How Did The Russian Revolution Affect The 1905 Revolution
The 1905 revolution had little impact but it is important to know that the Bloody Sunday which sparked 1905 revolution was starting point where the bond between the tsar and the people was heavily severed. This caused loss of popular support for Nicholas II. The Russian Revolution of 1905 was not a sudden event, but rather the culmination of years of discontent caused by several factors which were the poor economic condition of the peasantry, who had seen little improvement in their lives following emancipation, the autocratic nature in Nicholas II’s rule, which distanced him from the population. There was an economic recession in the early years of the 20th century, which resulted in high rates of unemployment and mass unrest was met with
…show more content…
These delivered in the October Manifesto, which promised free speech and an elected assembly called the Duma, whose agreement would be needed before any laws could be passed. Although Nicholas II initially promised greater liberties and said the Duma would have the power to act to ensure these liberties were upheld, he did not allow the Duma to elect its own ministers, and he claimed the right to discharge the council whenever he wanted. Reaction to the October manifesto was divided. Many of the rebels felt that their voices had been heard, and that the landowner would have to accept their demands. However, minority of extreme revolutionaries, including the Bolsheviks felt that the Manifesto did not go far enough in addressing the grievances of the Russian people. There was some armed resistance, but the tsar’s soldiers suppressed this, and its seemed for a time that stability would return to …show more content…
He proved unwilling to enforce the reforms that he had promised and issued the Fundamental Laws, which asserted his full autocratic powers. The police and the army continued to harass real or imagined critics of the tsarist regime, it is estimated that 15,000 people were killed and 70, 000 arrested within a year. The first statement of the fundamental laws was that supreme autocratic power belongs to the tsar. This denied the hopes of those who saw the Duma as a means of bringing more representative government to Russia. The tsar could introduce laws and could veto those passed by the Duma. Minister were still appointed by the tsar, who controlled military and foreign
These delivered in the October Manifesto, which promised free speech and an elected assembly called the Duma, whose agreement would be needed before any laws could be passed. Although Nicholas II initially promised greater liberties and said the Duma would have the power to act to ensure these liberties were upheld, he did not allow the Duma to elect its own ministers, and he claimed the right to discharge the council whenever he wanted. Reaction to the October manifesto was divided. Many of the rebels felt that their voices had been heard, and that the landowner would have to accept their demands. However, minority of extreme revolutionaries, including the Bolsheviks felt that the Manifesto did not go far enough in addressing the grievances of the Russian people. There was some armed resistance, but the tsar’s soldiers suppressed this, and its seemed for a time that stability would return to …show more content…
He proved unwilling to enforce the reforms that he had promised and issued the Fundamental Laws, which asserted his full autocratic powers. The police and the army continued to harass real or imagined critics of the tsarist regime, it is estimated that 15,000 people were killed and 70, 000 arrested within a year. The first statement of the fundamental laws was that supreme autocratic power belongs to the tsar. This denied the hopes of those who saw the Duma as a means of bringing more representative government to Russia. The tsar could introduce laws and could veto those passed by the Duma. Minister were still appointed by the tsar, who controlled military and foreign