Preview

Why do some historians believe the Provisional Government was doomed from the beginning?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
915 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Why do some historians believe the Provisional Government was doomed from the beginning?
Historians may believe the Provisional Government was doomed because of a major problem with the provisional government which was the Dual Authority. The Provisional Government was made up of members of the old Duma that had refused to disband at the Tsars command. This meant that they were basically the same men that the Tsar had appointed before the revolution, so nothing had changed in that regard. Consequently, they had no goodwill from the public backing them up, so they would be judged purely on what the public could see happening. Furthermore, the Government had to share power with the Petrograd Soviet. This illegitimate relationship lessened the power of the Provisional Government existentially. Incidentally, it should be mentioned that the two factions were not necessarily hostile towards one another from the start, with some members being members of both groups at the same time. This combination of convenience however, could not last for long.Without a shred of a doubt, one of the biggest problems with the Provisional Government was the continuation of the war. The war was a lost cause by this stage and the Provisional Government would have wanted to pull out if it were a logical possibility, but in order to keep Russia afloat they needed to keep up the fight for the money that they were receiving from Britain and France. The loans that Russia had taken out from these countries while under the Tsarist regime had left Russia financially destroyed. The injections of money and supplies that the allies were providing Russia with because of their involvement in the war was the only thing keeping Russia stable. If Russia could have started to engage in peace talks, as suggested by Josef Stalin, then the Provisional Government could concentrate on sorting out the social and economic problems properly, but because of the desperate need for the war credits, this was not a viable solution. The effect of this choice to keep fighting is somewhat akin to watching a

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Firstly, the repressive policies of the Tsar was partly responsible for the survival of Tsarist rule as the Tsar made it very difficult for there to be any sort of opposition. This was because the Tsar implemented the Okraha (secret police) to exile anyone who opposed him. This created fear in opposition groups so they started operated from outside Russia. In addition to this, the Statute of State Security meant that the government opponents were tried so could not operate. This, with the help of Okhrana barred any opposition.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The reforms and policies made during the last Tsarist years were not in the interests of the people but were made simply to maintain the power of the Tsar and his nobles. Most people would argue that during the years 1917-1964 there was more political freedom and less repression than in the Tsarist years. The provisional government did not meet the needs of the Russian people. They were an unstable and temporary government, and many people on the furthest parts of the Russian empire did not know about their existence. This provided them with many issues, such as trying to enforce democracy onto people they did not understand what democracy actually was. Many historians believe that at this point the people of Russia did not know themselves what form of government they wanted and due to the lack of education they did not know what form was best for them. In October 1917 came the Bolshevik revolutions. With their leader, Lenin, the Bolsheviks overthrew the provisional government and came into power. The leadership of Lenin was met with great approval from the people. Lenin promised political freedom unknown to them under the Tsars and Provisional government. In his rule…

    • 1370 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Firstly, the opposition groups of the Tsar were known as the Populists, the Liberals and the Marxists. Each group had its own ideas on what was needed for Russia and each group wanted change, however, there were many problems within the groups and none of them were willing to work with each other. The Populists who were mainly concentrated on establishing a democratic government used violent tactics such as terrorism and assassinations, the most famous being the assassination of Tsar Alexander II. However, the Liberals, who also wanted to establish some sort of democracy did not agree on using violent tactics, they preferred to discuss things in meetings and banqueting campaigns. The Liberals were the most moderate of the opposition groups and wanted to keep the Tsar, but remove autocracy and have his current power shared between a democratic government. The Marxists, like the other two groups, also wanted to establish some sort of democracy; however, once again, they did not agree on using violence, they preferred to use propaganda campaigns, as did the Populists and Liberals, but not violence. These divisions meant that each opposition group’s strength alone was not enough to achieve their own specific goals and even though the groups did have some tactics such as propaganda in common, it was not enough. If each group had considered changing their tactics or been slightly more lenient, they may have succeeded.…

    • 800 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The first of these was headed by a moderate liberal, Georgi Lvov and the second was ran by Alexander Krensky. The Provisional Government knew that the Bolsheviks were going to strike. The reports of the Bolshevik's conspiracy in where always in Krensky's mind, but there was overwhelming dissent about the revolution. The government was so unstable that Krensky had little to no control over the congress or military, and because Krensky did not have "the majesty of government, the laws, the protection of friends and of the state," he had no power, no control over his fortune. Krensky's failure as a prince had to do with the unstable government and the political factions all brewing their revolutions and civil unrest. He did not prepare for fortune. He met his end by not being able to deal with…

    • 1377 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1Final negotiations began on 1 May, when an agreement was almost reached. However, one million miners were locked out, it being impossible to get them back to work without firm assurances concerning their wages. Last-minute negotiations failed to achieve this, leading to announcement by the TUC that a general strike "in defence of miners' wages and hours" was to begin on 3 May,[7] a Monday, at one minute to midnight.[8]…

    • 322 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    The big issues with the struggle for power was that after Lenin’s death the following leader was not selected by Lenin in his testament, this was because of the different personalities of each of the leaders and the places within the party. The most outstanding reason why there was a struggle for power. This was between all the political positions, left winged, right wing and central, this is due to the varied beliefs of each candidate. The main candidates that was most likely to take power included; Trotsky, who was renowned for his large input in the civil war being a big leader of the red army. Stalin who was high up in the party and was a very conniving, as well as devious person. This was because of his tactical manoeuvring that had taken place during the struggle for power. Lastly there was Bukharin who was also a big contender as he was close friends with Lenin and helped seize Moscow in the civil war. Two more contenders Zinoviev and Kamenev where also large contenders, I haven’t considered them as the biggest contenders for the power of Russia due to their political positioning within the parties as they went from Right to Left winged and therefore were seen as unreliable by the public.…

    • 1418 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Furthermore, the Bolsheviks had no figure of leadership in Russia – Lenin had been exiled to Switzerland. Consequently, until Lenin’s return in April, the Bolsheviks were left to decide what the best decisions to make for the party were; they began to support the Provisional Government, believing the Marxist’s plan of achieving a Socialist community was being fulfilled. However, when Lenin returned to Russia, April 3rd 1917, he degraded the Provisional Government and the idea of supporting them, insisting that all power goes towards the Soviet. Lenin’s sudden change in Bolshevik ideals unsettled the party and it took time to resolve the drastic change. This move made the Bolsheviks legitimacy questionable due to the abrupt change in Bolshevik ideals.…

    • 883 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Based on events in history, the main cause of the Russian Revolution was the state that the government was in and the conditions the working class was in. The Czar gave up his throne and the government began to be corrupt along with the build up of repression from the working class, who suffered for many years before, about to burst. These events set the basis for the revolution and grew with the circumstance of instability throughout the government and Dumas. Even before and after the abdication of the czar Dumas have formed and dissolved adding to the instability of the government as a whole. We see this here, “These disorders… Forced the government to promise the establishment of a consultive Duma, or assembly, elected by limited franchise.” (“Russian Revolution”) Along with this workers rioted for their working conditions and rations, soon enough the military refuse to break up the protesters and rioters involved. It now turned chaotic and violent. A peaceful protest gone bad was the influence for most of the violence because it was a weak spot to the government. The revolution caused an outcome of twelve years in suffering from a transaction of a different political standing. Negotiations came forth and at ended with Germany cutting in.…

    • 493 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Royal Romanov Family

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Liberals were not successful in gaining governmental acceptance of their ideas. However, when the Revolution was reignited in 1917, the Revolutionaries had more support and the determination to accomplish their goals. During this time, because of World War I, there was hardly any food or fuel, and hard winters made for hard times. Nicholas II then attempted to appease the people with the introduction of a Constitution and the Duma, a parliament which would give the people more of a say in government, but it was too little and too late. The mounting pressures of World War I, combined with years of injustice, toppled the rule of Tsar Nicholas II in March 1917. Forced to abdicate, he was replaced by a Provisional Government committed to continuing the…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wendell Willkie, the Republican Presidential candidate in 1940, once said, “It is from weakness that people reach for dictators and concentrated government power.” In Germany, Italy, and Japan, the awful economic, political, and racial conditions leading up to World War II gave rise to three of the modern world’s fiercest dictators. Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Hideki Tojo have gone down in history for all the wrong reasons, and they will forever be remembered for the dark stain they have left on history. Adolf Hitler, possibly the most infamous of dictators, is one of the most known figures in history. Before Hitler came to power, Germany was in the midst of an economic depression, still trying to find money to pay its war reparations after losing World War I (Hitler, 1).…

    • 668 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    History

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages

    I believe that one of the main reasons for the Tsar’s abdication and the collapse of the Romanov rule was the poor state which Russia was in. Russia’s economy was at the worst it had ever been. The economy was far worse than other countries in the War. There were millions of peasants in Russia who had very limited amount of money. With such a limited amount of money, many peasants were unable to buy food, and drink to help them to survive. Peasants believed that they weren’t getting rewarded fairly for the work which they were doing. The upper classes’ benefit greatly due to work done by the Peasants. This created a negative atmosphere around Russia and helped fuel the need for a change. Peasants wanted change; they wanted to be rewarded more for their efforts at work. Russia was in an economic crisis. They had borrowed a huge amount of money from capital countries in order to fuel Russia’s war effort. This was a problem for Russia because they simply didn’t have the money to repay these countries. During the war the country had suffered inflation. Prices had risen dramatically for everyday items such as bread. The country was suffering and the Russian people’s families were dyeing in a war which wasn’t being funded. The Russian people were bound to be discontent and they only had one person to blame and that was the Tsar.…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The serfs were "freed", the provisional government failed and the czar made serious mistakes. The serfs were "freed" then again got tooken over by the Communist party and were told what to do, where to live, and where to work. The provisional government failed fatefully by continuing war against Germany and got defeated. The czar, well he made a couple of serious mistakes. He fought in the Russo-Japanese War and got defeated. Then he went to war with Austria and Germany and got defeated. The last mistake he made was moving the headquarters to the front and leaving the Russian government under the Alexandra's hands. Conditions were desperate under her rule. The Russian Revolution should have never happened because so many Russian lives were lost under the Russian…

    • 942 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    As well as the lack of public support, the Provisional Government was also almost powerless in political and military terms. The Soviets, elected by workers and peasants and therefore generally against…

    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Bolshevik Takeover

    • 592 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In March of 1917 in Russia, The Tsar, Nicholas II had little choice. The Great War (as it was known as at that time) had turned into a disaster, conditions at home were horrible, and the Menshevik government had forced Nicholas to abdicate He did this for himself and his son and gave the power to his brother. His brother gave up the power the next day because the country was in such disarray. After that, the Provisional Government took power. By November of 1917 in Russia, the Provisional Government was in complete collapse. In the meantime, the Bolshevik party, which was helped by German money, had built up an efficient party organisation, had a brilliant propaganda machine, and a powerful private army know as the Red Guards.…

    • 592 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It is undoubtedly true that during Heath’s time in office, 1970-1975, he faced many difficulties, many of them at the hands of the Trade Unions, which made his time in government difficult to make any progress. However it cannot be denied that the Heath Government did make some successes, and considering the harsh times that Heath faced, it could be argued that the Heath government was not a total failure and instead was one that had experienced lot of bad luck.…

    • 980 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays