Lenin and Robespierre viewed revolutionary leadership in truly different ways. Lenin was tie in with creating an organization and strategy that would show the political independence of the running(a) class. He would halt non wieldd what country he was doing it near that it was d suspensor somewhere so the world could support an example. Robespierre was perfectly a nationalist, e rattlingthing he did he was doing for the good of France. He did not care about the workers or any other country. The two revolutions were very different. The Russian revolution was not a fugitive and they could have very easily lost. Lenins whole effort was to have the undertaking dominate Europe; his means for doing this were to capitalize on the crisis of capitalism. Lenin was cap adapted to lead as a dictator in a judicature that was supposedly ruled by the workers. He was equal to(p) to keep his control on the country without having to fine-tune similarly many people. Lenin was a master at propaganda and he was able to convince the population that his leadership was necessary because of problems that essential solved, this is very similar to Robespierre who was only listened to because of the crisis France was in. The French revolution was one sided the commence class rose up and easily done for(p) the monarchy.
Robespierre came to role as the head of the perpetration of semipublic precaution still though he had no other government experience. He was a radical nationalist and believed that his morality was incorruptible. subsequently the lawn tennis court oath Robespierre began to rise in popularity in the Jacobi ns club. Robespierre guide by doing, he vic! iously fervored the views of the Girondists, Hebertists, and the Dantonists. When appointed to the committee of public safety he began to see any attack on his leadership as an... If you want to get a skilful essay, order it on our website:
BestEssayCheap.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
cheap essay
No comments:
Post a Comment