Revolution in Russia - Within the reign of Tsar Nicholas?

Question

"The Tsarist regime was not overthrown; it merely collapsed from within"

What do people believe about this statement?

Detailed anwsers are appreciated very much, thanks.

Answer 1

I suppose that there is some truth within that statment. While I belive that people may have thought him to be a good man, he had no idea on how to run the largest country in the world. But at the same time he tecnicly was overthrown

Answer 2

Same thing was true of Rome or just about any other Empire you can think of.

The problem with the Tsarist regime was that, for a lack of a better word, it failed to address growing civil unrest. While the wealthy were living life in exceeding opulance, the poor (i.e. everyone else) could not make a descent living. This became an untenable situation in which revolution was inevitable.

I am not so certain that Americans are too far away from such a state of affairs themselves.

In the end, only two things effectuate social change 1) Money or 2) Torches and Pitchforks.

Answer 3

What this really means is that Nicholas' ineptitude was a very large contributing factor to the overthrow of his regime. He was probably one of the most ill-equipped tsars Russia ever had. He ignored the changes in the country and refused to accomodate the desires and needs of the people, and this stubbornness led to his eventual downfall. In a lot of ways he reminds me of George W. Bush. Any politician who completely disregards the voices of change will be shouted out of office. And that's what happened to Tsar Nicholas. He had ample time and many opportunities to make the reforms the people wanted, but he refused them all, believing he and he alone knew what was right for Russia (same as Bush "I am the Decider").

Now the governor of New York State is ignoring the will of the people and moving ahead with his own personal plan to give drivers licenses to illegals. Just wait and see what will happen to him. The idiots never learn.

Answer 4

This is a star quality question.
If a teacher gave you this, my answer would be FALSE.
Nicholas was overthrown - pure and simple - for some of the reasons noted in the answers already given above.

Nicholas WAS out of touch with the people. He had a chance to reform and modernize in 1905 when unrest at the time of the Russian war with Japan (which Russia LOST) almost led to his overthrow. Nicholas agreed to a parliament of sorts and later reversed his promise and allowed it no power.

In western Europe during the year of revolutions - 1848, the people (especially the rising middle class) were dissatisfied with the dictatorial power of the aristocracy. The 1848 revolutions in France, Austria, Prussia, and parts of Italy had led to some changes - though aristocrats in Prussia and Austria later rescinded their promises. The days of absolute monarchs in Europe were numbered after 1848, though autocratic regimes did hang on and persist in Germany and Austria/Hungary until after World War I.
It was the near the end of World War I in 1917 when the common people of Russia (rather than the small Russian middle class) simply had enough of the inept leadership of Nicholas. Nicholas had unwisely taken control of the army at the front where he bungled the job. Nicholas was not a brilliant man. He was not a soldier or an astute politician. His wife Alexandra (granddaughter of Britain's Queen Victoria) was trying to run Russia while Nicholas was attempting to lead the army at the front. Alexandra was a worried mom with a sick child at a time when medical science had no answer for hemophilia. She allowed the mystic monk Rasputin too much influence in the affairs of state - or so it seemed to the people.
When the end came in 1917 it was a clear overthrow of the leadership of aristocrats like Nicholas and his wife Alexandra. Leaders did not face reelection every four years
in autocracies like Czarist Russia. The only way to get rid of a leader was to depose him. And to prevent a return of aristocratic rule - Nicholas, Alexandra, and all five children had to die.

Added note - I don't think you can compare the U.S. government to an absolute monarchy. People in the U.S. may choose to replace leaders every four years simply by going to the polls and voting. It would help if people in the U.S. would really think about their votes and not just vote for the guy (or gal) with the most commercials on TV. Then the money spent on campaigns would not be so decisive in American elections. But education takes effort and thinking IS hard work. One major reason I like this site is the number of thinking people who use it.

Answer 5

There are many ways of finding the infomation you want, and I have included the links you will need to help you. Of course, in addition to this, you can also use the resources at your local library, they are only too happy to help you with your searches and queries.

http://www.google.com

http://www.wikipedia.org/

http://uk.search.yahoo.com/web

http://findarticles.com/

http://vos.ucsb.edu/index.asp

http://www.aresearchguide.com/

http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/886...

http://www.studentresearcher.com/search/...

http://www.chacha.com/