Answer: The comparison of Nicholas II and Vladimir Lenin
Explanation Both the leaders were hungry for power and came onto to become leaders by promising good for the people but the similarity didn't catch one's eye but how different to each historical figure was has been highlighted many a time.
- Nicholas II was czar and hence being born into a royal family made him an obvious leader whereas Lenin gained prominence in the party and came into power thus.
- Lenin had the willingness to lead Russia used the Bolshevik party to do so, however the Tsar was happy to be with his family and pets and not a bit interested in leadership.
- Nicholas II and his entire family were assassinated whereas Lenin died of natural causes way later.
- Lenin was the more brutal of the two and used his power to get what he wanted even if it meant torturing or murdering. here Nicholas made some concessions.
- The military responsibility was on Nicholas II during his regime but when Lenin took over he would delegate it.
Finally, none of them actually cared for the poor, the oppressed were further in distress when these two came to power.
Fundamental reason for this was Russia’s under-developed economy, which was mostly agricultural – in fact until the mid-1800s it was almost entirely agrarian, with only minimal manufacturing or industry. <span> Government incentives of the late 1800s instigated a sharp increase in industrial investment and manufacturing; French investors, attracted by government deals, cheap labour and tax breaks, had eagerly pumped money into Russia to construct factories and new mines. But even with this, Russia still tailed its western European neighbours by a long stretch.</span>
Answer:
Cernan
Explanation:
i know dis because i learn dis in history today...
