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

To What Extent Did Stalin Transform The Russian Economy from 1929-1940?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To What Extent Did Stalin Transform The Russian Economy from 1929-1940? Stalin attraction to the works of Karl Marx was what brought Stalin into the political world. He was in a seminary when he became interested in Marxism and this was frowned upon, and so he was expelled. This was where he joined the Bolshevik Party. During the time when the party split and speeches were being made, Stalin made one praising the present leader - Lenin, whose attention was caught. In 1917, Stalin became the Commissar of Nationalities meaning he was responsible for the ethic minority. Five years on, 1922, Stalin became the General Secretary of the Communist Party - this position was perfect for Stalin later on, as he came into knowledge about other members, which gave him a lot of favours. However just before Lenin's death, Lenin wrote a Testament, which had things about his party members and who would be ideal to be leader of Russia after his death. In this he was very critical of Stalin, which could have hindered Stalin's position in the party. Instead he used it to get rid of two of his opponents - Zinoviev and Kamenev. ...read more.

Middle

However this was only to get supporters for the battle for the top spot. Three years later, Stalin went against this policy and promoted rapid industrialisation. To start of this industry, Stalin started with the rural side of Russia. He started 'Collectivisation', which was where Stalin wanted to 'collect' all peasants' farms and make one big farm, which would work together to make more crops and grain. Stalin used 'kulaks' which is the term he used to describe the 'well-off' peasants. He used these 'kulaks' as propaganda for industrialisation, stating that it was there fault that there is famine and that the peasants have been reduced to this. A lot of peasants did not accept this and mayhem was among the rural side of Russia. People were sent to 'camps'. Many peasants burnt their crops and killed their livestock to stop the government from taking away what they owned. In the 1930's, there were 1/4 million people in 'collectivisation brigades'. The result of collectivisation was a complete disaster. Stalin did halt the process for a while because of the chaos, but then restarted it. He blamed the madness on the officials sent, stating they were "Dizzy with Success". ...read more.

Conclusion

Scrapping the NEP and bringing in Collectivisation did not agree with the people - it terms of its impact to the economy, it didn't help much at first, as people were burning crops and livestock and those unwilling to help were sent to labour camps - reducing the number of farm workers. Although after the chaos died down and famine eased in 1939, there was still not enough to feed the country and about 10-15 million peasants. Industrialisation furthered the economy. With the rapid increase in coal, etc, thanks to Stakhanovism, the economy ascended further. However, targets were made to look like they were achieved, but in fact they weren't. Of course, Stalin and the government were none the wiser. So in conclusion the extent Stalin transformed the Russian economy from 1929 to 1940, was a lot. Lenin changed it from the shambles it was made by from the Duma and Tsar, and Stalin improved the economy by introducing the 'Five Year Plan' even though targets were lied about, Russia's industry did make progress - the industry was more advance then it was 20 years or so ago. Industry plays a big part in getting money into the economy. Without Stalin putting his ideas into action, Russia could still be stuck in famine and probably only just beginning their industry progress. Amandeep Gill, 12IT, Mrs Yeomans 1 ...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. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent does Stalin deserve the title of Red Tsar when assessing his ...

    5 star(s)

    As anger in the provinces over wages, working conditions, long hours, forced collectivisation and the brutality of the NKVD, led to distress, Stalin crushed any unrest and able farmers, ruling strata and old intelligentsia were also removed. Although this distrust of the "masses" and strict government control was reminiscent of

  2. To what extent was Stalin responsible for the modernisation of Russia?

    This may suggest, therefore, that although Khrushchev had appropriate ideas, they were not executed properly. Stalin, however, was one of the most modernising leaders in agriculture. He had a desire to make agriculture more efficient through introducing machinery and making it more factory based.

  1. How far do you agree that the collectivisation of agriculture made an essential contribution ...

    Around 25-30% of all animals in USSR had died due to the peasants killing and eating them through protest. Stalin backtracked in 1930 as he feared if there was further peasant resistance it was likely to lead to the collapse of grain production.

  2. To what extent was equality achieved under Stalin?

    Lenin relentlessly tried to prevent this, but after his death the "Soviet republics in Asia were subjected to bureaucratic centralisation, chauvinist policies... and massive counterrevolutionary terror."6 The greatest impact of the shift of policy was put upon minority literature and the arts which are "perhaps the most important immediate factors

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

    The Famine however did accelerate the collapse of the language as those who died or emigrated in the famine were disproportionately Irish speakers, mainly because the famine hit rural areas hardest and that is where Irish had survived the longest.

  2. Did Lenin Transform Russia?

    This education included a strong component on communism. Civil war broke out immediately after Lenin took over government. The White Army and the Red Guards, which was renamed the Red Army under the commandership or leadership of Leon Trotsky, clashed.

  1. To What Extent Did Stalin Successfully Socialise Russian Society?

    Therefore whilst art was wholly reborn as a Soviet Socialist form of media it did not spark tremendous social change or belief in Socialism or Communism. However Stalin was able to change artist form and thinking to a highly Socialist demographic but he was unable to use this as a

  2. To What Extent Did Alexander II fundamentally transform Russia?

    Although tight censorship returned, judicial reforms led to a more educated public as the conduct of trials became known. Russia's previous judicial system was chaotic and cruel, and kept extremely secret from the public. It suited the maintenance of serfdom and was in line with Russia's autocratic government as the estate holder and was sole decider of the fate.

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