home

= **FRENCH REVOLUTION** =

**Which of the grievances of the Third Estate in France in 1789 were the most important? Explain your answer.**
= **IMPERIALISM** =

**“The main aim of the New Imperialism was to make money not friends - most did neither.” How far do you agree? DONE****
= **TOTALITARIANISM** =

**Why was Hitler able to establish dictatorial rule in Germany in the 1930’s?**
__Introduction__ "his manipulation of circumstances in his favour" allowed him to establish a dictatorship. Although, there were clearly other contributing factors, it is obvious that Hitler used the fear of communism in Germany and the hatred of the Weimar Republic to allow him to set up an authoritarian government. Ironically though, Hitler gained power democratically to do so - indicating that the role of others such as Hindenburg played a key role in allowing him the opportunity to set up a dictatorial rule in the 1930's.

__Domestic Issues__ The treaty of Versailles (terms such as was left with an army of 100,000 men, had to pay 6.6 billion in reparations etc) The treaty simply exacerbated the effects of World War One which were basically there were millions dead, much weariness, little prestige, severe unemployment and inflation

Evaluate how Hitler put out he would solve these problems. He called the Treaty a "Diktat" which gained the population's support as it was seen to be that Hitler was on their side. he was empathising with them. He told the German people what they wanted to hear eg he told the workers in the factories "all that stood between them and the riches was the government"

__Weaknesses of the Weimar__ Known as the "November Criminals" - they had stabbed the German population in the back. However, whichever government would have been in power would have been forced to sign such a treaty - however, Hitler played with the mood of the German population in turning them ever more against the government.

People were constantly looking left and right for political leadership - anything but democracy - the german population were not used to democratic ruling and there was a desire to return to a kaiser figure.

It was weak due to the constitution itself - Article 48 undermined the government. Hindenburg - irresponsibly thought he could control Hitler if he was appointed Chancellor.

__His rise to power__

C R E L N A F

R) fire - blamed communits E) due to the prior event he was able to justify this enabling act - he exaggerated the threat of communism L) Suppression of other parties - Gestapo to crush opposition ruthlessly N&A) Won the support of the army partly through the Night of long Knives and of course through the army oath

__Propganda__ Porrayed Hitler in a "Godlike Aura" - as a saviour of germany Presented him a a favourable light

**How important was the “cult of personality” to Hitler’s rule in the period to 1939?**
It was very important

Germans needed a hero as they had lost WWI

Hitler was extremely charismatic. He did great speeches and the endless propaganda promoted his rule.

Even the fact that he was arrested after attempting a revolution made him seem even more of a hero as it was seen as wrong by the government and that he was a hero for trying to change Germany “for the greater good”

Aryan Pride/purification/Anti Semitism particularly as the Jews were used as scapegoat to all of Germany ‘s problems

It was not that important as there were other factors (these are not in detail as I’ve already written about them in other questions : )

The failures of the Weimar Republic

The Great Depression and unemployment

The Treaty of Versailles meaning inflation and a swing towards radical groups

=

 * You’re looking at the factors, which occurred between Hitler becoming appointed Chancellor to the beginning of WWI. It is more likely that up until 1933 he relied on other policies to achieve the title of Chancellor. However, within the indicated dates, he relied more greatly upon fear to maintain his power. He utilised harsh repression methods to eliminate the disliked groups such as the Jews, the gypsies and countless other. This extermination made up of part of his aims to create a pure Aryan race in Germany … etc **======

__ **Yes, his rule did mainly rely on terror** __
Reichstag fire - The Reichstag fire was an [|arson] attack on the [|Reichstag building] in Berlin on 27 February 1933. The event is seen as pivotal in the establishment of [|Nazi Germany]. The fire was used as evidence by the [|Nazis] that the [|Communists] were beginning a plot against the German government. Van der Lubbe and four Communist leaders were subsequently arrested. [|Adolf Hitler], who had been sworn in as [|Chancellor of Germany] four weeks before, on 30 January, urged President [|Paul von Hindenburg] to pass an emergency decree to counter the "ruthless confrontation of the [|Communist Party of Germany] ". [|[2]] With civil liberties suspended, the government instituted mass arrests of Communists

Night of Long knives - was a [|purge] that took place in [|Nazi Germany] between June 30 and July 2, 1934, when the [|Nazi] regime carried out a series of political executions. Most of those killed were members of the [|Sturmabteilung] (SA), the [|paramilitary] [|Brownshirts]. [|Adolf Hitler] moved against the SA and its leader, [|Ernst Röhm], because he saw the independence of the SA and the penchant of its members for street violence as a direct threat to his newly gained political power The final deathtoll was estimated to be in the 100’s.

Kristellnacht - Kristallnacht, also to referred to as the Night of Broken Glass was a [|pogrom] or series of attacks against Jews throughout [|Nazi Germany] and parts of Austria on November 9–10, 1938.

Concentration camps & the holocaust – this was a reaction to the “final solution” to the unwanted Jews in the various countries. Although, concentration camps had existed before, after the final solution had been decided upon – they upped the anti. There were mass killings… etc

__ **No, his power relied on other factors** __
Propaganda is vitally important for any regime trying to maintain control, spread its system of beliefs and to persuade the population to identify with the new regime. Under Geobbels, propaganda was used to create the impression that Hitler and the Nazi Party were the only ones who could save Germany. It was also used to turn Germans against Jews, socialists, communists and gypsies.

What he actually promised the German people, aided him to stay in power and only have limited and sparse opposition. He promised a range things but the main promises were that he would; He also promised the following:

= He had a clever programme of indoctrination which allowed him to maintain his grip over the country - with Goebells they made cheap radios available to everyone - so his speeches could be heard everywhere. Other forms of propaganda = = __﻿__ =
 * Make Germany great again
 * Solve unemployment by making more public service jobs
 * Stopping the hyperinflation
 * Protect his people from the communists and other bad influences
 * Abolish the Treaty of Versailles
 * Let Germans back into the country
 * Increase German Lebensraum (Living room for the German People)
 * Get rid of large companies which were not owned by Germans (Most were owned by Jews)
 * Sell more local produce so that all German prosper from the changes and so that they wont have to pay alot of money for overpriced imported goods from markets__.__

The purpose of youth organisations, such as the Hitler Youth and League of German Maidens, was to prepare the boys for military service and the girls for motherhood. One member said, “we were politically programmed”, that was also the aim of the Nazi education system. In schools German children were indoctrinated with Nazi ideas. Subjects such as History and Biology were twisted to suit the Nazi Party. German youths were taught to put the Nazi Party first before anything else, including their families. // Although, interestingly, recent research suggests that propaganda does not really persuade people to believe something they do not want to believe. For example, in this case educated middle class Germans accepted propaganda because it told them something they wanted to believe – that Hitler was saving Germany, especially from Communism // Conclusion Yes, after 1933 Hitler relied mostly on terror to maintain his grip on the country. He had used other tactics to obtain power but afterwards he utilised the prospect of repression and fear to reinforce his control like every other totalitarian ruler such as Stalin.

Asses the strengths and weaknesses of Mussolini as leader or Italy in domestic affairs from 1922 to 1939.
World war one had resulted in many problems for Italy making it a particularly hard nation to govern and achieve successes in her domestic policy without taking extensive measures. Mussolini instigated many domestic policies however it is likely that they were mostly a failure as Mussolini was gearing greatly towards dominating the Adriatic Sea – and with Italy in such anarchy, half hearted attempts to govern the nation would not result in successes.

__Strengths of Italy in domestic affairs from 1922 – 1939 under Mussolini__

They handled the Great Depression creating jobs through public work schemes like HEP. They did not suffer like the Germans. The Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI) even successfully took over the role of banks in providing loans.

His Battle for Grain was an economic policy undertaken by the [|Fascists] in [|Italy] during the 1920s as a move toward [|autarky]. It saw an increase from 5.5 million tonnes to over 7 million. However, autarky, was never achieved as will be discussed later.

Propaganda – He communicated to the masses by huge rally speeches. Other forms of propaganda were radio, cinema and posters. The Lateran Agreement of 1929 was extremely successful. He got the Pope to recognise the Italian state. He received 30 million pounds in compensation. This eliminated a potential source of opposition.

__Weaknesses of Italy in domestic affaira from 1922-1939 under Mussolini__

In 1927 Mussolini had to revalue the lire from 150 to 90. It made Italian exports far too expensive meaning demand went down and tariff barriers made stable items like food expensive.

By 1933, unemployment had risen to 2 million and the working class were seeing a real decline in their wages and living standards.

Mussolini also aimed for a policy of autarky but never came near. The main reasons for this were his failures in the various battles which he initiated such as the one for Land, the Lira and the south.

Massive budget deficits and declining living standards were a consequence of re-armament and expansionist policies.

Propaganda – The failures were that fascist papers never had more than 10% of the overall circulation and also the Catholic church still had their own unchecked newpaper.

The Battle for Land saw insignificant land reclamation. Furthermore, the Battle for the South saw little progress with poverty, illiteracy rates and crime. Mussolini was not prepared to annoy his landowning supporters by helping the peasantry. The Battle for Births was also a failure. The population did not reach 60 million up until the present day. Women still made up 33% of the workforce.

Conclusion Although, there were some positive aspects it would be more true to say that his domestic policies were more of a failures. The instability of Italy regarding domestic affairs ,along with WW2 at a later date, as one of the prime reasons by which he fell from power.

How far do you agree that economic reasons were the most important cause of the rise of a totalitarian government in either Germany or Italy during the 1920’s and 1930’s?
Agree : Treaty of Versailles – 6.6 billion in reparations, she lost 13% of all her land. They lost a lot of natural resources in Alsace – Lorraine. These factors meant there was hyperinflation.

There was severe unemployment especially due to the returning soldiers of the war.

The Great Depression meaning a swing towards radical parties. This can be backed up by looking at the votes the Nazi Party acheived through out the period.

The Dawes Plan. America stopped providing the loans they had been giving to Germany to boost their economy. This further damaged them and made the effects of the Great Depression even worse.

Disagree : The loss of morale due to the fact they had had great pride in its military strength and then they had lost the war. The embarrassment, which this had caused, was extremely damaging to the nation.

No past experience with democracy. The failures of the Weimar Republic (go into detail about its failures – such as Article 48) There was a desire amongst the people to return to a Kaiser figure.

Treaty of Versailles: They were forced to accept the entire blame for the war. Her army was reduced to just 100,000 men; She was permitted just 6 battleships, and was allowed no submarines or air force. All these aspects further lowered their morale.

Communist revolution: The Sparticists revolt. This revolution deepened fears of a communist takeover and made the German population lean further towards right wing extreme parties.

Hitler himself: A great public speaker. He ensured that there were people in charge of severe propaganda such as Goebels. He told the German people what they wanted to hear. He harshly criticised the Treaty of Versailles and the Weimar Republic.

Conclusion: Despite there being many economic factors which would of course contribute to the rise of a totalitarian regime it is more true to state that it was the range of other social and political and potentially territorial factors which led to Hitler coming to power. This argument can be further backed up by the fact that the Great Depression affected countries like Britain where they was no indication of a dictatorial regime, meaning there must have been greater, more influential factors.

How similar were the methods by which Hitler and Stalin governed Germany and the USSR respectively during the 1930’s?
Similarities “Cult of Personality” – Propaganda One party – Nazis and the Communists Control of education – Hitler Youth and Young Communists Secret Police – Gestapo and the Cheka Censorship Elimination of opposition – concentration camps and the purges

Differences Hitler is extremely racist [anti-Semitic] – Stalin is a communist/socialist Hitler is capitalist – Stalin’s policy of collectivisation Hitler has a strong foreign policy – Stalin concentrates on economic industrialisation in Russia.

Conclusion Although, it may, at face value, appear as if there existed key differences between the methods by which each governed their country it is more likely to infer that these two totalitarian rulers were more similar than different. They both employed methods famous by any dictator such as the propganda, elimination of opposition and the strong secret police which enabled them to rule undisputedly over their respective countries for an extended period of time.

How far can Mussolini’s rule in Italy from 1922 to 1939 be described as a “totalitarian regime”?
__ Introduction: __ Being Totalitarian ruler signifies where the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed: [The dates refer to when he became Prime Minister to the beginning of World War Two]

__ Yes he was Totalitarian: __ In 1924, he introduced; -Censorship -Lots of propganda [portraits hung up,](although it can be debated how successful it was) -Banned political meetings -the banning of trade unions. -The OVRA was established – much violence was used against political opponents even after him becoming Prime Minister. His Fascist members continued to pour castor oil down the throats of opposition.

You could make reference to his attitude to Jews – although it didn’t come into being until after 1939

He removed parliamentary democracy. Furthermore, the laws he introduced once he was Prime Minister demonstrated he was authoritarian. The Acerbo Law which allowed a party, which got 25% of the vote to receive 2/3 of the seats in parliament.

__No he wasn’t Totalitarian__ //(These are just some ideas – you could pick a couple and expand)// The way in which is gained power can be seen as him not being Totalitarian. He became prime minister in October 1922 – supposedly through his “March on Rome.” In reality, as with Hitler, Mussolini was appointed to power with the connivance of the establishment. The King handed him the premiership after arriving in Rome dressed smartly in a suit. Mussolini did not use terror to gain this promotion.

However, when, in 1924, a highly respected socialist deputy, named Matteotti, was murdered by fascist thugs and there was an outcry against Mussolini and calls for him to resign. However, he continued to be supported by the King. The King was simply sidelined – he was never completely removed.

Unlike some totalitarian regimes, Mussolini's government was not diligent in regulating all aspects of life. The traditional groups that controlled Italy did not suffer greatly under the fascists. The old conservative classes retained control of the army and industry. Mussolini's convictions concerning the role of women in society were quite traditional.

It could be seen that Mussolini did not enforce his Fascist ideas into the people's minds either. Universities were almost untouched. Military training was not compulsory. Although Italian history books were changed to make them look good, it didn't mean that the teachers of the time followed it and took it as the truth.

Some of his critics survived – which you could not “imagine happening in Hitler’s Third Reich”

How much control of domestic affairs did he have? – Unemployment had risen to 2 million – The Battle for Land was a considerable failure - In 1927 Mussolini had to revalue the lire from 150 to 90. It made Italian exports far too expensive meaning demand went down and tariff barriers made stable items like food expensive.

How far was Stalin’s State Totalitarian? still have to do the non-totalitarian side of it.
= __Introduction__ = Being Totalitarian ruler signifies where the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed:

__His state was Totalitarian__
His rise to power – the process by which he eliminated every other member within the Politbureau à You could describe this in more detail. The Trial of the Sixteen – where he put these members (who had been accused of things like factionalism) on trial.

Propaganda and cult of personality: He was known as Uncle Joe – in an attempt to indoctrinate people into loving him. In the present day – there still exist people who were so heavily indoctrinated by this propaganda – they deny the fact that Stalin ever murdered anybody. This propaganda came in the form of statues, pictures and many others. He had places names after him such as “Stalingrad”

The slaughtering of millions of Kulaks after they protested about the policy of collectivisation by burning/hoarding their crops

The purges and the Gulags: The Great Purge was a series of campaigns of [|political repression] and [|persecution] from 1936 to 1938. It involved a large-scale [|purge of the Communist Party and government officials], repression of [|peasants] There was intense fear through the use of gulags which were prisons for political dissidents. He also had secret police.

He had a lot of control of the economy as he was attempting to reverse centuries of backwardness in just a few **decades. His key policy at attempting to do so was through industrialisation and a series of 5yr plans – within which the 2nd plan had the most success.**


 * The 2nd Plan (1932-37) was more successful, with iron and steel production increasing so much – it made the USSR self-sufficient. However, it led to hardships for the Soviet people. **
 * - Factories and mills were run 24/7 **
 * - Absenteeism became a crime **
 * Weekends ceased to exist – through these plans unemployment became non-existent **


 * In the conclusion, you could mention, how he died. He was not eventually brought down by opposition like Mussolini, but died from a stroke after many years in power. **

__ His state was not Totalitarian __

How far, by 1939, had Hitler solved the problems that had faced the Weimar Republic?
Inflation and war reparation – Hitler cancelled war reparations; the government funded building projects and constant conscription eased the problem of unemployment

Conflicting political parties – Hitler banned all parties except that of the Nazis by the “Law against formation of all other parties” in his rise to being Fuhrer.

Shame of the War guilt – He declared the Treaty of Versailles to be a “Diktat” and that the Weimar had stabbed the population in the back for signing it making them the November Criminals”

Lack of Patriotism – Hitler organises mass rallies, parades, festivals to increase the love for the nation once again

= THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION =

=
Nicholas II’s regime survived the Revolution of 1905 but not that of 1917 because the opposition faced in 1917 was much stronger and more organised and united than in 1905, because World War One had destructive effects on Russia, evident particularly when contrasted with the lesser negative effects of the Russo-Japanese War, and most importantly because by 1917 Nicholas II’s reputation had been severely damaged and he had lost the support of the army and could therefore not act against the opposition he faced.======

=
RTT--Nicholas II’s regime survived the revolution of 1905 but not that of 1917 most importantly because of the personal role of the Tsar and due to his loss of support of the army: In 1905 Tsarist authority was still highly respected by the Russian population, having the support of the Church, his ministers and the army. Excluding the naval mutiny that occurred in Potemkin, where sailors mutinied after being served rotten meat and the captain ordered that the ringleaders be shot, but the firing-squad threw him overboard and sailed off to Romania, all signs showed that the Tsar had the full support of the loyal army, and this was particularly useful when suppressing the 1905 revolutionaries. On Bloody Sunday, the Cossacks and the army defended the Winter Palace against the revolutionaries. The support of the army was also evident during the Russo-Japanese War. The Russians were crushed on both land and sea, in the Battles of Mukden and Tsushima respectively. Yet the army stayed adherent to the Tsar during his time of failure.======

=
When Russia became involved in World War One, Nicholas II made the terrible decision of naming himself Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, meaning that he could and was held personally responsible for the defeats in the War, notably the massive defeats in the Masurian Lakes and Tannenberg that accounted for one million Russian casualties. In June 1916, He launched the Brusilov Offensive, a major offensive against Germany, though the attack was successful, another one million men perished. These continuos defeats along with the poor leadership, and the fact that the Russian government had managed to mobilise fourteen and a half million men but was only able to provide them with 7 million arms out of the 18 million needed led the Tsar to lose the support of the army. It was evident that the people of Russia wanted the War to end, but the Tsar decided to continue to fight against the Germans, this proved to be a fatal decision.======

=
The Tsar’s concessions proved to be crucial to his maintenance of power in 1905, and his loss of it in 1917. After the seas of insurgence in the form of the revolution had calmed, the Tsar acted cleverly. He produced the October Manifesto, and took advantage of the disunity of the opposition to split them and weaken them. The peasants were satisfied with the October Manifesto as it promised agricultural reforms, consequently disturbances fell dramatically. The liberals were also pleased that a State Duma would be formed and that they could be represented. However, after the October Manifesto was issued, the Tsar backtracked on his promises and introduced the Fundamental Laws, which stated that ‘To The Tsar, To the Emperor of all Russians belongs the supreme autocratic power, and all must bow to his supreme power” meaning that the Duma had little power. The Duma itself was not very successful as people had hoped. The Tsar ignored proposals and vetoed laws. These actions of the Tsar destroyed his good reputation with the people causing distrust towards him. Therefore in 1917, he was seen as part of the problem, not the solution, and had evidently blown his chance of being able to offer more concessions and thus time.======

=
By 1905, the Russo-Japanese War had caused localized shortages and problems but not to the scale of the problems that were to come because of World War One. The War caused the disrupt of communications and of the transport of various commodities around Russia, and a slight increase in prices and scarcity of basic goods. Contrastingly, by 1917 World War One had caused the quadrupling of prices, the increased spiraling cost of living and increasing shortages of food. There was massive inflation as the government took out loans to pay for the war and paid for them with valueless money. rain supplies did not reach towns as most went to the army and kept by peasants who found little incentive to sell it for so little worthy money. Populations which were fleeing from the fighting zones crowded in the major Russian cities leading to sanitary problems.By the winter of 1916-1917 there was serious talk of food rationing, creating the panic buying of bread in the late February 1917, that combined with a strike by metal-workers and women textile operatives in Petrograd to create extensive chaos. J.Galloway argues that, “if Russia had not of been crushed by the World War One, she would have been securely on a path of stable democracy, and not on that of a revolution that would lead to the abdication of the Tsar”.======

=
Another key difference between World War One and the Russo-Japanese War that helps to explain why Nicholas II’s regime survived 1905 but not 1917 is the length of the wars. In 1905, the Japanese crushed the Russians so promptly, that tension in the country hadn’t had a chance to build up and problems had not propagated throughout the country. Yet in 1917, the Russians had been fighting in the Great War for 4 years, and the War was having deep consequences on the Russian population, particularly on the working classes. After four years, the people of Russia had had enough.======

=
In 1905, the opposition that Nicholas II’s regime faced, lacked unity. The different classes wanted different things, and this clash in opinions prevented them from reaching an agreement and a strong, coordinated course of action. Even within parties there were divisions, for example: Oktobrists/Kadets, Trudoviks/SRs, Mensheviks/Bolsheviks. Very few people in Russia wanted to overthrow the Tsar; they only wanted a fairer country, in other words they were ready to compromise. Opposition in 1905 also lacked a leader, though Trotsky was in Russia, both Stalin and Lenin were in exile.======

=
In 1917, St. Petersburg was again the centre of disturbances, but these spread more widely and more violently because Nicholas II had lost the power of his iron fist by losing the support of the Army, and the support of the people who were now more united as nearly all wanted the Tsar’s abdication. From the 22-27 of February, troops refused to fire on demonstrators and joined the revolutionary movement. When revolutionary disturbances arised in Petrograd because of the food shortages and the involvement in the war, soldiers mutinied and again joined protestors instead of crushing them. The opposition in 1917 was now well led by Lenin and other leaders that ensured that the revolutionary movement spread throughout Russia and its different classes. In the cities, workers took control of factories and painted their “enemies” in red or chucked them in the river in wheelbarrows. In the rural areas, peasants chopped down trees illegally, seized noble estates and demanded radical land reforms. Soldiers mutinied, and in addition, minorities declared their independence from Russian rule.======

=
Reiterate the line of argument that it was the Tsar himself and his actions that made him survive the 1905 revolution but not the 1917 revolution, and that later caused his abdication. Give particular importance to the fact that his decision to continue the war was crucial, looking into the future, saying that it was the Petrograd Soviets who were able to eventually gain power because they decided to end the War.======

How far by 1924 had Lenin established a Marxist State in Russia?
Introduction: Definition of a Marxist State as an economic system based on the public ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, characterized by not having a free competitive market and motivation not by competition but by collaboration, by implementing socialism with the final goal of communism. Establish argument: Russia being mostly not a Marxists State, but having communist aspects.

RTT--In some aspects Lenin had established a Marxist State in Russia by 1924:


 * Socially, he allowed more freedom and equality. He gave independence to minorities. There were no more forced grain collections. Allowed a more fair distribution of land by allowing peasants to acquire part of the land of the wealthy kulaks.
 * Economically, By War Communism he nationalised key industries such as coal and steal and decided what these should produce so that the Russian population could have basic goods.
 * Politically, by having a One-party communist state he ensured that Russia was Marxist. He had a strong police control enforced by the Cheka that fought against anti-communist opposition, it imprisoned politicians that were against Lenin.The Cheka’s intention was to root out counter-revolutionaries and sabotage, but it was increasingly used to check on the loyalty of the party members and to keep them compliant. Culpin and Henig claim that “the Cheka became a weapon of so called revolutionary justice, which brought fear and terror not just to Bolshevik enemies but also to friends and to critics within the Bolshevik party.” “All power to the Soviets”.

RTT--However, Russia was predominantly not a Marxist State by 1924 as there were still many aspects of Russia that were not representative of those of a truly Marxist State:


 * Socially, by War Communism there was not freedom of assembly for trade unions and peasant organizations. There was not freedom of speech and of the press for workers and peasants and for left socialist parties. Evidence that many socialists, ordinary workers, peasants and some Bolsheviks were against the dictatorial government of Lenin was evident in the Kronstadt Uprising. They asked for new soviet elections as “the present Soviets no longer expressed the will of the workers and peasants” and more freedom.
 * Economically, Lenin introduced the NEP which was considered to be partially capitalist, but nevertheless needed for economic recovery following the Civil War. Small factories, those employing less than 20 workers were privatised. After selling a set quota of grain to the state, peasants could sell any surpluses on the open market. Small-scale trading was also tolerated, but would exist alongside the public-sector enterprises which had been nationalised and would continue to be run by the sate. Lenin justified this with “one step backwards to achieve two steps forward”. Trotsky said that the NEP was “the first sign of the degeneration of Bolshevism”.
 * Politically, Marx believed that a spontaneous revolution occurred because of the exploited workers who formed the majority in society, because there would be first a stage of capitalism and then a stage of socialism which would in time transform itself into communism. Lenin ignored this stage of capitalism arguing that “The proletarian revolution is impossible without the forcible destruction of the bourgeois state machine and the substitution of a new one”.

Conclusion: “Lenin died too early to see with his own eyes the completion of the socialist transformation of Russia, but his steps towards it were certainly significant in allowing Stalin to complete further this transformation.” Hua Guofeng. Begun change into a Marxist State.

Why did Lenin and the Bolsheviks gain power in 1917?
Introduction There are a variety of reasons which accumulated to enable the party to take control, and govern Russia, in 1917. The main factors which enables their success were the following; the disastrous effects of WWI, the structure and failures of the Provisional Government, the parties aims and finally the timing of the revolution.

__The effects of WWI on Russia before 1917__ Within weeks they had suffered defeat; the German army had captured hundreds of thousands of prisoners. There was a lack of weapons to provide to the soldiers on the front. The government was paying for the war by borrowing from its allies Britain and France and partly by printing more paper roubles leading to massive inflation. Prices quadrulpled. There were food shortages as the country had been blockaded – the existing food turned bad as the government planned badly. Nicholas had taken on the role of Commander of the Russian army – (this increased hatred towards the royal family – you can explain why with Rasputin and leaving the country being governed by Alexander) à meaning people were willing to look towards any other form of governing role except the royal family.

__The structure and failures of the Provisional Government__ Primarily, it was “Provional” which didn’t signify a strong governing body. It had dual power with the Petrograd soviets – who actually undermined the government by stating that people should not listen to the Provisional Government unless warranted to do so by the Soviets.

They were facing many problems; they had chosen to continue the war (there had been alot of pressure from her allies to continue, the idea of 1million armed peasants coming back to the country side was imagineable, and the idea of a peace treaty would be too harsh)

They failed to carry out land reforms so peasants continued to carry out illegal seizues of land. The peoples unhappiness with the government was demonstrated in the various uprisings there were such as the July Days “the key event which demonstrated the lack of stability as a governing body”. (you could explain the The July Days briefly – and state how it increased support for the Bolsheviks and the trust for the PG decreased – as it seemed that only Lenin and his party could guarantee a share in power, peace, land and bread.

=
When Lenin returned on the 3rd April 1917, after being warranted by the PG to return, despite being a political activist – he announced the aims of the Bolsheviks known as the “April Thesis.” In was in these that he stated 1) People should oppse the PG 2) should oppose the war and 3) Power should go to the Soviets ... ====== Although, at first they caused a wave of shock it soon became clear that Lenin was the realist and that potentially supporting the Bolsheviks would be the way forward for Russia. Along, with his well known slogan of “Peace, bread, land” – people began to look towards them more and more, particulary the workers and soldiers.  The leaders themselves helped ensure the success of the revolution. Lenin and Trotsky were both great orators – much propganda was published in favour of the party.  It was actually Trotsky who proposed the idea of approaching the Russian Congress to judge the mood and see from there if the timing was right. Despite many members of the party having different ideas of when they should overthrow of PG at the Winter Palace, Trotsky’s idea was correctly decided upon.
 * __The timing of the revolution and the leaders themselves__ **

How far did Nicholas II personally cause the downfall of the tsarist government in 1917?
__Introduction__ It was Nicholas that personally caused the fall of the government due to a variety of factors such as his personality, his broken promises after the 1905 revolution and how he took control of the army. However, there were other factors as the Russia was backwards, the stronger organisation of revolutionaries and ultimately the poor, unfit army.

__He personally caused it__ //His personality// He was a weak, unstable - his sister described him as "wholly ignorant" and he was also described as being unfit to "run a local post office let alone a country". He was very much under the influence of his wife etc

//The concessions he granted// After the 1905 revolution, he granted the October manifesto reluctantly. However, later he issued the Fundamental Laws which completed contradicted the prior concession. He wasn't completely behind Stolypin and Witte's reforms (in agriculture particularly) - you could make reference to some of the changes Stolypins made.

//The War// He took the "fatal decision" of taking control of the army as "Supreme Commander in Chief". This meant that he was seen as personally responsible for all of the defeats - Alexandra was left in charge of all governmental affairs - Since she was german ideas of her supposed loyalty to the country spread - along with rumours of an affair with Rasputin. = drunken friend.

__No, it was other factors__ //The economy// The Russian economy was extremely backwards - and would be for a long time despite 'attempted' reforms. As it will be mentioned in the latter part of this essay - 45% of national expenditure was going on the army meaning there was little room for improving the social and economic problems of Russia and thus bringing a return to trust in Nicholas's regime.

You can mention some of the details of how russia was still so backwards and the bad conditions many were still in eg: Work&living conditions did not improve - crowded/badly housed. Per capita income in Russia was only about a third of the west.

//The revolutionaries// The revolutionaries were much more organised in comparison to the factionalism of the opposition in the 1905 revolution (Social revolutionaries, Popular protest, social democrats etc)

//General effects of the war// There had been talk of food rationing which caused a severe panic. This combined with the strike of the metal workers can be seen to have caused the downfall of the tsarist regime

//The army// Although Nicholas cannot be held personally to blame for the unfit army - (he may have played of part in the decision that 45% of expenditure was to be going on the army) A bad army meant a severe decrease in soldier morale along with the fact there was not enough ammunition.

__Conclusion__

In conclusion, it would be more true to infer that it was Nicholas II who personally caused the downfall of his regime. Although there had been an accumulation of long term grievances in Russia such (...) Nicholas and his actions provided the impetus for his abdication. The opportunity had arisen with the war with Germany to regain some prestige and prehaps even cover up the existing social and economic issues with military victory. However, Nicholas mis-handled the situation which led to calls for his abdication in March 1917.

What accounts for Lenin’s success as a revolutionary leader in October 1917?
Was Russia on the brink of revolution in 1914?

Introduction: Russia was not on the brink of revolution in 1914, it was the First World War that created the revolution. Socially, economically and politically, Stolypin’s, Witte’s and the Duma’s reforms were being effective, as the worker’s and peasantry’s life prospect began to improve, Russia’s agricultural methods modernised and Russia became a successful industrial power, and the Duma slowly began to transform Russia from an autocracy to a constitutional monarchy. Given time Russia would have continued to improve and the threat of revolution would have been entirely eradicated. However the opposing view that Russia was on the brink of revolution must also be analysed.

RTT-- Russia was not on the verge of revolution in 1914 because the government implemented a series of social, economical and political reforms that improved the general situation of Russia and particularly that of the different social groups within the Russian population, notably the workers, the peasantry, and the intellectuals. By making these groups content with the government and the progress achieved by the reforms, the government ensured stability and prevented a revolution. This view has often been associated to that of the Optimists, particularly to the historian J.Galloway who argues that “if Russia’s growth had not been crushed by the war, as a result of the reforms introduced after 1905, Russia would have been securely on a path of stable, democratic, Western-style development”.


 * Socially, reforms including the improvement of education, working conditions and the organization of land quieted the grievances of workers and crop farmers. Education improving so population in general feels that they’re improving and thus not likely to revolt- Effort to expand educational facilities. Third Duma increased government spending on elementary schools from 1.8% to 4.2%. 77% growth in number of students and 85% growth in number of schools. More professionally qualified people. Working Conditions improving so happy workers would not strike or revolt- Workers could now form trade unions. Labour legislation created sickness benefit funds and accident insurance. Stolypin’s land reforms were making agricultural peasants happy (80% population)- Could keep their land as private property, increase in resources in Peasant Land Bank so peasants could borrow money to buy extra land. Government resettlement program moved farmers to less overcrowded areas (Siberia and Central Asia). Later greater machinery, increased yields and improved animal husbandry. Cancellation of redemptions improved well-being. Cereal yields rose, so much that Russia could now export it and then became the largest cereal exporter between 1908 and 1913. Luck of good harvests.
 * Economically, Russia was at a peak. Pride for being among the world’s top producers grew among the population, so that nationalism prevented uprisings that would damage the country. 1906-1914 there is an industrial boom where Russia’s output increases by 100%, becoming the 4th largest producer of coal and iron. Factories used modern mass production techniques and Russia’s oil fields were matched only by those in Texas.
 * Politically, some improvements were made as Russia changed from an autocratic government to a constitutional monarchy. The change satisfied many of the political revolutionary leaders and intellectuals that had demanded a more democratic government, and so they did not act against the government. Creation of the Duma was “an important turning point in the development of Russian Constitutional law. It transformed the Russian empire from an absolute and unlimited monarchy into a constitutional monarchy”. (Henig) The October Manifesto, promise of freedom of speech, right to form political parties. No new laws without the consent of the Duma.

RTT-- However, It could be argued that Russia was on the verge of collapse by 1914 because the reforms introduced created many problems that aggravated the conditions of many Russians.


 * Socially, Russia’s population was largely discontent with the social reforms causing more additional problems than the amount of problems that they solved. Stolypin’s reforms caused problems to the peasants. So they were not happy. - Few peasants had the means to set up viable independent farms. There was a steady counterflow back towards communal tenure. Peasant-land hunger still persisted, despite good harvests in the years before 1914. There were too many peasants working in agriculture (80%). The assassination of Stolypin reveals the tensions and fears aroused by his policies. The Education reforms were not sufficient and only widened the social gap between the educated and the ordinary peasants. -Russia was still nowhere near providing universal primary education. Changes on education only affected part of the population. Social gap between the educated and the peasant families increased. Industrial production grew while wages and living and working conditions did not, this infuriated workers and caused disrupting strikes. There was an increase in industrial growth and the number of workers, but not of their working or living condition. Workers still in crowded factory barracks, wages had scarcely improved. Strikes to secure higher wages had been declared illegal. In 1912, in Siberia 270 strikers were killed by government troops. Many strikes, 2000 in 1912.
 * Economically, the improving economical situation did not directly benefice the ordinary people. Large population, so by head production was not that impressive. Ordinary workers and peasants did not see an increase on government spending on them to improve their conditions. Russo-Japanese war had had negative effects.
 * Politically, the persecution of political groups and minorities encouraged a lot of hostility towards the government and the Tsar did not want to become a constitutional monarch, so this angered those that had believed his democratic promises after the 1905 Revolution. Persecution of minorities and political groups-Revolutionary leaders were hunted down and exiled making intellectuals supporters of these leaders angry. The numbers in the social democratic party plummeted, they had less money, so they resorted to terrorists activities. Russification. Attacks on minority groups, especially the Jews was encouraged by the government, Krushev recalls “a decree that for three days you could do whatever you wanted to the Jews” without fear of reprisals. Historians Culpin and Henig point out to “the radicalism of growing numbers of workers by 1914 and to the hostility of minority groups as evidence that the Tsarist government was failing to solve the growing antagonisms caused by industrilisation and by programmes of modernisation, and that this failure was imperiling Russia’s very existence on the ever of war”. Membership of political parties and trade unions was allowed after 1906 but 600 were shut down by 1911. The uncompromising attitude of Nicholas II-Nicholas had no intention of adapting to the role of a constitutional monarch and giving away any of his autocratic powers, after the publication of the October Manifesto, he published the Fundamental Laws that reinforced his autocracy. R. Charques called it a “semi-demi constitutional monarchy”. Dumas didn’t last for long and had very limited power.

Conclusion: Russia was not on the brink of Revolution, it was World War One that caused it to collapse.

How far did Stalin, to 1939, continue the policies of Lenin?
cinema ( with films like [example], posters etc=