Effects of a successful 1905 Russian revolution

Basically what the title says.

Now ignoring for a second how plausible a successful revolution is, what kind of effects can it have?
 
Basically what the title says.

Now ignoring for a second how plausible a successful revolution is, what kind of effects can it have?

The monarchy wouldn't go away overnight, the deposition of the Romanovs was harried enough in OTL 1917 and it's hard to see the SD's or SR's being powerful enough to remove the Imperial crown.

In addition, people sometimes forget that 1905 was more of a revolution than either of the ones in 1917, areas around the Volga basin had still not been subdued until 1908. Any successful revolt in 1905 would have to come about because of the military siding with a more progressive equivalent of the October Manifesto and more moderate factions such as the Kadets siding with the Revolutionaries proper.

We could assume therefore that at the height of the crisis, Nicholas II is assassinated in a similar way to his grandfather, leaving Alexis as infant Emperor and a regency led by Grand Duke Mikhail and the establishment of a semi-Constitutional monarchy on a similar structure to Wilhelmine Germany.

It's possible that without the direct meddling of reactionary advisors that a hypothetical Prime Minister Stoylpin would be able to start his land reforms earlier and with the corresponding development of a true rural economy. Russia would enter the next decade in a state of flux and perhaps with numerous uprisings, but so long as Russification ended, the rightist elements of the old revolutionary movements would perhaps move away from direct Marxism in a similar way to their comrades in Central Europe. Russia would therefore be on much firmer footing politically and economically during any future European War.
 
It could be argued that the revolution was successful IOTL; after-all the events of 1905 directly lead to the creation of the Duma and the multi-party system. So a more successful 1905 Russian Revolution would further that; a parliament that sits continually instead of being called by the Tsar, with some actual power and checks on the emperor, etc. Assuming WWI happens on schedule there's likely no 1917 Revolution, so Russia stays in the war and the German forces IOTL used in the Spring Offensive are stuck on the Eastern Front. Might lead to an earlier end of the war and even harsher terms for the Central Powers :eek:
 
It could be argued that the revolution was successful IOTL; after-all the events of 1905 directly lead to the creation of the Duma and the multi-party system. So a more successful 1905 Russian Revolution would further that; a parliament that sits continually instead of being called by the Tsar, with some actual power and checks on the emperor, etc. Assuming WWI happens on schedule there's likely no 1917 Revolution, so Russia stays in the war and the German forces IOTL used in the Spring Offensive are stuck on the Eastern Front. Might lead to an earlier end of the war and even harsher terms for the Central Powers :eek:

This is assuming the war even happens.

One of the reason the Germans were so eager to start it when they did was because the Russians planned to modernize their military around 1917. The German military expected that 1914 would be their last chance to knock the Russians down before the Russian military would be too modernized to deal with.

If the Russian military is modernized around 1914 then odds are highly likely that the Germans won't be so eager to encourage the Austrians to mess with Serbia. So you could end up butterflying away WW1 if only because the Germans know they can't win in the long run.
 
This is assuming the war even happens.

One of the reason the Germans were so eager to start it when they did was because the Russians planned to modernize their military around 1917. The German military expected that 1914 would be their last chance to knock the Russians down before the Russian military would be too modernized to deal with.

If the Russian military is modernized around 1914 then odds are highly likely that the Germans won't be so eager to encourage the Austrians to mess with Serbia. So you could end up butterflying away WW1 if only because the Germans know they can't win in the long run.

Or an earlier war; The Tangier Crisis, Agadir Crisis, or Bosnian Crisis could have spiraled out of control - particularly the latter. Either way though Russia is in many important ways in a stronger position than she was IOTL.
 
Or an earlier war; The Tangier Crisis, Agadir Crisis, or Bosnian Crisis could have spiraled out of control - particularly the latter. Either way though Russia is in many important ways in a stronger position than she was IOTL.

It's hard to see if Russia would be prepared to fight a war if the 1905 Revolution was formally successful, as I said, in OTL, peasants are still burning down estates right into the summer of 1908 and should Bosnia flare up during these periods, chances are that the majority of the Imperial Army is going to be too busy putting down revolts in Poland, the Black Earth Region and Ukraine to have the ability for power projection. Russia needed at least twenty years of modernisation to catch up to Germany in 1917, I doubt that social revolution will do much to increase the industrial base, Witte failed for just that reason.
 
Russia needed at least twenty years of modernisation to catch up to Germany in 1917, I doubt that social revolution will do much to increase the industrial base, Witte failed for just that reason.

That certainly didn't stop them from going to war in 1914 though.
 
That certainly didn't stop them from going to war in 1914 though.

Not at all, but it's likely that a constitutional Russian Duma is more likely to block going into a war any earlier than OTL's 1914. However, that would change if we assume that Black Hundred-esc groups gain prominence in government.
 
Not at all, but it's likely that a constitutional Russian Duma is more likely to block going into a war any earlier than OTL's 1914.

Citation?

The French, who were republican, and the British, who had a strong parliament, both went to war in 1914 even with independent legislatures.
 
Citation?

The French, who were republican, and the British, who had a strong parliament, both went to war in 1914 even with independent legislatures.

Both were liberal democracies who went to war on 'humanitarian' grounds (with regards to the British) or for nationalist reasons (in the case of France). Russia had a far more ambiguous relationship with the Triple Alliance, especially with regards to the Westerners and Slavophile factions. The issue would depend on where war broke out, if as in 1914 or 1908, the issue was over Serbia, was with Austria is a given. However, should the dispute be more connected with North Africa or the issue of naval supremacy in the North Sea, expect a more mooted Russian response.
 
Top