Question by Magicalhobo: What are the differences and similarities between Tsarist Russia and Soviet Russia?
Exactly what the title asks. How was Tsarist Russia and Soviet Russia similar or different from each other? Thanks in advance to anyone that responds.
Answers and Views:
Answer by Remalda L
Brutal Imperial dictator then Brutal communist dictator (with the exception of Gorby) and now they have a brutal mafia run dictatorship.
The financial structure was different although the peasents saw little of what money there was under any of the three systems. Better health care, education and sports achievements under the Soviets. A rising lower middle class under the mafia
Give your answer to this question below!
Jesús says
I'm doing a Russian history course that assesses the similarities and differences between Tsarism (from 1855 and the death of Nicholas I, to 1964 and Khrushchev's removal from power). In fact I'm being examined on it tomorrow, so to practice, I'll try churning out what I know.
Firstly, a massive similarity is actually the ideology of the two governing bodies. Theoretically, the change should have been massive: autocratic Tsarism to egalitarian Communism. This was not the case. For example – if you consider that the ideology of autocracy is one person in charge, ruling with total unlimited power, this also applies to Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev. Nicholas II, on his accession to the throne said he would 'adhere unswervingly, as my father had, to the principle of autocracy'. This can be seen by his fundamental laws of 1906 – although leaning towards democracy with the Duma in 1905, he rebuked these changes in 1906. Similarly, after the Bolshevik failure in the November elections of 1917 (40.4% majority to the SRs), Lenin wasted no time in shutting down the Constituent Assembly, after 'one day of democracy' – thus proving that he intended to rule with unchallenged authority. The Decree on Party Unity in 1921 (making Russia a one-party state) only furthers this assumption. Even Khrushchev, who appeared to be moving towards collective leadership as opposed to autocracy because of his 'destalinisation' process, ended up ruling as an autocrat: the demise of Malenkov and execution of Beria left Khrushchev as a single party leader. Thus the Tsarist 'divine right to rule', and autocratic nature, had not changed with the Bolshevik takeover in 1917. One could also point out that under Lenin, around 5,000 Bolsheviks and their families lived in luxury in the Kremlin – seems very much like the nobility under Tsarist rule, and thus no change in social structure?
Another similarity is the governmental administrative structures. Under the Tsars, it was very hierarchical and top-down, meaning that all organisations were responsible to the top (the leader). For example, the Committee of Ministers under Alexander II and Alexander III (responsible for day to day administration) was directly accountable to the Tsar. The Communists also adopted this approach: Lenin's Sovnakorm appeared to be democratic as it was elected by the people but in reality it had little authority as it was dominated by Bolsheviks, who in turn owed their support to the party leader – Lenin. Another similarity can be seen by the fact that Nicholas II had the power to simply close the Duma – August 1915 after the 'Progressive Bloc'. Thus this Duma administration had not affected the fact that Russia was still very hierarchichal. In a similar way, Stalin appeared to be heading towards democracy through his creation of the Soviet of the Union and Soviet of the Nationalities in the 1936 constitution. Nevertheless, like Sovnakorm, these two bodies were dominated by Communist Party Members and thus they were obedient to the leader, Stalin. 'Democratic Centralism' was in fact very hierarchical and top-down in nature.
I would continue, but I'm running out of time so I'll summarise. Although both Tsars and Communists were non-hesitant in their use of repression, the Communists were actually more authoritarian and used it on a greater scale – (The Great Purge/Gulags etc). Secondly, the Communists were more effective in their use of censorship/propaganda than the Tsars, although both used it (Socialist Realism etc). As somebody has already mentioned, education, health and women's roles were improved greatly under the Communists. However, it's also worth pointing out the issue of religion – 'the opium of the people' under the Tsars and almost entirely eradicated under the Communists.
Super Dooby says
in soviet russia question answers you
Blackman says
tsarist russia was russia when it still had a monarchy.
when the communist party killed the tsar and his family and took over, they became soviet russia
Rene says
Tsarist Russia was of a past that the world will never see again. I mean the end of a monarchy which is basically none existent besides the Queen of England. Fascinating that all the royals to this day are related. The fact that the 1900's were bringing a change to Europe and Communism was beginning in Russia. The wealthy with their lands, serfs who worked the farms(who in all actuality were slaves). Lenin, Stalin who would come of power in Soviet Russia. The abduction of the Czar, Czarina, and their family and their killings would such a thing happen during these times? Very different worlds and who is to say which way was the better. I don't see any similarities.