• 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 ...

    Investment was made in new agricultural techniques with mixed success as Stalin realised that agriculture had to be used in order to boost industry, much like Stolypin before him. In contrast, under the Tsars peasants did not have access to such technology, however they were able to set their own

  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

    a landowner during the famine, as people struggled to make their rent. The reason why people struggled to pay their rent was because they did not actually receive pay/wages. After the famine what became known as 'Strong Farmers' emerged. This group of farmers were those who owned 15 or more

  2. How secure was the Tsars power up to 1904

    To secure his power, Alexander III reduced access to education so that enrolment in high schools fell and appointed 'land captains' in rural areas in 1889 with the power to whip and persecute the peasants for minor offences. This earned him bitter resentment from the peasants who felt that they were again being treated like serfs.

  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?

    In fact, they themselves talked more freely of it. Indeed, the number of local peasant riots had notably increased since the 1840?s. These peasant riots were used as argument for reform by independent persons like Koshelyov, Samarin, or the historian K.D.

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

    form of the Tsarist secret police, was created with the purpose to ?counter ? revolution and sabotage?, and its powers of arrest, detention and torture were unlimited. This is supported by Sheila Fitzpatrick, ?The Cheka became an organ of terror, dispensing summary justice such as executions?[7].

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