Question by arj.efc: What was Trosky’s opinion on Nicholas II ‘Tsar’?
any information would do, but mainly on things that Nicholas could of prevented, but didnt.
could you include a website or book if you used on 🙂
Answers and Views:
Answer by cp_scipiom
Trotsky wanted the Tsar dead. Same as all the other “communists”. He wanted to be the Tsar himself- again same as all the other “communists”. In the end it was Stalin who became the “red Tsar” and Trotsky ended up with a pick axe in the skull
The Tsar’s policies did not matter one bit- the communists sabotaged everything they could in order to lose the war against germany and blame it all on the Tsar. It did not matter how many milions died- just so long as the “communists” gained power
Read all the answers in the comments.
Give your own answer to this question!
Spellbound says
Trotsky, like most Russian Marxists of the period, thought that Nicholas represented the pinnacle of the Imperial, exploitative, regime. He loathed the power and wealth that the Tsar had,believing that only the working classes could rule in the interests of the great majority of people.
Nicholas was not the right man to prevent the February Revolution, he was an inept ruler who believed in his divine right to rule without a parliament. But it was by no means inevitable, even as late as January 1917 he could have quashed the desire for change.
He needed to address the following problems:
The cities were starving – this was because the peasants needed to bring in the harvests and to transport food to the cities were mostly in the army.
The workers were poorly paid for very long hours, worked in harsh conditions and had very poor living conditions.
The army was falling apart due to military defeats, poor leadership, infiltration of the army by political groups and the fact that the mainly peasant army wanted to return to their farms.
The peasants were dissatisfied with the Emancipation of some 50 years earlier, which saw them take on 50 year redemption mortgages in order to buy their freedom – millions were indebted.
And the intelligentsia and middle classes were dissatisfied with the lack of political representation.
To solve the crisis that led to his abdication and the February Revolution he could have ensured that enough peasants were left to work the land – even raising city-living volunteers to go to help sow & bring in the harvests.
He could have increased pay for the workers, with promises of better living and working conditions after the war ended.
He could have sent his officer corps to Britain or France to learn how they were holding up the Germans – they would possibly be willing to send troops and advisors to help shore up the Russian front lines.
He could have freed the peasants from their debt, and given them the land on which they worked.
He could have offered a constitutional monarchy, perhaps following the British model, which would have placated the intelligentsia.
In the end, he did none of these things, believing that as God made him Tsar, so he did not have to modernise Russia.
See:
The October Revolution – Roy Medvedev
Lenin, A Biography – Robert Service
Trotsky, A Biography – Robert Service