‘Opposition to the Russian government was more effective in the period from 1855 to 1917 than in the period from 1917 to 1964.’ How far do you agree?
Level
A Level
Year Examined
2022
Topic
Russia and its rulers 1855-1964
👑Complete Model Essay
‘Opposition to the Russian government was more effective in the period from 1855 to 1917 than in the period from 1917 to 1964.’ How far do you agree?
Opposition to the Russian Government: Tsarist and Soviet Eras
This essay will analyse the effectiveness of opposition to the Russian government during two distinct periods: 1855 to 1917, under the Tsarist regime, and 1917 to 1964, under the Communist state. It will argue that, while opposition movements in both periods faced significant obstacles and achieved varying degrees of success, opposition in the Tsarist era was ultimately more effective in achieving tangible change. This is due to a combination of factors, including the Tsarist regime's inherent vulnerabilities, the ability of opposition groups to mobilise popular support, and the ultimately successful overthrow of the Tsar. While opposition in the Soviet era also faced significant challenges, it lacked the same level of success in bringing about regime change.
The Tsarist Era: A Time of Growing Opposition
The period from 1855 to 1917 witnessed a surge in opposition to the Tsarist regime. While the Tsarist autocracy was firmly established, its internal weaknesses and the growing desire for change within Russian society provided fertile ground for opposition movements. The assassination of Alexander II in 1881, orchestrated by the terrorist group 'The People's Will', exemplifies the growing radicalisation of opposition groups. This event, while tragic, demonstrated the vulnerability of the Tsarist regime and the effectiveness of radical groups in striking at its heart.
The 1905 Revolution marked a watershed moment in the history of opposition to the Tsarist regime. Triggered by the 'Bloody Sunday' massacre, the revolution saw widespread protests, strikes, and the formation of numerous revolutionary groups. This period of unrest culminated in the October Manifesto, which granted limited democratic rights and established the Duma, a legislative body. Although the Duma's power was limited, it represented a significant concession from the Tsar and a victory for the opposition.
The period between 1906 and 1914 saw continued unrest, with peasant uprisings and the resurgence of revolutionary groups. This period of continued dissent contributed to the increasing instability of the Tsarist regime and ultimately paved the way for the February Revolution of 1917.
The Soviet Era: A Different Landscape of Opposition
The establishment of the Soviet state in 1917 marked a dramatic shift in the landscape of opposition. The Bolshevik regime, under the leadership of Lenin, implemented a totalitarian system that ruthlessly suppressed dissent. While the early years of Soviet rule saw significant opposition, including the widespread resistance to the Bolsheviks during the Russian Civil War, the regime's consolidation of power through brutal means drastically reduced the ability of opposition groups to operate effectively.
From 1924 to 1956, when Stalin was in power, the Soviet state employed a sophisticated system of control and repression. This included a pervasive secret police, mass purges, and a tightly controlled media that effectively silenced any dissent. The use of terror created a climate of fear and prevented the emergence of organised opposition. While underground resistance groups existed, their impact on the regime was limited.
The death of Stalin in 1953 and the rise of Khrushchev marked a period of limited liberalization. Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin's excesses and the relaxation of some controls allowed for a degree of criticism within the Soviet Union. However, this period of relative openness was short-lived, and the Soviet state remained firmly committed to its totalitarian ideology.
Conclusion: The Effectiveness of Opposition - Tsarist vs. Soviet
In conclusion, while opposition to the Russian government faced significant challenges in both the Tsarist and Soviet periods, it was arguably more effective in achieving tangible change during the Tsarist era. The Tsarist regime's inherent weaknesses, the ability of opposition groups to mobilize popular support, and the ultimately successful overthrow of the Tsar demonstrate the effectiveness of opposition in that period. While opposition in the Soviet era was met with brutal repression and faced formidable obstacles, it lacked the same level of success in bringing about regime change. The Soviet state, with its totalitarian system and brutal methods of control, proved far more resistant to the forces of opposition.
Therefore, while opposition in both periods played a crucial role in shaping Russia's political landscape, opposition during the Tsarist era was ultimately more effective in achieving tangible changes, culminating in the regime's downfall. In contrast, opposition during the Soviet era, while persistent and courageous, was met with overwhelming repression, failing to bring about a regime change.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
Introduction
This essay will assess the claim that opposition to the Russian government was more effective in the period from 1855 to 1917 than in the period from 1917 to 1964. It will argue that whilst opposition to Tsarist rule did achieve certain successes, particularly in forcing the Tsar to make concessions in 1905, the level and impact of opposition to both Tsarist and Communist governments was ultimately limited. This essay will therefore conclude that opposition was equally ineffective before and after 1917.
Opposition to the Tsarist Regime (1855-1917)
The Limits of Opposition
It is true that opposition to Tsarist rule gained some success in the period 1855-1917. The assassination of Alexander II in 1881, carried out by a small group of revolutionaries, demonstrated the potential for violence to impact the government. Further, the 1905 Revolution, fueled by widespread discontent with the Tsar’s policies, forced the Tsar to make concessions with the October Manifesto, granting limited democratic rights.
The Reasons for Ineffectiveness
However, opposition to the Tsar was ultimately limited. Opposition groups failed to mobilize the peasant masses, who remained largely apathetic to political change and were more concerned with economic hardship. Furthermore, the success of Stolypin’s reforms limited the effectiveness of opposition, as his attempts to improve the lives of peasants undermined the grievances of revolutionaries.
It is also important to remember that the Tsar’s abdication in 1917 was not solely due to opposition, but was also driven by factors such as the disastrous War effort and a lack of military support for the Tsar.
Opposition to the Communist Regime (1917-1964)
The Era of Terror and Cultural Control
Opposition to the Communist regime faced far greater obstacles than opposition to the Tsar. Lenin and Stalin employed brutal methods of repression through the use of terror, eliminating any potential for open dissent. The regime also maintained tight control over the media, education, and culture, effectively stifling any opposition that might arise.
Limited Successes
Despite the repressive nature of the Communist regime, there were some instances of opposition. For example, the widespread opposition to Lenin’s war communism policies between 1917 and 1921, which led to the introduction of the New Economic Policy, represents a significant example of opposition achieving change. However, it is important to note that this was a temporary concession spurred by economic necessity rather than a sustainable victory for opposition groups.
The rise of criticism under Khrushchev, following the end of Stalinist terror, represents a further example of limited opposition success. Although Khrushchev’s reforms were limited and did not challenge the foundations of the Communist system, they did show that the regime could be subjected to some degree of pressure from below.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the opposition to the Tsarist regime and the Communist regime were both largely ineffective. While the Tsarist regime faced occasional uprisings and protests, it ultimately maintained a firm grip on power. The Communist regime, through its use of terror and cultural control, effectively suppressed any organized opposition. Therefore, it can be argued that opposition was equally ineffective before and after 1917, although it is important to acknowledge that the nature and methods of opposition varied in each period.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
In supporting the hypothesis in the question, it might be argued that opposition prior to the end of Tsarism was able to achieve more than was opposition following the establishment of a Communist state.
Answers might consider the scale of protest movements in gaining popular support during the late 1800s, including the successful assassination of Alexander II.
Answers might consider the 1905 Revolution which resulted in the October Manifesto and a limited democratic change.
Answers might consider social unrest in the period 1906-14 and also the ability of protesters to force the Tsar to abdicate in 1917.
In challenging the hypothesis in this question, it might be argued either than opposition was equally ineffective before and after 1917, or that the opposition was less ineffective between c.1924 and c.1956.
Answers might consider the lack of wider support for opposition groups under the Tsars, as these failed to mobilise the peasant masses.
Answers might consider the ineffective nature of reforms achieved in 1905-6 as a result of opposition, and Stolypin’s management of opposition protest.
Answers might consider that opposition to the Tsar was only one factor in his overthrow, and that wartime conditions and the lack of military support were crucial.
Answers might consider the widespread opposition to Lenin’s government between 1917 and 1921.
Answers might consider Lenin and Stalin’s use of terror to control opponents.
Answers might consider the cultural control wielded by Stalin’s government to control opposition.
Answers might consider the growth of criticism of the state under Khrushchev once Stalinist terror had been ended.