Why Did Tsarism Fail
1) Contrary to traditional historiography, Pipes states that tsarism need not have collapsed. So why did it?
a. Pipes explains that, despite what many historians view (in hindsight) as the “inevitable” collapse of tsarism, that no one could have foreseen its end. That revolutionaries “acted with such reckless abandon” because they believed it would have no consequences for the regime (11).
b. He also cites the fact that foreign states were investing in the tsarist government, with nothing to indicate that the state would soon collapse and their money would be lost (12).
c. Finally, Pipes cites the common argument that an increasing number of strikes indicated that the end of tsarism was imminent, and he refutes this by using labor strikes …show more content…
Pipes states that, while he believes that the fall of tsarism and the triumph of the Bolsheviks were in no way inevitable, after they happened, it was inevitable that Stalin would come to power, in direct conflict with the revisionist historians (64).
b. While some historians believe Trotsky or Bukharim would have inherited the revolution if it had not been “hijacked” by Stalin (64), Pipes points out that there is record of Lenin’s mistrust of them(64).
c. Pipes states that “Stalin was the only high-ranking Bolshevik who cared about such matters and showed a talent for them” (74), and that this alone had a great impact on his “inevitable” rise to power.
d. Also, Stalin’s office as General Secretary gave him the chance to “build up a powerful bureaucratic apparatus loyal to him personally” (75), making him uniquely qualified to come to great power.
e. Increasingly it seems that while the fall of tsarism and the triumph of the Bolsheviks were the product of a series of grave missteps by one party or another, the circumstances around Stalin’s career, personality, and the current political situation, made his rise to power, as Pipes agrees, inevitable.
4) Pipes argues that the Russian Revolution is “the most important event of the twentieth century” (3). What evidence does he give for this statement? Do you agree with
a. Pipes explains that, despite what many historians view (in hindsight) as the “inevitable” collapse of tsarism, that no one could have foreseen its end. That revolutionaries “acted with such reckless abandon” because they believed it would have no consequences for the regime (11).
b. He also cites the fact that foreign states were investing in the tsarist government, with nothing to indicate that the state would soon collapse and their money would be lost (12).
c. Finally, Pipes cites the common argument that an increasing number of strikes indicated that the end of tsarism was imminent, and he refutes this by using labor strikes …show more content…
Pipes states that, while he believes that the fall of tsarism and the triumph of the Bolsheviks were in no way inevitable, after they happened, it was inevitable that Stalin would come to power, in direct conflict with the revisionist historians (64).
b. While some historians believe Trotsky or Bukharim would have inherited the revolution if it had not been “hijacked” by Stalin (64), Pipes points out that there is record of Lenin’s mistrust of them(64).
c. Pipes states that “Stalin was the only high-ranking Bolshevik who cared about such matters and showed a talent for them” (74), and that this alone had a great impact on his “inevitable” rise to power.
d. Also, Stalin’s office as General Secretary gave him the chance to “build up a powerful bureaucratic apparatus loyal to him personally” (75), making him uniquely qualified to come to great power.
e. Increasingly it seems that while the fall of tsarism and the triumph of the Bolsheviks were the product of a series of grave missteps by one party or another, the circumstances around Stalin’s career, personality, and the current political situation, made his rise to power, as Pipes agrees, inevitable.
4) Pipes argues that the Russian Revolution is “the most important event of the twentieth century” (3). What evidence does he give for this statement? Do you agree with