• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Stalin was more successful in modernising Russias economy than either the Tsars or Lenin between 1855-1956. How far is this a valid assessment?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Stalin was more successful in modernising Russia's economy than either the Tsars or Lenin between 1855-1956. " How far is this a valid assessment? Over the time period 1855-1956, Russia underwent hugely dramatic changes, in such a relatively short amount of time the country and its people was ruled by different groups and people, with different ideologies and stances and the economy, and more specifically industrialization. Although on the face of things, it is obviously apparent that Stalin was the most successful at achieving a " modernised economy ", the context of the situation he inherited and manipulated was unique, and this modernisation came at great cost. Stalin and Lenin both built on the structure that the Tsars created, although it was not nearly enough to stabilize Russia's economy, it was a start. Before explaining what impact each of these individuals had on the economy, it is important to understand the background of Russia's economy, both agricultural and industrial. ...read more.

Middle

Concerning industry, there was a low level of this also considering the size of Russia, because the majority of the working population lived rurally, urban factories and workers had only a limited amount of available work. In 1855, it is safe to say that Russia's economy needed a kick start; it was starting to become left behind and was being outranked by the other world powers. Tsar Alexander II 1855-1881, inherited the aforementioned situation, and it seems as though he was determined to make some sort of change. In 1861 he passed the Emancipation of the serfs, meaning that the vast majority of serfs, were granted freedom, allotted land, or were allowed to find work in the cities. It is estimated by 1864 some 50 million serfs had been granted " freedom". The reasons for this turnaround are varied, but most believe that Alexander II had finally realized that Russia's economy and industrial progress called for a free labour force. ...read more.

Conclusion

Although these numbers seem positive, considering the vast population and potential Russia had, these increases could have been much higher and are only just a start. Under Alexander II the state bank and ministry of finances in 1860 was established, giving the capital a strong position. Alexander III (1881-1894) took on a slightly less sympathetic position than his father, after Alexander II's assassination, his son believed that the only way forward for Russia was one through traditional autocratic ruling. One of his biggest shortcomings was the fact he emphasized hugely on industry and failed to utilize the potential of Russia's agriculture. Although this was negative, some advancement in industry was seen, such as the huge amount of railway development, namely the near completion of the vastly important trans-Siberian railway, and the production of coal doubled between 1892 and 1902. The policies of Sergei Witte had effects from this reign into that of Nicholas II. Investment from abroad and state subsidies to heavy industry all played a part in stabilizing the economy. However, the neglect of agriculture contributed to the 1891 famine. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Assess the view that Russias communist leaders did less than the Tsars to improve ...

    the Tsarist regime where the urban workers had virtually no access to medical care. Under Alexander II access to education initially improved, in particular through the university reforms and charter for secondary education introduced by Golovin, and improvements were also seen under Nicholas II and Lenin, following the restrictions emplaced under Alexander III.

  2. The Wannsee Conference was entirely responsible for the Holocaust. How valid is this assessment ...

    Feuchtwanger was an academic historian who studied History at the University of Southampton. As a secondary piece of literature it is very valid as Feuchtwanger's opinion as a structuralist is held in high esteem. The book specialises in Germany in the period 1916-1941, this shows that Feuchtwanger was primarily focused

  1. Impact of The Great Famine on Irelands Society, Economy and Politics

    acres of land, thus meaning they did not have to worry as much about survival, whereas farmers with less than 15 acres of land struggled. Before the famine labourers worked for free as a means of affording the rent on their property.

  2. How secure was the Tsars power up to 1904

    Furthermore he reduced the powers of the zemstva in 1890 in favour of increased landowner control over local government, exiled, hanged or imprisoned members of revolutionary groups (which weakened them for about ten years) and used the new secret police, the Okhrana, to spy on any group opposed to the Tsar.

  1. "The Wannsee Conference was entirely responsible for the Holocaust" How valid is this assessment ...

    Even though the Einsatzgruppen had taken a ruthless approach to the invasion of the Soviet Union it could still be added to brutalities of war, exempt from the Nazi party's official policy. Perhaps Wannsee can be seen as responsible for the beginning of the Holocaust.

  2. 'Alexander III was the most successful Tsar in the period 1855-1917'. How far do ...

    which drew attention away from the issue, very little was done subsequent to the war, in order to rectify the obvious issues with the army. Whilst the war did help to rally the population to the Tsar in support of the war effort for a short time, this very quickly

  1. What were the mains reasons for the emancipation of Serfs in Russia?

    So, there was a favorable environment despite the disagreement of land owners. It is possible to see that there was a favorable environment for the emancipation because, during the last years before the edict of emancipation, the conscious desire of the serfs themselves for liberation had grown stronger.

  2. How far could the fall of the Tsars be considered the most significant turning ...

    This weakness in the government can be seen when Nicholas decided to take direct command of Russia?s armed forces in 1915, leaving his wife Alexandra in charge, which led to the greater political influence of Rasputin. It can be seen from the historian Alex De Jonge that Rasputin?s power was

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work