The weak leadership of Tsar Nicholas II was the defining factor of the outbreak of the February/March 1917 Russian Revolution. What follows is an explanation of the complex set of circumstances, which were exacerbated by the weak leadership of Nicholas II, ultimately leading to his abdication in February 1917.
“Nicholas II was an absolute monarch who could appoint and dismiss ministers at will, determine policy, and in wartime, command the Armed Forces” (MacMillan, 2014, p.196). As a child, Nicholas II was taught by an arch-conservative, Pobedonostsev, who loathed any kind of liberalism and democracy (Lynch and Woodland, 2008 p.12). The ideologies preached by Pobedonostsev, were concepts that Nicholas II would take to heart, as can be clearly seen in his subsequent policies. Nicholas II’s most harsh policy was Russification, as it alienated different ethnic groups by forcing the Russian language and Orthodox religion upon their identity. It was the policy which brought the Tsar increasing unpopularity in a country whose only united-front was loyalty to the Tsar - this was problematic for Romanov rule. Nicholas was particularly opposed to reform and believed in his own divine ruling.
…show more content…
Industrialisation brought actual economic reform, and, superficial social reform. The overall standard of living of those in Russia dropped dramatically during the 20th century. The majority of Russians were peasants and many began to work in factories, as Russia became more industrialised. Nicholas II stunted the improvement of the standard of living among the peasantry by banning the formation of trade unions, and shutting down protests with violent police force. Workers had virtually no rights. “Russia was thus benefiting economically from industrialisation but suffering socially” (Williams, 2016,