Preview

Tsarist and Soviet Regimes: Terror and Repression during 1855-1964

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3481 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Tsarist and Soviet Regimes: Terror and Repression during 1855-1964
To what extent did the Tsarist and Soviet regimes rely on terror and repression to maintain order and control between1855-1964?
From the reign of Alexander the lll terror and repression has been widely used as a mean of control. Under the Tsar they were not used as much as their successors but they were used especially with Alexander lll with Russification (Okhrana), and the counter reforms also with Nicholas ll (Okhrana) with bloody Sunday. Under the leadership of Lenin repression and terror persisted with the ‘Red Terror’ campaign (war communism) which consisted of mass arrests and executions ordered by the Bolshevik government and implemented by the Cheka. This idea of control through repression and terror continued in Russia under the leadership of Josef Stalin (OGPU, NKVD, NKGB, MGB). After the death of Stalin, Khrushchev implemented a period of ‘de-Stalinisation’ (KGB) with the aim of ridding the state of its secretive and repressive nature to open up and make allies with the west which was the first time since Alexander ll.

Alexander ll became Tsar in 1855 after succeeding Tsar Nicholas l and was regarded as a “liberator” throughout his time as Tsar, until an attempted assassination attempt on him in 1866 were he turned more reactionary. Alexander ll was assassinated in March 1881, he was not radical and believed in a slow and progressive change, due to this he gathered much opposition to him and was eventually killed by The Peoples Will, and this kicked off ‘the era of great reforms’ [5]. Alexander ll was seen to be liberal in the early years of his reign as seen in the emancipation of the Serfs in 1861. This gave the Serfs more freedom and basic rights which at this time was a major liberal reform compared to the majority of the previous Tsars, this was by in large Alexander’s greatest reform. The emancipation, he hoped, would lead to greater agricultural output in order to finance the railways, and the beginning of the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Another thing that had changed in Alexander III’s reign to make Russia seem unrecognisable in 1894 compared with 1881 was that the idea of reform was strongly opposed by him so Russia appeared to moving backwards instead of forwards in all aspects. Alexander III introduced a Manifesto that stated that the Tsar would be in charge of all political power. It presented a very conservative Russia where political and social stability was to be controlled and supported by autocracy, Russian nationalism and the Russian Orthodox Church. This shows how Russia had changed to become recognisable in 1894 because any idea of a constitution was rejected by the Tsar and represented Conservative ideas in his decision making. Russia…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Chapter 27 Review

    • 735 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1: Russian society between 1815 and 1860 was full of reforms and a shifting government, all which led up to Alexander II who was responsible for many reforms.…

    • 735 Words
    • 3 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

    | * The land given to the peasants was not of good quality, the peasants also had to pay the state long term installments. The peasants were also responsible to the village commune that forced them to pay their installments and not be free of the land. * The local assemblies couldn’t attain much because of the interruption of bureaucrats afraid that it would turn into a self –government. * Alexander’s reform policies led to increasing reform movements that led to a populist group assassinating him, making his son turn against any reform and go back to repression. His reform policies also set the foundation for the fall of Russia’s Monarchy in 1917.…

    • 708 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Alexander ll recognized as the Tsar liberator was known mostly for the emancipation of the serfs. Serfs were the biggest social problem Russia faced as 80% of the population were serfs or state peasants. Serfdom had existed elsewhere in Europe in the 19th century but 1885 Russia was the only major power which kept serfdom. Eventually in 1861 Alexander ll issued an imperial decree which abolished serfdom. This was a huge step for Russia in the 19th century as it showed that they trying to do something about their progression in time. However this did not mean that former serfs were…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Draft ESSAY

    • 1114 Words
    • 3 Pages

    An aspect of the Soviet Union that changed between 1801 and 1939 was the shift of the government from a czar ruled totalitarian government to a more distributed communist government. In March of 1801, Paul I was killed and his son Alexander I of Russia was appointed the ruler. Czar Alexander I was not too harsh of a leader. He led a government that was not too strict upon its people unlike his father. But this changed when the next czar came into power, Nicholas I in 1825. Anybody who was leading or supporting the Decembrist Revolt was executed. Nicholas I undid everything that Alexander I did. He censored media, ran secret police, and exiled 150,000 people. Alexander II was the next one in power who was extremely different from Nicholas I. He freed the serfs but did not let them leave. But he did allot power to the people by creating local councils called Zemstvos to give them control of their land and women the right to vote. Alexander III went back into a strict totalitarian government, censoring media and deploying secret police. Alexander III also wanted all Russian minorities to speak Russian and convert to Russian Orthodox. Russian Jews were specifically targeted; they had to live in ghettos and eventually many Jews fled to the United States. The last of the czars in this time period, Nicholas II, came into power in 1894. A decade after his appointment, over three thousand workers grouped outside the czar’s palace asking for reforms. The czar was not home, but he still did not approve the order to fire at the protestors. In order to bring back his name, he enabled a national assembly called Duma that would allow the people of Russia to elect. As one of his reforms, he gave more land to…

    • 1114 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The first measure he took shortly after he came to power was to emancipate the serfs in order to modernise Russia and finally bring social stability after years of chaos and fighting to keep up with the West. The Emancipation Edict was passed in 1861 but was better known as the “Great Disappointment” due to the fact that state serfs had to wait until 1866 to be freed, and as a result of the redemption tax serfs had to pay back to their former owners for the loss of labour and as payment for the allotments they received at emancipation. The serfs also could not keep the land they had worked - day and night – on and ended up getting bad quality land most of the time as their former owners kept the fertile, good quality land, and this unfair distribution of land led to even more hostility and disappointment. Mirs were set up to provide uniformity and stability. They were responsible for the allocation of land and they had special village courts, which ensured that the peasants remained separate and denied the full equality of other citizens, despite supposedly being “free”.…

    • 722 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Stalin and Purges

    • 1516 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The aim of this investigation is to assess how the purges of 1934-38 helped Stalin preserve his power in the Soviet Union. In order to evaluate this, the investigation assesses Stalin’s role in relation to the purges, as well as their purpose. An analysis of this should indicate the extent to which the purges were successful, and their contribution to Stalin’s power. In the section entitled Evaluation of Sources, two sources used for this investigation (The Great Terror: A Reassessment, and Origins of the great purges: the Soviet Communist Party reconsidered, 1933-1938) are evaluated according to their values, limitations, origins, and purposes.…

    • 1516 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Cheka And The Okhrana

    • 1273 Words
    • 4 Pages

    How similar was the use of terror and its effectiveness under Tsar Nicholas II and Lenin?…

    • 1273 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Traditionally it is assumed that he was a reactionary, unlike the reformer his father, Alexander II, had been. However, as so often the case, this interpretation of Alexander III’s rule is undisputed. There is much reason to believe that despite some different policies, ultimately both men wanted to reach the same goals. Alexander III unquestionably did undermine the reforming policies of his father, but the underlying reasons for this are not so obvious.…

    • 1320 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Stalin is known as one of the most brutal and ruthless dictators in human history. He feared that the Ukraine, the largest of the non-Russian republics, was a threat to his Communist empire. In 1929, Stalin eliminated any threat from Ukrainian nationalists. Over 5,000 spiritual and intellectual leaders such as priests, bishops, writers, professors, and scientists were arrested and either murdered or sent to prison camps in Siberia. They were falsely blamed of planning a rebellion, but Stalin’s motive was to eliminate those who could organize and resist. This left the common citizens without any guidance or direction (Gavin).…

    • 1486 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Last of the Romanovs

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    The first person to impact the fall of Imperial Russia was Nicholas II, the last Russian Emperor. In particular, Nicholas’ coronation marked the beginning of a downward spiral for the Romanov family. Tsar Nicholas II was born on May 6, 1868 and was the eldest son of Alexander III (Levykin, 1999). Nicholas II had to assume the throne earlier than the Russian population would have liked. Nicholas’ father fell ill in the spring of 1894 and his health never fully recovered. On October 20th, 1894, Alexander III died of nephritis, forcing Nicholas to become the next Tsar of Russia at a young age (Lincoln, 1976). After the untimely death of his father, Nicholas was in dismay about becoming Tsar of Russia, a position he never really wanted. This is exemplified when Nicholas II refers to being the Tsar as, “the awful job I have feared all my life” (Massie, 1967, p. 59). To further Nicholas’ fears, the Russian people and government believed he didn’t have enough political training to rule Russia effectively (Harcave, 1968).…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Powerful Essays

    russia revision guide

    • 7465 Words
    • 24 Pages

    Explain why Alexander II introduced further reforms following the Emancipation Edict of 1861. (12 marks)…

    • 7465 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tsar Alexander II, ascended the throne in 1855 and came to be called by contemporary historians as the ‘Tsar Liberator’ after passing the emancipation ukase in 1861. However, this statute meant to remedy Russia’s backwardness, only reduced the land available to the peasants and increased their dependence toward the nobles. There were still redemption payments to consider and some still have to use the nobility’s land to earn money (Fordham and Smith). Moreover, the newly emancipated peasants are even more strained by the fiscal demands placed upon them. Along with this damage to…

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays