To what extent was the First World War Essay Example for Free

To what extent was the First World War EssayWorld fight integrity was not the sole cause of the revolution it was a trigger that affected the timing of the revolution in 1917 as it exacerbated problems that already existed. Such problems were limited thorough change, the shortcomings of Stolypins reforms, and the negative side affects of industrialisation, mass protest and the limitations of czar Nicholas II. Paragraph 1 Limited constitutional change The Tsar continue to reinstate his compulsive rule by ignoring his peoples desires, such as the upper class and lower class, and promising to reform but progressed with minimal improvement. Limited constitutional change caused the Russian people to become distrusting of the Tsar and resort to a revolution to change the governments policies themselves in order for Russia to become a more democratic state. An exercising of limited constitutional change is the October manifesto that was introduced on the 30th of October 1905, pr ompted by the 1905 revolution Bloody Sunday. The working class and peasants had appea guide to the Tsar concerning his superannuated form of government.Requesting for a share in representative government along with improved working conditions. The October manifesto produced turn to these concerns, with a promise of rationalize citizenship and no rule to be passed without the agreement of a state duma However, despite the Duma being permitted to exist, their powers were restricted to such a great extent that the Duma didnt give up any significant impact upon the government. Nicholas did this by issuing a set of Fundamental laws on the 23rd of April 1906, the eve of the opening of the first Duma.The Fundamental laws altogether reinforced the Tsars autocratic power and disengaged any potential government reform of Parliament by seizing its power. Nicholass half hearted root word of reform was not corresponded to satisfy the peoples desire for a share in representative government but to only safe-conduct his position as Tsar. This started to become evident to the people when the third Duma (1907-1912) was more conservative as the Tsar had replaced members who seemed critical of his government. The third Duma consisted of only 45 put for the kadels.The First World War put strain on the constitution as Russia required an efficient government organisation, however the Tsar wouldnt ply anyone to share his power thus resulting in a narrow-minded form of government that couldnt meet the demands of war. Additionally, the changes to the election laws were unrealistically gamy. This was yet an some other example of Nicholas trying to safeguard his position as Tsar as he thought repression would stop any opposition influencing his people in terms of democracy.However, it was already becoming clear to the people that autocracy was no longer suit adequate to(p) for the beginning of the 19th century as modernisation of attention required a modernisation of governmen t. * Limited constitutional change was d take to the Tsars inability to reform because of his stubborn personality. The First World War did not form these problems, as they already existed before 1914. Such an example would be Bloody Sunday. The liberal gentry also wanted more power given to the zemstva, as they were worried that if the Tsar didnt share power, a revolution would take place.The 1917 march revolution was the revolution they were apprehensive for. The Shortcomings of Stolypins reforms The Tsars pressure of receiving little help with the ruling of Russia allowed scarcely any reform to take place as the Tsar was not fully aware, or didnt intend to be, with the problems that needed addressing, such as peasant farming. This resulted with Stolypin introducing a land reform degree in November 1906. Peasants were allowed to leave the commune freely, have a right to own their own land and consolidate strips.However, one of the downfalls of these reforms was that they were no t compulsory. The war put a lot of pressure on Russias agricultural production as it was their main export and so underinvestment in agriculture meant that the war exacerbated problems that already existed, such as the redistribution of land held by the nobility. This was one of the key issues that hadnt been addressed by Stolypin, along with backward farming methods, lack of preserving land through not using fertiliser and high direct and indirect tax.By 1913 productivity rose by 1% per year with a record of 70 million ton harvest in 1913, however yields were still low compared to other countries. 25% of peasants made no change while 66% of peasants decided to own land privately, although by 1917 95% of peasants returned to the Mir. Despite the governments bearing to give the peasants some financial support by setting up a land bank between 1906 and 1913, most peasants were unable to afford the debt referable to the expensive taxes.Redemption payments were abolished by 1917 and peasant purchasing power increased by 15% but there was still no change to the high direct and indirect tax. Land prices sore and produce prices fell. This left peasants in an all too familiar financial detriment, giving them more reason to insurrection for improved living conditions as the first world war demanded produce by which they had no efficient methods to meet. The negative social affects of industrialisation As the peasants were released from the Mir, they were able to work and live in towns benefitting industry.Nonetheless, there were negative social affects of industrialisation as by 1914 two fifths of factory workers were in factories with over 1000 members. Their average wages were below the ptiful of 1904 therefore workers began to protest about wages and went on strike in 1912 in the Lena goldfields where 170 were killed. Development in industry from 1906-1914 with 8% per annum was beneficial for Russia, however Russia began from a low starting point and so it was e asier to achieve large percentage increase at the expense of Russias working class.Workers in towns that were used to the quiet countrysides were more susceptible to opposition propaganda. Workers were an important part of the industrial boom as they contributed to the efficiency of factories. As their raft increased, it was more likely strikes would occur because of the poor, unhygienic, dangerous living and working conditions they were forced to live in. Great masses in cramped spaces in towns also led to an increase in tension between them, raising the chance that the masses would join together and form a revolution to get the government to describe their propositions.The First World War demanded more military equipment and put pressure on working factories. Russias poor economic institution meant that the impact of war was too large a strain upon it and upon the working class. This lead to a revolution because laboring Russians wanted better lives and working conditions but th e Tsar continued to ignore them. Growth of mass protest As more workers revolted, so did the growth of mass protest. The government used repression in order to solve this, in 1906 stolypins necktie was introduced. And the Okhrana were still intrusive and demanded passports on the spot.Despite freedom of press, in 1905 newfoundspapers were still censored. World war one put the regime to new tests as repression was only a short term solution. In 1909, employers ignored the concessions of 1905 and the lack of the Tsars involvement meant the Duma intervened in 1912 producing an insurance scheme establishing auspices for workers Although order and control were issued through the Okhrana and repression using stolypins necktie, this only partially stabilized the regime. The war required an organised, efficient government, which Nicholas was not providing.Food distribution and legions equipment were not being delivered efficiently, causing revolts in response. It was clear that repressio n wouldnt last long, especially when the Tsar left his position to become commander in principal(prenominal) in 1915, leaving Russia without a Tsar. This would lead to a revolution because an unstable government wouldnt survive the pressures of the war and its demands, therefore people would rebel. Limitations of Nicholas II Nicholas very much made bad decisions, despite his good intentions making him a poor leader. In 1915 he took control of the Russian army.He became the spotlight for criticism of deaths and shortage of ammunition, poor equipment and the shortage of boots. People asked for consultative assembly however Nicholas had betrayed his people by issuing a set of Fundamental laws. This was because he had a languid character and was intimidated by criticism, so he didnt allow it. Poor leadership and incompetent communication among the leaders meant instructions were not followed carefully or not at all. Nicholas was personally responsible for Russias performance in the war.