Russia Economic Conditions

The instant consequences to the emancipation of the serfs left Russia crippled, ironic, when alleged that it intended to advance Russia’s status. Many historians argue that despite abolishing serfdom, the means in which it was carried out didn’t coincide with reality. Subsequently, there were many riots which caused a rise of political groups such as Narodnik movement whose existence proves that Russian society was changing. Disorder spread with calls for change within Russia like In May 1862 where a number of pamphlets were issued including the radical Young Russia. Such propaganda aimed to gain support and create challenging individuals which would pressure the Tsar to make further changes. One could argue that as a result this led to the 1905 revolution and the end of Tsardom.

In the 19th century, Russia was a huge country with millions of extremely poor farming peasants called serfs. They believed that the Tsar was second only to god in power, and that tsar had control over everyone.

Russia's overthrows and shortage caused revolutionary upheaval and massive inflation, which led to deprived infrastructure. During World War I, Russian society naturally caused great dissatisfaction among the serfs. As the revolution wore on, numerous reform and Tsar Nicholas II, a ruler, tried to change Russia's social structure and government. Among the masses, there was discontentment with Russia's social system and living conditions. Laborers worked and lived in horrendous conditions, which played a crucial role in aggravating the condition of workers and peasants. As a result, peasants starved and Russia’s armies were overpowered on the battlefield because much of its terrain was occupied by enemies. Hence, Imperial Russia was a

What were the social circumstances that gave rise to the Russian Revolution? Explain why the revolutionaries adopted a form of communism grounded in rapid industrialization and central planning? Poverty seems to be the biggest driver for social circumstances leading up to the Russian Revolution. There were few rich and many poor including those that were considered serfs. Serfs were individuals that lived and worked on farms and when the farms were sold, were included in the sale. It is very much like slavery. The revolutionaries adopted communism because they were following the idea of Karl Marx. The revolutionaries saw capitalism as being similar to what they had before the revolution. They felt that communism worked towards the common good as everyone worked together and share what was

The system of serfdom is where an agricultural worker in feudal Russia who cultivates land and belongs to a landowner. The emancipation of the serfs happened for a mired of reasons. Most of which are tied to Russia as a nation. The defeat in the Crimean war for example was a huge blow to Russia as a world power. The national prestige was lost as Russia lost the Crimean war to the allied powers of Britain, France, the Ottoman Empire, and the Kingdom of Sardinia. The humiliation that was felt through losing this war was based off of Alexander II’s viewing

Russia was a country rich in raw materials that had been undisturbed by modern extraction and refining techniques until then, however, the majority of the countries resource rich areas were nowhere near any railways, with the bulk of the heavy materials such as steel, iron, coal and copper being in the Urals, almost 1,000km away from the nearest railway system in 1860. Oil, another key ingredient in industrialisation was almost 1,500km away to the south, in the Caucasus area3. This lack of transportation in a period when steam powered machines were producing the goods and steam powered trains were delivering them and leading the industrialisation in other countries like Britain, the USA and a future foe in Germany is an indicator of the distance that Russia was behind its rivals under the leadership of the Tsar. So the Tsar’s Russia was largely an agrarian one, but even in the agricultural sector Russia was lagging far behind the rest of the West in terms of the methods employed by farmers, little fertiliser was used and the labour saving machines used in countries with enormous agricultural output like the US were nowhere near as widespread in Russia. The weaknesses of the Tsar’s management of the agricultural sector were highlighted in 1891 when famine hit. Due to the heavy tax on consumer goods, peasants had been forced to sell more of their

Despite being humiliated numerous times for his social status, Nikitenko was a rather lucky serf compared to other serfs during that time and even compared to nineteenth century American slaves. The vast majority of the peasant population were poor, ignorant, and

Collectivisation had a big impact on Russia for both positive and negative reasons; it was a failure in the aspect that it caused ‘chaos in agriculture’ and due to the problems caused, millions died due to famine and poverty in the short term. ‘Grain harvests dropped dramatically’ during the early 1930s and took until the late 1930s for yield to rise again. However, in the long run, a food surplus was secured and so could be used to feed and pay for the industrial workforce needed for the 5-year plan. It was also incredibly significant in history as it showed how much control Stalin had over Soviet Russia and the fear that the peasants lived in; for example if they were caught stealing even just a few pieces of grain they could be executed or imprisoned for up to 10 years. The lasting impression that is received from the wide tolerance of this policy was how small and insignificant the few rebellions were that were organised. This further demonstrates the power and influence held over the peasants during this period of time.

The landowners charged the Serfs high rent for the land and its use. Even though both countries had different economic inequities they were also similar. In both countries the land was owned by the higher class rather than the lower class. There was very little change when talking about the economic and social aspects of the people in Russia and

Imperial Russia from its conception, has not been an economic or agricultural power house. Often enough the majority of Imperial Russia’s population lived well below the poverty line and struggled to get by while the rich lined their pockets. This economic inequality became possible through serfdom. The emancipation of serfs in Imperial Russia has been greatly scrutinized for its ineffectiveness in promptly bringing about this change. However, ultimately the biggest question is how important were serfs to the economic ability of Russia and whether or not their emancipation was a positive economic force or negative.

Many forces lead both the French and Russian Revolutions. Both countries were faced with huge debts from wars. For France, this was the debt caused by their support in the American Revolution. For Russia, this was the higher cost in lives and money during World War I. The French’s middle class, who had more liberal ideas and progressive economic practices, continued to have less prominence and privileges that the noble class had.

In Russia, serfdom was a system under which the peasants were theoretically free tenants, but were actually in a state of vassalage to, and dependence on, the landowners. Some people condemn feudalism, stating that it was a corrupt system of labor as it exploited serfs, but without the use of the serfs the entire economy of Europe would have suffered. Serfs were the foundation of the economic system because they provided labor and goods to the entire kingdom. Serfdom influenced the Russian way of life and culture. The actual system set up in place for serfs goes more in-depth than just peasants working the property.

Historians do not always agree on the outcomes of the reforms. Zaionchkovsky outlines how the emancipation affected the lives of the serfs. He argues that the serfs economically were minimally better following 1861. Because the nobles controlled the amount of land they received, 99.2% of peasant households received less than the minimum needed for their economic survival. This forced many to rent extra land from their previous owners and rent was expensive, and rates increased every year due to a higher demand for land. He also points out that the peasants still provided the nobles with the livelihood they previously had, but with less land. The freedom the state gave them, he argues, was not true freedom as the situation the reforms created

For three centuries before the revolution, life in Russia was not peaceful. It was cold, hard, and bitter instead. “The end of serfdom was a major event in Russia; yet it just wasn 't enough.”, in 1861. Serfdom, under feudalism, is the the status of peasants in which they are bound to a lord, or master, works on their land, and can be sold like property. Despite serfs being given ‘freedom’, Russia was mostly ruled by the czar and nobles. The average person was, and stayed, poor. Therefore, World War I was not the main cause of the Russian revolution. This outdated feudal class structure, inability to modernize, lack of peace, and czars’ inept leaderships lead to the Russian Revolution.

All of Russia is our garden. The earth is great and beautiful; it is full of wonderful places. Think, Anya, your grandfather, your great-grandfather and all your ancestors were serf-owners, owners