, Research Paper
& # 8220 ; Both Lenin and Stalin adopted well-structured economic policies in order to construct their state into a well-established and powerful province & # 8221 ;
Both Lenin and Stalin had tremendous power to alter Russia as the leaders of the & # 8216 ; Dictatorship of the Proletariat & # 8217 ; ; the inquiry is how did they win in giving economic power to Russian people.
The first solid economic policy instituted in Russia after the stepping down of the Tsar and the overthrow of Kerensky & # 8217 ; s Probationary Government was Lenin & # 8217 ; s policy of War Communism. War Communism was non a policy designed to advance economic stableness in Russia. Russia was in civil war and war communism was a policy designed to acquire nutrient to the soldiers contending the Whites ( anti-Bolshevik soldiers ) and so following in line for nutrient were the workers who supplied the soldiers. One must maintain in head that Russia & # 8217 ; s economic system was in a bad province even before the establishment of War Communism. In economic footings War Communism was an abysmal failure. The province was forced to pay rewards in sort to workers because money was merely worthless. With the prohibition on private trade there was a break down of the currency system and rural communities reverted back to a swap economic system. The Bolshevik party forcibly seized all excess grain from the provincials doing opposition from provincials by concealing grain and non bring forthing more than was needed for themselves & # 8211 ; Russia had gone back to subsistence agriculture. This lead to a bead in production with some historiographers claiming that by 1921 there was more than a 60 % per centum bead in agricultural productiveness since pre-war Russia. The peasant reaction is justified sing that some historiographers estimate good over 5 million provincials were killed during the grain requisitions. In the metropoliss mills were taken over by the province and the province commissioned directors to run the mills & # 8211 ; the Bolsheviks felt that trueness to the Bolshevik party and Communism was more of import than competence. As a consequence there were reeling beads in industrial production particularly in fossil fuels. Oil production dropped from 9.2 million dozenss in 1913 to 3.8 million in 1921 under war communism. Coal production dropped a monolithic 67 % from 29.1 million dozenss produced in 1913 to 9.5 million in 1921 ( Statistics from Economic Systems in Action & # 8211 ; Oxenfeldt and Holubnychy ) . A clear mark of economic calamity in Russia was the estimated depopulation of 60 % of the population of the big Centres of Moscow and Petrograd. The state of affairs in Russia got so bad that 8 million kids were left homeless and 1000000s died in dearth caused by inefficient provincial agriculture. Russia was under huge fiscal strain from the Civil War and the dissidence of the provincials, something had to prostration and it was the Rouble.
Once the Civil War was under control and Lenin saw citizens turning restless he decided that a new economic policy was in order and the policy was given the name New Economic Policy. The Policy was a drastic step and I think it was merely what Russia needed and it was merely in clip. Politically, Lenin stepped on the toes of a few hardcore Communist Party members ( Bolsheviks ) but economically the policy was sound. The policy was a intercrossed Socialist-Capitalist economic system and was called province capitalist economy by Lenin. Lenin said the New Economic Policy was a impermanent step and was traveling to decelerate down the transmutation into communism to guarantee that when the province & # 8216 ; withered away & # 8217 ; ( In Marxist theory ) the atrophy would be every bit smooth as possible. I think that the New Economic Policy was Lenin seting the brakes on the Communist revolution, even if merely for a piece. There were two things that needed to be done desperately in Russia. First, the thickly settled needed to be calmed down and made happy because non even the mighty Lenin would be able to halt the people of Russia if they had a 3rd revolution. The policy was employed to guarantee the endurance of the Bolshevik Party. Second, the economic system needed to retrieve to some extent if the Bolsheviks wanted to industrialize Russia, which I believe they did desire to make in order to vie with the West and capitalist economy. The passage from a bid economic system to a somewhat capitalist one had immediate and far-reaching benefits such as provincial husbandmans holding their excess grain taxed alternatively of requisitioned. The revenue enhancement along with the legalization of free trade meant that husbandmans with extra grain could travel and sell it at the market and gain money, this had a important by-product & # 8211 ; money became the medium of trade one time once more. The criterion of life in Russia increased slightly. The Bolsheviks gained more peasant support because of the new policy. There was a drawback that occurred every bit far as communism is concerned, some provincials became affluent and were known as kulaks. Having wealth amongst the provincials was, nevertheless, positive for the economic system in precisely the same manner as an
addition in in-between category wealth is good for any developing economic system today. Industrial sectors remained largely under province control except little concerns ( using fewer than 20 workers ) . Capitalism still crept into industry in the signifier of fillips for workers for incentive intents. The consequences were amazing, by 1928 the coal and oil production mentioned earlier had risen to above the 1913 degrees with oil at 11.6 million dozenss and coal at 35.5 million dozenss. The New Economic Policy was an economic success.
By the terminal of Lenin & # 8217 ; s life he had taken Russia through three and a half old ages of an economically and socially disabling policy of War Communism and so into the beginning of the comfortable New Economic Policy. Lenin & # 8217 ; s impact on the economic state of affairs in Russia in the period taking up to 1939 can non be over emphatic. I think the War Communism adversely effected Russia and had as much negative influence on the economic growing of Russia as the positive influence of the New Economic Policy. The deficiency of cultivation of land during the period of war communism had a long-run inauspicious affect on Russia & # 8217 ; s agricultural capacity. Russia is likely still experiencing the effects of the 1000000s of potentially healthy able workers killed in the Red Terror ( Grain requisitions during War Communism ) , during the dearth of 1921 and the Cholera and Scarlet febrility epidemics.
Stalin contributed much to Russia & # 8217 ; s economic system and he has to be admired for taking an seemingly backward ( Some historiographers suggest Russia was non that rearward ) state and giving it economic power. Stalin & # 8217 ; s decided that the New Economic Policy had run long plenty and it was clip to set Russia back on its way to Communism. Stalin ordered the State Planning Commission ( Gosplan ) to invent a series of five twelvemonth programs which would put out precisely what the state & # 8217 ; s ends were for the following five old ages. The ends were broken down into smaller and smaller ends until finally every worker knew what he or she had to make for his or her specific displacement at the mill. The five-year programs were the ultimate illustration of end puting. Although the consequences of the five-year program & # 8217 ; s execution were amazing, the per centum additions were non every bit convincing as the alteration from War Communism to the New Economic Policy under Lenin. Oil production, for case, was 305 % of its 1921 degree by 1928 whereas it was merely 184 % of its 1928 degree by the terminal of the first five-year program. Obviously per centum additions bead as the sum of coal or steel produced additions so in order to maintain the astonishing addition in rate of production as I believe Stalin did to promote emerging communist states and self-praise to the capitalists, Stalin employed more and more adult females. Many installations were built for adult females merely because the USSR needed more workers and the figure of male workers unemployed was meaningless.
Stalin & # 8217 ; s two chief economic purposes were Collectivisation and Industrialisation. Collectivization was the combination of many provincials & # 8217 ; little farms into one big farm, which the provincials jointly ran. Collectivization made more sense for the province because it was more economically feasible to purchase machinery to work the land one time there was a significant piece of land and the province needed effectual, optimised farming with tools such as tractors. Industrialisation went manus in manus with the agribusiness because Stalin realised that the turning population needed to be fed and the system of each husbandman working a little piece of land was inefficient and did non suit in with his programs. Stalin & # 8217 ; s ends were lofty ; he wanted power production to travel from 5 to 17 billion kilowatt-hours in the first five-year program. When he tried to implement collectivization he found opposition from the kulaks and other provincials. After seeking to sell the thought by agencies of propaganda and weakness, Stalin used the more direct attack and merely sent the kulaks to the concentration cantonments. Thousands of kulaks were sent to labor cantonments and many burnt their harvests in protest and as a consequence there was a dearth in 1932. Agribusiness was virtually wholly collectivised by 1941 ( Modern World History & # 8211 ; Ben Walsh p105 ) .
Stalin had made tremendous paces in the race to do Russia competitory with the remainder of the universe. Economically he was a boom for Russia.
By 1940 the USSR had more physicians per caput of population than Britain
Modern World History & # 8211 ; Ben Walsh
One thing that we must retrieve though is that it was Stalin and the Stalinists who wrote the history of the USSR and the information I have presented may non be entirely accurate.
Lenin took Russia from a fighting state with few distastefully affluent and most incredibly hapless to a state with a budding economic system. Lenin brought Russia through a civil war and out of an economic slack. Stalin took the budding economic system and used force to do it bloom.