Explain How Far Was Tsar Nicholas Responsible For His Own Downfall
535 Words3 Pages
How far was Tsar Nicholas responsible for his own downfall?
Arguments:
1. Decision throughout the war
2. Constant treatment and repression of workers
3. Refusing to reform politically
Introduction:
Nicholas II had many factors that led to his eventful downfall and abdication. The three main factors was Nicholas’s refusal to reform politically, the consistent treatment/repression of workers and his decision to go to war. Also, Nicholas II caused his own downfall because he neglected the demands of three major groups of society. The army, of which without their support, wouldn’t be able to enforce any rules. The Liberals, which he needs to be on his side in Parliament to get any political policies passed. And lastly, the workers, which made up more than 50% of the population. The three main factors which leads to Tsar Nicholas II being responsible for his own downfall is his decision to go to war, refusing to reform politically and his constant treatment and repression of workers.
Section 1:…show more content… Tsar Nicholas II made two political important decisions. Firstly, he decided to become Commander in Chief of the armed forces at the front. This was significant as he would be blamed for military defeats. The second decision he had made was that to reject the proposal from Duma politicians to form a cabinet. This was also significant as it shows that Nicholas was power hungry and didn’t want to lose any of his power status.
Another reason to support my theory that Tsar Nicholas II is to blame for his own downfall was that he consistently refused to reform politically. This alienated the Liberals as he wasn’t meeting their demands which were to have say in parliament society. The army, of which without their support, wouldn’t be able to enforce any rules. The Liberals, which he needs to be on his side in Parliament