Foreign policy of the autocracy. Internal politics of the autocracy Politics of the autocracy

Crisis of industrial production.

The industrial boom of the 1890s, which caused such a noticeable revival of production, somewhat weakened the intensity of the labor movement. In conditions when every day brought huge profits, it was often more profitable for entrepreneurs to “buy off” the workers, partially satisfying their demands, than to drag out this or that strike. It is at this time that workers achieve the greatest success in their economic struggle: for shorter working hours, higher wages etc.

However, having entered the stage of imperialism, Russian industry inevitably found itself subject to global fluctuations - ups, downs, depressions. In 1900-1903 Russia, along with other developed countries, is experiencing a severe crisis caused by overproduction. It began with a sharp drop in prices for basic types of products and led to an equally sharp reduction in production. In total, during the years of the crisis, about three thousand large and medium-sized enterprises were closed. The same industrialists who won this brutal struggle for survival begin a decisive attack on workers' rights, significantly increasing the level of exploitation. It is during the years of crisis, having lost many of its recent gains, that the proletariat revolutionizes; in his midst the influence of the Socialist Revolutionaries and Social Democrats is noticeably increasing; strikes are increasingly becoming political in nature.

Nicholas II, who ascended the throne in 1894, tried to follow the reactionary course of his father. However, not to mention the fact that he did not inherit Alexander III’s strong will and strong character, the socio-economic and political crisis that struck Russia at the beginning of the 20th century significantly complicated the problems facing the tsarist government. They could no longer be resolved through purely reactionary measures. As a result, new the tsar inevitably pursued a dual policy: in a number of cases Nicholas II had to maneuver, make concessions to the "spirit of the times".

Protection of "foundations".

The desire to rule the country according to his father's behests was most clearly manifested in the defense of the autocratic system. Having declared at the very beginning of his reign that any hopes for the introduction of a constitution in Russia are “meaningless dreams,” Nicholas II led a decisive struggle against the opponents of the autocracy. At the same time, while fighting against professional revolutionaries and suppressing mass uprisings of workers and peasants, the tsarist government also persecuted liberals who were trying to form a strong legal opposition to the ruling regime. Nicholas II supported the local nobility with all his might, in which he saw the only reliable support for the autocracy. This support was most clearly manifested in the ever-expanding activities of the Noble Bank: by the beginning of the 20th century. the amount of loans he issued to landowners on preferential terms exceeded 1 billion rubles. The same goal was pursued by other financial measures: a significant reduction in interest rates on loans to debtor landowners, the establishment of mutual aid funds for the nobility.

Nicholas II, who ascended the throne in 1894, tried to follow the reactionary course of his father. However, not to mention the fact that he did not inherit Alexander III’s strong will and strong character, the socio-economic and political crisis that struck Russia at the beginning of the 20th century significantly complicated the problems facing the tsarist government. They could no longer be resolved through purely reactionary measures. As a result, the new tsar inevitably pursued a dual policy: in a number of cases, Nicholas II had to maneuver and make concessions to the “spirit of the times.”

The desire to rule the country according to his father's behests was most clearly manifested in the defense of the autocratic system. Having declared at the very beginning of his reign that any hopes for introducing a constitution in Russia were “meaningless dreams,” Nicholas II waged a decisive struggle against opponents of the autocracy. At the same time, while fighting against professional revolutionaries and suppressing mass uprisings of workers and peasants, the tsarist government also persecuted liberals who were trying to form a strong legal opposition to the ruling regime. Nicholas II supported the local nobility with all his might, in whom he saw the only reliable support for the autocracy. This support was most clearly manifested in the ever-expanding activities of the Noble Bank: by the beginning of the 20th century. the amount of loans he issued to landowners on preferential terms exceeded 1 billion rubles. The same goal was pursued by other financial measures: a significant reduction in interest rates on loans to debtor landowners, the establishment of mutual aid funds for the nobility.

As for the bourgeoisie, here too the new tsar acted similarly to Alexander III. With any claims of this class to state power the autocracy fought uncompromisingly; in the economic sphere, she easily found a common language with him. State loans and tax breaks, a protective customs policy and the desire to capture new sources of raw materials and sales markets - in all these respects, the reign of Nicholas II fully met the interests of the Russian bourgeoisie. The continuity of the course was also emphasized by the fact that the Minister of Finance under Nicholas for a long time remained S.Yu. Witte, who took this post under his father. This one is bright statesman, closely associated with commercial and industrial circles, took a number of serious measures that contributed to the development of capitalist relations in Russia. The main one was the monetary reform: in 1897, a gold currency was introduced into circulation, which stabilized the ruble exchange rate and ensured sustainable profits for entrepreneurs. Witte was one of the main organizers of the construction of the Trans-Siberian railway, which contributed to the intensification of Russian policy in the Far East. On his initiative, Russia began economic penetration into Northern China.

A new approach to the peasant question is also associated with the name of Witte. According to Witte and his supporters, the Russian village needed a strong, enterprising owner. To do this, it was necessary to equalize the rights of the peasants with representatives of other segments of the population, and, first of all, it was necessary to destroy the community: to allow the peasants to leave it of their own free will, securing their plots as private property.

However, this point of view had serious opponents in the ruling spheres, grouped around the Minister of Internal Affairs V.K. Plehve. In their opinion, such transformations were harmful. This group expressed the interests of landowners of the old, serfdom, who benefited from an inert, impoverished existence Russian village; in the person of peasant owners, such landowners were afraid to meet dangerous competitors. Plehve and his supporters intended to solve the peasant question traditional methods: to preserve the class isolation of the peasants, artificially maintaining the community, and at the same time, in every possible way to strengthen administrative and police supervision over the village. By 1903, Plehve’s group won.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. The labor issue again became the focus of attention of the tsarist government. It was clear to the most far-sighted representatives of the authorities that the labor movement was turning into a terrible revolutionary force. At this time, the head of the Moscow security department, S.V. Zubatov, received some support from the top. From his point of view, strikes aimed at raising wages, reducing working hours, etc., are quite natural: they are generated by the natural desire of workers to improve their difficult situation. The main task Zubatov saw it as keeping the labor movement within the framework of this purely economic struggle, depriving it of a political orientation, and neutralizing the influence that the revolutionary intellectuals had on the proletariat. And for this, Zubatov believed, government officials needed to take control of the labor movement.

In 1901-1903 societies for “mutual benefit of workers” began to emerge in Moscow; teahouses opened - a kind of workers' clubs; In the Historical Museum, lectures were given to workers about the legal organizations of the Western European proletariat - mutual aid funds, cooperatives, trade unions, etc. The most important thing is that the Zubatov “societies” began to intervene in conflicts between workers and entrepreneurs.

All this brought the Zubatovites temporary popularity among Moscow workers. But the last word remains with the entrepreneurs. Their constant complaints about the interference of the secret police in factory affairs were supported by the Minister of Finance Witte. In the end, the activities of the Zubatovites were officially limited to the purely ideological sphere - lectures and tea shops... After the workers became convinced that legal organizations were powerless to change their situation to For the best, they turned away from the Zubatians.

The difficult internal political situation in Russia in 1904-1905. further complicated by the war with Japan. At the end of the 19th century. this entire region and, above all, weak, decrepit China became the center of gravity for the economic and political claims of the great European powers, the USA, and Japan.

Russia is actively involved in this process. In 1896, it obtained the right to build the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER) in Northern China - Manchuria; in 1898, it received a lease of ice-free Port Arthur with the right to turn it into a naval base. All this inevitably aggravated Russia’s contradictions with rival powers, especially with Japan, a young, predatory imperialist state that sought to strengthen its position in Northern China. The fierce struggle for dominance in Korea and Manchuria led to the fact that on the night of January 26, 1904, Japan attacked the Russian squadron in Port Arthur without declaring war.

The war turned out to be a serious test for Russia; England and the United States, which considered Russia their most dangerous enemy in the Far East, openly provided Japan with generous military and economic assistance. Japan was technically superbly prepared for war. Japan also had a serious advantage in terms of command personnel, who acted very thoughtfully, decisively and energetically. Russian command, on the contrary, was characterized by passivity and lack of initiative; similar features, in particular, distinguished A.N. Kuropatkin, who was placed at the head of the Manchurian army. To this it should be added that the meaning and goals of the war were completely incomprehensible to both soldiers and officers.

Shortly after the war began, one of the Japanese armies laid siege to Port Arthur, and the other three began to actively act against the Russian Manchurian army, which was trying to lift this siege. Suffering defeat after defeat - the battle under Laoyang,- The Russian army retreated to the north. Port Arthur, meanwhile, offered heroic resistance: all attempts to capture the fortress by storm ended in failure. However, in November 1904, the Japanese managed to capture Mount Vysokaya, which dominated the fortress. After this, the head of the Kwantung fortification area, General A.M. Stessel, surrendered Port Arthur. In February 1905, another serious defeat - near Mukden - The Manchu army also suffered.

Military operations at sea developed just as bleakly for Russia. At the very beginning of the war, the commander of the Pacific squadron, a talented naval commander, Admiral S.O. Makarov, died on the battleship Petropavlovsk, which was blown up by a Japanese mine. The squadron found itself locked in a roadstead in Port Arthur; her attempt to break into Vladivostok ended in failure. In the autumn of 1904 from Baltic Sea First the 2nd Pacific Squadron, and then the 3rd, were sent to the rescue of Port Arthur. They arrived in the Far East only 5 months after the surrender of the fortress... The 2nd squadron was defeated in Tsushima Strait, and the 3rd, surrounded by the Japanese fleet, surrendered without a fight.

In 1905, peace negotiations began in the United States, in the city of Portsmouth. From the Russian side they were masterfully led by S.Yu. Witte, who achieved good results in this difficult situation. According to the Portsmouth Peace of 1905 Russia escaped with minimal territorial losses - the southern part of Sakhalin Island. In addition, she lost Port Arthur to the Japanese. Witte managed to get the Japanese side to waive demands for payment of war indemnity. But, despite the relatively successful results of the peace negotiations, the war with Japan played a serious role in destabilizing the internal political situation in the country. Both society and the people perceived it as a national disgrace.

Having ascended the throne in 1894, Tsar Nicholas II, in conducting domestic policy, chose the reactionary course of his father, Alexander III. However, the growing socio-economic crises and the intensification of national liberation movements during this period did not allow the tsar to use the methods that were effective during the reign of Alexander III.

Moreover, the new king did not have the rigidity and willpower that was inherent in his father, which also made it impossible to continue following the old course. The result was a dual domestic politics very often Nicholas II was forced to make significant liberal concessions, as required by new times.

Defense of autocratic foundations

Nicholas II was able to implement the desire to rule the state, according to the behests of his father, in the first period of his reign, directing a reactionary course towards strengthening the autocracy. Already in 1895, the tsar declared that the adoption of a new constitution was a waste of time, since the previous law had not yet lost its effectiveness.

It was this year that the period of tough struggle with opponents of the monarchy began. In addition to the revolutionary-minded masses and peasants who expressed their dissatisfaction with the imperial policies, the king saw subjects of persecution and liberals as hidden admirers of opposition forces.

The emperor considered the noble class to be the main support of the autocracy. So in 1897, Nicholas II issued a decree according to which representatives of noble families had the right to receive a loan from the Noble Bank without interest charges. During the year, the amount that was paid to the St. Petersburg aristocracy reached 1 billion rubles.

Autocracy and bourgeoisie

With the development of industry, in Russian Empire a new bourgeois class emerged. By the time Nicholas II ascended the throne, the bourgeois class had strengthened significantly and for the first time began to put forward claims to participate in public administration.

Fearing a seizure of power by wealthy entrepreneurs, the tsar severely limited the political opportunities of this class. At the same time, the government found a common language with the bourgeoisie on issues related to economic development.

Large entrepreneurs were provided with government benefits, new sources of raw materials, and interest-free lending. The interests of the Russian bourgeoisie were also defended by the famous statesman S. Witte, who took many measures to strengthen capitalist relations in the state.

On the initiative of S. Witte, a monetary reform was carried out in the state in 1897, thanks to which the ruble exchange rate stabilized. Also during this period, as part of economic reform, construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway began, which allowed Russian entrepreneurs to enter the Chinese market.

Peasant question

Since 1894, serious changes in policy regarding the peasantry began. Witte actively advocated equalizing peasant rights with representatives of other classes, introducing permission to freely leave the community and providing the opportunity for private land ownership.

However, such views did not find support in ruling circles. The most vehement opponent of such transformations was the Minister of Internal Affairs V. Plehve. Tsar Nicholas II also did not seek to change the historically established ways of peasant life. Despite Witte's efforts, by 1903 the peasant question was removed from the agenda without changes.

Nikolai II Alexandrovich Romanov. years of reign Under what circumstances did Nicholas II ascend the throne? Working with a document.p. 17 Leaflet from the archive: What senseless dreams is Nikolai talking about?

Autocracy and the people: The nobility is the support. Bourgeoisie - in financially influential, but has no political rights Peasants - a communal organization, maintaining a temporary position, the land issue has not been resolved. Workers - no rights, no labor legislation, the problem of strikes.

Vyacheslav Konstantinovich Pleve. Minister of Internal Affairs () Covered the country with a network of security departments, strengthening the role of their chiefs, giving them administrative rights. I tried to cope with the growing roar. movement as support for the organization S.V. Zubatov, and by intensifying repression, sending punitive expeditions against peasant protests, supporting Jewish pogroms, etc. He was one of those figures who convinced Nicholas II of the need for Russian Japanese war(“To hold the revolution, we need a small, victorious war”). He was killed by the Socialist Revolutionary E.S.Sozonov.S.V. Zubatova

Sergei Yulievich Witte. Minister of Finance. Minister of Railways (1892), Minister of Finance (), Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (190306), Chairman of the Council of Ministers (190506). He achieved the introduction of the “gold standard” in Russia (1897), promoted the influx of capital into Russia from abroad, and encouraged investment in railway construction (including the Great Siberian Road). Witte’s activities led to a sharp acceleration in the rate of industrial growth in the Russian Empire, for which he was nicknamed “the grandfather of Russian industrialization.” Opponent of the outbreak of war with Japan and the main negotiator at the conclusion of the Portsmouth Peace. The actual author of the manifesto of October 17, 1905, which envisaged the beginning of the transformation of Russia into a constitutional monarchy. By rank, actual Privy Councilor (1899). Since 1903 member of the State Council. Author of multi-volume memoirs.

"Zubatov's socialism." Sergey Vasilievich Zubatov. Attempt by the security department in take the labor movement under the tutelage of the government. The principles of the legal labor movement as presented by Zubatov: Creation of “Mutual Aid Societies for Mechanical Workers” Replacement of revolutionary teaching with evolutionary one, and therefore, denial, in contrast to revolutionaries, of all forms and types of violence. Preaching the advantages of an autocratic form of government in the region social relations, as a form, due to its extra-classical nature, containing the principle of arbitration, and therefore hostile to violent methods and prone to justice. An explanation of the difference between the revolutionary workers' movement, proceeding from socialist principles, and the professional one, based on the principles of the capitalist system: the first is occupied with the reform of all classes of society, and the second with its immediate interests. A firm understanding of the position that the boundaries of amateur activity end where the rights of power begin: going beyond this line was recognized as unacceptable self-will; everything must be directed to power and through power.

Foreign policy: “Great Asian program” of Nicholas II of including China in the sphere of interests of Russia “Bezobrazov clique” (Bezobrazov, Plehve and others advocated an aggressive foreign policy in the Far East “We need a small victorious war!”) Witte, Stolypin advocated economic cooperation with countries of Asia and the East (concession-CER lease of Port Arthur since 1898))

Foreign policy. Causes of the Russo-Japanese War: Russo-Japanese War. 1). The rapid strengthening of Russia in the Far East (in 1898 the Chinese Eastern Railway was built in Manchuria, the Trans-Siberian Railway was built through to Vladivostok, Russia built naval bases on the Liaodun Peninsula. Russia's position in Korea was strengthened) worried Japan, the USA and England. They began to push Japan to start a war against Russia in order to limit its influence in the region; 2). The tsarist government was striving for war with a seemingly weak and distant country - it needed a “small victorious war,” believed V.K. Plehve and others; 3). It was necessary to strengthen Russia's position in the international arena; 4). The desire of the Russian government to distract the people from revolutionary sentiments. The main result of the war was that, contrary to hopes that the “victorious war” would delay the revolution, it, according to S.Yu. Witte, brought her closer “by tens of years.”

To use presentation previews, create an account for yourself ( account) Google and log in: https://accounts.google.com

Slide captions:

Socio-economic development of the country at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries. A. National and social composition. B. Industry and banking system. Agriculture. 2. Domestic and foreign policy. A. Nicholas II and his political intentions. B. Autocracy and estates: nobility, bourgeoisie, peasantry, working class, Foreign policy: Russian-Japanese war,

Dominant elite -3% Middle strata - 8% Peasantry and Cossacks - 70% Proletarians - 18.5% and lumpen elements 0.5% Marginals. What is the difference between the concepts “social structure and social stratification”? Can we say that stratification existed in Russia?

Increase industrial enterprises 2 times. Industrialization. But in terms of production volume it ranks 5th in the world. Monopolization (cartels, syndicates, trusts and concerns) Formation of a financial oligarchy. Foreign capital in industry.

Community Peasants are isolated from capitalist relations. Development system.

The nobility is the support. The bourgeoisie is financially influential, but not politically. Peasants - land issue. Workers are the problem with strikes.

Attempt by the security department in 1901-1903. take over government custody

Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905

P.1,2 Definitions: modernization, monopoly, trust, syndicate, cartel, concern, Zubatovism, CER. Table “Russian-Japanese War. Date. Event.

On the topic: methodological developments, presentations and notes

A history lesson in 8th grade on the topic "General repetition: Russia in the first half of the 9th century", contains test tasks, historical problems...