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

Trotsky described war as the 'locomotive of history'. Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 to 1964 was caused only by involvement in wars?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Trotsky described war as the 'locomotive of history'. Can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855 to 1964 was caused only by involvement in wars? The 1855-1964 period saw a series of major changes within Russia. Most of these, such as, the assassination of Alexander II, the revolutions of 1905 and 1917, Witte's Great Spurt, emancipation and Russia's continuing desire to industrialise can all trace their roots back to involvement in war. Russia was repeatedly involved in wars in the 1855-1964 period which repeatedly showed the backwardness and poor state of the country. Even when successful, the Cold War increased Stalin's paranoia and led to heavy spending and a restraint on change under Khrushchev. War was the integral factor in Russian development throughout the period, but it was the only cause for change. When considering if change in Russia was solely down to involvement in war, there is considerable continuity in the fact that most wars Russia fought in the 1855-1964 period were bad defeats that showed Russia's backwardness and the need for change. War highlights existing problems and further emphasises the need for change, widespread reforms were commonplace in the anticipation and aftermath of war throughout the Tsarist period. ...read more.

Middle

The Civil War had also led to Lenin conceding defeat, as Nicholas II had done previously in drafting the October Manifesto, by abandoning war communism for NEP. Stalin's fear of a future German invasion was also key to the speed in which the 5 year plans were implemented. There is considerable change here when compared with other wars, because Russia was victorious in the Great Patriotic war and became a global superpower, whereas previous defeats had merely highlighted existing problems and aggravated opponents in the process. War had a vast impact on Russia in the 1855-1964 period, and involvement in wars had a significant impact on the development of the Russian state. Throughout the period, the Tsarist and Communist regimes shared a common goal, to industrialise. This shared aim was set about in different ways - Stolypin and Stalin in particular had seen the need to boost agriculture in order to support heavy industrialisation, whereas the policies of Witte and Lenin were less focused on this issue. Whereas Stalin's main motivation could be traced back to war, Stolypin and Witte appeared to have more concern for the masses when implementing their policy. ...read more.

Conclusion

The Cheka heavily intensified aspects of repression seen under the 3rd section and Okhrana, and the KGB would continue to do so. Concessions brought about by the rulers as a result of war were also met with repression, such as Stolypin's necktie and in particular the unprecedented terror seen under Stalin, who believed that ''death is the answer to all problems''. The success of opponents was in part due to war, as best demonstrated by the February and October revolutions, however well timed reforms, shown by war to be badly needed, limited their effectiveness. Repression was used to rulers to keep their grip on power and maintain autocracy, not because of war. War was the integral factor in Russian development throughout the period. The First World War in particular brought about a complete shift in ideology and the creation of the world's first communist state, but also paved the way for the fast industrialisation of Russia and a shift in focus from agriculture to industry. War had repeatedly shown Russia as a backward, weak nation however victory in 1945 had established Russia as a global superpower. Despite its obvious importance, war was not the only locomotive of change within Russia during the 1855-1964 period. Change in Russia was not solely down to involvement in wars. ...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)

    Even though Lenin and Stalin were very similar in some of their beliefs such as the belief in a monopolistic party, a strong state, the need for dramatic transformations within society13 to make Russia a socialist state. However unlike Lenin, Stalin did not believe that the communist movement should spread into the West outside the USSR.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Assess the view that the lives of the peasants in Russia did not improve ...

    4 star(s)

    In much the same way as the peasantry had been poorly treated under the Land Captains and the Mir, discipline was also severe. Lenin's NEP outlined a tax in kind where a percentage of production was taken, in contrast to the requisitioning of Stalin who forced through Lenin's collectivisation model.

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the ...

    4 star(s)

    wanted to wait until a new government was elected in six months time. The people didn't want to wait that long. They looked for an alternative and found it in the form of the Bolsheviks. While the Provisional Government weren't making any changes, the Bolsheviks had a clear plan of what they wanted to change and do.

  2. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    Why did famine break out in 1932? * Grain production fell because peasants saw no reason to produce for the state. Kulaks destroyed their grain rather than hand it over. * What grain that was produced was collected for the towns and export. In the Ukraine especially - the main grain producing area of the Soviet Union - there was a great famine in 1932-34.

  1. Free essay

    Was Stalin the most successful ruler of Russia in the period 1855-1956? Explain with ...

    Therefore, in conclusion, it must be Stalin who was the greatest leader in this respect. He maintained power and stayed in power for the longest out of all of the leaders. Additionally, his rule ended when he died in bed, whereas all other leaders were either killed or removed from office.

  2. Why did the rulers of Russia so often resort to repression in the period ...

    To disprove this, both resorted to violent repressive tactics. Repression under Lenin was more calculated - he talked of the 'coercion' needed for the 'transition from capitalism to communism'. Both governments were autocratic and wished to impose extreme ideologies and therefore required total support which they believed was only achievable by quashing any opposition.

  1. Compare and Contrast the February and October Revolutions in Russia.

    It has the same ideology as communism and the same beliefs as Communism has. Due to this, it was only a matter of time until the Bolsheviks changed its party name from Bolsheviks to Communist Party of Russia. Under this name, the Communist Party set up the world?s first socialist state in Russia.

  2. How far did government policies change towards agriculture in Russia in the period 1856-1964? ...

    as one.[13] The concept of a ?Kulak? class as Stalin meant it, has been proven by scholars to be a myth[14]; simply they had proven to be more productive farmers. Nevertheless, it proved Stalin with an excuse to coerce the peasantry as a whole ? middling and poor peasants as

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