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

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

Extracts from this document...


To what extent was Stalin responsible for the modernisation of Russia? When Stalin came into power in 1924, Russia was fifty to one hundred years behind other westernised countries. To maintain their status as a super power, the whole country had to be modernised. It is debatable, however, whether the modernisation of Russia was solely due to Stalin or whether past leaders, whether it be the Tsars or the New Economic Policy introduced in 1921. This essay will be looking at whether the modernisation of Russia was exclusively due to Stalin or whether there were others that contributed. One of the main focuses that was modernised within Russia was the industry. It was the main factor that put Russia behind so many other countries. Stalin did a lot that modernised the industrial side to Russia. Production of all raw materials was increased. For example, the amount of electricity that was produced for Russia by Russia was up at least 5000 million kilowatts, coal was up by at least 35 million tons and steel production was up by at least 4 million tons. Therefore, Stalin must have done something that increased production on such a large scale. He had created genuine enthusiasm amongst young pioneers. ...read more.


This certainly was the first step towards modernisation as serfs were once again liberalised. However, the tsars wished to keep their autocratic leadership, therefore it was not exactly freedom. Serfs were given less land than they had before and it was often not enough to support their family, therefore, it begs the question as to how they could make the surplus food to improve the economy if they could not even support their family. Also, regardless of how free the serfs were in theory, the Mir placed restrictions on travel, therefore, things were not modernised. Before the landowners were in charge of the serfs, yet they no longer had the power, therefore, a new system was needed to govern the serfs. However, within the time needed to set up the new government, violence spread across the countryside. Russia ended up being more backward than it was before the emancipation. Stolypin also attempted to modernise the agricultural sector of Russia, however, his plans were not put into power as WWI began, and therefore all interest went into Russian industry. Lenin continued to try to modernise Russia's agricultural when he was in power under his policy of war communism. Russia was constantly suffering from famines due to peasants keeping excess grain and selling it for large amounts of money, as opposed to it being taken off them directly and being distributed centrally. ...read more.


Social sciences were dominated by Marxist ideology and many scholars that didn't approve were purged. Nevertheless, it must have been modernised as the number of children starting school rose dramatically. Stalin continued to contribute to the social liberalisation. Girls were given equal education opportunities with millions benefitting from literacy campaigns in his power. Again, however, this is not solely due to Stalin, as the literacy campaigns would not have been started without the original introduction by Lenin. Therefore, in conclusion, it cannot be said that the modernisation of Russia was solely due to Stalin. However, it is more suitable to say that different leaders were successful in modernising different things in Russia. For example, as previously shown, Stalin made the most difference to agriculture. Nevertheless, it is also noted that in many of these policies, the successes of modernisation are due to more than one leader. For example, Stalin would not have been able to make such a difference to the education system if Lenin had not come up with a similar idea previously. Additionally, Stalin would not have been able to make such a difference in agriculture if Alexander II had not already laid down the foundations for change. Therefore, this essay concludes that whilst it was mostly Stalin that finished modernising Russia, the process lasted a long time which had contributions of many leaders which additionally lay down the foundations for many of Stalin's future policies. ...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. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    * Stalin always liked to play the role of mediator in the early phase of the revolution. He would listen to their arguments and then propose a compromise solution. In this way he came to be seen as a moderate, so not a threat.

  2. How far were the socio-economic policies of Stalin aimed towards the modernisation of Soviet ...

    Many think that the purges from 1934 to 1938 were an attempt to gain leadership authority, Stalin executed countless members of foreign countries and of his own communist party, in what many think was an attempt to secure his leadership position.

  1. Joseph Stalin's Economic Plans. Stalin ended Lenin's NEP and set about achieving modernisation ...

    In 1931 a number of former Mensheviks were put on trial on charges that were obviously made up. However, the really terrifying period in Stalin's rules, known as the Purges, began in 1934 when Kirov, the leader of the Leningrad (the new name for Petrograd from 1924)

  2. To what extent was equality achieved under Stalin?

    In order to fulfil quotas, propaganda was used by the media to encourage ordinary people to criticise anyone from the party officials to the workers. This was almost too successful; there was a flood of denunciations for "dubious class origins, long-forgotten sins, and current misdeeds"52.

  1. How secure was the Tsars power up to 1904

    With the help of his ministers, the church and the army, who all helped to limit resistance to his rule, it is possible to list the ways in which Nicholas II secured his position as Csar: Most of the peasants were controlled by 'mirs' which were under land captains appointed by the Csar.

  2. Free essay

    To What Extent Was The Crimean War A Series Of Accidents? ...

    not thinking of extending to the south'".3 It is quite clear that certain individuals were suspicious of Russia, yet can that be said for the whole of Britain whose opinion can be examined as rather diverse of either anti-Russian or anti-Turkish feeling?

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

    Overall, the change between the Tsarist and Communist governments? policies towards agriculture during 1856-1964 was in some aspects huge ? such as their take on the peasantry: Tsar Nicholas tried to expand his support base from them; while Stalin attempted to exterminate the very same, now opposition, base.

  2. What were the mains reasons for the emancipation of Serfs in Russia?

    as much our liberation as theirs: for at present we are under the yoke of a law that destroys still more in us than the serfs any human quality.[3]? In this part of the memorandum, the writer explained how the serfdom was not moral.

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