Who were the major players in the Spanish Civil War and how did they affect its course and outcome? For the first time in Spain’s history, 1931 marked the year that changed the country into an orderly democratic republic. The exile of King Alfonso XIII in 1931 because of the loss in support from the Spanish people only highlighted that the monarchy was doomed. Therefore, the Second Spanish Republic ruled from 1931 until 1937 and was under the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera whose main aims was to modernize Spain through liberal, democratic means. Although, the development of change already faced opposition from right-winged supporters, including rich landowners who feared social changes that the Republic would try to implement.
They were also willing to give rights to the newly developed middle class. Their Leader, Lord Grey was an aristocrat who believed in practical reforms to pacify the angry radicals. A political problem was the death of King George IV was also a big factor. His death gave an encouragement to the pro reform as George had been primarily against reform, while his brother, William IV was more willing to help the cause of the reform. The death of a king also meant elections and in the November 1830 elections the pro reform candidates did well and their leader, Earl Grey became the P.M.
These reforms made a significant change to the government as a weakened sense of autocracy replaced the traditional span of control the Tsar ruled over, due to freedom of serfs which ultimately creates opposition. Further consequences of war faced by the government can be illustrated in the assassination of Alexander 2nd and the severe social unrest following the Russo-Japanese war. These protests are suggested to be the beginning point of the 1905 revolution. This caused extreme damage to the government as it questioned the strength of leadership and citizens became more and more critical, eventually leading to further reforms and the initiation of changing the way Russian government was formatted. However, it can be argued that
Part of Alexander III’s problem was the legacy left by his father who had begun reforms which raised expectations of major change within Russia. Other problems he faced were that Russia was economically underdeveloped, he had to keep the large multi-ethnic empire together and also the country was still recovering from the death of Alexander II. As a result Alexander III pursued a policy of counter-reform. Counter-reform was partly a reaction to the murder of Alexander II, but Alexander III also believed that his father’s ‘Great Reforms’ had been a mistake, weakening Tsarism and leaving it insecure. His policy was to undo the reforms as far as possible and he did this through a number of social and political changes.
The King used the India Bill as an excuse for a dramatic change in his government. In the beginning of Pitt’s rule, he governed a minority government. This was a great challenge for Pitt as he was young and inexperienced and facing the strong and experienced oppositions of Burke, Fox, North and Portland. However, we can see that with the King’s support, Pitt was able to gain more popularity amongst
This the King used as an excuse for a dramatic alteration in his government. In the beginning of Pitt’s rule, he governed a minority government. This was a great challenge for Pitt as he was young and inexperienced and facing the strong and experienced oppositions of Burke, Fox, North and Portland. However, we can see that with the King’s support, Pitt was able to gain more popularity amongst independent MPs. By March 1784, the majority had dramatically decreased and George III dissolved parliament and called a general election.
Chris Trujillo Mr. Robinson AP US History 10-3-2011 DBQ Essay: Alterations between Britain and America In the aftermath of the French and Indian War many relationships between Britain and the American colonies were changed drastically, especially in the areas of politics, economics, and ideology. The political side of Britain became more oppressive of the colonies, the economics in the colonies became much worse due to severe taxation, and Colonists developed and freer more united ideological ways. All of these issues between politics and economics caused the colonies to develop the “rebellious” and independent ideology they did. Because of the debt that Britain found itself in after the war, the British felt it appropriate that the colonists should help to repay the debt, due to Britain believing that they fought the war for the colonists with no assistance. The colonies however, felt that they fought the war side by side with the British, causing the two groups to have different political ideas.
How far were divisions among its opponents responsible for the survival of Tsarist rule in the years 1881-1905? Divisions among the Tsars opponents were important to the survival of Tsarist rule. However other elements also affected it, such as the belief in the Russian Orthodox Church and the belief that the Tsar was divinely appointed, poor communication across Russia this included the large the number of different languages and nationalities and the Cossacks which stayed loyal to the Tsar. The growing political opposition to the Tsar affected the stability of the Tsarist regime. Many Russian intellectuals were rising up against the Tsar; they believed that the regime was oppressive and that European countries had more freedom and felt that many Russians lacked basic freedoms seen in other European nations.
The Seven Years War also increased Britain’s empire in the colonies and therefore had more power and control of the governing of the colonies. These changes strained relations between the colonists and Britain because Britain felt dominating over the colonies while the colonies wanted to separate. Economically speaking, the Seven Year’s War had a huge impact on the colonists and Great Britain. The war convinced the colonists of their growing strength, but it left them weak in man power and in debt. Debt in England was greatly increased after the war, and British capital poured into the colonies.
This raises the question of whether the Reform Act rightly inherits the title, ‘Great’ at all. The Reform Act wasn’t the only factor in political development during this time however, other examples being the changes that had been happening to tax at the time, as well as uneasiness forming within the Tory party following Roman Catholic Emancipation, creating a major sense of distrust and betrayal between the Duke of Wellington and other Tory members. This heavy strain on the party was only to add to the troubles, as well as providing the public with a reason not to put their faith in the present government, also representing an opportunity or opposing Whigs to seize control of Parliament themselves. As you can see from these points alone, there are other things that prove themselves just as important as the Reform Act in bringing about political change. Likewise, the current condition of politics in this period (1780 – 1832) was becoming out-dated and intolerable for the public of the country to cope with.