Notes

Using your own knowledge of historical context, assess how convincing the argument the argument in these extracts are in relation to the failure of opposition to Alexander II and Alexander III

Extract A suggests that the opposition groups were not fully functioning due to their being divisions and were too moderate in their operations. This is mostly convincing because as was weak as they had few in numbers. However, the revolutionary groups did grow rapidly. Under Alexander II this is shown when liberal Prince Lvov wanted to have a national assembly but wanted to reform Tsardom, not overthrow it as this would weaken his noble assets. Opposition being too moderated under Alexander III is demonstrated when Leo Tolstoy who was a liberal wrote a book called 'What I Believe' in 1883. This book was pleading for change and reforms but rejected a violent approach. The extract also writes that 'revolutionaries in 1870s' asked for 'peasant revolution but failed.' This is heavily convincing as its majorly supported by Alexander II IN 1874 arresting 1600 populists and Alexander III hanging people from the Peoples Will in 1881. However, there are limitations to this argument as the Peoples Will did actually assassinate Alexander II but this did not transform and end autocracy.
Furthermore, the extract writes that 'divisions existed among Marxixts' which is very convincing as only 1.1 percent of the population workers knew about Marxist ideas and agenda due to the slow industrialisation. Also, Deich who smuggled Marxist books into Russia was arrested in 1884. However, Marxists did have formal conferences in 1898 despite repression but there was only 9 delegates attending Thus making it a huge failure.

Extract B suggests that repression was not that effective and created opposition. This heavily lacks a convincing argument as repression upheld autocracy even though russification pushed some towards revolutionary groups. This is showed when Alexander II made opposition illegal in 1885-1894 with 647 riots about emancipation being instantly crushed with the army asked to stop the disputes 19 times. Alexander III in 1886 turned Poland into a 'Vistula Provinces' following an uprising and turned its governing as the same as Russia. Which would also reduce nationalist and radicalism as from 1876 all Ukrainian language was banned. However, russification did enhance opposition support as in 1881 5 million Jews were living in the pale of settlement and they were 4 times more likely to be in revolutionary groups than Russian Christians as they were blamed for Alexander II assassination. The extract writes that 'government pushed its citizens into opposition' which is not that convincing as the Third Section and the Okhrana did mass arrests of populists 1874 and crushed the Peoples will in 1876. In 1881 150 members of the populists were arrested or the assassination of Alexander II. The government did not tolerate opposition, it hugely suppressed it. Which proved successful as Alexander III died of natural causes. However, the 600 laws against the Jews in 1882 ans 1887 pushed people into the opposition as they suffered badly from attacks and were angry at the autocracy.
In addition, the extract also says that 'the zemstva openly employed radicals as teachers' which is not convincing at all as strict censorship was enforced from 1874 which restricted well known literature and education. This hugely limited opposition groups to spread their ideas.

Extract C implies that peasant suffering led to alienation by the end of Alexander III era and most of the population were against the regime. This is partially convincing as the moderate liberals did feel alienated after the land captains were introduced however peasants who were 80% of the population did remain loyal. This argument is supported as intellgentsia grew in the 1870 under Alexander II as nobles began to have a greater understanding of the state of the country and were angry at the tsar for suppressing the peasants.
However, the peasants weren't impressed with them as they were loyal and thought the police would find out and think they were being revolutionary so they often reported the populists to the police. By 1874 1600 populists died due to this. Additionally, emancipation reduced unrest with the peasants. The extract writes that 'famine attracted widespread liberal opposition' which is not that convincing as the opposition was not that huge and 'widespread' as the opposition was not much of a priority as people needed to secure a food supply. However, the famine provoked the first real peasant interest in opposition as the famines in 1878 and 1891 made them desperately hungry. Lastly, the extract writes that Alexander III 'widened the gap between the regime and the people' which is slightly true as Alexander III redid his fathers liberal reforms and made the country more conservative and traditional. For example, in 1881 the Okhranas powers were heavily extended with emergency powers being allowed which reduced Alexander II effort for a western democracy. However, Alexander did help the peasants with creating the 1883 liberal reform of a peasants land bank which would help them with their struggles of buying land and the 1883-6 abolition of the poll tax was favoured by peasants as in reduced village authority over them.