Stolypin like Witte wanted to strengthen the Tsarist rule. He used the phrase, suppression, and only then, reformation, but he also believed in reformation to solve serious bitter social issues. He also believed in industrial process, but that the nation needed to be fed, this meant agriculture. The Rural crisis was basically the overpopulation of the countryside (82% peasants) and so a shortage in land, and so a series of bad harvests set (poor weather + land) set of terrible famines. Stolypin immediately after the 1905 revolution set about reformation of the land.
He first, ‘de-revolutionised the peasantry’ and pretty much introduced that all outstanding payments would eventually be cancelled outright. The mortgage due to emancipation had impoverished the peasants and was the reason for their inclusion in the revolution. Secondly, was the ‘Wager on the Strong’, which was a continuation of his successful peasantry decision. Farmers were told to replace the strip system with fenced fields. He opened a land bank, to provide funds for the peasant to buy land. This was called wager on the strong, to create a layer of rich and strong peasants which would turn the massive population as tsarist supporters.
Whether this was successful is debatable, as Russian peasantry were so conservative it prevented them from embracing reformist change and there was doubt about replacing the strip system. However, it did create a layer of strong peasants, with proof from tax returns, a significant minority paying higher tax. It is also true that land reform needs time to work, 20 years plus, but the war of 1914 only allowed eight. Figures that support success are new independent farms, 1907 – 48,500, 1908 – 508,500 though by 1913 the policy was clear to be losing steam, 1913 -134,554 as the ministry of agriculture saw the conservatism a problem.
SUMMARY
-Terrible Famines due to poor land, overcrowding, mass peasantry and bad harvests.
'De-revolutionised the peasantry' - Ruled out emancipation decree mortgage.
'Wager on the strong' Land bank + replace strips, for rich peasants to be Tsar supporters
DEBATE
- Land reform needed time to work, interrupted by WW1.
- Huge conservatism in peasantry, unlikely to convert from strip farming
- did create layer of strong peasants
- Eventually started to lose steam
THE ECONOMY AFTER SERGEI WITTE
The economy improvement has simply not been the work of just Witte, it was a worldwide boom, but by this point, industrial recession set in. This was difficult for Russia, as the boom meant huge migration to the cities and as it was not organised or managed, acute overcrowding was a problem. Originally these peasants who migrated to become workers, accepted their grim conditions because of increased pay, but when the boom ended, this turned to unemployment, who became homeless and had their hopes of a better life completely ruined. This was a contributing factor to the social unrest 1900-1907. The number of strikes also began to increase from as low as 222 in 1908 to 3000 in 1914
However figures show that the number of factories increased by 2000, state revenue had doubled and workers had increased by almost half a million over the period of recession 1908-1913. Few workers really gained from the expansion however, and the wage of workers barely increased although inflation did.
The key question is how strong the Russian economy had become by 1914, and evidence suggests that if WW1 never intervened, the Russian economy would have continued to develop and industrialise into a comparable size of the other great nations, using the figures of growth and expansion. It can be argued that Russia would never have reached this stage, as at 1914 80% were still peasantry and undermines the industrial development.
Alex Nove, on the subject says that there are convincing arguments on either side, ‘if growth rates for industry and agriculture were projected over 50 years, there is no doubt that they would lead decent lives, however this involves necessary adjustments to manage the state by the Tsar to account for the changing society’, simply that the Russian economy would of continued to grow, but the tsar would have to make reasonable and rational reformation to use the money for the gain of the country, and that this most certainly would not be the case. Still, it is impossible to tell as WW1 intervened. Nove uses the phrase ‘There must surely be a limit to the game of what-might-have-been’
SUMMARY
Worldwide economic improvement
- Migration of peasants to cities to work,
- Ended boom saw acute overcrowding- growing population not managed.
- Peasants hopes of new life dashed, leading to social unrest, more strikes towards 1914
Expansion
- state revenue doubled to 4Bil
- 2000 more factories
- Workforce increase by 400,000
- Wages however DID NOT INCREASE whilst INFLATION did
Debate
- Russian economy would of continued to expand if not for WW1
- Argued that 80% peasantry undermined this
Nove
- Growth rates continued for 50YR than Russian lives would be better
- But the Tsar would have to become more reformist to apply its economy for the benefit of Russia and its people.
The Duma was the most important concession to the liberals of Russia. The First Duma, April – June 2006 had its hopes dashed before it even came together. The Tsar successfully arranged a huge loan from France, lessening the likelihood that the Dumas would have economic hold over the Tsar. The Tsars Fundamental Laws meaning the tsar could effectively dismiss the Duma, and they also announced that the Duma was to be of two chambers or bi-cameral, the elected lower house and the state council of which was appointed by the tsar, who could veto. This second chamber effectively deprived the elected chamber of any power in decision making.
This caused bitterness at the first meeting, and the first election returned a majority of reformist parties. They voiced their anger and demanded the rights of the Duma to be increased. The tsar, is reported to have said ‘curse the Duma. It is all Witte’s doing.’ After two months of bitterness, the tsar dissolved the Duma. This lead to 200 Kadets and Labourists to reassemble in Vyborg, Finland to draw up an appeal for the Russian people to defy the government by refusing to pay taxes and disobeying conscription orders. However the Kadets made a tactical error as the Russian people did not give passive resistance but scattered violence and so the government could fight fire with fire, giving them a reason to arrest the Kadets and bar them for Duma election. The Tsar appointed Stolypin to quell the disturbances of scattered violence and Stolypin had 2500 people executed, giving the hanging noose the nickname ‘Stolypin’s necktie’. The Kadets never really recovered from their humiliation, and so this gave the extremists to give their view.
The second Duma, feb-june 1907 saw the Kadets lose half of their seats, which were filled by SD’s and SR’s, which made the Duma very anti-government. However, since the very rightwing reactionary conservatives had also grown in numbers, there was disagreement within it and the government. This was hostile to the government, and Stolypin who was willing to work with the duma saw his land reformation opposed. When SD’s and SR’s were accused of rebellion, the Tsar dissolved.
The Third Duma Nov 07- June 1912, the tsar was keen to keep the Duma as it made Russia look democratic, France and Britain who he was in talks with was very impressed by this advancement. He was also keen as Peter Stolypins new electoral laws allowed him to effectively rig the election by only allowing middle-class to vote. This meant that the third and fourth duma’s were heavily right-wing and reactionary and so criticisms were muted. Stolypin then finally got his land reforms passed without any opposition and the 2571 progressive reformations saw important proposals for modernising the army, social reform of education and national insurance.
The fourth Duma, Nov 1912- august 1913, had started to voice criticisms about the tsar’s government and to the point of they started to not put through new proposals as the tsar’s government was in danger of collapse. This was seen as the ‘rubber stamp’ Duma, just there for show but they did continue with social reform work, although often critical of government.
SUMMARY
First Duma – very reformist parties, doomed from beginning,
- Loan from France
- Bi-cameral Duma
- Fundamental laws
Tsar dissolved after mass bitterness from reformist parties. 200 kadets/labourists met in Vyborg. Appeal drawn up – passive resistance. Peasants mistook for violence. Stolypin appointed to crush scattered violence. Militant kadets banned from next duma election
Second Duma – SR’s and SD’s with Reactionaries.
- Disagreement within themselves as very extremist against each other
- Disagreement with the Tsar heavily
- Reformist parties discredited
- Tsar dissolves
Third Duma
Just Reactionaries
- Britain and France impressed with ‘Democratic Russia’
- Stolypin rigged election so only middle/class could vote
- This removed criticisms and social reform began
- National Insurance, military proposals and schooling, also no criticisms for Tsar
Fourth Duma
Reactionaries
- Saw as a rubber stamp of the Tsar
- Continued with some reform
- However more judgemental of the Tsar, began to voice criticisms
- Almost gave up towards end as Tsar’s gov was in danger.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment