What needs to happen in Russia in 1905 to avoid revolution in 1917?

Was it already inevitable? Would WWI have brought down the Tsar regardless? If not, what reforms, however gargantuan, should Nicholas and his ministers have instituted post the attempted Revolution of 1905 to avoid the eventual revolution?
 
Was it already inevitable? Would WWI have brought down the Tsar regardless? If not, what reforms, however gargantuan, should Nicholas and his ministers have instituted post the attempted Revolution of 1905 to avoid the eventual revolution?


a real duma with actual say in the government and their ability to listen and allow them to deal with the nations problems.

If Niki didn't like what the Duma was doing he would just dismiss them.. not very conducive to what the people wanted.

i would also say that if the Tsar showed more sympathy to his people with real reform projects such as mandating literacy and education, increased industrialization and bringing the empire into the 20th century then yes.. he just might have avoided the bullet ...

alas the best thing he could have done is stepped down in favor of Mikal or jimbo the pet chimp.. Niki was really not cut out to be Emperor. He was to reactionary and unwillingness to budge in his beliefs that only father knows best and any other ideas are not exactly welcomed in a time that called for extraordinary forward thinking.

Avoid WW1?
the Russians did not start WW1 .. that was the Austrians and the Serbians.. followed by the Germans, Russians and the French .. then the British..

If you have a stronger more forward thinking Russia then you will change things up to 1914. maybe shift some alliances around if the big bear is throwing its weight around in the balkans or in the Crimea-Armenia region.
 
Okay. In my view, there are only two things that can keep Imperial Russia alive: keep Stolypin from being assassinated and, at the same time, have Nicky II get killed (in the same event that OTL killed Stolypin). This'll give Stolypin an essentially free hand to do whatever he wants under the cover of destroying the "enemies of the state" that killed Nicky.
 
If the Duma was given real power with universal suffrage, maybe that could save the Russian regime. However, the 1917 revolutions weren't inevitable at that date, fighting the First World War lead to them directly, with millions of Russian soliders dying on the Eastern Front, and with Petrograd and Moscow only receiving a third of their pre-war food supplies. Nicholas assuming supreme command of the Russian forces didn't do him any favours either, as any setbacks suffered during the war would be blamed on him, and that's how it turned out.
 
Okay. In my view, there are only two things that can keep Imperial Russia alive: keep Stolypin from being assassinated and, at the same time, have Nicky II get killed (in the same event that OTL killed Stolypin). This'll give Stolypin an essentially free hand to do whatever he wants under the cover of destroying the "enemies of the state" that killed Nicky.

problem is the Autocratic lack of forward thinking state is what was just as much an enemy of the state as any socialists of the time. and Stolypin was considered as such, after all he was the prime minister.. until his death in 1911.. which would give 3 and some change years for reform?

I mean come on .. would have liked to be a worker or peasant in Russia in 1905? would your belief in your industrious leaders infailabilty in light of the Russo-Japanese war helped? the appalling conditions of the people had obviously reached a breaking point.

How could the people trust a government as such?

lol wikipedia

In a TV poll to select 'the greatest Russian' in 2008, Stolypin placed second. Alexander Nevsky was first; Joseph Stalin came third.[11]
 
Last edited:
If the Duma was given real power with universal suffrage, maybe that could save the Russian regime. However, the 1917 revolutions weren't inevitable at that date, fighting the First World War lead to them directly, with millions of Russian soliders dying on the Eastern Front, and with Petrograd and Moscow only receiving a third of their pre-war food supplies. Nicholas assuming supreme command of the Russian forces didn't do him any favours either, as any setbacks suffered during the war would be blamed on him, and that's how it turned out.
A Duma with real power or at least a Tsar more inclined to listen to it is definitely a pre-requisite. Universal suffrage may prove more destabilising however. You'd need Stolypin's agricultural reforms to work in creating a large class of conservative peasant farmers in the countryside, and a substantial urban middle class, before you think about extending the franchise.
 
... have Nicky II get killed...


This.

With the Short Bus Tsar on the throne, any attempts at any reforms by anyone are going to fail. Either actively or passively, Nicholas will personally thwart reform, support those factions which wish to thwart reform, or act as a rallying point for any reaction against reform.

The more I read about Nicholas the more I'm struck by how profoundly stupid and how poorly educated the man was. When Kaiser Bill, who wasn't a paragon of mental stability either, wrote that Nicholas wasn't fit to live in a country house and grow turnips he wasn't overstating the problem.
 
This covers it entirely.

hard to avoid WW1 when you're tied to France and Britain by treaties and your national pride is tied to the other oppressed slavic peoples of southeast Europe. If nothing else changes and the only ticket is avoid WW 1 then they are screwed.. since avoiding the war alone is not going to cut it.

actually let me rephrase some of that.. Yes you may/will avoid the revolution in '17 if Russia stays nuteral.. but then you are pissing off France and England and the Balkans... and just guaranteed a Central Powers victory. but that doesnt mean that you will avoid the next one in the '20's or when the CP decide to turn east after defeating the West..

The Tsardom was falling apart and not much was going to stop it. come depression it all over. it was a sickly moribund state that was stuck in the early 1830's and is only glorified since the alternative wasn't a puppet to the west and was actually more ruthless then the Tsar.
 

Deleted member 1487

hard to avoid WW1 when you're tied to France and Britain by treaties and your national pride is tied to the other oppressed slavic peoples of southeast Europe. If nothing else changes and the only ticket is avoid WW 1 then they are screwed.. since avoiding the war alone is not going to cut it.

actually let me rephrase some of that.. Yes you may/will avoid the revolution in '17 if Russia stays nuteral.. but then you are pissing off France and England and the Balkans... and just guaranteed a Central Powers victory. but that doesnt mean that you will avoid the next one in the '20's or when the CP decide to turn east after defeating the West..

The Tsardom was falling apart and not much was going to stop it. come depression it all over. it was a sickly moribund state that was stuck in the early 1830's and is only glorified since the alternative wasn't a puppet to the west and was actually more ruthless then the Tsar.

There wouldn't be a war in the West without Russia making an issue of defending Serbia. If Russia cuts ties and takes the domestic hit for it, Serbia is crushed and the world moves on. In 1917 AH slips into civil war over the Ausgleich issue (most likely), which might see a war start then as everyone dog-piles on to get a piece of the spoils.
 
There wouldn't be a war in the West without Russia making an issue of defending Serbia. If Russia cuts ties and takes the domestic hit for it, Serbia is crushed and the world moves on. In 1917 AH slips into civil war over the Ausgleich issue (most likely), which might see a war start then as everyone dog-piles on to get a piece of the spoils.


I dont see Russia backing out of that though.. loosing face amongst its slav brothers would be detrimental to its image as the protector of the slavs.. This is Nicholas II we are talking about after all.. the man was stubborn, single minded and at best inept for his station.

I will take the it was basically inevitable for the events of 1914 once in motion to have turned out any other way due to national pride and revenge issues. The Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia basically guarantees Russian involvement and if that doesn't then the French itching for 1870 the sequel will get them involved. it will be a much different played out WW I but the same players minus Italy who may stay CP in this one.

the over reaching problem being that too many powers have too many claims against each other or at least against (Germany and Austria-Hungry and of course the Russians wanting to dismantle the remainder of the Ottoman Empire) for this to blow over.

It was the perfect storm time, Everyone felt it best to have the war then before the other side was too strong. hence why Balkan war I - II -III - III.5 - III.6 - addnausiem never flared up or Morocco or other events.

Britian not wanting competition on the high seas

france - alsac lorraine - still really kinda irked from 1870

Austria-Hungry - Serbia must die

Germany - hey what can i steal from Russian Poland or can i kick france in the face again?

Russia - hey we are the Russians.. must look strong or they will think WE are the sick man of Europe and we have to protect our fellow slavs..

Ottoman Empire: hey we are not as sick as you think we are!

Italy: iny miny mini moe.. catch an ally by the toe..

USA: i want in!.. just dont want to look to aggressive and dont want to actually get my hands dirty!

Japan: whoo hoo! spoils of war and no one is on this side of the globe!

see what i mean..
 

Deleted member 1487

I dont see Russia backing out of that though.. loosing face amongst its slav brothers would be detrimental to its image as the protector of the slavs.. This is Nicholas II we are talking about after all.. the man was stubborn, single minded and at best inept for his station.
I never said he would back down, I was just correcting the scenario you presented IF he backed down. In reality there is no way that the GOVERNMENT would back down, as OTL Nicky didn't want mobilization, but was pressured into it by his military/government.

I will take the it was basically inevitable for the events of 1914 once in motion to have turned out any other way due to national pride and revenge issues. The Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia basically guarantees Russian involvement and if that doesn't then the French itching for 1870 the sequel will get them involved. it will be a much different played out WW I but the same players minus Italy who may stay CP in this one.

the over reaching problem being that too many powers have too many claims against each other or at least against (Germany and Austria-Hungry and of course the Russians wanting to dismantle the remainder of the Ottoman Empire) for this to blow over.

Italy will never stay CP, because they hedged their bets so much, that the only way they could declare war on France is if the French suddenly and without provocation invaded Germany, an event that was virtually ASB.

Much of the 'claims' issue is overblown, but in the East everyone had interests contrary to one another (including Germany and AH).

It was the perfect storm time, Everyone felt it best to have the war then before the other side was too strong. hence why Balkan war I - II -III - III.5 - III.6 - addnausiem never flared up or Morocco or other events.
Not exactly...

Britian not wanting competition on the high seas
The naval race ended in 1912 when Germany stopped building as many ships. The British were more worried about German economic competition and the fact that OTL the Germans were trying to invade everyone and become the continental hegemon, which no one was willing to tolerate. Otherwise the Brits would not have gone to war.

france - alsac lorraine - still really kinda irked from 1870
Not as much as you'd think. This is a really overblown point. France was more afraid of German economic competition and military power, especially if they decided they wanted French land or expand eastward. OTL they would have had MASSIVE civil unrest if they went to war without Germany attacking them first. In fact the army planned on instituting a military order over the civilian population and arrest thousands of 'troublemakers' that they thought might disrupt mobilization. When they were attacked OTL they didn't need to worry about that, much to their surprise. Now the French government was a different animal and the leadership may have thought about reclaiming Alsace and taking the Saar to humble Germany, but that was fantasy, not policy.

Austria-Hungry - Serbia must die
This also was more to sort out internal governmental problems and present a strong face in the Balkans to show that they were not the 'old man of Europe' despite the fact they were because of their terrible governing. In fact most of the AH leadership was relieved that FF was dead.

Germany - hey what can i steal from Russian Poland or can i kick france in the face again?
This is pretty much right, but with the caveat of "OMG they have us surrounded, let me knock out the weaker guy first!". Germany thought it was going to be blocked from any expansion once Russia got its military sorted out.

Russia - hey we are the Russians.. must look strong or they will think WE are the sick man of Europe and we have to protect our fellow slavs..
Its more of "hey let's head off revolution by looking strong in foreign policy!", much like AH actually.

Ottoman Empire: hey we are not as sick as you think we are!
A small cabal of 'reformers' signed a treaty with Germany after getting pissed off by British actions vis-a-vis their dreadnoughts. Not really about looking strong, more a stupid knee-jerk reaction to being humiliated yet again.

Italy: iny miny mini moe.. catch an ally by the toe..
Italy had been screwed out of treaty gains by AH and was pissed by the lack of rights her minorities had in AH. Yes they were opportunistic and sought unnoble gains, but they did have legitimate grievances against AH.

USA: i want in!.. just dont want to look to aggressive and dont want to actually get my hands dirty!
Again terrible characterization. More like "hey let's make some money and if that helps the less bad guys why not?". Then "hey our people are getting murdered on the high seas. We tried to play nice and end this thing and you guys try to have mexico invade us???". The US was really not at fault for entering the war when it did, but bungled the whole thing.

Japan: whoo hoo! spoils of war and no one is on this side of the globe!

see what i mean..
Yeah, that's about right.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Get rid of Nicky II. The reforms could have gone further without his meddling. Even better: look for an earlier PoD and get rid of that Reactionary retard Alex III.
 
hey at least we agreed on the last part! ;) basically what i was saying is that the war hawks were circling at the right time in history to bring it all together. in many of those cases that i implied .. the "LEADERS" were not really in charge of the situation, but there advisers and prime ministers and respective military's. but back to the topic on hand..

I stand by the idea that reforms of 1905 need to be real and substantial for no revolution in 1917. I dont see any other way out of WW1 otherwise. I would wager if real reforms took place, then Russia would have been and posed a much larger threat as to probably negate WW1 all together as the counter weight against the CP

Now i do agree that messed up AH needed to look strong and as such brought the whole deck of cards down in the balkans by being blinded fools and as such with the assistance of willies massive ego and the inaine need for Germany to want more and more of poland (what on gods green earth for i have no idea) all heck broke loose.. and at that point with russia the way it is in OTL and events playing out up to outbreak of the great European Imperial infighting war, well Imperial Russia is doomed..

Russia needed time to fade the memory and recover from 1905. There was no real reform in Russia, no real middle class, no real chance if you were not in inner circle to have much of a life beyond borsch and taxes. Hence why the alternative was so extreme when it showed up in the likes of Ulyanov and Trotsky. The people were tired of being treated like cattle, once the urban centers gave up .. well it was pretty much over.

<light bulb> ok.. here ya go.. just Have Karensky end the war in the west.. be done with it.. cut the cord.. declare a constitutional connvention and hope to stave off the others. then pray to get Grand Duke Micheal to take the crown.

guess that might not count as its still a revolution but if at the end of the day you get Micheal as the Tsar it might be just a hic up.. :D
 
Get rid of Nicky II.


Agreed.

Even better: look for an earlier PoD and get rid of that Reactionary retard Alex III.

Nicky was the retard. Alex, on the other hand, was deliberately evil and thus far far worse.

Nicky blocked reforms and tried to rule as an autocrat because he was too stupid to do anything else. Alex blocked reforms, rolled back other reforms, and ruled as an autocrat because he chose to.

There's a difference between a child who burns down your house while playing with matches and a man uses a flamethrower to burns down your house after he locked you and you family inside.
 
Agreed.



Nicky was the retard. Alex, on the other hand, was deliberately evil and thus far far worse.

Nicky blocked reforms and tried to rule as an autocrat because he was too stupid to do anything else. Alex blocked reforms, rolled back other reforms, and ruled as an autocrat because he chose to.

There's a difference between a child who burns down your house while playing with matches and a man uses a flamethrower to burns down your house after he locked you and you family inside.

you could have the 1881 plot fail.. though that is before the ops time frame.. but would probably be the best course for Russia ..
 

Deleted member 1487

]with the assistance of willies massive ego and the inaine need for Germany to want more and more of poland (what on gods green earth for i have no idea)
Not that I am aware of. In fact Germany didn't want any part of Eastern Europe before the war (except maybe the Baltic area), but definitely not Poland. They already had too many Poles and weren't interested in more.
During the war different feelings developed from the more insane warmongers. Read this for more:
http://www.amazon.com/War-Land-Eastern-Front-Occupation/dp/0521023904
 
Top