You are on page 1of 4

Gibson 1

Liam Gibson

Bennett and Martin

Humanities/AP World

22 February 2017

Were socialist ideas good for the established Russian culture and populace?

The unity of a nation, culturally and physically, will drive a country forward, even in the

hardest of times, carried onward by a strong working class. Leading up until, and during World

War I, the exposure Russia received to socialist beliefs, and Western society, pushed the state

towards socialism, and eventually Communism. Near the end of World War 1, these newly

developed beliefs pushed the people to overthrow Tsar Nicholas II and the formation of Soviet

Russia, referring to the period of time before the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922, was an

attempt to reform an economically broken, though culturally rich empire. The empire returned to

its former glory when a new form of government, communism, was introduced to the now

named Soviet Union. Although the world perceives the actions and consequences of the Soviet

Union as negative, it paved the road for one of the worlds most physically, culturally and

economically rich states, Russia.

Russian interactions with European countries served to spark interest with socialist

ideologies, and blaze a path for a socialist takeover for the better of the people. During the rule of

Nicholas I Russia was failing, with constant cases of corruption. Because of the tsarist rule, there

was no hope for the Russian people to become free from tyranny, except by force. The Russian
Gibson 2

people joined together as an army, and multiple revolutions happened, in an attempt to free

themselves from the shackles imposed on the population. Isaiah Berlin stated in his article,

Russia and 1848, that Russia was in a gigantic strait-jacket of bureaucratic and military control

which, if not devised, was reinforced and pulled tighter by Nicholas I. Berlin describes the rule

of Nicholas I as that of an asylum keeper, locking his people in small rooms, restricting the

goods they can obtain, and when his rule is threatened, he responds with military force,

destroying his country from the inside. This pushed the Russian population to band together, and

seek out European help. Berlin also states in the article, Eighteen years earlier, in 1830, the

news from Paris had put new life into Russian radicals; French utopian socialism wholly

transformed Russian thought; the Polish rebellion became the rallying point of democrats

everywhere, very much as did the Republic in the Spanish civil war a century later. But the

rebellion was crushed, and all embers of the great conflagration, at any rate so far as open

expression was concerned, were by 1848 virtually stamped out? In St. Petersburg no less than in

Warsaw. To observers in western Europe, sympathetic and hostile alike, the autocracy seemed

unshakable. Nevertheless the year 1848 is a turning-point in the development of Russia as of

Europe, not only because of the decisive part played in subsequent Russian history by

revolutionary socialism, heralded by the Manifesto composed by Marx and Engels to celebrate

its birth; but more immediately because of the effect which the failure of the European revolution

was destined to have upon Russian public opinion, and in particular upon the Russian

revolutionary movement. Berlin highlights the French efforts to pump blood like a heart into

Russian revolutionists, which helped to restore socialist ideas, which was a basis of Russian

culture from the beginning, and gave the uprisers hope that if they band together, regardless of

origin, they can kill the toxicity of the current government. The other revolution that had
Gibson 3

happened in the past, before the Russian revolution really took off, gave the Russian people

hope, as they could see many had successfully overthrown exploitive governments. The joining

of the Russian people helped to develop their culture, and the discussion of what form of

government they will use to replace the tsar. The union of the Russian people against the tsarist

rule sparked discussion of foreign ideas introduced by the French, and the revival of cultural

ideas helped to pave a road to revolution, and the construction of one of the worlds most

successful empires.

The development of socialist beliefs in Russia excelled the development of Russias

culture, and enriched an otherwise failing state. The primarily socialist population felt threatened

by capitalist ideas, which was the main reason the populace banded together in order to preserve

their rich history and what they felt were the right government policies, which simultaneously

accelerated the industrialization of Russia, giving the country more ground to become a world

powerhouse. William A Pelz says in his article, War Leads to Revolution: Russia(1917), Central

Europe(1918-19), that If the war to end all wars was a disaster for the commoners of the West,

it was, if possible, even worse for the people of the Russian Empire. Backward economically and

as deeply superstitious as it was religious, Russia was a historical curiosity. French financial

capital had invested heavily in attempts to modernize this land, as had the British and Americans.

Between 1890 and 1904, the total railroad mileage within Russia doubled. In addition, national

production of coal, iron, and steel doubled during the last five years of the nineteenth century.

The Russian bourgeoisie, with its ties to Paris and London, was European in mindset. Likewise,

the radical leaders were far better schooled in revolutionary theory than one might expect. As

William A Pelz states, Russia was a historical curiosity, meaning they asked many questions, and
Gibson 4

sought answers, augmenting their culture, and making great advancements technologically.

Historically, Russia has always sought to be the most sophisticated country, and the working

class exposure to European influence swayed beliefs to be like that of Europeans, growing the

socialist mindset across the state. The adoption of socialist policies and ideologies were in favor

of the people, and while later on down the road the corruption of leaders would harm the country

as a whole, the ideas that follow socialism outweighed the negatives. Yes, Russia could have

gone down the capitalist road, and go against the people, but the country would have suffered

more, making the wealthy even more rich, and increase the class gap, which is what the people

wanted to avoid, which they did when adopting socialism. Everyone was given a purpose, and

could work for their own good, and the betterment of the people, rapidly expanding in

technologies unheard of by the public, and the enrichment of the culture that followed the

unification of the population under a socialist authority. In the end, Russias adoption of socialist

policies and working towards the growth of the community as a whole, rather than taking the

direction towards a class structure with large gaps, gave power to the people, and grew the

country culturally and physically, as the Russian society shared more ideas freely, and labored

together, and eventually would go on to fight many wars together, many of which they played a

crutch role in ending.

The unification of Russia under a socialist regime enriched, and preserved the already

established culture, and the establishment of a workers union accelerated the technological

advancements of an otherwise failing state. The Russian empires former glory was soon restored

when revolutionists overthrew a corrupt tsar, and paved a path for Russia to become a world

power house, ending wars, and making great scientific discoveries.

You might also like