Preventing the rise of Communism MKII

[Crossroads Inc.]

Ok, after my last disastrous attempt in here, I have licked my wounds, taken my time, reconsidered things and, with the help of "Temujin" put together a new scenario that we both hope meets the standards of the History forum.

On 13 March 1881, Tsar Alexander II was assassinated by the revolutionary movement the People’s Will. The initial attack, a bomb hurled at his bulletproof coach, killed the driver and injured guards. Unharmed, Alexander II, concerned for those outside, stepped out of the coach against the protestations of his personal guard. Another assassin threw a second bomb, mortally wounding Alexander II.

Ignoring the who, what, where, and how; let us assume that for whatever reason Alexander either avoided or survived this attack. How might this have changed Russian history? At this time, Imperial Russia had been generally dominated by conservative authoritarian principles. Yet Alexander, partially due to his education, had developed a more liberal, humanist outlook, and in light of coming to power during the Crimea War, had realized the degree of Russia’s backwardness. As a result, Alexander II worked to implement a series of reforms and modernization in an attempt to bring Russia into line with the more advanced Western countries of Europe.

Major Reforms:

Improvement of communication via railway lines – from 600 miles (965 km) to 14,000 miles (22,525 km). Resulted in improved economic conditions for rural areas as well.

Military reforms under Dmitry Milyutin:
• Improvement of military schools
• The Army Statute of 1874: Introduced conscription for the first time, making young men of all classes liable to military service.

The Emancipation Act of February 19, 1861, which led to the abolition of serfdom, despite bitter opposition from landowning interests.
• Pros: Serfs were given modest allotments of land, and it had a great psychological effect.
• Cons: The reform failed in creating an “economically viable class of peasant” and “helped to undermine the already shaken economic foundations of Russia’s landowning class.”

Judicial Statute of 1864:
• Improved and modernized Russia’s judicial system to be comparable with Western nations (modeled somewhat on France’s).
• Established the zemstvos, elective local assemblies that:
o Extended the area of self-government.
o Improved local welfare (education, hygiene, medical care, local crafts, agronomy).
o Helped increase rural literacy.

Other Political/Religious Reforms:
• Release of political prisoners
• Return of Siberian exiles
• Relaxing of disabilities on religious minorities
• Lifting of restrictions on foreign travel
• Relaxing of Russian rule in Poland
• Abolishment of medieval punishments

Overall, the reforms modernized Russia, ended feudalism, reduced class privileges, and spared economic development. While piecemeal, it was extensive.

Despite this, Alexander II was still a firm supporter of the traditional autocratic system and generally against a constitutional or representative government. Increased political unrest in Poland and radical movements in Russia strengthened these conservative views.

However, the so-called Loris-Melikov Constitution, an ukaz that he signed on the day of his death, created a number of consultative commissions that might have been transformed eventually into a representative assembly and constitutional Monarchy. Coupled with additional plans for industrialization and increase reforms for the serfs, it might have kept the rise of Communism from happening at all.

However even with Alexander II living longer, upon his death current history has him succeeded by his son Alexander III, who in a nutshell was an extreme conservative autocrat, opponent of liberalism and representative government, and supporter of orthodoxy, autocracy, and narodnost (belief in the Russian people / Russian nationalism).

With the initial layout, how could one keep the reforms of Alexander II and/or prevent Alexander III from taking the throne and undoing his father’s work. Following that how might these events work to undo the rise of the Communist party and the eventual October revolution and over-through of the Czars?

Hopefully this passes a bit more then my initial attempt, as well as being more acceptable grammatically.

[That NOS Guy]

I think this is somewhat off-base. Being an advanced industrial state did not prevent the Communists from attempting to revolt and/or stay relevant in the politics in say Weimar Germany. The seizure of power by the Communists in Russia was as much directly related to the fact that things were an insane mess because of the aftershocks of World War I which allowed the window by which extremists such as the Bolsheviks could seize power, not because Russia was industirally backwards.

That said, the Bolsheviks willingness to allow the peasantry to keep the land they seized from the gentry, at least intially, played a big role in the Communist victory in the resulting Russian Civil War. It might help the white causes if land was more freely available to the peasants, but I am unsure if that would be enough to turn the balance.

[Temujin]

Well the point of the OP is more of a consideration as to what might have happened if Alexander II had lived longer, and hence was able to implement a greater number and degree of reforms. Would these additional changes have been enough to set Russia on a more constructive course, and hence create an environment less amenable to the Bolsheviks.

As an added consideration that I discussed with Crossroads, Alexander III was originally not in line to inherit the throne. His elder brother Nicholas, who passed away in 1865 at the age of 21 from cerebro-spinal meningitis was originally supposed to be Tsar. Unlike Alexander III, I couldn't find any information as to what his disposition was like or what his views were. If Nicholas had lived, and was more like his father, than even with Alexander II's death, the reforms might have continued rather than be pushed back.

Granted, this is a lot of speculation, and it may not be entirely appropriate for the History forum, thus a mod may want to move this to Off Topic.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Ah well, at least we tried Temujin. Thanks for all the help again, I guess its just a few interested in such 'what if' scenarios.

[Temujin]

Well your TR thread ain't doing bad; and at least one other person posted, unlike this Russian thread.

[Twigler]

I can't talk for others, but first of all I don't like these alternate history scenarios in the History forum.

Setting that aside it is a massively complex scenario and I think you focus too much on one person's role and ability control it. I can see plenty of ways where communism would have failed in Russia even with the Tsar acting as he historical acted.

Maybe to help narrow it down a bit, it might be worth investigating why communism didn't take over more countries in Europe. You can get some solid data there that says: communism failed in Germany because of A, B, and C with a side-serving of D, E, and F. Then look at Russia and see if those failure points were available there.