There were some major similarities between the Tsars. They all believed in autocracy and that it was their divine right to rule. They all needed to repress, reform and keep support of the nobles. They needed to modernise Russia to prevent invasion from up and coming powers like Germany and they depended upon the army as a central control to stop riots like the Lena River gold miners, shot in 1912. But by 1914, the Tsars had lost support from the nobles, army, Petrograd was receiving one third of the grain it needed and other than the ‘Great Spurt’ industrialisation was very limited. The railway system had broken down and the number of workers had only increased by 0.4million, in a country with the population 165 million people.
Stalin was different to the Tsars, he was an atheist and justified his rule not by god but by Leninist-Marxism, claiming he was ruling in name of the proletariat until they could rule themselves. As Stalin rule continued he allowed fewer freedoms and unlike the Tsars he wanted to industrialise to prove communism worked. Although he most resembled Alexander III who was also a repressor, there are major differences. World War was not a failure for Stalin in fact it increased his support, he became the hero who defeated Germany and was compared to the Great Russian historical figures like ‘Ivan the Terrible.’ Stalin had greater central control and his power increased, due to the purges creating fear and by 1938 he had established a totalitarian rule. Whereas the Tsars concessions like the October Manifesto only weakened their central control, the Tsar was incompetent as Commander of the Army and by 1914 the elites felt that the Tsarist state was not worth fighting for.
Central controls were vital in an attempt to improve agriculture for both forms of government. The Tsars needed to improve agriculture in the hope to speed up industrialisation, to become a world power again whereas Stalin needed to prove to the world communism worked. Most of the Tsars policies failed and they did not manage to improve agriculture long term or industrialise. In 1913 the amount of grain produced was 90million tonnes; by 1916 it had decreased to 64million tonnes. This could be due to war but there were other factors. Alexander II emancipated serfdom to give the peasants the incentive to grow food. This was not successful due to the limited amount of land they received and having to pay redemption fees to the noble. The peasants actually lost their incentive, which was also the case for Stalin. Stalin’s collectivisation policy saw the reverse of emancipation of serfdom, the peasants practically became serfs again, forced to work for the state against their will. It also saw an end to the kulak farmers which ironically had been the Tsars most successful policy. For both of these reasons, grain produced also decreased from 73.3million tonnes in 1928 to 67.6million tonnes in 1934. Which was even less than the amount produced in 1913. Agriculture policies failed for Russia throughout both Tsarist and Communist rule. Hence the great need for Khrushchev to try to modernise agriculture. However, collectivisation was a success for state because it did appear communism worked, which had been Stalin’s main aim. He had managed to collectivise the country in four years and peasants were too scared of the NKVD to rebel. They scrutinised them in the Mechanical Tractor Stations but although peasants did not rebel, the peasants incentive disappeared which is why grain productivity had fallen in 1934.
A similar reason agriculture did not improve in Tsarist and Communist Russia was peasant conservatism. In Tsarist Russia the peasants had not wanted to use new farming methods and liked the security of the Mir which was why in 1914 the number of kulaks was limited and Stolypin had only managed to use his strip system on 10% of the land and under Stalin the peasants had refused new machinery, this meant agriculture could not progress for both governments and they had to focus on how to deal with the peasants rather than the actual policy itself. The peasants had no incentive to grow food, they received no reward and did not see the point in growing the food so that the NKVD could take it away. Another reason was both forms of government felt threatened by individuals which had power or in the case of the Tsars seemed radical. Nicholas II and his ministers distrusted Witte and Stolypin, two Russians trying to save the Tsarist Regime and Stalin instead of working with successful farmers (kulaks) felt threatened by them being able to charge high food prices and had them exiled or murdered.
Industrialisation differed in success for Stalin to the Tsars. The Tsars had not been successful. Witte had managed to build the Tran Siberian Railway but it was one way, incomplete and during war had broken down altogether. The number of factories had barely increased rising from 22,600 in 1908 to 24,900 in 1914. But Stalin had more success. In 1940 iron and steel production was greater for Russia than Great Britain, oil had increased by 27 million tonnes and hydro-electricity had been developed. The reason behind Stalin’s success and not the Tsars was in the late 1920’s Stalin inspired his workers. He had the use of modern technology such as cinemas and radios to promote a brand new Russia, a utopia for future generations. Then by 1932 workers were too scared not to work for the state. If they were even twenty minutes late they could be sent to a Labour camp, fear had become their motivator. This was different to the Tsars because they did not have such a strong central control system. They had no one to pay close attention to the peasants and the Tsar was hostile towards the middle class. It is usually the middle class who industrialise but the Tsar could not pay attention to their needs in case he upset the nobles. The nobles became bitter when the Duma was created and resented the power it had, they did not want to see the middle class get any richer. Stalin’s key supporters, party officials worked for him and not themselves.
The Tsars and Stalin both had key supporters. The Tsars were the nobles who were rewarded for being loyal with land and titles. Stalin’s were the party members who were also rewarded for loyalty but by better homes, jobs and schools. The major difference was the Tsars lost the support from the nobles whereas Stalin’s support grew stronger.
The two governments also had very different opposition which both tried to eradicate and failed to do so. The Tsars had political opposition and it was not just one Tsar who was defeated by them by actually two. Alexander II was assassinated in 1881 by the People’s Will. Alexander III then tried to get rid of opposition by strengthening the Okrana. The 1890’s saw a rise in political opposition due to the poor state of Russia. In 1905 Nicholas II tries to divert attention from domestic situations and starts the Russo-Japanese war, which Russia lose and the October Manifesto is a result of how bad the situation in Russia had become for the Tsar. This is an example of the Tsar losing central control as time continue rather than getting stronger. Duma deputies actually claim power once the Tsar falls which demonstrates how weak the Tsar had become. An institution the Tsar created seized power after him. Stalin does not have political opposition and considers anyone rebelling against his Totalitarian rule a traitor. A worker turning up late could be sent to a labour camp, if a company does not make its quota, the director is blamed of sabotage and arrested. In 1934 when the purges begin, Stalin appears paranoid. He encourages lower party members to denounce higher party members to the NKVD, so they then move up the rank. However, some historians argue, he planned the purges. They ensured no one stays high in power for to long and encourages the members to fight rather than unite. In 1937 Stalin removes all the army officers and replaces them with party members, this makes it inefficient but Stalin wants a loyal army. He also sends intellectuals off to Labour camps so that they cannot have idea’s spread and other Russians are too scared to share ideas. One major similarity between the two governments is that Stalin does not destroy his opposition either even though he has much tighter central controls and is much more brutal to his enemies. Stalin desperate attempt to destroy the church fails. In the late 1920’s he shuts down churches, makes marriage a civil ceremony, bans wedding rings, converts churches into anti-religious museums. But, in 1941 he asks the church to unite with him for the war and despite his attempts to make Russians atheists over half still support the church. Priests had survived and had been teaching underground. This illustrates that although opposition appeared weaker in Stalin’s Russia than the Tsars, the opposition were dead but that fear prevented Russians to speak freely about their beliefs.
The two forms of government did depend on a high degree of central control. However, Stalin used central control more than any of the Tsars due to his paranoia and to secure his dictatorship Jane Red Fern; “undeniably central to dynamics of Stalinism was Stalin’s paranoia of opposition that led to an emergence of organised terror.” Agriculture was also a failure for both forms of government. Neither forms of governments managed to give peasants an incentive and change their conservative views, Harold Stukman; “A minority achieved success as independent farmers, while the majority were unable to withstand rising taxes.” Brian Moynahal; “A quarter of cattle, sheep and goats, and a third of pigs were slaughtered in 1930 by peasants who were determined that they should not be given to the collective.” However, there were some major differences between the two forms of government. As time progressed the Tsars lost support from the nobles and power, after 1905 revolution Nicholas II had very little central control. But Stalin’s dictatorship increased in strength and by 1938, the purges had made Russian’s so fearful, they were willing to accept the totalitarian ruler instead of the democratic system which had originally been hoped for in the February 1917 revolution. Stalin had also used fear as a motivator for workers and managed to industrialise. Overall the most similarities occur between Alexander III and Stalin due to their repressive actions but although all the Tsars and Stalin depended on central control, it cannot be said that there were more similarities because of the power and support for Stalin’s when his reign ended compared to the weak Tsarist system which Russians felt was not worth saving.
Total Word Count 3247
