Question 1#
Was the February Revolution an ‘overthrow from without or a collapse from within’?
In my opinion the February Revolution was both an overthrow from without and a collapse from within. But, I feel that the factors that Czar Nicholas II could not control happened first, and that he did not respond to them well. His response to the problems caused the collapse from within. So in a way the February Revolution was a cause and effect problem that resulted in the abdication of the Czar.
The beginning problems of Russia, to name a few, were the lack of good transportation, the rise in food prices, and the need for better technology and weapons. The transportation could be a problem that would slow down shipping products and with the entry of the war, it would be harder to transfer soldiers in Russia. The crops at this time were bad which caused food prices to rise substantially. The people of Russia were starving in their homes. During the war, what little food was around was going to the army. This caused the people at home to starve to death. All of these things that the Czar could not control lead to revolts from the people. The Czar was not really doing anything to fix these problems, he was making them worse.
On Bloody Sunday, hundreds of Russians gathered in front of the Imperial Palace to riot. They were rioting because they were not getting treated well, and they had no say in the government. They needed someone in the government to represent them and their needs. Czar Nicholas II should have told them that he would try to make some changes and resolve the problem peacefully. Instead he ordered his men to shoot the people outside the palace. This was a wrong move for the Czar, the people had little faith in the government at the time and this made it much worse. The people felt like they could not trust a government who was just going to shoot them, when the problem was fixable.
When it was time to enter the war, the people were not supportive of the government and the army so there was little nationalism to excite the people. They had no reason to support the government because they were not being taken care of. So, the soldiers in the war did not want to be there because they had no weapons, no food, and they were resentful of the government. This did not lead to a good fight, soldiers who do not want to be there are not going to be doing anything spectacular. The Czar decided that he should go to the front lines of the army and lead it himself. This was another one of his mistakes. He had no experience which made the soldiers not trust him. They did not want to be lead in the army by someone who did not know what they were doing, it would have them ending up dead. The Czar could not be trusted as a military leader or a government leader.
So the people of Russia were very resentful of the Czar. They did not want to join the army and they did not want to live under the Czar. After he created the Duma, the people lightened up. Czar Nicholas II did not end up listening to the Duma which turned the people against him even more. It seems as though Czar did not work well under pressure. As soon as the people began to have problems, he began making wrong decisions. He did not want to seem weak and could not have people speaking out against him. He knew that if one person spoke out against him, then he would stand no chance. The events of the February Revolution was first an overthrow from without, and then ended up being a collapse from within. Czar did not control his country when they were doubting him, he gave them more reasons.
In my opinion, I believe that the February Revolution was an overthrow from within for many reasons because as a leader Czar Nicholas II was to blame for not attempting to solve many of the problems that led to the revolution.
ReplyDeleteFor starters, Czar had it coming for himself. He ignored the rights of the people or what they wanted. The Duma came to be a complete failure for its purpose (to let the citizens' voices be heard). He also failed to recognize civil liberties and leadership when Bloody Sunday occurs, (a glorious day for citizens to revolt against Czar). Instead of being a leader, Czar decides to fight back against the citizens of the country that he rules! Here was an opportunity for Czar to assume leadership and INSTEAD OF REVOLTING; he had an opportunity to listen to the concerns of the citizens. Russia also lost the Russo-Japanese War, decreasing Russian credibility. And finally, Czar involves Russia in World War I, in which the country was unprepared and Czar takes leadership of the military and country AT THE SAME TIME! Although the country has a strong level of nationalism, others suffer from food shortages at home.
Evaluating all of the following events, it is shown that Czar did not assume the role of leadership. Obviously, Czar was doing nothing to help the people or solve the problems that were currently at stake, which led to bigger problems. Weak military, angry citizens and a country that is steadily falling, economically and politically. He continuously piles problem on top of problem. Lucky for Czar, his country had a strong sense of nationalism, because piling World War I on top of other unsolved problems would have been the chance for citizens to go against him. Historians could challenge this by saying that other factors led to this and that the people could have turned this into an outside force and that the people were not forced to defend Russia. But from a citizen’s perspective, it could have helped them to gain respect and hopefully start to rebuild their country. And still, even with strong nationalism, Czar does not attempt to meet citizens half way with civil liberties. Czar is clearly concerned about ruling the country his way, as long as everyone abides by what he feels is “right”. For Czar to create the Duma and ignore what they wish, it is clear that he was only set to “shut the country up” and make it seem as if he is trying to please them. The Czar also proves himself to be an unworthy leader when becoming military leader and ruler at the same time. With issues currently existing, Czar does not bother to FIX them, but would rather take over the military instead of assigning someone to take care of the war, allowing for Czar to work on fixing the issues. Czar is a leader who clearly thought that his methods of “fixing” Russia were going to be helpful and work in his favor. Czar failed to repair the country, leaving many workers and families angry and forcing to overthrow him to gain a better country economically and politically.
hi, ignore this comment. wrong spot! ♥
ReplyDeleteYou talk about how the Czar did not respond to the problems well, but to fully understand these problems I would suggest starting from the VERY beginning. That is, for each problem examine why these things occured and you will most likely find that the Czar was a contributor to the problem in the first place. For example you talk about food shortages and shortages of war supplies not being his fault, but as the leader of the country I believe he must be held somewhat responsible for things such as this that affect his country on such a large scale. The only type of problem, in my opinion, that he should not be held responsible for is trains freezing and not being able to transport goods (4 Movie). The Czar manipulated many things, but Mother Nature was not one of them. You also talk about how his citizens doubted him, but besides poor decisions don't you also think incapabilities played a role in his abdication? He made bad decisions to get ahead as far as possible, but I also think he was too ignorant to truly know what to do in these situations. Wouldn't him escaping to the war front and leaving the Tsarina in charge be a perfect example of this? Lastly, I disagree with you that the Czar wants to rule the country as long as everyone "feels his way is right." I think the Czar could not care less about how his people think or feel. He clearly showed this by making them think they had a say in the government with the Duma and shooting at them on Bloody Sunday (2 Belk notes).The Czar didn't care if they felt the same way as him, and obviously he didn't care if they were dead; he just wanted the government to be ran his own way and he tried to do this by removing all "obstacles" in his way.
ReplyDelete