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

what was the situation in russia when bolsheviks came into power

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The civil war over, and the Bolsheviks had established rule. However, the soviet economy was in ruins by 1921 the transport system was on the edge of collapsing. Factories were unable to obtain material that they needed, and generally industrial enterprises had ceased production and on top of that there were additional issues that were increasing the burden. Radical changes were essentially needed to be made. Was this desperate situation the cause of the kind of state that had developed by 1924? Lenin was in crisis, and needed to take radical action towards the crisis he was seeing in 1921. Grain production had fallen, famine was rampant, and hundreds were dying from diseases. The peasantry was turning out to be a major threat to the communist party, erupting in a series of revolts engulfing the countryside. Not just in the countryside, in the cities the ''harsh' winter they were facing of 1920-21 brought repeated strikes, predominantly due to the bread ration cut in cities, including Moscow and Petrograd. This produced a problem for Lenin, as the strikers in Petrograd were supported by the sailors at the Kronstadt Naval base, who in 1921 mutinied against the Bolsheviks in the hope of starting ...read more.

Middle

this Faced with the problems of economic collapse and widespread rebellion the wartime policies were abandoned which Russian society no longer wanted to put up with, so made a radical turn around which soon became to be known as the New Economic policy. The radical turn around, abolished grain requisitioning, where now meant that peasants had to give fixed proportions to the state much less than what was taken by grain requisitioning. This enabled peasants to see any surpluses on the market. The NEP allowed small-scale businesses under private ownership to be re-opened, as Lenin realised that peasants would not sell their produce unless there were goods that they wanted on sale. Another feature of the NEP was the removal of the ban on private trade which allowed food and goods to pass more easily between the countryside and towns, thus, rationing was abolished. The policy, allowed the state to keep control of large-scale heavy industries like coal, steel and oil. In addition, it retained control of the transport system. The NEP was answering and implementing radical changes to the economic crisis, and the widespread rebellion. ...read more.

Conclusion

The communists also mounted a fierce attack on the church in 1922, orders were sent out to strip churches of their precious items, apparently to help famine victims, when really they believed the church to be a rival to the government's power. The policy changes of 1921 had a major impact on the development of the state by 1924. Despite the 1924 scissors crisis the NEP had helped Russia economically and resolved the widespread rebellion. The policy led to political repression, which strengthened control. Despite the clear view that the radical changes made were partly due to Lenin's desperation in the face of crisis, it did resolve the problems but to what extent. What type of state was left in 1924? Had the policies developed a centralised state, a totalitarian state, or a bureaucratic state, what was the end result? In my view the radical changes left a totalitarian state. Yes it could be argued that what had developed was bureaucratic or centralised due to the Nationalities issue, the GPU and the other issues. But looking at the final result of the policies, I believe the state was left in greater control, was left as a 'one party government' by 1924. ...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. Free essay

    Examine the impact of policy changes of 1921 on the development of the Soviet ...

    They won only 25% of the seats with 177 votes and the Socialist Revolutionaries huge 410 votes. Lenin simply forcibly closed the constituent assembly in which a Sovnarkom directive authorised this. The next day Lenin's response was ruthless, as he sent the Red Guards in and they dissolved the assembly with an "act of violence."

  2. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    * Most of European Russia was destroyed. Most of the advances of the 1930s were wiped out. What effects did the war have on Stalin? * During the war the Soviet people suffered terribly. This made Stalin determined that this should never happen again.

  1. Causes of show trials + purges of 1930s.

    should take power, with the slogan "All power to the Soviets" and who believed in immediate peace not the defensive war of the Mensheviks and SRs.The Bolsheviks, under Lenin, did not believe that dual power was a workable option like the other socialist parties did with their 'bourgeois revolution' theory.

  2. The enormous role that Trotsky played in the success of the Bolsheviks up until ...

    By doing this he could make the public associate him with Lenin who was a great leader and admired. Not only did Trotsky's naivety as to Stalin's cunning count against him, but his appearance and background surprisingly also did. Trotsky was Jew and looked like one, with anti Semitism still very much alive in Russia this counted against Trotsky greatly.

  1. Soviet State

    Party officials reacted quickly, and pressure on the peasants was eased, but not diminished. * The results of collectivisation: A HUMAN AND ECONOMIC DISASTER FOR THE PEASANTRY - For the majority of the peasants and for the economy as a whole, collectivisation was a disaster.

  2. The Impact of Stalins Leadership in the USSR, 1924 1941. Extensive notes

    It was not efficient enough. Some of the written propaganda did not reach those illiterate peasants. 2. People were not brainwashed into accepting the party line. There were individuals who might conform physically, but not mentally. How much power did Stalin really have? It?s possible to argue that Stalin could not run everything personally and could not know everything that happened.

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