History, asked by muskannusrath9807, 1 year ago

Highlight the social and political conditions that led to Russian revolution


nandk4309: Please give me the answer
nandk4309: Highlight the social and political condition that led to Russian revolution

Answers

Answered by amishayadav2002
6
Votes
History
Mark favorite Subscribe Report
Comment
Tutors, please sign in to answer this question.
2 ANSWERS

Sharunas P.
Brooklyn, NY
0
0
The causes of Russian revolution are much more complicated than they appear in the explanations given by massive culture. The system of autocratic ruling ("samoderzhavije") in Russia was an organically developed original Russian system for ruling the vast territories of Rus' governed by rapidly Moscow state as well as the immense lands of steppes (prairies) and taiga (northern forests) inhabited by multitude of different tribes - the territories of former Great Mongol Ulus ("steppe empire") annexed by dukes of Moscow, who assumed the title of Tsar (=Emperor). This title of Tsar Russians dared to reserve only Byzantine Emperor and later to Great Khans of mongols or those of Golden Horde, which were all considered feudal overlords of all Russian dukes and their lands. Even the supreme duke of Moscow was sort of main sherif of mongols in Rus' who cared about collecting the tribute from all lands of Rus' and to send it to mongols in time.
Only in 1480, when the Mongol-Tartars grow week, did one monk -Vasian Ryla, the spiritual guide of duke Ivan III of Moscow, dare to call the duke the "real Tsar" and to call Mongol Tsars the usurpers of the throne. This way he inspired Ivan to fight the "Tsar" of Mongols Achmat who came with a huge army to make Rus' obedient once again. In the long battle of several weeks - "standing at Ugra river" the Russians managed not to let Mongol-Tartars pass the border river Ugra for the first time. they were lucky that Grand duke of Lithuania (that was very powerful and the biggest state in Europe at that time) - Kazimieras (Casimir) came too late with his army to help the Mongols.
From then on Ivan the III began to collect Russian lands and to make Russia (Muscovy) a really big state calling himself Tsar (=Caesar/ Emperor / king of kings) when communicating to Western Rulers, but he was very humble with the "Tsar" of the last remnant of Mongol world power - the khanate of Crimea, calling himself in a letter to him "Moscow duke Ivashka".
But when Russia (Muscovy) gained real power and began to add vast Tartar lands to its territory it acted like a restorer of Golden Horde and Tsar was presenting himself to the Eastern tribes as "The White Tsar" (equivalent to former title Ak Khan/ White (=noble) Khan of Mongols. This way the power of Tsar was made legitimate in a territory which had to become the greatest country (better to say country composed of many countries) in the world.
Such a tremendous territory needed one ruler to govern it effectively.
And even the "native" Russian lands = the lands that they colonized before freeing from Mongol rule in nowadays European Russia were very big - biggest in Europe.
SO gradually Russians developed their type of autocracy - rule of Tsar alone, their special system which adopted many features from Great Mongol Ulus including army organization and "jam" - the efficient imperial post that carried messages in enormous steppe lands enabling efficient control of information and managing the events in such big spaces. So the people viewed such an efficient system as the only possible one and securing the power of their state.
Of course Tsar needed local officials, which were sometimes good and sometimes bad but the simple Russian folk blamed first of all the abuses of the officials for all the troubles, viewing "Tsar batiushka" - (The little father) as their protector, who did not know about bad actions of local oppressors. The portrait of Tsar was in every peasant house in the most honorable place near the Icon of Our Lady and/or Christ - even before the October revolution in 1917.
Did the Russian folk itself need and long for a liberal system? If we explore Russian history with conscience it seems they did not. The liberal rearrangements were the dream of some representatives of "intelligentsia" PART of lawyers, doctors, students, etc. mainly so called zapadniki ("westerners") there were strong tendencies between Russian thinkers to argue that liberalism is not the system for Russia and is contrary to human society in general.
Part of the "westerners' " stream were the social-democrats (founded by merely 9 Marxists) and their fraction - communists with Lenin as their leader. They were calling for "liberation" of peasants and workers, though Tsar Alexander II gave personal freedom to 48 million of serfs in 1861. Though in is an open question what was better for the serfs - liberation or previous condition. They were used to the care of the landlords. After liberation they had too little land and they could not pay for the received land - they went into debt/ The peasants had a sense of disorientation because of abrupt change in the only way of life they knew. He reduced punishments and time of service in the army.
Answered by dsg7353
1

Answer:

Social condition - 85% of Russia's population was agriculturist.The industry of existence,but in which most of them was privately owned.Workers were divided on the basis of their occupation.They mainly migrated to cities for employment in factories. The peasant community was deeply religious but did not care much about the nobility.They believed that land must be divided among themselves

Political condition - Political parties were illegal before 1914. The Russian Social Democratic Worker's Party was founded in 1898 by socialists who respected Marc's ideas.In 1903,this party was divided into two groups-Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks,who were in majority,were led by Lenin who is regarded as the greatest thinker on socialism after Marx.

Explanation:

Similar questions