Russia indicted him for their squander. Furthermore, the
citizens began to rampage and cause commotion that Nicholas had no alternative but to relinquish his spot on the monarchy. " March 1917, the army
Garrison at Petrograd joined striking workers in demanding socialist ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Jones and Czar Nicholas II were portrayed by George Orwell very well in my opinion. Orwell used Nicholas II to base his character Mr. Jones in
an understandable, simple, modernized way. It was very easy to connect the dots and draw comparisons. The two of them, Nicholas II and Mr. Jones,
had many similar problems and actions that were in each other's life. Some differences were there, but not many. Mr. Jones in the book Animal Farm
did not die like Nicholas. They Both lived in a bed of roses, but surprisingly, they still had work needed to be done. Be that as it may, they failed in
doing their necessary duties which cause an uprising in their responsibilities. Consequently, both the men were over the throne and put to

The Crimean War And Its Lack Of Modernization
The Crimean War was the war between Great Britain, French, and along with some other countries against Russia. While Russia led by Nicholas I,
entered to the Crimean War to defend Orthodox Christian within the autocrat empire; French entered this war because they promoted the Catholics
Christian; Great Britain wanted to maintain the autocrat empire and maintain power (Aksakov and Danielevsky, 378–389). It was an absolute
humiliating when Russia defeated the war. The Russian military was outplayed because the British had much more sophisticated weapons, technology,
and supply line (Riasanovsky and Steinberg, 366). Many liberal, conservative, and Russian people believed that the defeat of Russia in the Crimean War
was evidence of Russia 's economy and material backwardness and fallen behind many European nations (lecture, 10/19). This led to the "forces of
modernization".
Defeat in the Crimean War made Russia's lack of modernization clear. The first step toward modernization was the emancipation of serfdom. Soon
after the war end Nicholas I came to end of his life. Alexander II was on the throne and the Great Reform period of Russia began. He first issued the
emancipation manifesto in 1861. Alexander II "took steps to improve the condition of the peasantry. But these steps were only partly successful,
depending as they did on the goodwill and voluntary action of landlords (Cracraft, 340). Therefore convinced that the task of improving the condition
of the peasants kind of

Tsar And The Russian Revolution
Nicholas II was known, not only for being the Emperor of Russia but also for his character and personality which undoubtably led him to his own
downfall. Nicholas was often referred to as not being ready to become Tsar as well as being a weak leader. Firstly, Nicholas II himself, amongst a very
large proportion of Russian society, believed that he was not prepared to be coronated Emperor. Nicholas himself stated "What is going to happen to
me and all of Russia? I am not prepared to be a Tsar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling.". (Russian Revolution
Quotations 2015). Nicholas was aware of what he was getting himself into and that he was not prepared for such a role. This is further corroborated by
the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Grand Duchess Olga wrote in her journal: "...and he was wholly ignorant about governmental matters. Nicky had been trained as a soldier".
(Fiehn, T. 1996). Nicholas' sister suggests that he was not ready due to his lack of training. Margot Tracey, daughter of a Russian industrialist
declared in 1917, after Nicholas' abdication "Everybody was fed up with the Tsar because they thought he was weak. When he abdicated there
was great rejoicing everywhere. My parents opened champagne bottles and celebrated with friends.".(White 1994 p.14) Margot shows her
understanding of what was going on at the time and that Nicholas was very weak leader, although still a tyrant. Margot's statement supports the
hypothesis as it plainly says that the people did not like Nicholas as a leader due to how weak he was. Margot's statement is further corroborated
by Sergei Witte, a Russian Minister during Nicholas II rule "I pity the Tsar. I pity Russia. He is a poor and unhappy sovereign. What did he inherit
and what will he leave? He is obviously a good and quite intelligent man, but he lacks will power, and it from that character that his state defects
developed, that is, his defects as a ruler, especially an autocratic and absolute ruler." (Russian Revolution Quotations 2015). These sources work
together to support the fact that Nicholas II was responsible for his own downfall due to his weak character and that he was not properly prepared for
the role. This caused

Nicholas II Twilight Of The Empire Summary
Lieven, D. B. (1993). Nicholas II: Twilight of the Empire. New York: St. Martin's Press. The purpose of Lieven's piece is to present a new
assessment of Tsar Nicholas II and his reign over Russia. The author argues that his book takes a more sympathetic interpretation towards the Russian
leader than many Soviet or Western scholars do. Therefore, in his literary piece, Lieven focuses on the political and dynastic elements of Nicholas
II's reign as well as the social and political contexts in which Nicholas II was living. By doing so, Lieven demonstrates that Nicholas was not solely to
blame for Imperial Russia's collapse. While Lieven does believe that Nicholas II's indecisive nature paired with his feelings of insecurity did influence
the later revolution, he ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This revolution brought newly freed peasants into major cities and the low wages and long work hours lead to the creation of radical parties.
Moreover, both before and during Nicholas II's rule there was a decrease in the amount the dynastic power that the autocracy was able to use. For
instance, at the time of Nicholas II's sovereignty he was forced to sign the Manifesto of October 22, which created the DUMA, or rather the first
parliamentary system in Russia. The author argues that this attempt to shift power from the autocrat to the people coupled with the limited amount of
power that Nicholas II was actually able to enact as tsar only caused more turmoil during his reign. Lieven concludes his book by pointing out the
similarities between Nicholas II and other rulers, including the imperial emperors of Japan and German, as well as drawing parallels between the
Tsar's issues with ruling an empire to issues that were current within 1990s Russia. This allows the reader to draw further parallels and conclude that
Nicholas II may not have been an inept despot, as other sources claimed, but rather he was a smart

The Tsar 's Role As A Family Man
Nicholas II had ruled in an autocratic method due to the fear of appearing a weak leader. He was also not ready to make any drastic changes to the
organisation and structure of the empire. The Tsar did not take any advice from either his political relations or the people of Russia. He thought he
was 'chosen by God' to fill the role as the nation's leader. Nicholas was not suitable for his role as Tsar, and would've rather spent his time with his
family. Subsequently, he was disconnected with his people and could not see that, although in theory autocracy would demand the respect he so
anticipated, but, in practice, it would do the reverse. Nicholas was more suited to his role as a family man; he was successful at ordering repression,
especially as he could hide behind the disguise of administration and autocracy.
The Tsar reluctantly resorted to repression to maintain his control over the public. Understandably, defiance to the tactic increased, and the people of
Russia began to support revolutionary groups and call for revolution or reform.
It was quite evident that Nicholas did not know much about the needs and wants of his people. His people began to realise that the ruling system was
depriving them from advancing and that they could flourish without Nicholas and his autocracy. In the early periods of the twentieth century there
were many political, economic and social complications faced by the Russian nation. Due to the decades of neglect from generations of the

Essay on Rti Act
The much talked about Right to Information Act came into force on October 12. The Union government says the Act is revolutionary, as it opens all
official departments across the country to public scrutiny. The government also claims the new law will help it share power with the humblest, and
empower the weakest The Right to Information (RTI) Act is a law enacted by the Parliament of India to provide for setting out the practical regime of
right to information for citizens. It was passed by Parliament on 15 June 2005 and came fully into force on 13 October 2005. The RTI Act mandates
timely response to citizen requests for government information. It applies to all States and Union Territories of India, except the State of Jammu and
Kashmir, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At least, now alert citizens can slow down corrupt officers and politicians.Third, Indian politics will hopefully mature as more information passes
through the hands of political rivals, police, judiciary, media and the people. The Act will reveal who is exploiting whom and how one can get
justice for the poor and the needy. The judiciary will now have better data to decide against the corrupt.That sounds so far flung, doesn't it? Let us
start from the district level. If the road leading to your town is washed out in the first rains of the season, you might like to ask who was given the
contract to build that road, at what price and what the terms and conditions were.Was the contractor related to a Member of Parliament or a member of
legislative assembly in that area? During the building of that road, did any government officer object to any deficiency or malpractice? Was there any
communication in this regard? The concerned departments will have to come up with answers in the stipulated period.
Some panchayats are run by local goons or the community caste heads. They bully people when someone raises questions of accounts and money
spent. The Sarpanch or development officers are rarely forthcoming. Now, all resources and their distribution will have to be transparent on paper. The
RTI Act specifies that citizens have a right to: request any information

The Influence Of Nicholas I Police On Russia
Maintaining Order
The Reign of Nicholas I has been marked with war. He grew up in a time when war was the accepted norm of
Russia. As a child he saw his brother fight against the evil, which was Napoleon. With war being part of
Nicholas everyday life he quickly became infatuated with it. "He always remained an army man, a junior officer at heart, devoted to his troops, to
military exercises, to the parade ground, down to the last button on a soldiers uniform (Riasanovsky, 323)" Nicholas time growing up in Russia had an
immense influence on him. He observed strategy's like those of Prince Michael Kutuzov, and learned only with proper order can one fully achieve
military dominance. Three major conflicts accurately describe how Nicholas I ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Police held Russia under a microscope, in a coup like state. Committees like the "Third Section", and a "Statute on Censorship" also assisted Nicholas
in knowing exactly what his people were doing (Nicholas,
51). Nicholas I fear of liberal thought drove him to not have a reign of reform, but rather one that would merely maintain order. Even issues like
serfdom, which he knew was morally wrong, Nicholas's did not enact reform because of his fear of losing autocracy. " A single stroke of the
sovereign Emperors pen can turn serfs into free men; but no foresight can predict the consequences of such a sudden change, and no power's will be
sufficient to restore order and security amidst general anarchy (Reader, 66)."
Nicholas I foreign affairs were run like a carbon copy of how he ran his nation. Alexander influenced him heavily by signing what was called the
Holy Alliance. "Signed on September 26, 1815, by Russia, Austria, and Prussia, and subsequently by the great majority of European powers, the
alliance simply appealed to Christian rulers to live as brothers and preserve peace in Europe (Rias., 314)." Nicholas felt that it was his duty to
preserve everything that this treaty stood for. He was going to police Europe. Nicholas I did not work alone when representing Russian views. Count
Karl

The Major Cause Of The Russian Revolution
In 1917, there were many major world events going on. World War I was under place and had been since 1914. There were civil rights movements in
the United States. A worldwide influenza epidemic had broken out. The Chicago White Sox won the world series against the New York Giants.
During the year 1917, there was also a major revolution in Russia. The people of Russia split themselves into several political groups, all fighting over
how the government should be run. One of these groups was the Bolshevik party. They were a communist party and ended up taking over Russia by
the end of the revolution. For the revolution to begin and finally end with a communist power in Russia, there needed to be causes. The three major
causes of the Russian Revolution were Russia's participation in World War I, an unstable government andVladimir Lenin. The first factor that led to
the 1917 Russian Revolution and the communist government that followed was Russia's participation in World War I. When Russia first entered the
war in 1914, they were confident, but their economy and political and social states were not doing well enough to sustain a war. At the time, Czar
Nicholas Romanov II was the leader of Russia. Russia had an autocracy for a government, which meant Nicholas had all the power. He appointed his
cousin, Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolaevich, to be the commander–in–chief of the Russian army for World War I. Nikolaevich had never been a
commander before, but Nicholas still chose him

To What Extent Did Alexander Ii Deserve His Title of the...
Does Alexander II truly deserve the title of liberator? To liberate is to set free (a group or individual) from legal, social or political restrictions.
There is evidence to suggest that he disliked serfdom. Even his father, Nicholas I, believed that serfdom was an "evil palpable to all," and Alexander
II was certainly even more liberally educated than his father.
His arguably most fundamental reform was the emancipation of serfdom in 1861. As he said, "It is best to abolish serfdom from above than to wait
until it abolishes itself from below". This quote demonstrates his realization that reform was needed. Many saw serfdom as Russia's biggest handicap in
development into a new modern era, to be the equal of other European powers. There ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Milyutin's reforms made the army more civilized and efficient–the army was made to be more accommodating for the soldiers with the army methods
being made more humane. This meant that training was made more relaxed and corporal punishment was banned. Shorter services meant that the army
was no longer seen as a 'prison life sentence'. The success of the reform was due to the efforts of Dmitri Milyutin, not Alexander II, but overall
successful nonetheless. Furthermore, the success of the reform was not measured in the number of victories in battle, but the way in which it
introduced a sense of professionalism and discipline in soldiers. This gave birth to modern military strategies and more effective combat tactics.
In 1864, Alexander introduced a modern western–style judicial system based on the French system that was aimed to be "equal to all our subjects."
The salaries of judges were also increased, making them less likely to accept bribes, thus decreasing corruption. Further reforms included the opening
of courts to the public, which drastically increased freedom of expression and opportunities of careers in law. As historian Hugh Seton–Watson argues,
"the court–room was the one place in Russia where real freedom of speech prevailed." However, the success of these reforms can be questioned as the
police of the Third Section could arrest people on demand and political and military cases were soon

Essay about Comparison Of Nicholas I And Nicholas II
Nicholas I and Nicholas II both struggled with similar uncertainties of a possible revolution. Both came to a conclusion with a strong resemblance, and
yet at the same time remained drastically different when their rule ended. While the names may suggest that Nicholas I was the father of Nicholas II,
Nicholas I was actually Nicholas II&#8217;s great granduncle. The summarized history of their terms below will tell of and compare the
Nicholas&#8217; reigns of the Russian monarchy.
Nicholas I (1796–1855) was born at Tsarskoe Selo, the third son of Czar Paul I. Nicholas came tothrone in 1825 after his brother Alexander I had died
and his older brother Constantine had given up his claims to the throne. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nicholas&#8217; foreign policy was directed towards the east. He increased Russian territory at the expense of Persia soon after he came to the
throne. In 1828 he fought a war with Turkey and won the Eastern Shore of the Black Sea and a protectorate over Moldavia and Wallichia for
Russia. With great severity he put down a revolt of the Poles in 1831 and in 1849 he sent his troops into Austria to help the emperor put an end to a
rebellion of the Hungarian subjects. Nicholas hoped to drive the Turks out of Europe. As an excuse for another war he demanded a protectorate over
all Christian subjects in Turkey. This demand clashed with British and French interests and brought on the Crimean War in 1853. France and Sardinia
joined the Turks to help them defeat Russia&#8217;s ambitions. Nicholas died before the war ended. His oldest son, Alexander II followed him
as Czar.
Nicholas II (1868–1918) was born at Tsarskoe Selo, then son of Alexander III and the grandson of Alexander II. He received a military education
and traveled through Greece, Egypt, India, and Japan before he became czar. In 1849, he received the crown and married the German princess
Alexandra of Hesse, who bore four daughters and a son. Russian liberals had hoped the new czar, who was a pleasant and friendly young man, would
grant badly needed reforms and lift his country to a position among the free, progressive nations of the world. Nicholas was

The Rising Of The Decembrist Russia
The rising of the Decembrist Russia was due to a confusion over the next succession. In 1825, Alexander I died suddenly. Alexander 's younger brother,
Constantine, who was next in line, had no desire to assume the throne of such a burdensome empire, so he gave his right of succession to his brother
Nicholas. Nicholas, however, had been left unaware of the official details of the change and on learning of Alexander 's death he proclaimed
Constantine emperor at St. Petersburg, at the same time as Constantine in Warsaw was proclaiming Nicholas. For nearly three weeks in December
1825 the throne remained vacant. Russian officers and troops had come into contact with currents of liberal thought, with new social conditions, and
with new political institutions in western Europe during the struggle against Napoleon. Upon their return home they saw that the idea of the rights of
man was regarded with contempt by their rulers, that their country by trodden under the heel of an autocracy which made all progress impossible. As
they had no legitimate means making their desires known, they organised secret societies which agitated for reforms, including the establishment of a
constitution. These societies, afterwards called the Decembrists, were planning a widespread uprising but, when Alexander suddenly died, resolved to
take advantage of the uncertainty that existed regarding the succession to attempt a coup d 'etat. But the plotters had no clear plan or organisation and
had made no

Was World War One Responsible for Nicholas Ii's Downfall?
Emily Hawkins
How far do you agree that Nicholas II's downfall was caused by World War 1?
1914 was a devastating year for many countries of the world, as world war one began to take full effect. But as world war one shook the world; it
began to question Nicholas II's ability to rule Russia. In this essay i will discuss the extent of world war one's responsibility in Nicholas II's downfall,
and the extent of other contributing factors. I will argue that Nicholas II's own traits as a leader were the main reason for his downfall.
On the one hand, world war one had a huge impact on the Tsar and his country. Firstly, the cost of the war was placing a huge strain on Russia's
economy. Taxes increased hugely and the cost of living rose by... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Duma also refused orders to dissolve, and 12 of its members formed a committee that planned to take over Russia; the called themselves 'The
Provisional Government'. The soviets also issued 'Order number 1' which demanded that all officers in the army be elected by their men, proving
that the Tsar had lost all of his power. Therefore, there were many factors involved in the Tsar's downfall, such as the political opposition, strikes and
the disloyalty of the army and the Duma. Once people started to support the other political parties, they lost all loyalty for the 'God appointed' Tsar.
The strikes highlighted the weaknesses of the Tsar's leadership skills and proved that he couldn't no longer control and rule Russia. The disloyalty of
the army and the Duma completely removed all of his power, meaning that Nicholas could no longer be Tsar.
I personally believe that Nicholas II was responsible for his own downfall. Although there was definitely contributing factors, his naive attitude and
inability to effectively rule a country caused his downfall. Nicholas failed to trust key advisors such as Witte and Stolypin and despite him issuing the
October Manifesto; he preserved his own autocratic power through the fundamental laws, which the Russian people didn't like. He failed to think and
plan ahead to create a better future for Russia, he didn't think like a leader should. Even though the war was already a huge strain

The Impact of Industrialization and Collectivization: <40

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Erin Ross

More from Erin Ross (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Impact of Industrialization and Collectivization: <40