The Effect of Kerensky, Trotsky, and Lenin in the February and October Revolutions of 1917 - Essay Example

Curse The Effect of Kerensky, Trotsky, and Lenin in the February and October Revolutions of 1917 Introduction Russia had been under the rule of Tsars for very many years. Many people in the country were not happy because the rulers were dictatorial. The first uprising to happen in the country occurred on December, 1825, and was known as the Decembrist uprising. After the Russo-Japanese war, another uprising occurred in 1905 (Raleigh, 1986, p. 29) The Russian people had been fighting for a democratic country but the Tsar; Nicholas II would hear none of it. Alexander Fyodorovich Kerensky was a famous Russian politician before the Russian Revolutions of 1917. He was born in Simbirsk along the Volga River on 4 May, 1881 and died on 17 June 1970 (Acton, 1990, p. 12). In 1912, Kerensky was elected to become a member of the Fourth Duma in which he represented the Trudoviks. Kerensky was an active member in both camps of the Petrograd Soviet and the provisional government. It is worth noting that initially he was used as a bridge between the two principal bodies. During his time in the provisional government, he was the minister for justice, war, and became the prime minister later in his career (Acton, Cherniaev, & Rosenberg, 1997, p. 56). On the other hand, Lenin believed that Kerensky was not taking the Russians to the right direction and as a result, he used the Bolshevik party to engage the people in a revolution. The Russians were against the First World War and they thought that the Tsars were not fighting for their rights. When Lenin got the control of the government, he became more tyrannical than any other ruler in the history of Russia. This is despite the fact that the Russians believed that Lenin would fight for the rights of the common citizen (Kennan, 1989, p. 194). Strikes, food riots and the ensuing war made Russia ungovernable. When Lenin arrived by train from Switzerland, he was against the war and could not stomach Kerensky because he thought that he was not for reforms. Lenin mobilized the people and especially the army by promising them economic reforms and ending the war. Leon Trotsky was born by the name of Lev Davidovich Bronshtein and he initially supported Meshevik Internationalists. Prior to October Revolution, which occurred in 1917, he had joined the Bolshevik Party. He went ahead and became a prominent leader of the Bolshevik party. Despite the fact that he supported people and workers, he was later removed from power by the rise of Josef Stalin. The Rise and fall of Kerensky By the time the February Revolution erupted during 1917 spring, Kerensky was among the most vocal leaders for the revolution. The fact that he was an affiliate of Provisional Committee of the State Duma enabled him to be chosen a Petrograd Soviet’s vice-chairman. When the provisional government was created, he became its first Minister for Justice (Acton, 1990, p. 123). This was despite the fact that the Petrograd Soviet had banned its members from joining the government but a speech he delivered saw him become exempted from that requirement. After he was appointed to the post of minister of justice, but he failed in his attempts to bring together the revolutionary forces that had led him rise to that post. In addition, he did not abandon Russia’s commitment in the First World War and he led a disastrous campaign that culminated in the death of hundreds of soldiers in Galicia (Acton, Cherniaev, & Rosenberg, 1997’ p. 16). During his tenure as the prime minister, he deferred several economic reforms, which were needed in the country because he could not undertake them without the needed democratic assembly. Moreover, the elections of such assembly could not be achieved fast because of the disruptions of the ongoing war. This implies that the people became dissatisfied with his way of ruling because they saw his government as being ineffective. Kerensky’s government had very limited support, which could not fight a revolution. This is despite the fact that Kerensky was effective but the times could not allow him to effect the required reforms (Acton, Cherniaev, & Rosenberg, 1997’ p. 16). Kerensky was politically moderate and this gave him an upper hand in bridging the gap connecting radical socialists who were made up of the Petrograd Soviet. These were soldiers’ council and workers. On the other hand, conservative liberals were dominant in the provisional government. As fate would have it, the war did not abate and as a result peasants, soldiers, and workers became increasingly restless and they opted to topple Kerensky’s government. The three above-mentioned groups became increasingly critical of Kerensky and they started to support the Bolshevik party because it offered other solutions, which could not be found at the Petrograd party. This line of thought told by Lenin when he claims that he answered the call of the people (Wildman, 1987, p. 99). After taking office, many soldiers thought that Kerensky would end the war but he did not. He announced a new offensive soon after taking office, which was to start at the summer of 1917. This prompted nearly two million soldiers to desert their duties unofficially. Majority of the soldiers went to their homes with the weapons they had been assigned to. They used them to seize land from the nobles. This led to the death of wealthy landowners and although Kerensky supported by the provisional government went to their rescue, he did not help the situation. Bolsheviks begun campaigning for the end of the war and this resulted in the order of arrest of anybody who was against the war on July 19. The targeted people included Lenin because of his known outrage against the regime (Wildman, 1987, p. 364). In order for Kerensky to stay in power he gave Petrograd workers arms in the Kornilov Affair. These workers had already invaded the Bolsheviks by the turn of November 1917. This is the main reason why Bolsheviks launched the second liberation, between 06 and 07 November 1917. In Petrograd, the government’s support was almost zero because only one battalion made of one hundred and thirty seven members represented it. As was expected, pro- Bolshevik members defeated the battalion and this forced Kerensky to escape to Pskov where he organized another battalion, which was later defeated. Kerensky escaped the fight and remained in hiding for a few weeks before he fled the country (Wildman, 1987, p. 364). Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky Vladimir Lenin was a renowned leader even though he lived in Switzerland. This is the main reason why he was sent by the Switzerland to go to the rescue of the Russians. On the other hand, Lenin was a founding member of the Bolshevik Party and he organized the October Revolution Wildman, 1987, p. 364). Lenin had fled Russia in July as he escaped police arrest and returned while wearing a wig in early October and hid in the house of a party worker by the name of Margarita Fofanova. The Bolshevik Party held a meeting on October 10 and Lenin attended. At the meeting, the party members decided to vote for an armed conflict with the ruling party, however, they did not give a specific date on when to start (Wildman, 1987, p. 364). On the contrary, Lenin had other pressing matters to put forward because he knew that the second all-Russian Soviet Congress was meeting at Petrograd on the 20 October. This development according to Lenin, if they carried out the revolution after the meeting any future government would not have a choice other than including all the Socialist parties (Whittemore, 2012, p. 56). On the other hand, Lenin was aiming at a one party government and this could be achieved if the revolution was undertaken before the congress date. After Lenin convinced the other Bolshevik members on the importance of staging the revolution before the Petrograd meeting, Leon Trotsky as Petrograd’s chairperson decided to organize a Military Revolutionary Committee that would be responsible for the representation of the entire Soviet. In addition, it would act as a defensive weapon against the Germans and any revolution that might take place in Russia (Bone, 1974, p. 54). At this time, the Soviet leaders had learnt of the secret held by the Bolsheviks and as a result, they decided to push the meeting forward by five days in order to have enough time to mobilize the opposing sides to come to their side (Pipes, 1990, p. 78). Nevertheless, unknown to the Soviet leaders this gave the Bolsheviks enough time for the preparation of their coup. After the Bolsheviks took control of Petrograd on 25 October, and detained all the ministers, Kerensky had already escaped. This means that the government forces did not counter the taking over of the latter. This can be attributed to the fact that Kerensky had failed terribly in uniting the forces and workers in the Soviet Union after taking on power (Melgunov, 1972, p. 54) A challenge that faced Lenin at that moment was ensuring that his socialist colleagues did not take over the leadership of the country. Although the Bolsheviks represented the highest number of delegates during the soviet congress of October 25, this was not the majority, which meant that Lenin could not take up the leadership easily (Gilbert, 2003, p. 180). The first resolution calling for the formation of a united democratic government proved to be very hard to overturn on the side of the Bolsheviks (Lockhart, 1991, p. 34). The Bolsheviks were helped by the short sightedness of members of Socialist Revolutionary and Menshevik because the members believed that the resolutions been passed at the meeting would definitely lead to a civil war (Rabinowitch, 1976, p. 81). This gave a big blow to the opposition, and gave Trotsky and Lenin an opportunity to trounce the opposition and promise to form a revolutionary government that would represent the Soviet but draw its members from the Bolshevik party only. This became the Soviet of Peoples Commissars and took over the leadership of the country (Magstadt, 2011, p. 14). Lenin did not waste any time and on 26 October, he presented the congress with two bills, which had to be passed with immediate effect. Lenin advocated for peace and as a result, he presented the Decree of Peace, which laid bare Russia’s weaknesses, and it culminated in the signing of the Brest-Litovsk treaty that was signed in March 1918 (Figes, 1989, p. 37). The fact that Lenin seized power from the democratically elected government gave him very many enemies. This meant that Lenin had to deal with insiders and outsiders who were not ready to work with him (Sukhanov, 1962, p. 72). Supporters of the disbanded regime were branded White Russians and were very much opposed to the rule of Lenin. In addition, the constituent assembly was disbanded and as a result, the members became agitated by the decision and decided to oppose Lenin (Del, Lemoine & Strickland, 2001, p. 40). Conclusion The works of Kerensky, Trotsky, and Lenin have had significant effects on the lives of the Russian people. These can be attributed to the fact all of them wanted the best for the public but they ended up failing miserably. Kerensky took the leadership of Russia in order to overthrow the Tsar’s leadership but other people had different ideas. Russians believed that the Tsars were undemocratic and as a result, they could help them in achieving their dreams. This led to the February revolution, which was led by Kerensky but he was later to be overthrown by the Bolsheviks. This implies that despite the fact that the latter wanted the best for the people of Russia, others thought that he was not best-suited fort the job. This can attributed to the fact that majority of Russians were against the war and they wanted a leader who could pull Russian soldiers from the war front. References Acton, E 1990, Rethinking the Russian Revolution, Edward Arnold, London. Acton, E, Cherniaev, VI & Rosenberg, WG 1997, Critical Companion to the Russian Revolution, 1914 - 1921 Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Bone, A 1974, The Bolsheviks and the October Revolution: Minutes of the Central Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) August 1917 - February 1918. Pluto Press, London. Del TDW, Lemoine, F & Strickland, J 2001, Government leaders, military rulers, and political activists, Oryx Press, Connecticut. Figes, O 1989, A Peoples Tragedy: The Russian Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gilbert, H 2003, Leon Trotsky: his life & ideas, WA, Red Letter Press, Seattle. Kennan, GF, 1989, Russia leaves the war, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Lockhart, RB, 1991, ‘The February Revolution of 1917, History Today, Vol. 41, no. 2, p. 34. Magstadt, TM 2011, Understanding politics: ideas, institutions, and issues, Cengage Learning, Boston. Melgunov, SP, 1972, Bolshevik Seizure of Power, tr. James S. Beaver. Santa Barbara, CA: Clio. Pipes, R 1990, The Russian Revolution, Knopf, New York. Rabinowitch, A 1976, The Bolsheviks Come to Power: The Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd. Norton, New York. Raleigh, DJ 1986, Revolution on the Volga: 1917 in Saratov. Cornell University Press, New York. Sukhanov, NN 1962, The Russian Revolution, 1917, tr. and ed. Joel Carmichael, Harper, New York. Whittemore, WJ 2012, Untimely deaths by assassination, Universe Inc., new York. Wildman, A, 1987, The End of the Russian Imperial Army, Vol. 2: The Road to Soviet Power and Peace. Princeton University Press, New York. Read More