Readings Newsletter
Become a Readings Member to make your shopping experience even easier.
Sign in or sign up for free!
You’re not far away from qualifying for FREE standard shipping within Australia
You’ve qualified for FREE standard shipping within Australia
The cart is loading…
This title is printed to order. This book may have been self-published. If so, we cannot guarantee the quality of the content. In the main most books will have gone through the editing process however some may not. We therefore suggest that you be aware of this before ordering this book. If in doubt check either the author or publisher’s details as we are unable to accept any returns unless they are faulty. Please contact us if you have any questions.
As the central event of modern times, the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 remains a major focus of historical investigation and controversy. Unavoidably, the conception of the historical problems and the evidence presented are shaped by the historian’s view on both the desirability and the inevitability of the Bolshevik Revolution. The years 1890-1917 are particularly important as the crucible in which revolutionary forces developed. In the nineties, Finance Minister Sergei Witte laid the groundwork for a modern economy. While he achieved many of his economic goals, the stresses and strains of forced draft industrialization contributed to the revival of the revolutionary movement; political instability was their immediate effect. By the turn of the century the peasants were in open revolt, an alienated and militant urban proletariat was emerging, and a cohesive liberal opposition was beginning to develop. All these groups demanded fundamental reforms including full political rights for all citizens. By 1905 they had gathered sufficient strength to force the government to issue a constitution and a legislature called the Duma. Neither side, however, was satisfied. The Imperial government tried to take back what it had granted under duress and the opposition parties attempted to discredit the system as sham constitutionalism.
Only a small center was willing to work with the government and the government was not always willing to work with them.
$9.00 standard shipping within Australia
FREE standard shipping within Australia for orders over $100.00
Express & International shipping calculated at checkout
This title is printed to order. This book may have been self-published. If so, we cannot guarantee the quality of the content. In the main most books will have gone through the editing process however some may not. We therefore suggest that you be aware of this before ordering this book. If in doubt check either the author or publisher’s details as we are unable to accept any returns unless they are faulty. Please contact us if you have any questions.
As the central event of modern times, the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 remains a major focus of historical investigation and controversy. Unavoidably, the conception of the historical problems and the evidence presented are shaped by the historian’s view on both the desirability and the inevitability of the Bolshevik Revolution. The years 1890-1917 are particularly important as the crucible in which revolutionary forces developed. In the nineties, Finance Minister Sergei Witte laid the groundwork for a modern economy. While he achieved many of his economic goals, the stresses and strains of forced draft industrialization contributed to the revival of the revolutionary movement; political instability was their immediate effect. By the turn of the century the peasants were in open revolt, an alienated and militant urban proletariat was emerging, and a cohesive liberal opposition was beginning to develop. All these groups demanded fundamental reforms including full political rights for all citizens. By 1905 they had gathered sufficient strength to force the government to issue a constitution and a legislature called the Duma. Neither side, however, was satisfied. The Imperial government tried to take back what it had granted under duress and the opposition parties attempted to discredit the system as sham constitutionalism.
Only a small center was willing to work with the government and the government was not always willing to work with them.