Opposition To The Reforms Flashcards
Why was it possible to oppose the Tsar?
- reforms did not prevent opposition but rather encouraged them by raising expectations that were disappointed. Alexander was well aware he could not fulfil the expectations without undermining the autocracy
- relaxation of censorship by Alexander II meant radical books and magazines could be published
- education reforms produced students who saw Russia needed to change
- zemstva meant that some people at local level could argue they could administer better than Tsar
- new legal system publicised many wrongs of tsarism and new lawyers prepared to argue against it
- when Alexander tightened controls in reaction, potential opponents were left even more unhappy
What were the main groups who opposed the Tsar
Liberal intellectuals: small group of educated intellectuals who had varying views but most wanted to keep tsarism but reform it
- Nihilists, anarchists and Marxists were very radical
Populists: another small group of intellectuals but didn’t want to get rid of tsar themselves. They believed in stirring up peasants to do it for them
- Narodniks (‘to the people’)
Who were the Liberal Intelligentsia
- many opponents to Alexander II could be found among poets, novelists, students
- backed social reform including a form of ‘peasant socialism’ based on communal landowning
- these people were educated, wealthy and time to reflect on politics
- many travelled abroad so aware of backwardness
- most wanted reforms rather than total change so active in zemstva
- many debated on the best direction for russia - Asia? European? Unique?
Who were the Westernisers?
- felt russia needed to move towards a western-style of government
- also wanted western economy
- embrace European culture and customs
- to become more European in outlook (like Britain, France and Germany)
- ideas like this had been popular in the past like under Tsar Peter the Great
What did the Westernisers argue?
- western governments had a more modern outlook and not held back by outdated tradition or religion
- western monarchies were not autocratic and were limited by constitutions (e.g. Britain)
- western governments were enlightened/civilised towards their treatment - no cruel treatment or slavery
- democratic rulers had to think about welfare of their people to remain in power - responsive to needs of people
- governments are mostly elected by the people
- industry and commerce was more efficient - copying methods of organisation and worker’s welfare, economy could develop
- styles of education better prepared for the future
Who were the Slavophile?
- Russia had its owned ancient culture and traditions
- Russia dwarfed Europe
- Why should it copy its smaller neighbours?
- modernise by strengthening its own economy and culture
What did the Slavophiles argue?
- autocratic system and Russian Orthodox Church has served well for over 300 years
- Western Europe had always been split by wars and rivalry whilst Russia had enjoyed 300 yrs of stability
- paternalistic outlook of Tsarism had served all Russians well - Tsar was a father figure who cared for his people and people looked up to him
- Russians had traditions and culture that held country together
- russia could move forward by modernising but also preserving culture
- superior Russian path would lead to better future
Who were the Nihilists?
- A member of a revolutionary movement of mid 19th century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in radical change in society through terrorism or assassination
- rejected all forms of authority in name of freedom
- a movement of ideas rather than a political organisation and helped to undermine Tsarist authority
- attitude of defiance appealed to the young who suffered under the restrictions of tsarist oppression
- supported science and reason so rejected church
- Nihilist published many critical papers of regime - Young Russia and it is rumoured it inspired the destruction of 2000 shops in June 1862
Who were the anarchists?
- took nihilism one step further and believed in the destruction of centralised government and that society should be organised on a local level
- to achieve this they favoured terrorism and passion for destruction
- small group of anarchists was active in russia in 1870s led by Michael Bakunin and Prince Peter Kropotkin who believed in power of the peasants and state ownership should be replaced by collective ownership
- associated with assassinations of government officials and destruction of property
- anarchism was an intellectual movement without popular appeal and as a result did not pose significant threat to
Who were the Marxists
- Karl Marx believed all societies were split between the ‘haves’ - the wealthy who owned capital (money and other means of making money) and the ‘have nots’ - poor who were exploited
- ideas eventually developed into communism
- ideas were new to Russia but began to grow in the later years of the 19th century
What were some opposition groups?
1862 - ‘Young Russia’ - group of young students who were opposed to the Tsar and Orthodox Church. Based in St Petersburg and started fires, destroyed shops
1863 - ‘The Organisation’ - group of students at Moscow University who tried to organise student protests
1864 - The St Petersburg Zemstva - demand a central zemstva should coordinate and organise all the smaller regional zemstva and so run russia instead of Tsar
1869-72 - The Populists - young people who set out into the villages to persuade peasants to start a revolution
These groups were still very small
Some radical thinkers
Nikolay Chernyshevsky - published ‘What is to be done’ in 1863 that argued peasants should rise up
Alexander Herzen - journalist published ‘The Bell’ in 1860s which argued peasants should run Russia at a local level
Mikhail Bakunin - anarchist who argued private ownership of land should be replaced by common ownership. 1869 he was first to translate Karl Marx work into Russian
- first real opponents for Tsar were a few isolated individuals who came up with new ideas - some had caused to backtrack on his reforms
What did the Narodniks do?
- 1899-72 Sergei Nechaev smuggled books into Russia which encourage radical ideas of land and fairer taxes
- 1874 - Pyotr Lavrov began to take ideas seriously and said needed to be taken ‘to the people’
- gathered 2000 students who tried to act like peasants in order to transform views. They believed peasants were made aware of their poverty and terrible living conditions, they would rise up
- Peasants did not react as they hoped as they were superstitious, ignorant and traditional and blindly loyal to Tsar who they saw as God on earth
- Peasants forced out or turned into police - 1600 arrests
Why did the Narodniks fails?
- did not understand countryside due to being upper class students
- Russian orthodox and the tsar still had an irrational hold over the peasants who were deeply traditional
- peasants ignorant of poverty and did not believe the changes they aimed to make
- timing was wrong - 1870s meant they were not as educated as later decades
However they tried again in 1876 but failed again and more were arrested
What did the Narodniks do next?
- reformed in 1877 with a new name ‘Land and Liberty’ and its members aimed to work with peasants as doctors or teachers whilst others decided that the other way to achieve a change was assassination
- 1878-79 they assassinated General Mezemstev (head of secret police) and Prince Krapotkin (governor of Kharkov region) and even tried at assassinate Tsar
