Preview

Nicholas II: The Breakdown Of Social Order In Russia

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
478 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Nicholas II: The Breakdown Of Social Order In Russia
Firstly, the breakdown of social order was instigated by the leadership of Nicholas II. The Tsars’ archaic policy’s led to the persecution of racial minorities and oppression of the working class, which held Russia’s population majority and contributed to over half the nations’ income. Nicolas II was very easily influenced, which led to him being easily persuaded by his advisors and wife. His wife, Tsarina Alexander was a very strong believer of the autocratic system and believed that power should not be shared. The Tsarina was very politically strong-minded, however she was ill-informed. The Tsar often relied on his advisors to help make decisions, as he himself had not been exposed to the harsh reality of life in Russia. His lack of determination and his political naiveté led him into his decision to be the front command for the Russian troops in WWI, which would eventually prove fatal, as behind him, he left his ill-equip wife to lead with the highly influential Rasputin with her. The support from Nobles and army generals began to diminish, as they saw …show more content…
In the ‘Fundamental Laws of the Empire’, it Is written that “all must bow to the supreme power, not only out of fear but also out of conscience.” This sends a clear message to all that communication with the Tsar is irrefutable and repressive. The social construct of the autocratic system saw the intense disparity of peasants, which made up 82% of the population, and the working class (4%). The Tsarist autocracy gave power to the tsar not only to control all power and wealth, but also control the distribution of it, meaning people were not endorsed by merit. For example, the army’s authority was not assigned based on proficiency or skill, rather on what could be sold or bought. Autocratic Russia was not interested in the improvement of social equity or economic

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    In July 1918, the royal Romanov line was suddenly and brutally ended by the Bolsheviks. The Romanov family had ruled the Russian Empire for over three centuries. The Romanovs reign was one of strict tyranny. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia made one big step toward a more equal Russia by freeing the serfs but because the serfs owned no land they had little to no money still. After WWI when nicholas led Russia to a crushing defeat there was lots of unrest throughout Russia. I think that the main reason the Tsar was forced to abdicate the throne and then was slaughtered is that he made a more equal Russia but in doing so he made the serfs more impoverished than ever, that he had led Russia into multiple wars that had ended badly and that the technology…

    • 151 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Summary: Romanov Dynasty

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages

    “The daily work of a monarch he found intolerably boring”-Kerensky. In a tsarist autocracy, all power and wealth is controlled and distributed by the tsar. The center of the tsarist autocracy was the person of the tsar himself, a sovereign with absolute authority. The rights of state power in their entire extent belonged to the tsar. Power was further entrusted by him to persons and institutions, acting in his name, by his orders, and within the limits laid down for them by law. The purpose of the system was to supposedly benefit the entire country of Russia. “Autocracy is a superannuated form of government that may suit the needs of a Central African tribe, but not those of the Russian people, who are increasingly assimilating the culture of the rest of the world. That is why it is impossible to maintain this form of government except by violence.” -Nicolai Tolstoy. Unlike western monarchies who were subjugated in religious matters to the Pope, the Tsar of the Russian Empire was the supreme authority on religious. Another key feature was related to patrimonialism. In Russia the tsar owned a much higher proportion of the state (lands, enterprises, etc.) than did Western monarchs. The tsarist autocracy had many supporters within Russia. “Be more autocratic than Peter the Great and sterner than Ivan the Terrible.” -Tsarina…

    • 4116 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    War broke out in 1914, with Tsar Nicholas becoming commander-in-chief in 1915, meaning he was away from Petrograd. Not only was this poorly thought out by Nicholas because it gave the people an opportunity to plot against him, but as he was away he left Tsarina (also a German princess), Alexandra, in charge during his absence. Due to the war being against Germany, this made the Russian people nervous and skeptical towards the extreme power she had over them during such a crucial time. Not only were they disgruntled by this, but also Alexandra’s close friendship to Rasputin, a Serbian peasant. This particularly angered the aristocracy and middle classes as they believed they were being led by someone of lower demeanor than that of themselves. This weakened support for the autocratic rule and lost the Tsar many of his supporters, which put him in a vulnerable position in the case of revolutionary upturn. This also could have inspired the peasantry to discover greater aspirations and encourage their belief that they could have greater status which in turn could trigger new revolutionary ideas amongst the lower classes. This demonstrates a link between Nicholas being away in order to commandeer army movement for the war, however it is arguable that it was a lack of authority and respect for the Tsarist regime that caused the change of opinions towards the Tsar amongst all classes, lessening his support and leaving him far more vulnerable in the case of a revolution.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another factor that was responsible for the survival of the Tsarist rule was the reluctance of the Peasantry to support opposition. The Peasants were extremely uneducated and they didn’t understand how these policies could change their lives. The Tsar had been the political power since the 13th century so it was all that they knew. They believed that the Tsar was appointed by god so whatever he did, they believed it was for the best. They were fearful that if they joined an opposition group the Tsar would be able to ‘see’ them and…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    All state leaders across the whole period held qualities that didn’t please the whole of the population in Russia. During the reign of Alex II, the government showed some strength with controlling opposition from the peasantry through the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It was thought that to prevent revolt from below, this was a key movement that had to be made, and therefore prevented future unrest and opposition. However, the new liberated serfs had to deal with more laws concerning land ownership with led to further unrest and repression in the peasantry by the state. The state moreover, appeased the most vocal critics but in such a way that allowed dissenters to express themselves in the knowledge that Tsar’s decision would be final. Compared to Nicholas II’s reign, this showed a decisive leading technique, as Nicholas’s style was more conservative, and showed weakness, relying on others’ advice to fuel his decisions. A key failure throughout his period was the mixed rule attempt with the Duma introduced from 1906 to 1917, it is arguable that Nicholas II made concessions only to keep opposition temporarily at bay and that his aim was to uphold the principle of autocracy.…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Over the Eastern Front, the German general Hindenburg and his chief of staff Ludendorff devised strategies that gave them many victories over Russian armies. The war became increasing unpopular among the Russian people. Ludendorff, sensing a chance to take Tsar Nicholas II’s country out of the world war, arranged for an exiled Marxist revolutionary named Lenin to cross Europe in a special train and get back into Tsar’s country Russia. As expected, Lenin helped fan the rising revolutionary sentiments. The Tsar was prosecuted. For the first time in Russian history a democracy formed, but its leaders overlooked the people’s resistance to continuing the war. When the newly elected government could not bring peace, it was overthrown in November…

    • 134 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Throughout this time period the ruling elite, who made up 1.1% of the population despite owning 25% of the land, maintained constant support of the Tsar. This support was based on reliance in the Tsars rule in order to ensure their own aristocracy. The nobles controlled the land Therefore through the nobility’s control of land and as a result the means of production, the Tsar had autocratic power over the majority who worked this land; the peasants, both of state (32.7%) and through the nobility 50.7% as despite the emancipation of serfs in 1861 the lives of these peasants were heavily restricted and reliant on the land owners through the Mir, censorship, tax and redemption payments, of which many could not pay for and so were forced into debt. the peasants themselves, being both restricted in the Mir and due to their traditional attitudes and acceptance of social situation, what Marx would call a lack of revolutionary consciousness, can be attributed to the Tsarist survival.…

    • 2563 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    The autocratic rulership and repressive policies promoted the feudalistic style class system and prevented societal advancements throughout Russia. The world was entering a…

    • 1611 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Undeniably, Nicholas II had an enormous role in bringing about the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty in March 1917. Whilst many historians argue the fall of the Tsarist regime to be the direct response and product of World War I, it is quite evident that it was Nicholas’ inefficient and fatal autocratic ruling which led to the March Revolution of 1917. The effects of Russia’s involvement in numerous wars only heightened and highlighted Nicholas’ unsuitability for the role of Tsar, and his absolute and stubborn belief in autocracy. Had Nicholas’ various choices throughout his reign differed, the Romanov Dynasty could in fact, have existed…

    • 1391 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The social structure of 1800’s Russia was a rigid hierarchy. According to the 1879 census 82% of the population were peasants, 4% was the working class, 1.5% were the middle classes, and 12.5% were the upper classes. The peasants were small farmers that used outdated methods. They were mostly former serfs that were freed in the 1861 serf emancipation under Alexander II.…

    • 1469 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Agriculture was a crucial area which needed to be reformed if Russia was to ever be modernised. At the root of the inherently backward Russia was the peasant workforce, who mainly worked in the agricultural sector, which left Russia a world away from other European Countries in terms of industry. ‘Out of the 60 million people in European Russia in 1855, 50 million were peasant serfs’1; this was a huge obstacle to modernisation as it limited. The goal of Emancipation was to release the peasants from the land that they were bound to in order to create an industrial workforce that would drive modernisation. The predominantly agricultural workforce would now work in factories thus changing Russia into an industrial juggernaut, which would be key in modernising Russia. The reform was also crucial as it was the first step in the deconstruction of the Ancien Regime within Russia. Emancipation was key in establishing support for the monarchy, ‘in other countries Serf emancipation took place as a consequence of social and organic change’2, this meant that in Russia the monarchy had…

    • 1981 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Tsarist Autocracy

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Tsarist autocracy has succeeded for more than three hundred years, but the Russian Revolution that occurred on November 1917 ended the long term autocracy. During this time period, Tsar Nicholas II was the leader of Russia and indeed the last one. He caused Russia’s downfall and made many Russians frustrated about the government. The Tsar did not acknowledge the nation's problems and failed to improve the lives of the citizens. As the Russians struggled with limited rights and lack of help from Nicholas II, they had to make a move. Although peasant unrest led to the Russians protesting and rebelling against the country, the Russian Revolution occurred because of Tsar Nicholas II’s weak leadership, in which he failed to accomplished the Russian’s goals, horribly managed the military, and thought that the system should not change.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Soon after becoming Tsar he would ask Alix for support instead of trusting the “bureaucrats and sycophants” (Atchison). Nicholis would shy away and find himself lonely throughout his reign (Atchison). Nicholas II knew that his time as Tsar would be short lived and his people had grown tired and angry with him. He believed the only reason Russia was still holding “at the seams” was because of the monarchy (Atchison). This led to the Revolution in February of 1917 which was an “uproar” (Biography).…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    The Russian Empire was a state that existed from 1721 until the Russian Revolution of 1917. It stretched from Europe to the Pacific Ocean and included people with diverse cultures and traditions.2 Russia was a land of disparity and contradiction by the turn of the 20th century. It was caught in between two worlds: the traditional world of the peasantry and the modern world of the westernized elite.3 As these two world coexisted, their values, culture, and way of life extremely differed. Regardless of the persistence of a rural society and economy, Russia became exposed to profound urban and industrial growth during the second half of the 19th century. 4Many peasants surfed…

    • 2030 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Alexander II became the Tsar, Russia was in total disarray. Her once widely respected and feared army was humiliated on the battlefields in the Crimean Peninsula, 80% of the people were in poverty and illiterate. Russia was still stuck in the middle ages while the rest of Europe was steaming in through the Industrial Era. Alexander II saw this as a need for change, primarily in response to the Crimean War, however to be able to do this, he also had to change the Russian society, therefore in 1861 he abolished serfdom, becoming the most significant events in Imperial Russian history, giving him the name as the ‘Tsar Liberator’ (Watts, Peter, History Review, 2014). However, although Alexander II’s reforms did pave the way for a more educated,…

    • 1434 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays