To what extent do the sources agree that Russian government policy on agriculture consistently failed and that peasants resisted it under both Tsarist and Communist rule?

Authors Avatar

Russia Coursework Assignment

Irrum Khan

972

To what extent do the sources agree that Russian government policy on agriculture consistently failed and that peasants resisted it under both Tsarist and Communist rule?

Source 1 acknowledges that the emancipation ‘conferred freedom on many millions of men, women and children’. Serfdom had prevented the industrial growth and introduction of modern agricultural methods. The abolition of Serfdom was in their mind the only method of preventing a peasant’s revolt. Source 1 however states that the majority of peasants were still ‘bound to their village communes’ after the emancipation, emphasising the failure of land policies that had been set up after the end of Serfdom. Source 1 states the peasants did resist because they felt that the policies did not suite their needs and because they had to pay money for their land, it can be argued that this demonstrates that the policies were a failure because they were designed so that the peasants could not afford the repayments anyway. The source also contains a negative tone with verbs such as ‘resented’ and ‘resisted’.

The peasant’s resistance was aroused during the emancipation due to unpopularity of the policies. This is mentioned in Source 1 and Source 2. In Source 1 Ronald Hingley states that ‘special community courts ordered the flogging of recalcitrant peasants’ and mentions that they were later sent to Siberian exile. The mere fact that community courts were necessary acknowledges that there were a large number of peasants that were resisting at the time. Source 2 also mentions a coherent peasant’s resistance clearly stating that they were ‘very hostile to the Law of 9 November’, to what extent is unclear but goes onto mention a collective feeling of ‘fear that their children will become paupers’. The reliability of the Source is put in question as it was accounted by a tsarist official who clearly could be biased and simply not agree with Stolypin’s radical ideas. Stolypin’s land law was however produced 40 years after the emancipation. This clearly demonstrates that policies made after the emancipation was not successful and were being amended years later.   The third part of the source illustrates that there is evidence that not all peasants resisted the policies and some did find benefits such as being released from taxes. Sergei Semenov concludes in Source 2 that a ‘bright new future lies ahead of the peasants’.

Join now!

Collectivisation began the real decline for peasantry. Stalin in Source 3 describes the collective farm policy as a ‘terrible struggle’ but affirms that it was ‘absolutely necessary for Russia’. This was only ‘necessary’ because policies including Lenin’s NEP had previously failed. Collectivisation was regarded as a failure, as was the agricultural productivity which made no obvious change despite Stalin’s claims in Source 3 that they had ‘vastly increased the food supply’ and ‘improved quality beyond all measures’. Stalin clearly blames the peasants for the problems with collective farming, ‘tractors were spoiled in a few months’ this is consistent with ...

This is a preview of the whole essay