Introduction Russia is generally apportioned the benefit of having introduced a political phenomenon that basically provided an alternative for capitalism; communism. Since this concept was only set in motion at the turn of the 20th century, we can therefore deduce that, to a large extent, Russia is, to most people, synonymous with leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, and Gorbachev. This supposition is entirely based on the premise that the Russian revolution of 1914 inherently altered the socio-cultural and socio-political direction of the nation, bringing into birth a never before envisioned era where Russia was not ruled by the Tsars, but by simple men; men who spoke to and articulated the needs of the masses. To this extent, communism, therefore, is largely misconceived as having been the fulcrum of Russia’s civilization. Much of this misconception , as signaled earlier, is based on the growth and progression of the Russian society in the years after the revolution until 1990, when the Berlin wall fell, essentially bringing down with it decades of Soviet Union tradition based on communism.
However, to believe that communism, a relatively new concept even in Marx’s consideration, is responsible for Russia’s modernization is to apportion ignorance to history as a whole. According to Abbott (2007), the title of the founder of Russian civilization is largely accorded to Peter the great; the man who according to MacLean (n.d), introduced significant reforms in the practice and policy of every aspect of the Russian society. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to examine why and how Peter the great changed modern Russian, and whether or not he was
Historically, Russia has always been a country of perplexing dualities. The reality of Dual Russia, the separation of the official culture from that of the common people, persisted after the Revolution of 1917 and the Civil War. The Czarist Russia was at once modernized and backward: St. Petersburg and Moscow stood as the highly developed industrial centers of the country and two of the capitals of Europe, yet the overwhelming majority of the population were subsistent farms who lived on mir; French was the official language and the elites were highly literate, yet 82% of the populati...
Peter preferred to live comfortably, and didn’t have a need for extravagance as much as Louis XIV did. But that didn’t mean he didn’t think big. Peter’s main goals were to modernize Russia, and to make it a major European power—a force to be reckoned with—and also to gain control of the church. He tried to achieve these in many different ways. One way he attempted to make Russia more powerful was by westernizing the country. He traveled all over Western Europe, learning about the culture, more modern practices and way of ...
The main driving force behind Peter I’s consolidation of power and reformation of Russia was the goal of ultimately enhancing military efficiency, allowing Russia to become a world power. Throughout his reign, war raged on and became a huge part of daily life. Compulsory lifetime military
Peter the Great had many goals during the time he ruled. One of his biggest goals was to modernize and westernize Russia. The main reason Peter the Great modernized Russia was because he did not want the country he ruled to be left vulnerable to expansionist powers in Europe. The powers were constantly at war, fighting to take over each other’...
The main challenge Alexander II faced in his projects towards modernization of Russia was a compromise between advancing his state thorough improving the lives of his subjects, without falling prey to the demand for further reforms he would be unable to satisfy. Westwood, revisiting Russian History in 1981 phrased the problem as follows: “how to advance the education of the state by educating the people, without educating the people to questions the state? ”.
There are many people who have lived through and within the Bolshevik Revolution, so there are a multitudinous variety of perspectives, thoughts, and insights about the revolution. The Bolshevik Revolution is known for many things; some say that the revolution helped women become free of control, and others proclaim that it did nothing but continue to hold women captive of their desired rights. The Bolshevik Revolution article states the side of a history professor Richard Stites, who argues yes the revolution benefited the women whilst the other side is declared no the revolution did no justice for women at all, which was argued by a Russian scholar, Lesly A. Rimmel. The opposing arguments both create an effective view on the revolution, and
However, he met two obstacles in his purpose. First of all, according to the book “Peter the Great” (2013) most of commodities were low quality such as woolen, linen, silks which were prepared for exportation (p59.pp3). As a result of this, Russian commodities were not compatible in the market of neither in Russia nor in the Europe. The main reason for law quality was lack of entrepreneurial industrial skills of Russian merchants and entrepreneurs. Evgenii Anisimov in his book “The Reforms of Peter the Great” wrote that most of companies were established with the help of foreign experts (1993.p140.pp5). As a consequence, Russian domestic industrial economy was backward from other European countries. This reason burdened Peter to improve its commercial economy at the period of
Peter the Great wanted to bring Russia into a new era. He achieved his goal of domestic reformation through Russia's economy, the church, and education. By boosting the industrial, commercial, and agricultural aspects, Peter hoped a richer Russia would invest in their military to increase strength, and therefore increasing Peter's amount of power. Unfortunately, he did not gain as much as he had hoped for, but he did help boost Russia into a period of rapid economic growth ('Peter the Great - domestic reforms' 2). Peter also saw a need for reform in the church. Not only did the church have a large source of wealth that Peter wanted a part of, but it had land, power, and serfs challenging those of the tsar. When the head of the church died in 1700, Peter did not replace him -- rather, he handed the property of the church over to a branch of the government. In turn, subjecting it to Peter's command. In 1721, a regulation was set on the church as it fell entirely under state control. This regulation stated everything the clergy could do and, in a sense, controlled their daily life. The clergy's job was to 'make their congregations totally submissive to the state by convincing them that Peter was all but God-like to ensure the population of Russia's total subordination to the crown' ('Peter the Great - domestic reforms' 1). If Russia had any hopes of becoming a superpower, they could not be fulfilled until the education aspect of society was modernized. Peter knew that proper education for both the soldiers and the officers was vital for a successful military. With this in mind, he set up schools for navigation and maths, artillery and languages, medicine, engeneering, and science ('Peter the Great - domestic reforms' 1).
The Similarities of Tsarist and Communist Rule in Russia Both forms of government did depend on high degree of central control. However, some Tsars and Stalin exerted more central controls than others. Stalin’s stronger use of central control created differences between the two forms of government. The Tsars used different levels of central control.
It was the rulers of Russia who were at the pinnacle of the empire's top-down administration, and so it was fitting that these rulers took credit for the accomplishments of the nation. Famous period journalist Mikhail Pogodin, also a supporter of the national movement, asserted that the nation owed its greatness to the Romanovs, particularly Peter the Great. The reasoning behind this was that Peter the Great had turned Russia into an enlightened, and civilized, world power. Without him, the Russians could have never hoped to achieve advancements comparable to their European
Wood, A. (1986). The Russian Revolution. Seminar Studies in History. (2) Longman, p 1-98. ISBSN 0582355591, 9780582355590
Lenin was an incredible historical figure. He founded a powerful communist faction, the Bolsheviks, the party that caused the October Revolution of 1917. Under his rule, the world’s first socialist state was proclaimed. This state, the core of what eventually became the USSR, survived against all odds. Lenin and the communist leadership pulled Russia out of the First World War and overcame its first civil war. By setting up the Communist International, Lenin imprinted himself upon politics in the entire continent for eternity. The USSR became a beacon to socialists and a threat to conservatives and liberals. Lenin interpreted the doctrines of Marx and Engels, and his writing became a sacred text for communists everywhere. Thus, at his death, it was dubbed Marxism – Leninism. After the Second World War, the communist model (the one-party state, the monopolization of ideology, the elimination of rival authority, and ruling by fear) was adopted by Eastern Europe, China, South eastern Asia, and eventually parts of Africa and the Caribbean. Communism was overruled in Europe in 1989 and in the USSR in 1991. However, no one had a greater impact on the development of communism than Vladimir Lenin.
Peter the Great, the Russian Czar, inherited his absolutist power from his brother, Ivan V. Born in aristocracy, Peter’s dad was the Czar, and later his brother, and after his brother’s death, him. He was a firm believer in the possible benefits from the control of a single leader to make decisions for the people, and he exercised this divine right to create many renouned institutions. At the beginning of Peter’s reign, Russia was in a poor condition: many rejected modernization from the Renaissance, and large spending from his brother’s reign caused economic droughts. He took advantage of his absolutist power to help ameliorate Russia’s situation and first decided to minimalize power from the other aristocrats. The subduction of the rich allowed
According to most historians, “history is told by the victors”, which would explain why most people equate communism with Vladimir Lenin. He was the backbone of Russia’s communist revolution, and the first leader of history’s largest communist government. It is not known, or discussed by most, that Lenin made many reforms to the original ideals possessed by many communists during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He revised Karl Marx and Friedrich Engles’ theories to fit the so-called ‘backwardness’ of the Russian Empire. Lenin’s reforms were necessary to carry out a socialist revolution in Russia, and the contributions he made drastically changed the course of history. It can be assumed that, the Soviet Union would not have been as powerful if it was not for Lenin’s initial advocacy of violence and tight organization.
Exploring the October revolution and the establishment of communism, Richard Pipes concludes that the origin of communism can be traced back to the distant past in Russia’s history. Pipes states that Russia had entered a period of crisis after the governments of the 19th century undertook a limited attempt at capitalisation, not trying to change the underlying patrimonial structures of Russian society. (Pipes, 1964)