Assess the Consequences of the 1905 Revolution for Russia? Essay Example
Assess the consequences of the 1905 revolution for Russia?
‘Stolypin’s necktie’, this quote was a piece of black humour which nicknamed the execution noose after Stolypin, in a period of mass executions during 1906 and 1911. Arguably this quote shows one that the 1905 revolution did not achieve a legislative, peaceful Russia. However, in this essay one will argue that even though there was significant political change in the way that the tsar’s power had been diminished from the October manifesto of 1906 to a more democratic country. That there were several limitations which obtained all rights given in the October manifesto such as fundamental laws and electoral reforms. Also, one will consider the change in the economy; Stolypin’s land reforms and land banks, and the cancellation of the redemption payments. However, it will be considered that these economic changes were hardly valid due to un-content peasants and bad land. Finally, social change will be assessed as social reforms took place e.g. better education, and civil rights and the acceptance of trade unions. However, one will argue that all of the social improvements were also out-manoeuvred by repression of workers, the Lena goldfield’s incident and Stolypin’s ‘necktie’. Overall, in this essay one will assess the changes in Russia made possible by the change of power situated in Russia with the limitations that took promises made by the tsar away from the people.
In this paragraph one will argue the political changes in Russia due to the 1905 revolution were invalid due to the fundamental laws and electoral reforms. This may be argued because in 1905 the October manifesto was introduced. This gave civil liberties right of ‘free citizenship’ and ‘freedom of person, conscience, speech, assembly and union’. Also, the October manifesto allowed the creation of a legislative Duma. Therefore, this meant that political parties could exist and trade unions were accepted and most importantly the power of the
‘Stolypin’s necktie’, this quote was a piece of black humour which nicknamed the execution noose after Stolypin, in a period of mass executions during 1906 and 1911. Arguably this quote shows one that the 1905 revolution did not achieve a legislative, peaceful Russia. However, in this essay one will argue that even though there was significant political change in the way that the tsar’s power had been diminished from the October manifesto of 1906 to a more democratic country. That there were several limitations which obtained all rights given in the October manifesto such as fundamental laws and electoral reforms. Also, one will consider the change in the economy; Stolypin’s land reforms and land banks, and the cancellation of the redemption payments. However, it will be considered that these economic changes were hardly valid due to un-content peasants and bad land. Finally, social change will be assessed as social reforms took place e.g. better education, and civil rights and the acceptance of trade unions. However, one will argue that all of the social improvements were also out-manoeuvred by repression of workers, the Lena goldfield’s incident and Stolypin’s ‘necktie’. Overall, in this essay one will assess the changes in Russia made possible by the change of power situated in Russia with the limitations that took promises made by the tsar away from the people.
In this paragraph one will argue the political changes in Russia due to the 1905 revolution were invalid due to the fundamental laws and electoral reforms. This may be argued because in 1905 the October manifesto was introduced. This gave civil liberties right of ‘free citizenship’ and ‘freedom of person, conscience, speech, assembly and union’. Also, the October manifesto allowed the creation of a legislative Duma. Therefore, this meant that political parties could exist and trade unions were accepted and most importantly the power of the