Theme-Industry

Question 1

what is industry

Answer 1

Industry refers to the manufacturing of goods in factories. The industrial transformation was a process which radically changed the course of history, originating in Britain around 1750-1850. The process of industrialisation involved the shift in production away from hand-produced goods towards machine produced goods. Manufacturing prior to the shift occurred largely in the home and largely by hand. From the mid-1700s onwards, machinery started to develop which shifted manufacturing from the home to the factory.

Question 2

new technology that made industry more efficiant, steam engines

Answer 2

initially used to pump water out of mines. Initial steam engine in the early 1700s were able to pump water out of mines more efficiently than a team of 500 horses pushing a pump on rotation. Central to the functioning of steam engines was the power-source: coal. Coal had long been used as a source of heat, but now it was being used as a source of energy, making the production of many goods more efficient.

Question 3

new tech that made indusrty more efficiant
trains

Answer 3

The development of trains made the transportation of good much easier. The first line in Britain was opened in 1830 between Manchester and Liverpool. Transportation prior to rail had been done by horse-wagon and boat. Rail could both transport more and was faster than these.

Question 4

new tech that made industry more efficiant
the mechanisation of weaving

Answer 4

. Before the industrial transformation, weaving was a manual craft. The Power loom, using the steam engine, allowed it to be mechanised.

Question 5

new tech that made industry more efficiant
puddling of iron

Answer 5

Iron before the industrial revolution was weak and brittle (pig iron) because it had impurities. Puddling made iron more durable. In the 1830s production boomed as the need for new railways and steam engines increased.

Question 6

what industrial problemsdid russia face in 1855

Answer 6

The main problem for Russia in 1855 is that it had not yet started to industrialise on a scale that was comparable to Britain or other Western European countries.

· By 1855 England produced 10 times more iron than Russia

· Russia had just 1,600km of rail track, compared to 15,000km in Britain.

· Towns and cities were relatively small.

Russia’s industrial backwardness was shown to be a significant issue in the Crimean War, 1853-56. Russian equipment, transportation, and technology was proven to be way behind both Britain and France.

Question 7

why was russia so far behind in industrialisation. - surfdom was a barrier to industrialisation

Answer 7

for a number of reasons. Firstly, serfdom prevented urbanisation because serfs were tied to the land. Cities and towns, therefore, lacked a workforce. Secondly, serfs were incredibly poor. This meant that Russia lacked an internal market to purchase industrial goods.

Question 8

why was russia so far behind in industrialisation - russias population lacked finantual capital

Answer 8

Russia lacked a ‘middle class’ able to invest in industries. In Britain industrialisation had been driven by people who had built up capital as merchants and in cottage industries. As a results, Russia was not industrialising ‘spontaneously’ like Britain had done. ‘capital’ needed to come from other sources.

Question 9

why was russias industrialisation so far behind - russias geography meant the transportation of coal, was difficult

Answer 9

Russia had lots of raw deposits, but they could not be easily moved to major towns and cities. In England this had been achieved through a massive investment in canal systems but also in the extensive use of coastal shipping. Transportation of coal by sea was much more efficient than by horse/carriage. However, Russia could not do this. Hence – transportation links needed to improve, highlighting the importance of developing the railway system.

Question 10

why was russias industrialisation so far behind - russia lacked constitutional monarchy in its autocratic system

Answer 10

This prevented the rule of law, and the protection of property and patents. In Russia the Tsar was autocrat with supreme power and could possess all property and wealth should he choose to. A successful business or factory could be taken over by the state, making it less likely that individuals would choose to invest in these areas.

Question 11

alexnader II and industury

mikhail von reutern as finance ministor 1862-1878

Answer 11

Alexander II appointed Mikhail von Reutern as Finance Minister between 1862-1878. Von Reutern’s policy has been described as “the first [proto] state managed exercise in industrial advance” – Trebilcock, 1982. Yet, when compared to other later policies, the role of the state was limited. Von Reutern’s two key polices were:

1. Encouraging private railway construction
2. Encouraging foreign expertise and investment.

Essentially – the state tried to facilitate these two developments. Reutern’s aim was to follow the Western model of free-market capitalism leading industrialisation. The only major difference being that he was relying on foreign investment under the protection of the state rather than domestic investment.

Question 12

alexander II

Mikhail von Reutern as finantial ministor
foregin investment/ expertese

Answer 12

· New industrys developed through the encouragement of foreign capital – e.g. Ludwig Loop of Manchester invested in Russia’s textile industry + the Nobel brothers invested in oil in Baku.

· Welshman, Hughes, was employed by the Russian government to support iron and steel production. His company, the New Russian Coal, Iron, and Railmaking Company was the largest producer of pig iron in Russia by 1884. He also founded Yuzovka, modern-day Donetsk. The name Yuzovka came from the Russified version of his name [Hughes -> Yuz]

Question 13

alexander II

Mikhail von Reutern as finantial ministor-
on railways

Answer 13

· The amount of railway track increased from 2,194 in 1866 to 13,979 in 1878.

· Industrial output grew by 6% year-on-year.

· Reutern secured foreign capital by issuing government bonds, taxation exemptions, and monopoly concessions. These three things helped to make Russia look like an attractive and safe place for foreigners to invest because it effectively guaranteed repayment.

· 94% of rail was in private hands by the 1880s.

Question 14

alexander II

limits on Mikhail von Reutern as finantial ministorpolicies

Answer 14

· Foreign investment led to financial issues. A third of all government spending was on debt in the 1880s.

· The extent of Reutern’s impact was limited. Things had improved, but from a very low base. By 1881 Russia remained a rural country with a small industrial base and Russia was actually falling further behind the West, not catching them up.

· There began to be a recognition that private investment was too slow. The lack of a middle class and reliance on foreign investment meant Russia had to turn to state-led industrialisation. All future leaders would rely on this model, as opposed to the Reutern.

Question 15

alexander III finance ministors- bunge

1881-1886

Answer 15

Bunge tried to reduce the debt burden on peasants to create a market for domestic goods – abolished Poll tax, 1886. Bunge’s primary role was to begin the process of rail nationalisation. As above, 1880 94% was in private hands. By 1900 70% was under state control.

Question 16

alexander III finance ministors- vyshnegradsky

1886-1892

Answer 16

Vyshnegradsky continued rail nationalisation but sought to raise money in order to invest more into industry

Question 17

alexander III

vyshnegradskys policies
protecionist economic policy

Answer 17

tariffs were put in place to stop foreign goods under-cutting domestic ones, and state investment in industry and rail increased dramatically. The Medele’ev Tariff of 1891 raised taxes to 30% on over 700 imported goods. The rationale was that by increasing taxes on foreign goods, domestically-produced goods would be ‘protected’. Under the tariff domestic goods would be cheaper than foreign goods, and foreign goods could not undercut Russian-produced ones, encouraging the development of domestic industry. Prior to the tariff it was cheaper to import foreign iron rather than use Russian iron. After the tariff it was cheaper to purchase Russian iron, creating more demand.

Question 18

alexander III

vyshnegradskys policies
ruthless attempts to achieve a budget surplus and raise revinue for industrialisation

Answer 18

Vyshnegradsky’s efforts to raise capital for industrial investment involved increasing taxes and exporting grain abroad. The policy continued despite the 1891-92 famine when Vyshnegradsky was quoted saying, “let us starve, but let us export!”

Question 19

alexander III and Nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
state- sponcered development of heavy industry

Answer 19

Significant investment into iron, coal, and steel industries.

Investment in trains – Witte believed railways were symbols of progress. He recognised their importance in relation to
[1] transportation,
[2] opening up new markets,
[3] stimulating the growth of other industries such as iron. Railway boom – the amount of rail track doubled. By the 1890s 4/5 trains in Russia had been produced by Russia and trains consumed 60% of steel and iron.

The grandest project was the Trans-Siberian railroad [built 1892-1903]

Question 20

alexander III and nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
foregin loans, investment and expertise

Answer 20

The state did not have money to fund all this spending on its own. Most of the money came from foreign loans, particularly from France.

Foreign companies were also encouraged and the number increased from 16 to 269 between 1888 and 1900

Question 21

alexander II and nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
high tariffs on foregin loans

Answer 21

Witte continued high tariffs to protect domestic industries from foreign competition, particularly, iron & steel

Question 22

alexander III and nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
gold standard

Answer 22

The Rouble was matched to the price of gold adding security for foreign investors.

Question 23

alexander III and nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
raised taxation

Answer 23

Taxation on goods was increased. In particular a tax on vodka raised ¼ of state revenue in 1910

Question 24

alexander III and nicholas II

wittes great spurt policies -
export of grain

Answer 24

Grain exports continued to be the main way Russia raised money from foreign buyers. These revenues were invested back into industry.

Question 25

alexander III and nicholas II

achievements of wittes great spurt

Answer 25

The industrial expansion brought about by Witte’s policies was the most successful burst of industrial activity during the Tsarist period. Trebilcock [1982] stated: that the growth rates were ‘far exceeding Russian achievement for any comparable period before 1914 and establishing one of the most impressive performances in late nineteenth century Europe.

· 9% growth rate year-on-year

· Coal output tripled

· Russia was the third largest producer of iron in the world

· Moscow was the fastest growing city east of New York.

Question 26

alexander III and nicholas II

limits/ criticisms of wittes great spurt

Answer 26

· Russia was hit by an international recession in 1899 which slowed growth [highlighted the reliance on French loans]

· 20% of Russian spending was on paying off debt

· Witte prioritised heavy industry over light industry

· Industrial growth came at the cost of poor conditions in towns and cities. Growth was prioritised over welfare, hence the large rise in strikes during this and latter periods.

· He had failed to create a consuming market for goods. The Russian people still lacked capital to purchase goods.

Question 27

argument one

russia had a strong economy in 1914

Answer 27

Industrial production grew by 6% year on year 1908-14. By 1914 Russia was the fourth largest producer of coal, pig iron and steel, and the Baku oilfields were only rivalled by Texas. Russia was the fifth largest economy. Russia was becoming less reliant on foreign loans. State investment still drove growth, particularly in armaments, but a domestic market was growing. Coal production had doubled – 1900-1914

Question 28

argument 2

russia has a weak economy in 1914

Answer 28

Structural issues – the economic growth was driven by military investment which meant that sectors such as agriculture were ignored. Chemical and machine tools were being imported. Industry heavily concentrated in certain regions – Moscow, St. Petersburg, Dombass Low productivity – 67% of workers worked in small workshops, but they produced just 33% of total industrial output. Compared to other countries Russia was weak in 1913: - Per capita income was 1/10th of USA, 1/5th of UK - Russia’s coal production was just 10% of Britain’s. - Pig iron production was half of UK - Per capita output half that of Austro-Hungary

Question 29

tsarist industrial developments conclusions

in what ways are tsars similar

Answer 29

· All tried to encourage foreign investment

· All used the state to try to encourage private investment

· All prioritised heavy industry over light industry

· Russia was backward compared to the West in 1855 [as shown by the Crimean War], and it remained backward in 1914 [as shown by the fact that per capita output was half that of Austro-Hungary, the least well developed of the other European powers].

Question 30

tsarist industrial developments conclusions

in what ways did tsars differ

Answer 30

· Witte’s Great Spurt [Alexander III / Nicholas II] saw the period of greatest change [1893-1903]

· Alexander III and Nicholas II were more willing to use the state to directly invest in the economy. On the other hand, Alexander II was keener to encourage private investment.

Question 31

lenins economic policies guided by the role of ideology/ economic determinism

Answer 31

For Marxists the ‘means of production’ were ideologically very important. Whomever controlled the means of production had the power to control everything else within a society. In a capitalist society, the bourgeoisie controlled the means of production, allowing them to exploit the working classes. After the revolution, Lenin believed that workers should have a greater say in how factories were run and that the state should take ownership of key industries – increasing nationalisation. In this sense, ideology played an important role in Lenin increasing the role of the state. A ‘Socialist economy’ can be defined as one where there is no private ownership and all members of society share in the state’s resources.

Furthermore, ideology also played a significant role in Lenin’s economic aims. Lenin famously said: “Soviets plus electrification equals communism”. His ideology was an inherently forward-looking one. He understood that Russia needed to modernise before the socialist ideals for which he had fought for could be achieved. In this manner, both Lenin and the Tsars recognised the need for modernisation.

Question 32

lenins economic policies guided by self presevation

Answer 32

Lenin recognised that in order to achieve his long-term aims of achieving communism, the regime needed to survive. He faced many challenges in October 1917: the First World War and the threat of Germany, as well as opposition to his rule within Russia itself. The need for self-preservation meant that Lenin could not introduce a pre-determined plan of economic action. Instead, he needed to respond to event as and when they developed. Hence, Lenin’s policies adapted to circumstance.

Furthermore, a strong industrial economy was required for the Red’s to fend off any threats [whether foreign powers or otherwise]. Russia needed to industrialise quickly!

Question 33

lenins first major economic policy. war communism 1918-1921
what were the terms

Answer 33

· Nationalisation of industries. In July 1918 the Decree on Nationalisation brought over 30,000 economic entities under state control. These ranged from windmills to huge steel plants. These were put under the control of the Supreme Economic Council, an arm of the government. The previous owners received no compensation.

· The end of the free market. Private trade was banned.

· A class-based rationing system introduced. Red Army soldiers and the working class were given priority access to foods and goods.

· Forced requisitioning of grain [see agriculture notes for more on this].

· Militarisation of labour. Discipline was reintroduced to factories. Professional managers were employed by the state to ensure workers were punished for any lateness or absenteeism.

Question 34

war communism

how did lenins context differ from the tsars

Answer 34

· Faced shortages in labour, capital investment, valuable resources [due to loss of land in Brest-Litovsk], and lack of supply of agriculture goods.

· Lenin could not rely on foreign investment or loans – these went to the White armies in the Civil War.

· Lenin did not rely on an alliance with private economic organisations. The Bolsheviks ruthlessly controlled the economic resources of the central areas they ruled.

Question 35

what was the inpact of war communism

Answer 35

· Economy was in a worse state in 1921 than during any comparable Tsarist period.

· 9 million had died in Civil War and famine by 1921

· Workers were leaving towns or had died – the number od workers was just 76% of 1917 numbers by 1919.

· The population of St. Petersburg fell from 2 million to 600,000 by 1920

· Coal, oil, and other heavy industry production was well below 1913 levels.

· Lenin wrote in 1921 – ‘large scale capitalist industry has been destroyed’ and that the working class has been ‘declassed and ceased to exist’.

Question 36

lenins second economic polocy

the new economic policy
1921-28

Answer 36

The NEP was introduced in the context of the above socio-economic crisis. Russia was suffering from an economic, demographic, and political crisis. The reform was an attempt to stabilise the deteriorating situation and ensure that the Bolsheviks remained in power. In 1921 the Bolsheviks were threatened by the Kronstadt Revolt. A group of sailors had revolted in Petrograd, having previously supported the October Revolution of 1917.

The NEP was sold as a ‘temporary’ measure designed to concede economic reform in order to prevent political reform. As such, it was similar in motivation to the reform of Alexander II when he claimed Emancipation was designed to ‘prevent revolution from below’.

Question 37

the terms of lenins new economic policy

Answer 37

· De-nationalisation of small industries and a return of private ownership (BUT continued state control over heavy industry)

· Return of the free market

· Return of foreign investment and expertise

· End of requisitioning.

Question 38

lenin

positives of lenins new economic policy

Answer 38

• Agricultural recovery. 1925 – cereal production had grown 25% on 1920.
  · 1920-23 factory production rose 200%, from a very low base
  · industrial recovery. Industrial output increased rapidly, helping Russia to recover to pre-War levels of economic output. For instance, coal production
  rose from 8.9 million tons to 27 between 1921-28. This compared to 29 million tons in 1913.

Question 39

lenin

negative aspacts of lenins new economic policy

Answer 39

• Scissor crisis – oversupply of grain (but was resolved by a shift in policy and the introduction of a tax in cash rather than in kind)
• • Foreign powers made trade agreements – Germany in 1922; Britain in 1924
• • Urban workers suffered
• – unemployment rose sharply and wages were low. NEP was called ‘new exploitation of the Proletariat’ by critics.

Question 40

stalins five year plans and ‘command economy’

the great turn

Answer 40

Between 1929-1941 Russia’s economy underwent something called the ‘Great Turn’. It has become known as the Great Turn for two reasons. Firstly, there was a shift in the type of economy in the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union’s economy shifted from being a ‘mixed economy’ [Under the NEP], with aspects of public and private involvement, to a ‘command economy’ where the state was responsible for economic planning. Secondly, the Great Turn resulted in a period of enormous change – comparable to Witte’s Great Spurt but on a far greater scale. Economic changes amounted to a revolution in the towns [through the Five-Year Plans] and countryside [through Collectivisation].

Question 41

stalin

aims for stalins five year plans and ‘command economy’

Answer 41

What were the aims of the plans? As with Lenin, there was a combination of ideology and self-preservation motivating this shift. Regarding ideology, the debates of the 1920s highlighted the left-wing criticisms of the NEP. After all, the NEP represented a capitalist economic model that was always going to be a short-term solution. Stalin’s aim of achieving ‘Socialism in one country’ could only be achieved, he argued, through rapid and state-driven industrialisation. Economic modernisation was a pre-requisite to socialism. Furthermore, Stalin wanted the USSR to achieve ‘autarky’ (self-sufficiency).

Secondly, ‘catching up with the West’ also played a role in the economic changes. Stalin wrote in 1931 that: “The history of Russia is the history of backwardness and defeat…. we are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good the distance in ten year. Either we do it, or we shall be crushed”

Question 42

stalin

first five year plan, 1928-32
aims

Answer 42

Production increase by 300% Develop heavy industry Boost electricity by 600% Double light industry

Question 43

stalin

first five year plan 1928-32
evidance of success

Answer 43

Electricity output trebled Coal and iron doubled Steel production increased one third New cities like Magnitogorsk developed

Question 44

stalin

first five year plan 1928-32
evidance of faliure

Answer 44

None of the main targets were met Chemical industries, housebuilding, and other consumer goods were neglected

Question 45

stalin

second five year plan 1933-37
aims

Answer 45

Aimed to: - Continue the development of heavy industry - Improve light industries - Develop communications Boost engineering and tool-making

Question 46

stalin

second five year plan 1933-37
evidance of success

Answer 46

• Moscow Metro Opened 1935, Volga Canal Opened 1937, Dneieprostoi Dam produced hydro-electric power and was completed in 1932 - Steel output trebled - coal production doubled - by 1937 USSR was self-sufficient in metal goods and machine tools

Question 47

stalin

second five year plan 1933-37
evidance for faliure

Answer 47

Light industries lagged behind No appreciable increase in consumer goods which meant that economic growth was not translating into improvements in living conditions There was an emphasis on quantity over quality

Question 48

stalin

third five year plan
aims

Answer 48

Aimed to: - Focus on the Development of heavy industry - Rapid re-armament Complete the transition to ‘communism’

Question 49

stalin

third five year plan
evidance of success

Answer 49

Heavy industries benefitted: - strong growth in machinery and engineering - spending on rearmament doubled

Question 50

stalin

third five year plan
evidance for faliure

Answer 50

Some stagnation in production – particularly in steel and oil – causing a fuel crisis. Consumer goods neglected

Question 51

stalin

summary; the five year plans being very sucsessful

Answer 51

Industrial output trebled, with an annual growth rate of 10% year-on-year. These growth rates were huge and greater than during the 1890s. The pace of change transformed lives in towns and cities during the 1930s and made the eventual victory over Nazi Germany possible.

Question 52

stalin

summary; limitations to five year plans

Answer 52

· Economic growth came at the expense/cost of living standards. Consumer goods were consistently ignored meaning that quality of life remained poor for the Russian people.

· Emphasis on quantity over quality in order to meet targets. E.g. the average life expectancy of a T-34 tank in WW2 was just 2 weeks; but Russia was able to produce 1,300 per month in 1943.

Question 53

khrushchevs seven year plan
aims

Answer 53

· Improve living standards

· ‘catch-up and overtake the West by 1970’

· Shift emphasis of industry away from the old heavy industry towards new ‘modern’ industries

· Boost technology

Question 54

khrushchevs seven year plan
achievements

Answer 54

· Re: Technology : Sputnik, 1957, [the first satellite in space] + Lenin, 1959, the first nuclear-powered icebreaker. Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space in 1961

· Re: living standards: Consumer goods increased – e.g. tv sets, Refrigerators, retail spending.

· Re: new industries: air transport was expanded Areoflot was subsidised making air travel very cheap.

· Re: catching up with the West – Russia initially got ‘ahead’ in the Space Race being the first to send people to Space.

Question 55

khrushchevs seven year plan
limitations

Answer 55

· Growth rates fell by comparison to 1930s-50s. 1930s averaged 10% year-on-year, as did the initial post-war years. The Seven-Year Plan averaged 7.5%.

· The Space Race came with costs. excessive risk-taking [Laika – the first dog in space – died in orbit] + distorting the economy.

· The Soviet Union came nowhere close to overtaking the USA

Question 56

communist conclusions

in what ways were communists similar

Answer 56

· The Communists all nationalised key heavy industries

· No foreign investment

· All saw periods of significant economic change

· Mostly focused on heavy industry [even Khrushchev’s focus on the Space Race]

Question 57

communist conclusions

in what ways did communists differ

Answer 57

· Khrushchev somewhat shifted the focus away from heavy industry and focused more on improving living standards than Stalin.

· Stalin’s Great Turn oversaw the more significant economic change of the period.

· Lenin’s use of the Capitalist NEP differed from the central planning of Khrushchev and Stalin. Lenin showed more pragmatism and a willingness to react to the situations he found his regime in.

Question 58

comparing tsars and communists

changes

Answer 58

· Foreign investment was significant under Tsars, not too significant under Communists. Stalin even rejected Marshall Aid from the USA after World War Two because it required him to make political concessions. on the other hand, the Tsars welcomed French loans in the late nineteenth century during Witte’s Great Spurt.

· Change to private involvement. The Tsars worked alongside private investment in the long-term, while the communist only had a short-term period of private involvement under the NEP

· Quantitatively, Soviet industrial achievement was greater than Tsarist industrial achievement. In particular, Stalin’s achievements were above others. [see below]

· Motivations – ideology was more important to the Communists. The FYPs, etc, were about achieving communism.

Question 59

comparing tsars and communists

contionuitys

Answer 59

· State involvement was significant under both Alexander III, Nicholas II, and Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev. Nationalisation of key industries. This had to occur because Russia lacked a middle class with the capital to invest spontaneously & Russia consistently lacked an internal market wealthy enough to purchase those goods. As a result, the state played an important role both in facilitating investment in industry and creating a demand for it.
· Prioritisation of heavy industry over light industry. This was built on the needs of the state being a priority.
· Aim - Russia remained behind Western powers and always sought to catch up with them