October 1917 A Bolshevik-Engineered Coup Or A Popular Revolution

FINAL EXAMINATION - OPEN BOOK – 250 pts possible

NAME: Mariah Hines

Due July 8th by 6:00pm via SafeAssign – No late exams will be accepted!

ESSAY QUESTIONS (125 pts per question possible, 250 pts total) please answer any two of the questions below, each in at least a 750 word, 3-4 page response. Your finished exam will be two essays. Please format your answers in MLA style, do not change fonts or margins from what is in this document (Times New Roman, Size 11). You may use books and readings from class in your answers, but they must be cited. Lack of formatting or bad formatting will detract from your final grade.

Develop your answers carefully, using evidence and citing class readings and lectures to support your statements wherever possible.

Was the overthrow of the Provisional Government in October 1917 a Bolshevik-engineered coup or a popular revolution? Why has the Bolshevik capture of the Winter Palace to become an iconic moment of the Russian Revolution? Is the significance of this event justified? Who were the major players and how did they affect the outcome of the Revolution? What is your argument on the subject?

Early 20th century Russia was a hotbed for political discontent. The 1900s saw an increase in rebellion, riot, and opposition to the incompetent and unpopular Tsar Nicholas II (McCauley). New political parties, based on the theories of Marxism, began to gain power amongst the lower class workers and peasants (McCauley 17). By 1917, a series of unfavorable policies including Russia’s involvement in WWI led to the eventual crumbling of the Tsarist regime (McCauley). In February of 1917, the Tsar was forced to abdicate his position as head of the state, and a new provisional government, led by members of the former Duma, was set up in his place (McCauley 14). However, tensions between the Menshevik, Social Revolutionary, and Bolshevik parties emerged as each party attempted to forge its own political path. These tensions culminated in the October Revolution, in which Bolshevik leaders ousted the Provisional Government by taking over key government buildings. Although the Bolsheviks were increasing in popularity during the time of the revolution, it is clear from the resulting Civil War that the

Foreign policies towards the Ukraine would perhaps have even been peaceful, as Zyuganov, during his 2012 campaign, voiced his opinion that Russia should grow close to its allies (Aljazeera). Noting the importance of maintaining a good relationship with the Ukraine as well as the CIS countries, a Communist president would have avoided annexing Crimea and exacerbating tensions with its allies. And, as the main goal of the Communist Party was to reform Russia away from its capitalist ways and back towards socialism, a Communist president would have primarily focused on matters of economic and domestic concern (White). During his campaign, Zyuganov endorsed policies of re-nationalizing sectors of the Russian market, including the defense and agriculture sector (Aljazeera). There is little evidence that a return to socialism would be beneficial for the Russian public. The world has become increasingly capitalist, and it is uncertain how a socialist Russia would fare in the international arena. Though a Communist president would have forestalled the crisis in the Ukraine, he would have also placed Russia’s economy in a precarious situation by reverting to a socialist government. Thus, a communist president would not have been a better alternative for the