English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

any advice or ideas would be greatly appreciated!!! Best answer gets 10 points and ill ask a random question and automatically give u best answer!!! thankssss

why didnt the russians turn to..
capitalism
democracy
unite with western powers including the us??

2006-11-30 10:41:06 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

4 answers

Okay, both the answers before this one are not entirely correct. In fact, both seem to be missing the most important aspect of the question, that is that it doesn't deal with provisional government of Russia under Kerensky from the February Revolution (March 1917) to the October Revolution (November 1917 - the Russians up until the Soviets took over used the Julian Calendar which was behind a number of days owing to leap years they never calculated in). Kerensky was the leader of the Petrograd soviet (a soviet is basically a union), and under his brief rule he was very liberal in his policies. He supported the alliance with the west to continue in World War I and was very optimistic about defeating the Germans and Austria-Hungary. He alienated right wingers and monarchists by promoting a relaxed attitude toward the Bolsheviks, which turned out to be a bad idea, because the Bolsheviks threw him out and took over about ten months after he came to power.

Hope this helps! Good luck!

2006-11-30 12:56:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What an astonishingly good bunch of answers. You need five things for a popular revolution. 1) Social dislocation. In this case it was caused by the war. 2) Crisis of confidence by those in power. In the Russian autocraacy it came down to the Czar and his advisors 3) Loss of morale among the security forces. 4) An ideology everyone can adhere to - with Lenin it was Peace and Bread. 5) A revolutionary leadership willing to take risks. The Mensheviks could have squash the Bolsheviks if they had made peace. Sadly, Kerensky was too much of an establishment figure. See my answer to the question on Russia before Lenin's death for the probems facing the Bolsheviks once they took power.

2016-05-23 06:09:52 · answer #2 · answered by Deborah 4 · 0 0

First off they had developed their own system which insured that they would not be over-thrown like their former leader. Also their system assured them that the wealth of their country would be directed in one direction, And they would control where it would go and how much would be going for what ever.. As for capitalism that system would limit the power of those that rule..... Democracy in their minds would place to much power in the hands of the people and far less in the hands of the rulers........ As for uniting with the western powers would create a system where they would be totally depended on the cash flow and good will of other.. Also that to would limit their control over the people they wish to rule. Another fact is Russia also tried to sell 2/3 of Russia to the United states and if Woodrow Wilson had went for that purchase. Russia would have never been the power house it is today and democracy would rule the day in Russia and all of the Baltic countries as well as most of Europe.............................

2006-11-30 11:11:03 · answer #3 · answered by kilroymaster 7 · 0 0

World war I led to the downfall of the Czarist regime. There were competing factions fighting in the Russian revolution, including the "whites" who wanted capitalism and democracy.

The Russian people had been slaughtered by the millions on the battlefields, all with no gain. It was an unpopular war and the Russian people justly felt they were being sent to die for nothing. The only result was more suffering in Russia, starvation, disease and death.

Nicholas was already wildly unpopular due to the fact that he considered himself appointed as Czar by God himself, and that the opinion of the masses met nothing to him. The peasant and mystic Rasputin caused even more unrest among the population of Russia. The people saw him as an unholy devil, and as being the real power behind the Czar. This was especially true when Nicholas went to the front himself to try to lead his troops, which in itself was a disaster.

During his absence, rumors circulated that Rasputin was involved in an illicit affair with Alexandra. It was already a well-known fact that this man who the Czar considered "holy" and sent by God engaged in sexual perversions and orgies as a matter of practice in order to "cleanse his soul". The Russian people deeply resented that such a man could be living in the Imperial Palace.

The Reds promised to make all people equal. This appealed to the tens of millions who had been ruthlessly oppressed under the tyrannical reign of Nicholas Romanav. Democracy really had no meaning, as they had never known freedom. Equality, on the other hand, appealed to nearly everyone.

The Reds seized power and created their own state sponsored terror. This was worst under the reign of Joseph Stalin, but applied to some degree to most of Russia's future rulers.

2006-11-30 11:05:40 · answer #4 · answered by Samuel Crow 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers