Burdette--Collapse From Within Caused an Overthrow From Without

The February Revolution began as a collapse from within and caused an overthrow from without.

Under Czar Nicholas II, Mother Russia suffered. First, she lost to the Japanese (Yes, the huge country of Russia lost to a tiny, little Asian country. What is the world coming to?!?) in the Russo-Japanese War. This caused a huge blow to Russian pride and nationalism as well as to the czar's credibility. He was the one who got them into the war and it was probably very easy to blame him for their humiliating loss. Nicholas II's decision to enter into the Russo-Japanese War led to instability and doubt within Russia, directed towards the czar. His support "ebbed away" and the "majority of the soldiers turned against the Tsar" (1). This shows how Czar Nicholas's decision to enter into the Russo-Japanese War (which was ultimately a first of quite a few unwon wars) led to an unstable country and a distrust in the leader that made Russia ripe for revolution. The bad decision on the Czar's part (the collapse from within) led to distrust of the people and the soldiers who turned against him (an overthrow from without), protesting in a huge demonstration and my next piece of evidence: Bloody Sunday. In this protest, people of Russia rose up against Czar Nicholas II, crying out for bread and exclaiming, "Down with the tsar!" (3). Mother Russia was in economic turmoil and people were hungry. And Czar Nicholas II didn't listen to their cries. Instead, he sent soldiers out to shoot down the very people who rose up (2). Mikhailaich said, "It is impossible to rule the country without paying attention to the voice of the people, without meeting their needs, without a willingness to admit that the people themselves understand their own needs" (1). This is so true. There is no way the Czar could have successfully ruled his people without paying attention to the people. He chose not too, however, perhaps thinking arrogantly that he didn't need their advice or that they didn't know as well as he did. Instead, he had those who spoke out slaughtered by their fellow countrymen. This made the people resent him even more, making them more susceptible to leaders like the Bolsheviks and Lenin who promised to listen. It even made the provisional government set up by the Duma attractive because it promised to be a democracy (even and infant one) that actually gave the people some rights (which Czar Nicholas II did not do despite many promises). Again, this shows how Nicholas II's decisions caused great unrest within the country and made the people ready to overthrow the current government. I think the final decision made by the Czar that really sent Mother Russia over the top was when he took control of the army during WWI (1). He had absolutely no military training or experience and by taking control of the army, he was putting himself in the perfect position to be blamed completely for a loss (1). The army, poorly equipped and understandably struggling, didn't meet very happy ends in WWI. What could have been blamed on their food and equipment shortages was instead blamed on Czar Nicholas II. He was the leader after all. He led them into the war and suddenly, he was calling not only political moves but also military moves. The czar's unwise decision yet again put him on bad terms with the people of Russia. His decisions may have had only minor repercussions had he not be leader of all of Russia. Instead--because he was--his unwise decisions had huge consequences. Czar Nicholas's actions (the collapse from within) led to unrest within the country and a people ready to revolt against him (the overthrow from without).