The socio-economic development of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the twentieth century was for many decades a virtually unexplored aspect of Russian history. In Soviet historiography, this topic was “forbidden”, and mostly pseudoscientific propaganda lampoons were written about “backward tsarist Russia”, “poor starving peasants”, etc. In emigrant literature, only S.S. Oldenburg and B.L. Brazol in their brilliant works “The Reign of Emperor Nicholas II” (http://www.e-reading.mobi/book.php?book=150563) and “The Reign of the Emperor Nicholas II 1894-1917 in figures and facts" (http://www.dorogadomoj.com/dr51bra.html) were able to convey to descendants the truth about the real Russia that perished in the battles of the civil war and the dungeons of the Cheka. Currently, interest in True Russian History among the population is steadily increasing, and an increasing number of various historical works - monographs and articles - are appearing (both in Russia and in the world - just remember the American economist Paul Gregory) - which piece by piece collect the true image of historical Russia , the Russian national state in which our ancestors lived 100 years ago.

First of all, it should be noted that the Russian Empire was one of the four powers, a little later than others (Britain and France) that entered the era of the industrial revolution and experienced industrialization at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. rapid economic and demographic growth, namely of the German Empire, the Russian Empire, the United States of America and the Japanese Empire. Economic growth in the above countries was ensured by the rapid development of the free market while maintaining state regulation in heavy industry, low taxes, attracting foreign capital and the active development of their own natural deposits (the latter, however, did not apply to the Land of the Rising Sun).

So, what was the economic development of our country at the beginning of the twentieth century, the “Russian economic miracle”? Below are figures and facts that, in various social and economic aspects, characterize the fundamental processes that took place in the Russian Empire in those years:

1. Industrial production growth was 8% in 1889-1899. and 6.25% in 1900-1913. In general, from 1890 to 1914. Russian industry increased its productivity 4 times, from 1885 to 1913. – 5 times. At the same time, the growth of heavy industry exceeded the growth of light industry (174.5% for 1909-1913 versus 137.7%). The Russian Empire ranked first in the world in terms of economic growth and production concentration. In terms of industrial production, #Russia was in 4th place in the world, after Britain, the USA and Germany. In terms of GDP, Russia was in second place in the world (after the USA).

2. The country's national income increased from 1894 to 1914. 3 times - from 8 billion to 22-24 billion rubles. In terms of national income, Russia has taken 4th place in the world. In terms of its growth rate, Russia was also in first place in the world.

3. There was a significant increase in income of the population. Thus, national income per capita from 1894 to 1913. increased by 2 times. In terms of national income per capita, the Russian Empire ranked 5th in the world. Deposits of the population in savings banks only for the period from 1908 to 1912. increased by 30% (from 1899 to 1912 - by 110%), while the stable and high growth in the standard of living of the population was approximately the same for all classes. The total volume of deposits of the population for 1894-1914. increased 7 times.

4. The Russian Empire pursued a policy of a deficit-free budget, without raising taxes. In 1908, the budget balance was 30 million gold rubles, in 1912 – already 335 million.

5. One of the most important reasons for the rapid development of the economy was low taxes. The Russian Empire had the lowest taxes in Europe (only Italy had lower taxes than Russian ones). For comparison: in Russia, direct taxes per person were 3.11 rubles, indirect - 5.98 rubles, in Britain - 26.75 and 15.76 (measured in rubles), respectively. The tax burden was distributed fairly - 80% of the country's population accounted for 32% of all taxes and payments.

6. The gold reserves of the Russian Empire, thanks to the country’s successful financial policy, by 1914 reached 1st place in the world in terms of volume - 1 billion 695 million rubles, or 1311 tons of gold.

7. There was a cooperative boom in the country. Russia ranked 1st in Europe in terms of the number of cooperatives. The total amount of the population's investment in small credit institutions (on a cooperative basis) increased from 1894 to 1917. 17 times.

8. In terms of foreign trade volume, Russia ranked 5th in Europe and 6th in the world. From 1900 to 1913 Exports of Russian goods doubled and exceeded imports. Thus, in 1912, exports amounted to 1.52 billion gold rubles, and imports - 1.37 billion.

9. Railway boom - from 1880 to 1917 58,251 km were built. railways, the average annual increase was 1575 km. In terms of the length of railways, the Russian Empire was in first place in Europe and second in the world (after the USA). It should be added that Russian railways were cheap and comfortable, and that the most powerful steam locomotive in Europe (type “L”, designed by V.I. Lopushinsky) was invented in Russia.

10. From 1887 to 1913 (i.e., in the years of the highest rates of economic growth), coal production increased 8 times, oil - 3.4 times, iron smelting - 7.8 times, steel - 7.4 times, flax production - 2.9 times, Portland cement - 46 times. Those. we can confidently talk about the rapid development of all major sectors of the mining industry. By 1913, Russia was in second place in the world in terms of oil production, 5th in coal production, and 4th in terms of ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy output.

11. Mechanical engineering was developing at full speed. From 1907 to 1913 production of internal combustion engines increased by 3.8 times, wagons for steam locomotives - by 1.9 times, plows - by 1.9 times, seeders - by 2.1 times, harvesting machines - by 2.3 times, threshers - by 6 ,6 times. 63% of equipment and means of production were produced domestically. In total, in terms of mechanical engineering output, Russia was in third place in the world.

12. The electrification of the country was actively taking place. In terms of electricity output, the Russian Empire was in third place in the world (after the USA and Germany, on a par with Britain). From 1908 to 1912 the amount of electricity production increased by 400 - from 9.2 to 46 million rubles.

13. The country's textile industry also showed successful growth. From 1900 to 1912 the number of weaving factories increased by 94%, the volume of fabric produced - by 45%. For 1894-1911 The textile industry doubled its production. The Russian Empire fully provided itself with the products of the textile industry, and also “clothed” other countries in Europe and Asia, occupying 1st place in the world in textile exports.

14. Economic development was supported by rapid demographic growth. From 1894 to 1917 Russia's population increased by 62.5 million people - from 122 to 184.5 million. Thus, the average annual population growth at that time was just about 2.4 million people per year. Thus, a colossal demographic potential was created, which was never revealed due to 1917 and the further “charms” of Bolshevism.

15. Russian agriculture also developed rapidly. In terms of the volume of exports of grain crops, eggs, milk, butter, meat and sugar, the Russian Empire was in first place in the world. It also took first place in the number of horses, cattle and sheep per capita. For 1908-1912 Compared to the previous decade, wheat production increased by 37.5%, barley - by 62.2%, oats - by 20.9%, corn - by 44.8%. Grain exports accounted for 40% of world exports in the years of good harvest (1909-1910), in 1908 and 1912. - 11.5% (because there was a bad harvest), in 1913 - 30%.

16. The Russian Empire had a hard currency, on which a gold standard was established. 1 gold ruble was equal to 2.16 German marks or 0.51 dollars. The gold reserves covered paper money by 100% (in Germany and Austria-Hungary - no more than 50%).

17. In the Russian Empire there was exceptionally developed social legislation. In terms of average annual earnings of workers (taking into account taxes and prices for basic food products), our country was second only to the United States on a global scale (our average wage was 85% of the American one). Our average working year was 250 days (for comparison: in Britain - 310 days, in continental Europe - 300 days). The workers' social insurance law adopted in 1912 (earlier than in many European countries) was one of the most progressive in the world. From 1890 to 1914 industrial workers' incomes tripled.

18. There was an active development of healthcare. From 1901 to 1913 healthcare costs increased 3.3 times; in terms of the number of doctors, Russia was in 2nd place in Europe and 3rd in the world. From 1901 to 1913 the number of people who received medical care doubled – from 49 to 98 million people.

19. Literacy of the population increased at a successful pace - from 21% in 1897 to 56% in 1916. It must be remembered that official statistics took into account gymnasiums, secondary schools, zemstvo schools, but did not take into account, for example, numerous parish and other rural schools, built with money from peasants, and not from the state itself. In addition, some social groups, namely the Old Believers, being universally literate, did not indicate their level of education for political reasons. Therefore, the actual literacy of the population was much higher than 56%; only non-native regions of the North Caucasus, Central Asia, Siberia and the Far North were illiterate. In 1908, universal primary education was introduced, and 10 thousand secondary educational institutions were built per year. In addition, in 1916, about 80% of conscripts were literate, and the Soviet census in 1920 found that 86% of young people from 12 to 16 years old were literate (the vast majority of them were educated during the times of “tsarism”).

So, based on the above facts, we can conclude that the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries. developed at an extremely high rate, which fully fits the definition of an “economic miracle.” It should be noted that absolutely all sectors of industry and agriculture were actively developing, and a successful social policy was being pursued. All this led to the fact that by 1913 Russia entered the top five leading world powers (Britain, USA, Germany, Russia, France) in terms of most socio-economic indicators, and at the same time, far from exhausting its potential, continued to develop successfully and already during the war years (as discussed in my other article). And that is why the words of the historian and sociologist B.N. Mironov are so accurate: “During the 19th-20th centuries, the Russian autocracy was the leader of modernization, the indisputable conductor of economic, cultural and social progress in the country. Significant, perhaps the greatest, successes in the entire history of Russia were achieved in the last two reigns, with the active participation of the supreme power and its government.” And that is why the German Chancellor T. von Bethmann-Hollweg was so right when he declared: “The future belongs to Russia.”

Russia at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. remained an agricultural country, but its industry was experiencing rapid growth.

The impetus for production growth was railway construction. It resumed in 1893. The railway network expanded from 1895 to 1899. on average by more than 3 thousand km per year, in the next five years - by more than 2 thousand km per year. The construction of the Great Siberian Railway (Trans-Siberian) was of great importance for the development of industry and agriculture. The construction of railways contributed to an increase in the production of metal, heavy engineering products, coal, timber and other materials.

The sectors of the national economy associated with new types of fuel - coal and oil, the production of which increased 3 times, developed at a particularly rapid pace. In general, the output of heavy industry products increased 2.3 times. The rate of industrial growth in Russia was the highest in the world - up to 8.1% per year.

Despite the high rates of development of industrial production, Russia lagged significantly behind the world powers in terms of qualitative indicators of the economy: industrial production per capita, labor productivity, and technical equipment of enterprises. In terms of the level of socio-economic development, it was a moderately developed agrarian-industrial country with significant potential.

Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. was a country with a diverse economy. Along with the latest capitalist production, small-scale (craft, handicraft) and even subsistence farming occupied a significant place in its economy.

The role of the state in the economy.

An important feature of Russia was the presence of a large public sector of the economy. Its core was state-owned factories that met the military needs of the state. They belonged to the state and were financed by it. The only customer and buyer of their products was the state, and they were managed by government officials. At the beginning of the 20th century. There were about 30 largest state-owned factories: Tula, Izhevsk, Sestroretsk, Obukhovsk, Izhora, etc. In addition, the state owned over 2/3 of the railway
networks, vast land and forest lands, postal and telegraph communications.

The role of the state in the Russian economy did not end there. The government influenced the economic activities of private enterprises: it regulated prices; protecting Russian industry, it introduced high customs duties; distributed government orders to private companies and firms; provided them with loans through the State Bank.

Foreign capital.

The state created favorable conditions for attracting foreign capital. An important role was played by the 1897 on the initiative of the Minister of Finance S.Yu. Witte monetary reform. She introduced gold backing of the ruble and the free exchange of paper money for gold.

At the beginning of the 20th century. foreign investment in the Russian economy accounted for almost 40% of all capital investments. Active attraction of foreign capital did not lead to the creation
foreign zones of influence, to complete or even partial dependence of Russia on foreign companies and states. Foreign companies and banks did not pursue independent economic policies and did not have the opportunity to influence political decisions. Coming to Russia, foreign capital merged with domestic capital, and the opportunities for Russia's inclusion in the world economic system expanded.

The participation of foreign capital in the Russian economy also had its drawbacks: part of the profit, which could have increased the country’s national wealth, expanded investment, and increased the living standards of the population, went abroad.

Russian monopoly capitalism.

In 1900-1903 European countries were rocked by a powerful economic crisis. It also hit the Russian economy. Heavy industry suffered the most, especially such
industries such as metallurgy, metalworking, mechanical engineering, oil production and refining. The crisis caused the death of many enterprises that were weak financially, organizationally or technically. Over three years, over 3 thousand enterprises were closed, employing 112 thousand workers. These enterprises could not withstand the competition. Railway construction has decreased significantly.

The response of the capitalist economy to the crisis was the increased concentration of production and the creation of monopolies. Let us recall that when creating monopolies, the owners of individual enterprises agreed on production volumes, prices, markets for raw materials and other issues.
The forms of monopolies were different. Cartels, syndicates, trusts were created, and later concerns appeared.

Syndicates became the main form of monopolies in Russia. They fought for the complete subjugation of the leading sectors of the economy. Thus, the Prodameta syndicate (1901), which at the time of its inception united 12 metallurgical plants in the south of Russia, in 1904 controlled the sales of 60%, and in 1912 - about 80% of the country's metallurgical products. The Produgol, Prodvagon, and Gvozd syndicates controlled the corresponding industries. The Nobel-Mazut cartel reigned supreme in the oil industry.

Monopolies also emerged in the banking system. The five largest banks controlled almost half of the country's financial transactions. Gradually they began to squeeze out foreign capital, becoming the main investors in domestic industry.

Agriculture.

By the beginning of the 20th century. Russia ranked first in the world in terms of total agricultural production. It accounted for 50% of the world's rye harvest, about 20% of wheat and 25% of world grain exports. The production of sugar beets, flax, and industrial crops increased rapidly. Livestock numbers and productivity increased.

There were successes, but the situation in Russian agriculture as a whole was not determined by them. Contemporaries talked about the impoverishment of the center. In the provinces of Central Russia, semi-middle peasant and poor peasant farms predominated. They did not produce commercial (specially intended for sale) products. The fields were cultivated using old methods - plows and wooden harrows. Lack of livestock and money prevented the application of sufficient fertilizers. Productivity was low, and even if peasants sold bread on the market, it was at the expense of their own nutrition. The catastrophic consequence was mass starvation in lean years. The peasants were convinced that the situation could change only when they received at their disposal part of the landowner's land, which was used extremely inefficiently.

There were 130 thousand landowner estates on more than 20 million peasant farms. According to experts, for the normal existence of a family of 6 people in the black earth zone, 10.5 dessiatines were required. In fact, there were about 7 dessiatines per peasant farm. The impoverishment of the center was complemented by agrarian overpopulation - historians talk about 20 million “extra mouths” that had no use in the countryside. The situation was complicated by the preservation of the community. At the beginning of the 20th century. 4/5 of allotment peasant land was in communal use.

The community carried out regular redistribution of land among its members, vigilantly ensuring that everyone got the land equally. Meanwhile, the population of the Russian Empire increased annually by 2.5 million people, mainly due to the peasantry. With the next redistribution, each peasant farm had less and less land left.

The shortcomings of communal land ownership became more and more obvious: the community, which saved the weak, hindered the activities of strong, economic peasants; she strove for relative equality, but prevented the improvement of the general welfare of the village.

So, Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. In terms of economic development, it was a moderately developed agrarian-industrial country with a diverse economy. The priority task was to modernize agriculture.

Preface

03/12/2016 was the birthday of grandfather V.V. Milekhina. A discussion between me and my family members revealed my family's misunderstanding of my scientific viewpoint and mistaking it for blind faith. Before this, I had never written a scientific paper, and therefore this work can be considered an amateur work as close as possible to a scientific one. Since this work contains questions on historical topics, and I, not being a professional historian, do not have access to archives, in this work I will use materials from available scientific works of professional historians, where there are the necessary archival references, with links to these scientific works.

Economic development of the Russian Empire 1905-1917.

1. Results of the 1905 revolution

As you know, the first revolution took place in the Russian Empire in 1905. On January 9, 1905, an event occurred that went down in history as “Bloody Sunday.”

At the end of 1904, the economic situation of the workers was extremely difficult. Due to the impossibility of reaching an agreement with factory owners and officials, the workers attempted to appeal to the tsar. A “Petition for Workers’ Needs” was drawn up, and a procession of workers to the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg was legally organized. At the Narva Gate, Trinity Bridge and other places, the path of the procession was blocked by police and cavalry detachments, who met the workers with rifle volleys. Only some of the demonstrators managed to get to Palace Square. The troops lined up here opened aimed fire on them. On this day, over a thousand people were killed and several thousand were wounded.

After this incident, a wave of strikes and uprisings took place throughout the country, which lasted until October 17. As a result of the revolution, the government made a number of democratic concessions, and the State Duma was created as “a special legislative advisory institution, which is given the preliminary development and discussion of legislative proposals and consideration of the list of state revenues and expenses.” Members of parties representing various classes of society were represented in the Duma.

But the ruling elite did not like the decisions of the Duma, and they decided to disperse it, then they had to assemble a new Duma so that popular uprisings would not happen again. But its decisions did not satisfy the ruling elite. Then, in 1907, the Third Duma was assembled, the drafting of which was approached more responsibly, and it well reflected the interests of the ruling elite. P.A. Stolypin was appointed the new prime minister, who was supposed to carry out the necessary reforms in the economy and society.

The revolution of 1905-1907 serves as a good example of the people defending their interests in the state system, as well as the attitude of the authorities towards these interests.

Caricature of the elections to the Third State Duma.

2. Stolypin's reforms

To consider Stolypin's reforms, it is worth noting that bourgeois agrarian development followed two paths - bourgeois-landowner and bourgeois-peasant, and as a result of the revolution, the first of these paths was chosen. Representatives of workers and peasants in the Third Duma were a clear minority, and this made it possible for the authorities to carry out the most stringent counter-revolutionary laws against them.

Many hundreds of participants in the liberation struggle were executed, tens of thousands were imprisoned and sent to hard labor. The tsarist authorities sought to liquidate the organizations of the proletariat.

From 1906 to 1912, more than six hundred trade unions were closed and no less than seven hundred were denied registration. Revolutionary Social Democracy was most brutally persecuted. The mere fact of belonging to the proletarian party served as the basis for the most severe sentences.

The capitalists widely resorted to economic terror: lockouts, “blacklists,” punitive dismissals of advanced workers. Coming in 190 - 1908 the new industrial crisis led to mass unemployment, especially among metalworkers. Thus, those layers of the proletariat that played a leading role in the labor movement weakened. Under these conditions, the bourgeoisie managed to eliminate a number of economic gains of the working class. The working day was lengthened again, to an average of 10-12 hours. Old methods of exploitation were supplemented by new ones aimed at increasing the intensification of labor. Male labor was replaced by cheaper female and child labor.

In the villages there was reprisal against participants in peasant unrest. The landowners more than compensated themselves for the “losses” incurred during the revolution: rental prices for land, fines for cutting down the master’s forest, for grassing meadows, etc. increased.

The aggressive course in the national-colonial policy of tsarism intensified. Through a series of acts, the government nullified a significant part of the concessions in relation to Finland that the revolution of 1905 wrested from it. A police campaign was launched against the national culture of the oppressed peoples: many newspapers and magazines, cultural societies that emerged during the revolution, were closed; teachers who taught children in their native language were persecuted.

The liquidation of the democratic gains of 1905 and the unlimited arbitrariness of the tsarist authorities were combined with the pogrom activities of the Black Hundred gangs, which were openly and secretly encouraged and financed by the government.

However, after the objective lessons of the revolution, even the most ardent reactionaries realized that a simple return to previous forms of political domination was no longer possible. In order to retain power in its hands, tsarism was forced to maneuver, supplement absolutism with Bonapartist methods, and rely simultaneously on both the feudal landowners and the big bourgeoisie. For this, the Duma was needed as a form of organization on a national scale for the counter-revolutionary bloc of the propertied classes. The autocracy needed a parliamentary façade to obtain new foreign loans. The reaction also did not abandon plans to deceive the masses, to split the democratic forces with the help of the Duma.

The executioner's zeal, combined with a “constitutional” pose, as well as the understanding that tsarism needed to take new steps towards the capitalist development of the country, turned the noble protege Stolypin into the most acceptable candidate for dictator for the top of the commercial and industrial bourgeoisie. “First calm, then reforms” - this Stolypin saying contained the general program of the counter-revolution.

The revolution forced the landowners to abandon their reliance on patriarchy and the monarchical illusions of the peasantry and look for an ally in the village elite - the kulaks. At noble congresses they dreamed aloud about an army of strong property owners who, “like soldiers behind an officer,” would follow the landowners in the event of a new revolution.

The focus on the “strong” required the elimination of the community and communal equalization of land use. To give scope to the kulak's enterprise, to help him rob the rural poor and round up the lands at their expense, to establish a large capitalist economy with the widespread use of hired labor from ruined peasants - this was the new course of tsarism's agrarian policy. To implement it, it was necessary not only to ensure the exit of the kulak from the community, but also to force the rest of the peasants to do so.

The Stolypin agrarian law allowed all plots of communal land that were in constant use of the peasants to be assigned as personal property. This order was beneficial primarily to the kulaks, who over the years managed to get their hands on a considerable part of the poor peasants' plots in the form of rent and other things. In addition, the best part of the communal lands was allocated for kulak farms and cuts (a cut is a plot of land allocated for personal ownership; a farm is the same plot, but located separately, with economic and residential buildings on it).

The growth and enrichment of the rural bourgeoisie did not, however, mean the success of Stolypin’s agrarian policy as a whole. Tsarism failed to introduce individual farming of peasant owners everywhere: by the beginning of 1917, farmsteads and farmsteads accounted for approximately only one tenth of peasant households. Most of them were located in two separate regions, centers of developed capitalist agriculture - the north-west, adjacent to the old centers of farmsteads in the Baltic states, as well as the south and south-east (southern regions of Ukraine, Ciscaucasia, Middle Volga region). In the remaining provinces of European Russia and, above all, in the black earth center of the country, communal orders survived.

Semi-feudal forms of exploitation of the peasants remained on a huge scale and, as a result, the extreme backwardness of agriculture. In terms of productivity, Russia was one of the last in Europe. Although noble economies and kulak farms used agricultural machines on a much larger scale than before, the main agricultural implements remained the plow and the wooden harrow. The peasantry for the most part became impoverished; over 60% of it, according to 1912 data, were poor (horseless and one-horse households).

According to the land census of 1905, in 50 provinces of European Russia there were 12.3 million households owning 138.8 million dessiatines. allotment land. 9.2 million households owned land under communal law (76.7% of all households), which owned 100.7 million dessiatines. (80.4% of allotment land). Together with the Cossacks, 77.2% of households and 83.4% of allotment lands were under communal rights.

According to the governors, who were far from interested in downplaying the successes in carrying out the reform and had the most extensive data on the state of affairs in the provinces, by January 1, 1916% separated from the community and consolidated the land into the personal property of 2.5 million householders (27% of all communal households), which had 15.9 million dessiatines. (14% of all communal lands). The most active exit from the community was in 1908-1910. (more than half of all allocated households left), and since 1911, exit from the community has sharply decreased.

3. Economy of the Russian Empire on the eve of the First World War

A comparative historical analysis of the natural, demographic and military-economic potential of the Russian Empire on the eve of the First World War makes it possible to identify, in terms of quantitative and qualitative parameters, the real place it occupied in the world.

In the literature, these issues, traditionally being at the center of the ideological and political struggle, have received contradictory interpretations.

Possessing great national wealth - 160 billion rubles. (or 8.6% of world wealth), a significant part of which (90 billion rubles) were various kinds of natural resources, the Russian Empire, however, was in third place, after the United States (400 billion rubles, 21.6%) and The British Empire (230 billion rubles, 12.4%) place, sharing it with the German Empire and slightly exceeding the possessions of France (140 billion rubles, 7.5%). The qualitative indicator - the average per capita distribution of national wealth in Russia (900 rubles) was barely close to the world average (1 thousand rubles), exceeding only the Japanese by 1.5–1.8 times, but 3–5 times inferior to the American one, British, French and German, and 1.5–2 times Austrian and Italian.

The same follows from the data characterizing the role of financial capital and its place in the formation of national wealth. With a financial capital of 11.5 billion rubles. (4.6% of world financial capital), of which 7.5 billion rubles, or 2/3, were foreign investments, Russia in absolute terms surpassed only the powers of the second magnitude: Austria-Hungary (8.9 billion rubles, 3. 5%), Italy (5.1 billion rubles, 2%) and Japan (4.5 billion rubles, 1.8%), but was several times inferior to the leading world powers: 4.5 times the USA and the British Empire (52.5 billion rubles each, 21%), 4 times in France (47 billion rubles, 18.8%) and 3 times in Germany (35.1 billion rubles, 14%). If we take only the Russian national financial capital itself, without taking into account foreign investments, then the absolute and relative indicators will decrease by at least another 3 times.

The share of financial capital in the national wealth of Russia, which proportionally reflects the process of capitalization of the national economy, across all its structures from imperial to central metropolitan, fluctuated, amounting to 7.1%–11.6%, that is, it was at least half as much as all average indicators: world average - 13.5%, imperial average - 17%, metropolitan average - 19% and metropolitan average - 23.4%. For all these most important qualitative indicators, Russia was 2.5–4.5 times inferior not only to the leading, most developed French (33.5–43.7%), British (22.8–36.2%), German (23 - 24.5%) parameters, but also 1.5–2.5 times Austrian (15.3–37.8%), American (13.1–14.8%), Italian (12.1–17 .9%) and even the smallest - Japanese (12.5–15.5%).

Ultimately, of all the leading world powers that embarked on the path of capitalization of the national economy, Russia occupied the last place in all imperial structures, and only Great Russia barely reached the world average level. Although the Russian Empire ranked fourth in terms of national income (16.4 billion rubles, 7.4% of the global total) after the United States, German and British empires, its per capita indicators were in penultimate place, ahead only of Japan, but not reaching the world average.

In terms of gross industrial production (5.7 billion rubles, 3.8% of the world total), the Russian Empire was even inferior to France, being in fifth place in the world. All Russian quality indicators (the volume of industrial production per person and the annual output of one worker) were only half of the world average, exceeding only Japanese and Italian imperial data, but significantly, 5–10 times, inferior to the USA, Germany and Great Britain.

In terms of foreign trade turnover (2.9 billion rubles, 3.4% of the world), the Russian Empire exceeded the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Italy and Japan, but was significantly, 7 times, behind Great Britain, 4 times behind Germany, 3 times - from the USA and France. In terms of average per capita parameters, the contrast was even more striking. All Russian indicators. were 2–12 times less than those of other leading powers.

In terms of the length of railways (79 thousand km in single-track terms), the Russian Empire ranked second in the world, inferior, albeit 5 times, only to the United States. According to such quality indicators as the length of railways per 100 square meters. km., Russian imperial indicators (0.3) approached only those of France (0.4) and the British Empire (0.1), but were 6 times less than those of the USA, 20–50 times less than the metropolitan structures of European states In terms of the length of railways per 10 thousand inhabitants (4.2–5.2), the Russian Empire was ahead only of the traditional maritime powers - the Japanese and British Empires, but compared to the United States, this figure was 8 times less. Only Great Russia had this indicator (5.2) close to the world average (5.9).

Although formally there were 2.5 million registered tons of passenger fleet cargo under the Russian flag, in fact only a fifth of it belonged to it, the rest was the property of French shipowners. Therefore, in terms of tonnage, its merchant fleet was at the level of Austria-Hungary - a traditionally land power - and was significantly (60 times) inferior to the British merchant fleet. This gap is explained primarily by the maritime nature of the Russian Empire, as well as the relatively weak development of its navy as a whole. In terms of the number of registered tons per 1 thousand inhabitants (2.7–4.1), Russian indicators were the lowest and amounted to only 10–20% of the world average (24.3), 5–100 times less than that of other leading powers.

Although, in terms of volume indicators, Russia occupied an intermediate position between the leading industrial powers (USA, German and British Empires), on the one hand, and industrially developed ones (Austria-Hungary, Italy and Japan) on the other, and had overall potential close to that of France , according to quality indicators, it shared the last and penultimate places with Japan. In this regard, Russia lagged behind the leading industrialized countries by 3–8 times, and behind Italy and Austria-Hungary by 1.5–3 times.

This gap can only be explained by the fact that if England embarked on the path of industrialization from the middle of the 17th century, the USA and France - from the end of the 18th century, Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary - from 1805–1815, then Russia and Japan - only since the 1860s. Therefore, the position of a catching-up power became characteristic of Russia in the second half of the 19th and 20th centuries, when the advantages of the new industrial society, especially in the economic sphere, became obvious. The gap between traditional (feudal) and industrial society acquired a qualitative character, which is especially noticeable when comparing average per capita indicators, which began to differ by an order of magnitude or more.

4. First World War.

I will not describe the course of the war here. But I want to note that in view of the above state of the economy at the start of the war, there was nothing good there. The most interesting thing about this war is that after several months of fighting, our army simply ran out of ammunition, and our wonderful capitalist economy, built by the economic genius Stolypin, could only borrow more and more funds to buy ammunition and weapons from our Western partners. The state of affairs rapidly deteriorated, and in 1917, first the February bourgeois and then the socialist October Revolution took place, after which the Bolsheviks concluded the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which saved our country from the fate of a colony fragmented by foreign capital on the outskirts of the world.

5. Conclusion to the first part

There is another interesting aspect to this moment in history: the ability of our country's capitalist economy to fight a long war. I recommend you think about this.

From Boris Yulin's LiveJournal:

I open Academician Tarle, the “Crimean War”. I'm reading chapter 3:

The game of the British cabinet during Menshikov's entire stay in Constantinople was very difficult. On the one hand, it was necessary to support Turkey’s resistance in every possible way, promising it help and protection, and to conduct active agitation both in the English press and in European diplomatic circles. On the other hand, it was necessary to lead Brunnov in London astray from the correct understanding of reality, instilling in him in various ways the idea that in fact the English cabinet would never take up arms because of Turkey. The first function was assumed by Foreign Secretary Clarendon, who became the instrument of Home Secretary Palmerston, and Lord Stratford-Radcliffe. The second function was involuntarily performed, of course, primarily by Prime Minister Lord Aberdeen, who at first, however, wanted to achieve the diplomatic defeat of Nicholas without war, and only then stopped opposing Palmerston. In any case, objectively, Aberdeen did in 1853 what Palmerston needed: he inspired the Tsar with confidence that England would not come to the defense of Turkey, and this pushed Nicholas to take more and more irreparable steps. But sometimes attempts were made directly from Palmerston’s group to convince Nikolai that everything was going well for him in London. At the beginning of May, Clarendon speaks with Brunnov, discovers “the extent to which the cabinet’s anxiety is aroused by the seriousness of the state of affairs in Turkey,” and ends by suddenly conveying the extent to which Her Majesty Queen Victoria rejoices, directly “congratulates herself” (se félicite) on the fact that her friendly relations with the Russian court “are becoming closer and closer.” And then Clarendon (leading Palmerston’s irreconcilably hostile anti-Russian line) informs Brunnov that all Hamilton Seymour’s reports from St. Petersburg are imbued with the “best spirit”...

In general, in the spring of 1853, when the main work of Stratford-Radcliffe in organizing the failure of Menshikov’s mission was essentially completed and several days remained before the final result, in London they continued to so skillfully deceive and deceive Brunnov that he seriously believes that “Lord Stratford has taken for facilitating a friendly agreement between the ambassadors of Russia, France and the Turkish ministers,” and only a few do not understand why the benevolent lord sitting in Constantinople would not simply advise the Turks to sign a formal act. He writes this on May 14, 1853, under the impression of a conversation with Lord Clarendon, who assured him that “Her Britannic Majesty’s government relies on the efforts of Lord Radcliffe to facilitate a friendly agreement”...

List of sources

1. http://scepsis.net/library/id_2207.html - Ivan Kovalchenko

Stolypin agrarian reform (myths and reality)

2. http://scepsis.net/library/id_1217.html - Alexander Stepanov

Russia's place in the world on the eve of the First World War

3. http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000152/index.shtml - World History. Encyclopedia. Volume 7

First of all, it should be noted that in the 80s. XIX century The industrial revolution ended.

The expansion of the country's transport network intensified trade exchange and the growth of small-scale production (especially in the textile industry, the center of which was the Moscow region). Intensified competition, monopolization of production, and the global economic crisis caused the death of many financially, organizationally and technically weak Russian enterprises (the crisis of 1900-1903 led to the closure of over three thousand enterprises, which employed 112 thousand workers). At the same time, within the framework of agricultural production (more than 4/5 of the population was employed in the country’s agriculture; in 1905, peasants in the European part of Russia owned 160 million dessiatinas and rented another 20-25 million, leaving only 40-50 million dessiatines of arable land), handicraft, handicraft and fishing industries developed. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century. in the Ozernaya region (which included the Pskov, Novgorod and St. Petersburg provinces) there were 13-14 thousand factory workers and 29 thousand handicraftsmen. In the Central Russian Black Earth Region, 127 thousand people were employed in factories and factories, and there were 500 thousand artisans. In the Vyatka province, 180-190 thousand workers were involved in handicrafts. Craftsmen made a variety of crafts from wood, bark, fabric, leather, felt, clay and metal.

Russian agriculture has also been capitalized, as evidenced by the growth of commercial entrepreneurship and the associated specialization of individual economic regions of the country. This was facilitated by the rise in world prices for agricultural food products at the beginning of the 20th century. At the beginning of the 20th century. The steppe provinces of the South and Trans-Volga region were finally identified as grain production areas for sale on the market, mainly on the external market. The northern, Baltic and central provinces became areas of cattle breeding and dairy farming. The northwestern provinces specialized in the production of flax, and the cultivation of sugar beets was concentrated in Ukraine and the Central Black Earth Zone. In the agricultural economy, the use of machinery, mineral fertilizers, and selective seeds increased. All these processes went in parallel with a sharp increase in the peasant population. In 1905, the tsar's manifesto announced a reduction in half from January 1, 1906 and a complete cessation of redemption payments from January 1, 1907. At the same time, a Senate decree was issued establishing more preferential conditions for issuing loans from the Peasant Land Bank in order to successfully help land-poor peasants in expanding the purchasing area of ​​their land holdings. The revolutionary explosion among the peasantry in the first Russian revolution was a reaction to unjust land management. By the beginning of the 20th century. 2-3% of the peasant population were kulaks, and 7-8% of wealthy peasants joined them; There were 25% of horseless farms; 10% of peasant farms did not have cows. The basis of the village was the middle peasant, the main bearer of patriarchal traditions. The peasants wanted to take the land from the landowners and divide it among themselves. A surplus population appeared in the Russian village, the number of which at the beginning of the century was 23 million people. Part of it served as a reserve for Russian industry, but the latter’s capabilities were limited and this circumstance stimulated “peasant intervention.” The head of government, P. A. Stolypin, was able to pass a decree that marked the beginning of agrarian reform (the creation of small personal land ownership). But Stolypin spoke out for recognition of the inviolability of private property and against the forced alienation of landowners' lands. Stolypin, speaking out against the agrarian programs of the radical left parties, prophetically warned: “...recognition of the nationalization of the land will lead to such a social revolution, to such a displacement of all values, to such a change in all social, legal and civil relations, which history has never seen.” By 1915, individual farms accounted for 10.3% of all peasant farms, occupying 8.8% of all allotment land. Of the 2.5 million households that separated from the community, 1.2 million sold their plots and rushed to the cities and beyond the Urals. The government forced the mass resettlement of peasants, exempted them from paying taxes for a long time, exempted men from military service, provided them with a plot of land (15 hectares for the head of the family and 45 hectares for the rest of the family) and cash benefits (200 rubles per family). Over three years (1907-1909), the number of immigrants amounted to 1 million 708 thousand. In total, from 1906 to 1914. 40 million people moved to Siberia. The percentage of those who settled in the new place was very high; only 17% or 524 thousand people returned. The resettlement had a progressive significance: the population of Siberia increased, new settlers developed more than 30 million acres of empty land, built thousands of villages, and generally gave impetus to the development of the productive forces of Siberia.

The agriculture of the resettlement areas was looking for the most acceptable ways of existence for itself, including the formation of land relations in the resettlement areas in accordance with the program of P. A. Stolypin - along the path of creating strong individual farms based on credit cooperation, which then began to carry out sales and supply functions. The increased specialization of agricultural areas led to the formation of cooperative unions. Cooperative unions included peasant production in the system of not only the Russian but also the world market. The Siberian unions sold oil, furs, wool, wheat, bast, and hemp abroad. Exports provided huge revenues to the treasury. Over time, similar cooperation spread to European Russia. In 1912, the cooperative Moscow People's Bank was created, which provided loans and supplies to the peasantry through cooperation of agricultural machinery, fertilizers, and seeds. The bank took over the cooperation activities of local cooperative unions. The next stage in the development of the cooperative movement occurred during the First World War. On January 1, 1917, there were 63 thousand different types of cooperatives in Russia, which united 24 million people. Rural cooperation served 94 million people, or 82.5% of the rural population.

The rapid economic development of Russia, the modernization of production, the expansion of the domestic market, the growth of the purchasing power of the population, the increase in wages for workers, positive changes in the country's agriculture (increased profitability) contributed to a new industrial boom (since 1909). The new rise was characterized by the increased development of agricultural production, the further growth of cities, an increase in the level of technical equipment and power supply of industry, and an increase in military orders from the government. In 1909-1913. industrial production increased almost 1.5 times. During the pre-war industrial boom, the State Bank remained the country's largest commercial bank, which expanded trade lending, especially in the periphery. His role in lending grain trade was great. The entry of Russian banks into the financing of industry marked the beginning of the merging of banking and industrial capital. During this period, the system and form of industrial financing changed: the role of the main investors was increasingly assigned to domestic rather than foreign banks.

Government reforms of the second half of the 19th century. and the beginning of the 20th century. contributed to the growth of the country's population. According to the 1897 census, the total number of inhabitants of the Russian Empire was 125.5 million people; in January 1915 it was 182 million people. Russia was the country with the highest population growth in Europe - 1.6% (Germany - 1.4%; England - 1.2; Belgium - 1.0; France - 0.12;).

In Russia, the social structure of the population was also changing. First of all, the erosion of the “old” commercial bourgeoisie - the merchants - began. At the end of the 20th century. Professional criteria for enrollment in merchant guilds were abolished. They began to enroll as merchants to gain advantages. For example, Jews enrolled as merchants of the 1st guild in order to obtain the right to reside outside the Pale of Settlement. Class prestige led to the “flight to the nobility” of merchants through receiving the rank of general for great merits (for example, donating collections to museums or the Academy of Sciences; such generals were P.I. Shchukin, A.A. Titov, AABakhrushin). At the same time, a new bourgeoisie was being formed from among the directors and board members of joint-stock enterprises and banks. This was a narrow group of people closely connected economically and politically with the state apparatus (its most famous representatives were N. Avdakov, A. Vyshegradsky, A. Putilov, L. Davydov).

The Moscow and large provincial bourgeoisie (the Ryabushinskys, Morozovs, Mamontovs, Vogau, Knops and other “Old Russian” clans) had a different character. At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. these millionaires began to turn their family firms into joint-stock companies (share partnerships with a very narrow circle of owners), which claimed to be the spokesmen for the common interests of Russian commercial and industrial circles. Some of the “Moscow” entrepreneurs, who had merchant roots, were closely connected with the Old Believers and inherited religious beliefs, gave the capital they received from God a “godly” direction in the form of supporting art and education, clinics and hospitals.

Intensive capitalist development and the corresponding social changes in Russia occurred so quickly that they could not qualitatively change mass consciousness. This especially applies to the Russian peasantry. The capitalist elite included both entrepreneurs and shareholders or homeowners (representatives of the old nobility and bureaucracy). There were a lot of new owners and proprietary interests in Russia, but they did not yet have their own “worldview”, a disinterested and superpersonal belief in the sanctity of the property principle. The peasantry, having entered into new economic relations affected by the city, fell into confusion and spiritual division. It was not ready to meet the outside world.

The landed nobility also largely determined the political and economic face of Russia. Huge funds in the form of land ownership were concentrated in the hands of landowners (over 4 trillion, rubles in 1905). But by the beginning of the 20th century. even large landownership lost its purely noble character (in 1905, out of 27,833 large (over 500 dessiatines) estates, 18,102, or less than two-thirds, belonged to nobles). A third of large landowners were bourgeois in origin. To an even greater extent, bourgeoisification affected the average landownership (from 100 to 500 dessiatines), which was most suitable for transfer to capitalist rails. In this category, nobles owned 46% of the estates. Thus, the nobility gradually lost the privilege of monopoly ownership of land.

The process of loss of land by noble landowners proceeded at a rapid pace. Their total number was 107,242 people, of which 33,205, or 31%, owned plots the size of which did not exceed 20 dessiatinas, which made their farms similar in size to peasant farms. 22,705, or 25.8%, nobles owned from 20 to 100 acres. Only 18,102, or 17%, large landowners owned 83% of all noble landownership, and the 155 largest latifundists - 36.6%.

The bulk of the noble landowners were unable to adapt to the new conditions. Landowners' expenses, as a rule, exceeded their income. Lands were mortgaged and remortgaged, sold off. By 1915, almost 50 million dessiatines of land worth over 4 billion rubles were pledged. Since January 1, 1905, the total area of ​​noble estates in European Russia has decreased by 20%. Bankrupt landowners joined the ranks of officials and intellectuals. The noble elite was losing its economic importance.

After the abolition of serfdom, the Russian peasantry sharply increased its numbers. In rural areas of European Russia alone, the population grew by 50% from 1858 to 1897. This army replenished the cities, spread beyond the Urals, exploring new geographical spaces. In the country at the beginning of the century, there were 363 thousand 200 beggars and vagabonds, almost 14.5 thousand professional prostitutes, more than 96 thousand people were in prisons and other places of detention.

By 1917, there were up to 500 thousand officials in the country (under Nicholas I, 30 thousand officials ruled Russia). 14% of the state budget was spent on maintaining the administrative apparatus (for comparison: in England - 3%, France - 5%. Italy and Germany - 7% each). According to the Ministry of Finance, the number of officials and officers who received salaries exceeding 1 thousand rubles. per year, reached 91,204 people. The higher bureaucracy was replenished by hereditary nobles. Officials, appreciating their professionalism and great connections, were willingly hired to work in private banks and joint-stock companies.

According to the 1897 census, the percentage of literate people averaged 22.9% across the country. In cities - 45.3%, in European Russia - 48.9%, in St. Petersburg - 62.6%, in Moscow - 56.3%.

There were 3,296 scientists and writers in the country (including 284 women), people of other creative professions - 18,254 (4,716 women), technical intelligentsia - 4,010 (4 women), medical workers of various specialties - 29,636 (including 10,391 women) .

At the beginning of the 20th century. a group of the population called the “intelligentsia” is distinguished. The term “intelligentsia” was introduced by the writer P. D. Boborykin in the 60s. XIX century and was used in several senses. In a broad sense, the intelligentsia included people engaged in complex, predominantly creative and intellectual work - the “educated class.” In a narrow sense, the term was used as a political category.

In the post-reform period (since 1861), as a result of economic development, primarily in industry, the system of Russian capitalism finally took shape. At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. Russia, from a backward agrarian power, became an agrarian-industrial one, and in terms of industrial output it became one of the five most powerful states (England, France, the USA and Germany) and was increasingly drawn into the global economic system.

In comparison with most European countries, where the principles of parliamentarism and a multi-party system were established, and the role of elected bodies was increased, the Russian Empire remained the last bastion of absolutism. At the beginning of the 20th century. in the political and legal system of Russia there were no democratic principles of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial. Absolute power belonged to the emperor, who, in managing the state, relied on a centralized and extensive bureaucratic apparatus. Since Russia was not isolated from the transformations in Europe, the problem of political transformation - the limitation of the power of the autocracy by constitutional institutions, the participation of wide circles of the public in government through elected bodies, democratic freedoms and the like - throughout the 19th - early 20th centuries. was in the center of attention of society, which influenced the level of development of the socio-political movement.

Deprived of representative bodies, the public showed political activity in illegal groups and organizations opposed to the government. The peasantry suffered from landlessness, high taxes, the power of landowners and petty tutelage on the part of the peasant community.

The workers were mercilessly exploited, resulting in the working class becoming fertile ground for the propagation of revolutionary ideas. The state supported the development of certain industries and pursued a policy of protectionism, which ensured the loyalty of the bourgeoisie to the absolutist regime. These contradictory trends in political and social development destabilized the internal political situation and led to three revolutions that led to the collapse of the Russian state.

During the past two centuries, the main task of Russian tsarism was to strengthen unlimited autocratic power. Political reforms of the 60-70s of the 19th century. (the creation of zemstvos and city dumas) were only a prerequisite for the development of parliamentarism. However, already in the 80s, during the period of “counter-reforms” of Alexander III (1881-1894), the role of these bodies was reduced to nothing. The government and the emperor saw the origin of the revolutionary actions of the “populists” in the liberal reforms of the 60s and 70s of the 19th century. In 1882, censorship was strengthened; in 1884, a new university charter was adopted, which significantly limited the autonomy of universities and placed the professorial and student corporation under strict government control. The same measures were applied to secondary schools, and a special circular of 1887 limited access to secondary education to people from the lower classes. Primary schools were transferred to the subordination of the Holy Synod. In the early 90s, the rights of zemstvos and city self-government bodies were significantly limited. The centralization of power reached its apogee and the extensive bureaucratic apparatus became the absolute master of the situation. The State Council and the Senate were only the highest advisory bodies, and all decisions were made individually by the emperor.

In conditions of patriotic upsurge after the victorious Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878 pp. chauvinistic policies in relation to the national outskirts of the empire intensified. its main components were the strengthening of the role of the Orthodox Church, Russification and restrictive measures. The establishment of the “Russian national spirit” was accompanied by restrictions on the freedom of non-Orthodox religious denominations and the activities of sects in 1883. At the same time, numerous measures began to be taken aimed at the Russification of the occupied areas of Central Asia, a ban on teaching the Polish language in the western regions of the empire and the Baltic states, and a ban on foreigners acquiring land property , restriction of the autonomous rights of Finland and the like. 31881 they introduced restrictive measures against Jews - they established the so-called Pale of Settlement for them, 1887 they introduced a 3 percent quota for admission to universities (although it was never strictly adhered to), they were not accepted into the civil service and were even expelled 20 thousand from Moscow.

Nicholas II (1894-1917) not only did not strive to bring the country's political system in line with the requirements of the time, but also saw the main political task in preserving and strengthening the autocratic form of government. He responded to numerous zemstvo petitions for the inclusion of elected bodies in the system of public administration and limiting the arbitrariness of the bureaucracy in his speech from the throne: “I will protect the foundations of autocracy as firmly and steadfastly as my late father did.”

The first evidence of such a course was the celebration of the coronation of the new emperor, during which on a field in Khodynka (near Moscow), in pursuit of cheap royal “gifts,” a crowd trampled 1,389 people to death, and 1,300 were seriously injured. During his 23 years of reign, Nicholas II dragged Russia into two lost wars and three revolutions, which cost millions of human lives and caused terrible upheavals.

For various reasons, discontent gripped almost all layers of society, and at the end of the empire's existence, almost its entire politically conscious population belonged to the dissatisfied. Society expected political changes.

In Russian society, brought up on the traditions of the deification of tsarist power, there was no legal culture, no respect for individual rights and freedoms. The principles of parliamentarism, as established by representatives of the progressive intelligentsia, were known only in theory and not in practice.

The liberal opposition movement was started by zemstvo leaders. In 1899, Zemstvo residents created the illegal “Conversation” circle. As supporters of the evolutionary development of Russia, liberals advocated the consistent implementation of reforms and legal methods of struggle. their moderate program did not even imply limiting the legislative power of the emperor, but proposed expanding the rights of zemstvos, establishing equality of citizens, granting freedom to the press, introducing universal education, and the like. These demands were supported by the majority of the intelligentsia, which at the beginning of the century created professional associations and unions. The “constitutional” movement, started by the Liberation Union party (1904), was spreading, which tried to organize by legal means the struggle for the creation of a parliamentary system and the implementation of broad social and political reforms.

In 1904, the Zagalnozem congress took place, which adopted a resolution of 11 points. It spoke about improper public administration, noted the need to introduce political freedoms in the country, create an elected representative body under the government, and expand the rights of local self-government. In the same year, on the initiative of the Liberation Union, a so-called banquet campaign was held (banquets were held on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of progressive judicial reform). The banquets brought together people of similar professions (lawyers, journalists, doctors, professors), who demanded the introduction of a constitution in the country with a legislative assembly, political freedoms and all the attributes of a rule of law state. More than 120 banquets were held in 34 cities of Russia, in which almost 50 thousand people took part.

Progressive statesmen were also aware of the need for political reforms. The Minister of Internal Affairs P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky submitted a memo to the Tsar on the need to strengthen the rule of law, expand the political rights of the people, introduce into the State Council elected representatives from the provinces where there were zemstvos, and the like. Special meeting in defiance of the emperor and the outspoken conservative. Pobedonostsev supported the minister’s proposals. Nicholas II responded with a decree that ignored the opinion of not only liberals, but also ministers. It emphasized the need to maintain autocracy and the immutability of laws. The Emperor rejected the possibility of a peaceful political transformation of Russia, pushing Russia into the arms of revolutionaries, who considered the best way out of the political crisis to be a radical change in society.

at the end of the 19th century. Radical revolutionary parties emerged in Russia. In 1888, G. Plekhanov and some former “populists” created the “Emancipation of Labor” group, whose task was to distribute Marxist literature, propagate in Russian society ideas about the need to overthrow the autocracy by revolutionary means and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.

In the fall of 1895, V. Ulyanov (Lenin) created the underground organization “Union of Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class,” and in 1903 the revolutionaries united into the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP). The organizational principles of the new party laid down by Lenin (strict centralization, discipline, strict hierarchy, unconditional compliance by its members with the decisions of the central body) turned it into a party of conspirators who neglected universal human values ​​in order to achieve the political goal - the destruction of the autocracy and the seizure of power.

The Socialist Revolutionary Party (SRs), which emerged in 1902 and inherited certain elements of populist ideology and the tactics of individual terror, also waged an active struggle against the autocracy. The party's goal was to achieve political freedom through constitutional means, and in the long term - to gain power. The Social Revolutionaries carried out propaganda among peasants and workers, and their “military organization” successfully carried out several terrorist attacks against the emperor’s relatives and senior dignitaries.

The Social Revolutionaries are representatives of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. The Socialist Revolutionary Party arose in 1901, until 1917. was in an illegal situation. By nature it is neo-populist, ultra-revolutionary, terrorist. Reflected primarily the interests of the peasant masses. Basic demands: democratic republic, political freedoms, socialization of the land. After the February Revolution of 1917, the most influential and largest party in Russia (in the summer of 1917 it had almost 1 million members). Leaders of the Socialist Revolutionaries: Chernov, Gots, Avksentyev, Spiridonova and others. Striving for a broad unification of all progressive forces, they collaborated with the Mensheviks and Cadets. The Social Revolutionaries prevailed in local governments and most public organizations, and were part of the Provisional Government. They refused to seize power, planned to gain a majority in the Constituent Assembly and peacefully and democratically implement their program, the core of which was the agrarian question. They proposed abolishing private ownership of land and transferring it to public use without ransom. their foreign policy course was determined by the slogan “Democratic peace to the whole world,” while at the same time the possibility of a separate peace with the states of the Quadruple Alliance was denied. The right Socialist Revolutionaries perceived the October revolution as a “crime against the motherland and the revolution,” and the left supported the Bolsheviks, created the Party of Left Socialists-R-Tsioners (Internationalists) and collaborated with the Bolsheviks for some time (November 1917 - July 1918). In the elections to the Constituent Assembly, the Socialist Revolutionaries as a whole received 58% of the votes. By a resolution of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of June 14, 1918, the right-wing Socialist Revolutionaries were expelled from the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and councils at all levels. In July, the Bolsheviks excommunicated the Left Socialist Revolutionaries from power. During the civil war in Russia, the Socialist Revolutionaries were persecuted by the Bolshevik government. After his arrest in 1925. the last composition of the Central Bureau of the Socialist Revolutionary Party, the latter actually ceased to exist in Russia (USSR). Yeserov's emigration with centers in Paris, Berlin and Prague continued to operate. The last emigrant group of Social Revolutionaries in New York ceased to exist in the mid-60s of the 20th century.

Opposition parties found support among villagers and workers. The demographic explosion of the beginning of the century led to an increase in the size of the peasant population and acutely raised the problem of providing it with land. Compared to the post-reform years, peasant plots have decreased almost threefold. The government tried to resettle some of the peasants from European Russia to Kazakhstan, Siberia and the Far East, but did it ineptly and unorganized, which further aggravated social tension in the countryside. The lack of agricultural machinery, draft power, and effective agronomic and veterinary services led to low yields. Taxes, land prices, and rents increased due to a simultaneous fall in prices for agricultural products. Drought and crop failure periodically caused famine. The peasants understood that the land problem could be solved by redistributing landowners' lands. In 1902, a wave of peasant uprisings swept through Ukraine and the Middle Volga region. The peasants destroyed the landowners' estates, seized fields, livestock and agricultural equipment.

A consequence of Russia's dynamic economic development was the emergence of an industrial proletariat. Its numbers were constantly growing, its concentration in large industrial enterprises was increasing, and there was a stratification into skilled and highly paid (working elite) and illiterate, unskilled people from the village. It was the latter who were the best object for Bolshevik and Socialist Revolutionary propaganda. Long working hours (up to 14 hours), low wages, numerous fines, lack of safety precautions, unsanitary living conditions, and the ban on professional associations turned the work environment into a source of social tension. There was no labor legislation in Russia, only certain laws prohibited the use of women and children at night, reduced the working day to 11 hours, and regulated the imposition of fines. However, entrepreneurs avoided them in every possible way. In 1903, the south of Russia was swept by a general strike of workers. Along with economic demands (increasing wages, shortening working hours, improving working conditions, etc.), workers for the first time put forward political slogans (political freedoms, the right to create professional associations, strikes, etc.).

In the early 90s, the economic situation in Russia was aggravated by the global economic crisis, famine in the Volga region and in the south of the country, which was caused by cold and drought. There was a real danger of falling behind major European countries, which, in conditions of tense international relations and the Anglo-German military confrontation, threatened state security. It was necessary to develop heavy industry and carry out technical re-equipment of the army and navy. An obstacle to this path was the state budget deficit. The solution to the complex task was entrusted to the Minister of Finance, Count S. Witte, who for 10 years consistently pursued a policy of accelerated development of Russian industry based on decisive financial measures. Strict financial discipline, new taxes and excise taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco, sugar, matches, etc. ensured financial stability and made it possible to carry out financial reform in 1897, establishing the gold equivalent of the ruble. Industrial production almost tripled, and coal mining and iron smelting almost quadrupled. The length of railways at the beginning of the century reached 58 thousand km. The daily life of residents of large cities included the latest technological achievements: electric lighting, telephone, electric tram, water supply and sewerage, photography. The army received new types of weapons, including machine guns. The fleet was replenished with new warships, and its basis was made up of battleships.

The share of foreign capital in the modernization of Russia was quite high: according to the latest estimates, in heavy industry in 1900-1913. it was 48-52%. Among foreign investors, the French and Belgians made up the majority (58%), followed by the Germans and the British. About 2/8 of all machines used in industry were foreign-made. At the same time, the country's external debt also grew, which in 1913 reached $4 billion, or 35-37% of the gross national product.

Economic growth continued until the global economic crisis of 1900-1903 pp. The influx of foreign investment declined sharply, the government was unable to take advantage of foreign loans, which led to a reduction in government orders in heavy industry and the closure of several thousand industrial enterprises and mass layoffs of workers.

at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. Russia pursued an active foreign policy in the Far East. She traded profitably with Mongolia, Manchuria, Tuva and China. In 1891, construction began on the strategically important Trans-Siberian Railway from Chelyabinsk to Vladivostok. Russia, taking advantage of China's defeat in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894 - 1895, provided it with a loan in 1895 to pay the indemnity to Japan, created the Russian-Chinese Bank, and in 1897 began construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway. In 1898, Russia leased Port Arta and turned it into a naval base.

China Eastern Railway (China-Changchun Railway) is a railway line in Northeast China. Built by Russia in 1897-1903. After the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 - 1905, the southern direction of the line went to Japan and was called the Manchurian Railway Since 1924, it was under the joint management of the USSR and China, in 1935 it was sold to Manchukuo, since August 1945 it was under the joint management of the USSR and China under the name China-Changchun Railway.In 1952, the Soviet government transferred the government free of charge China's rights to the highway.

Port Arthur (Lüshun) is a city and port in China in the Bo-haiwan Bay of the Yellow Sea. According to the convention of 1898. received by Russia on temporary lease. At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. A Russian naval base was established here. In 1904-1945. - occupied by Japan. Liberated by the Soviet army in 1945. The naval base was shared by the USSR and China. In 1955, the USSR withdrew troops from Port Arthur and handed over the structures in the base area to the Chinese government free of charge.

At the beginning of the 20th century. Russia actively joined the struggle for China, which was waged by the United States, Great Britain and Japan. S. Witte insisted on pursuing a peaceful policy in the Far East and proposed continuing commercial and industrial penetration into this region. However, the “politics of power” won. In 1900, the Boxer Rebellion broke out in China. Under the pretext of protecting the personnel of the Chinese Eastern Railway, Russia sent troops into Manchuria and put forward a strict demand to China - not to grant concessions in Manchuria to other states without first offering them to the Russian-Chinese Bank. Under pressure from other states, China did not agree, but this strained relations between Russia and Japan. In January 1902, the Anglo-Japanese Treaty was signed, which pushed Japan towards war with Russia.

Nicholas II was disdainful of the Japanese army, and the Russian military convinced foreigners that “Japan in Europe was too overestimated in terms of its military power after its victory over China. The Japanese had never dealt with European troops.” Obviously, this attitude towards its powerful eastern neighbor provoked it before the war and did not allow the Russian army to carry out appropriate preparations for war. Events unfolded very quickly. At the end of December 1908, Japan delivered an ultimatum to Russia demanding the withdrawal of Russian troops from Manchuria; St. Petersburg left it unanswered. In January 1904, Tokyo announced the severance of diplomatic relations with Russia. Instead of bringing its Far Eastern army into combat readiness, St. Petersburg exchanged diplomatic notes with the Japanese government. S. Witte wrote in his memoirs about the causes of the war: “We didn’t have enough Poles, Finns, Germans, Latvians, Georgians, Armenians, Tatars, etc., we also wanted to annex the territory with the Mongols, Chinese, Koreans. That’s why the war arose, which shook the Russian empire."

The fighting began on January 27, 1904 with an unexpected attack by a Japanese squadron on Russian ships in Port Arthur. Japanese destroyers blew up two panzer ships and one cruiser. The next day, the main forces of the Japanese fleet fired at Port Arthur and blocked the Russian fleet in its bay. A heroic page in the history of the war was written by the cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets", which entered into an unequal battle with Japanese destroyers in the Korean port of Chemulpo. Only individual Russian cruisers and destroyers, which were based in Vladivostok, had access to the operational ocean space. Thus, Japan fulfilled the first part of its strategic plan - establishing supremacy at sea.

Russia entered the war unprepared. The combat training of troops and navy, reserves and communications for maneuver did not correspond to the conditions of that time. The army was led by incompetent military leaders. International isolation also had its effect - England and the USA openly supported Japan, Russia's ally France declared neutrality, Germany pushed tsarism to take active action without accepting any obligations. The internal situation in Russia was unstable - a wave of anti-government protests by workers, peasants, and students was growing.

In March 1904, the attempt of the Pacific squadron to leave Port Arthur to meet the Japanese fleet was defeated. The flagship battleship Petropavlovsk was sunk, on which the fleet commander, Admiral S. Makarov, died. The Japanese army completely seized the strategic initiative, blocked Port Arthur and began its siege.

On April 18, after the Battle of the Yalu River, the Japanese army forced the Russian troops to retreat to Liaoyang. Within a few days, the Japanese captured the railway between Port Arthur and Manchuria, which gave them the opportunity to finally blockade Port Arthur. Due to command errors, the Russian fleet was unable to break through the blockade.

The defense of Port Arthur on July 17, 1904 lasted 157 days. The first assault began on August 6 and ended in failure for the Japanese. The Japanese army lost more than 6 thousand soldiers and officers during the September assault. In September - November 1904 alone, the Japanese carried out three general assaults. In August 1904, Russian troops, despite their double numerical superiority, were defeated in Manchuria near Liaoyang. The attempt of the Russian army to launch an offensive in September 1904 on the city of Mahe also ended in failure, after which it went on the defensive. In November, the Japanese captured Mount Vysokaya, from which they fired at Port Arthur and the Russian squadron, which was stationed in the inner roadstead of the port. On December 20, 1904, the commandant of the fortified area, General A. Stessel, signed the act of surrender of the fortress, which was still quite combat-ready.

The fall of Port Arthur meant for Russia the futility of further warfare. This was confirmed by the battle of Mukden in March 1905, in which the mediocre general A. Kuropatkin practically gave victory to the Japanese, leaving almost 90 thousand Russian soldiers killed on the battlefield.

The final stage of the war was the naval battle in the Tsusimsky Strait on May 14-15, 1905. Back in October 1904, the 2nd Pacific Squadron was sent to the Far East. Hastily assembled from outdated and different types of ships, she, with great difficulty, circumnavigated Africa and reached the Far East. However, the fall of Port Arthur left it without a land base. The fast and well-armed Japanese fleet, many of whose ships were built in English shipyards, almost completely destroyed the Russian squadron - out of 38, 19 ships were sunk, 7 were captured, and only a few managed to reach Vladivostok.

On August 28, 1905, Russia and Japan signed the Portsmouth Peace Agreement, which witnessed the collapse of the Far Eastern policy of tsarism. Korea was recognized as a sphere of economic, political and military interests of Japan. Russia gave Japan Port Arthur, the southern part of the United China Railway (to Changchun station), the southern part (up to the 50th parallel) and the Sakhalin Islands, and provided the Japanese with fishing rights along the Russian shores in the Sea of ​​Japan, Okhotsk and Bering Seas. Russia has actually lost free access to the Pacific Ocean.

The war did not stop the wave of anti-government protests. In the summer of 1904, members of the “combat organization” of the Socialist Revolutionary Party killed the Minister of the Interior. Plehve, who took harsh measures against revolutionaries and liberals. In December of the same year, the Liberation Union organized a “banquet campaign” on the occasion of the anniversary of the Decembrist uprising, where there were calls for an immediate convocation

Constituent Assembly. In January 1905, St. Petersburg workers began a mass strike. Revolution 1905-1907 in Russia developed in two directions: liberal and revolutionary. The intelligentsia and the bourgeoisie tried to peacefully solve the problems of democratization of Russia (introduce a parliamentary system); the peasantry sought a fair solution to the agrarian question; workers put forward slogans for improving their economic situation and carrying out political reforms. Revolutionary organizations (Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries) propagated the idea of ​​armed struggle against the autocracy and organized spontaneous uprisings of peasants and workers.

The Bolsheviks were first representatives of a faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (1903-1917), and later an independent party. The name “Bolsheviks” reflected the results of the elections of the governing bodies of the RSDLP (b) at the Second Congress (1903), at which a split occurred among Russian Social Democrats. Its reason was the tough position of V. Lenin and his supporters regarding defending the concept of the party as an illegal organization of professional revolutionaries, capable of conspiratorial work and the seizure of power. Program requirements (before 1917): abolition of autocracy and replacing it with a democratic republic by convening a Constituent Assembly; creation of a unicameral legislature; universal, equal and direct suffrage; inviolability of person and home; freedom of speech, press, assembly, strikes, unions; the right of nations to self-determination; the right of every person to prosecute any official; selectivity of judges by the people; replacing the standing army with the general arming of the people; separation of church and state; general free education and the like. The vast majority of program demands turned out to be declarative and were ignored by the Bolsheviks after they came to power. 31917 rub. they began to establish a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” dispersed the Constituent Assembly, started a civil war, and sought to implement a “proletarian” revolution throughout the world. Bolshevik victory in the civil war of 1917-1920. The communist totalitarian regime was finally established and the Bolshevik experiment continued virtually until 1991. The leader and ideologist of Bolshevism was V. Ulyanov (Lenin). Other prominent figures of the Bolshevik Party are N. Bukharin, L. Trotsky, I. Stalin and others. The desire to dissociate themselves from the RSDLP (Mensheviks) led to the use (from March 1918 to October 1952) of the double name of the party (“Bolshevik” and “ communist"). The word "Bolsheviks" was included before the official name of the Communist Party - RSDLP (b) (1917-1918), RCP (b) (1918-1925), VKP (b) (1925-1952). The 19th Party Congress (October 1952) decided to rename the CPSU (b) into the Communist Party of the Soviet Union - CPSU.

Attempts by the autocracy to preserve the country's political system through minor concessions to the public, a split in the camp of democratic forces, and the refusal of radical parties to peacefully resolve problems did not make it possible to politically reorganize Russia - to limit the autocracy, introduce a parliamentary system, and implement political and social reforms.

To put pressure on the government, a strike was organized by workers at the Putilovsky plant in St. Petersburg. Since January 1905, 12 thousand workers stopped working in protest against the dismissal of four comrades. The strike instantly spread to all enterprises in the province. On January 8, there were already more than 200 thousand strikers. A meeting of Russian factory workers, under the leadership of the priest G. Gapon, popular among the workers, on January 6 prepared a petition to the Tsar with economic and fairly moderate political demands. it was signed by more than 150 thousand workers.

On January 9, 1905, over 100 thousand workers went to the Winter Palace to present a petition to the Tsar, but were met with fire from army units and police. Several hundred people died and several thousand were injured. “Bloody Sunday” dispelled the workers’ faith in the “good and just tsar and became the beginning of a mass strike movement” that in the first half of the year covered most of the industrial cities and regions of the country - St. Petersburg, Moscow, the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine, southern Russia, etc. The strikers put forward demands for democratization of the country.

To relieve tension in society and calm the strikers, on February 18, 1905, Nicholas II issued a rescript on the creation of a representative body and the implementation of political reforms. The latter were proposed to be carried out gradually while maintaining the foundations of the monarchical system. At the same time, a decree was signed that allowed private individuals and public bodies to submit petitions and proposals to improve public administration. However, tsarism was late again and the public demanded not a consultative body, but a full-fledged Constituent Assembly.

Professional organizations of the intelligentsia (teachers, lawyers, doctors, etc.) united into the “Union of Unions” headed by the historian P. Milyukov. They sought the introduction of representative government and a multi-party system. At the same time, the Bolsheviks at the Third Congress in London (April 1905) called for organizing an armed uprising against the autocracy. Thousands of workers went on strike in May. Armed clashes with the police often resulted.

In Ivanovo-Voznesensk, workers created the first Council of Workers' Deputies, which led the strike, maintained discipline and helped the strikers financially. The Bolsheviks assigned the Soviets the role of organizers of the uprising.

In the spring, peasant unrest began in Ukraine and the main agricultural regions of the country. The peasants sowed the land of the landowners, seized grain and agricultural implements.

To organize spontaneous protests by peasants, the intelligentsia created the All-Russian Peasant Union, which supported the program of the Union of Unions. In the summer, the 1st All-Russian Peasant Congress took place, which put forward demands to the government: to allocate land to the peasants through the expropriation of landownership, to reduce taxes, to hold elections to the Constituent Assembly, and the like.

In the summer of 1905, a strike by Lodz workers developed into an armed uprising led by the Bolshevik committee. Barricade battles in the city continued until June 25. Simultaneously with the events in Lodz, an uprising of the sailors of the battleship "Prince Potemkin-Tavrichesky" began in Odessa, which was provoked by the rude treatment of officers, poor nutrition and Bolshevik agitation. A few weeks later, the battleship surrendered to the Romanian authorities of the port of Constanta.

The events of the spring and summer of 1905 indicated that delaying the implementation of political reforms was dangerous for the autocracy. On August 6, 1905, Nicholas II issued a decree convening the State Duma, but with limited powers and deprived of legislative initiative. The opposition movement split into supporters and opponents of the boycott of the Duma elections. Moderate liberals proposed using the Duma to fight for the democratization of the country. Radical liberals from the Union of Unions and Social Democrats called for a boycott of the elections and resort to a general political strike.

The strike began in October 1905. Soviets of workers' deputies were created in Moscow and St. Petersburg. On October 17, 1905, the Tsar issued a Manifesto in which he promised to grant the people civil liberties (speech, press, assembly, the creation of organizations, personal immunity), ensure elections to the Duma for all segments of the population, develop a law on general elections, and transfer legislative functions to the Duma. The liberal opposition greeted the Manifesto, although warily, but with hope, since it opened up prospects for real parliamentarism and legal ways of political reorganization of the country. The parties of the Octobrists (October 17 Party), Cadets (Constitutional Democrats), and the “Union of the Russian People”, which occupied right-wing positions, were created.

The Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries did not cooperate with the autocracy and intensified preparations for an armed uprising. Armed “fighting squads” were created, weapons and ammunition were purchased, and agitation work among workers, soldiers and sailors intensified. At the end of October 1905, uprisings of sailors broke out in Kronstadt and Sevastopol, unrest began among the troops who were returning home after the end of the war with Japan; Peasant uprisings spread to Chernigov, Kursk, Saratov and Simbirsk provinces. The culmination of the revolutionary uprisings was the uprising of the Moscow workers, which began on December 7, 1905. Barricade battles continued for more than a week, but the poor armament of the rebels, lack of leadership, and lack of mass support in other regions of the country led to the defeat of the uprising. More than a thousand people were killed by Cossacks and regular army units.

The defeat of the rebels in Moscow and other regions of the country allowed tsarism to launch a counteroffensive. Freedom of the press was again limited, strikes were banned, and a new election law was introduced, which turned them into multi-stage and unequal elections. The Duma lost the right of legislative initiative. The election law was very complex and confusing, providing advantages to landowners and peasants. But in the elections, held even behind these laws and in an atmosphere of repression, opposition candidates won - Cadets, Octobrists, non-party deputies who sought political and economic reforms. The Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries boycotted the elections.

At the first meetings of the new legislative body, an appeal was adopted to the government demanding the restoration of general elections and the abolition of all restrictions on the legislative activity of the Duma. The appeal noted the personal responsibility of ministers, guarantees of civil liberties, the abolition of the death penalty, and the like. The government categorically refused to accept the proposed provisions. The government's relations with the Duma were further aggravated by the agrarian issue, which became the main issue at Duma meetings. The government's ignorance of all the bills developed by the Duma led to its adoption of a vote of no confidence in the government and a demand for its complete resignation. But on July 9, 1906, the emperor dissolved the Duma itself.

The new Prime Minister P. Stolypin introduced a state of emergency in certain regions of the country: worker and peasant unrest was suppressed by punitive detachments, military courts handed down thousands of death sentences, and the publication of publications opposing the government was suspended.

Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin (1862-1911) - hereditary Russian nobleman, an outstanding Russian figure, the last reformer of Tsarist Russia. He began his career after graduating from St. Petersburg University in 1884 from a modest position in the Ministry of Agriculture and State Property. High education, decency, determination, deep knowledge of administrative and economic work, natural oratorical talent contributed to his career advancement: Kovno district, provincial leader of the nobility (1889-1902); Grodno (1902-1903), Saratov (1903-1905) governor; Minister of the Interior and Chairman of the Council of Ministers (1906-1911). A staunch monarchist, supporter of the rule of law and a strong executive branch. He developed a broad package of reforms for the peaceful renewal of Russia, which included the introduction of laws on freedom of conscience, personal integrity, universal primary education, etc. He attached particular importance to the agrarian issue. The agrarian (“Stolypin”) reform was supposed to solve the long-standing problem of land ownership and land use in Russia and promote the development of productive forces in the countryside. It was based on the Decree of November 9, 1906, which granted communal peasants the right to leave the community while at the same time securing the personal ownership of part of the communal land that they used. In land transformations, he was guided by the progressive and healthy forces of the peasantry. Killed in Kyiv. Buried on the territory Kiev-Pechersk Lavra.

“First - calm, and then reforms,” argued P. Stolypin. However, even in this situation, the new Duma, which began work on February 20, 1907, was in opposition to the government. In addition to the liberals, it included representatives of the Social Democrats, People's Socialists and Socialist Revolutionaries. The agrarian question remained central, in the discussion of which there were disagreements between the Cadets and the left parties. However, the Duma unanimously condemned the continuation of repression and refused to deprive deputies from social democratic parties of parliamentary immunity. From June 1907, Nicholas II issued a manifesto on the dissolution of the Duma and new changes to the electoral legislation, which asserted inequality in the rights of various social groups. This event was called the “third-heart coup” and meant the completion of the revolution of 1905-1907.

Repressions against revolutionaries and the dissolution of the Duma, which was in opposition to the government, made it possible for P. Stolypin to continue S. Witte’s course towards modernizing the country for four years (1907 - 1911). P. Stolypin's concept provided for the transformation of peasants into full-owning owners of the land through liberation from the tutelage of the community; accelerated development of the industry through the expansion of the domestic market and the formation of national cadres of industrialists; development of a wide network of school education through the introduction of compulsory four-year education.

Agrarian reforms were the main component of P. Stolypin's reforms. The need to implement another reform in boula agriculture is associated with profound objective changes that have long prepared the preconditions for radical changes in the sphere of socio-economic relations:

o firstly, the Russian economy, especially agriculture, in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. found itself in a state of protracted depression, which threatened the existence of the state itself;

o secondly, the main tasks set by the tsarist government during the agrarian reform of 1861 were not fully realized, which aggravated the impoverishment of a significant part of the population and caused a powerful anti-landlord, anti-monarchist movement;

o thirdly, Russia’s economic lag behind Western European countries led to the state’s increasing dependence on foreign capital, which created the danger of losing the integrity and national independence of the Russian Empire;

o fourthly, the revolutionary events of 1905-1907. showed that the state does not have a stable social force capable of becoming a conductor of government agricultural policy.

The chairman of the government, P. Stolypin, with whose name the agrarian reform was associated, understood that the bulk of the peasantry would greet the radical changes he proposed without enthusiasm (the reformer himself repeatedly and openly stated that his reform was “not for the weak and infirm, who are the majority in Russia, but for wealthy and powerful owners").

In relation to landowners, this class turned out to be noticeably weakened and relying only on it was risky.

The industrial bourgeoisie also became an unreliable ally. Firstly, it was small in number, and secondly, its interests did not always coincide with the interests of the landowners.

Consequently, it was necessary to look for a new social force interested in radical changes. Such a force, although not numerous and organizationally weak, already existed - free peasant owners, the wealthiest part of them, which was formed after the abolition of serfdom and led a new, capitalist way of farming.

The merit of P. Stolypin was that he was one of the first to discern in this layer a stable and promising ally of the government. It was she who was most interested in creating economic conditions for free economic activity, capable of protecting her land property and the entire institution of private property. In the economic aspect, it was more stable and more promising than other segments of the rural population. Therefore, P. Stolypin’s strategic move - to expand the private property system of the state by increasing the number of wealthy peasant owners - was not only comprehensively justified, but also timely.

The central idea of ​​Stolypin's agrarian reform was:

o firstly, to forcibly destroy the peasant land community and on its ruins to create a new, Khutir-Vidrub system of land tenure;

o secondly, on the basis of the approval of private land ownership, to form a class of land owners from the wealthy part of the peasantry.

The government of P. Stolypin began the reform by creating the necessary technical prerequisites for regulating land relations.

On March 4, 1906, a special decree laid the foundation for the creation of a system of land management commissions, which became the conductors of new land legislation and land management. At the same time, a Land Affairs Committee was created in the capital, which served as a coordination center. In accordance with this decree, land management commissions were supposed to begin activities primarily in those provinces and districts where there were more landless peasants.

At the same time, the government of P. Stolypin prepared a number of legal measures that contributed to the implementation of agrarian reform.

o firstly, in villages where there were no general redistributions for a long period, the communal order of land ownership was considered liquidated and the peasants switched to household land use;

o secondly, every householder who owned land on the basis of communal law could at any time demand that the part of the land due to him be assigned to himself as private property;

o thirdly, the householder had the right to demand, in exchange for the inter-strip plots assigned to him, the allocation of a “cut” or “farm”, that is, the reduction of all individual plots into one place (“demolition”) and the transfer of the estate (“farm”) there, which ensured the creation of isolated, strong peasant farms independent of communal orders;

o fourthly, the principle of family property was limited: from now on, the owner of the land assigned to the courtyard became the sole “householder,” that is, the head of the family, and not the courtyard as a whole, as was the case before.

Note that P. Stolypin’s government did not have the legal right to issue such legislative acts without their approval by the State Duma. However, he showed exceptional determination and persistence, publishing them in the form of temporary decrees, which became legitimate after some time, when they had basically already been implemented.

The law on land ownership, adopted by the third State Duma, was adopted on May 29, 1911. It, in particular, emphasized that every peasant had the right to leave the community and begin farming on a compact part of the former collective property, erected to a separate plot, even under the condition that the village meeting will oppose this.

Along with the lumpen peasants, who were satisfied with the communal order with mutual responsibility, guaranteed minimal opportunities for material wealth, there were many peasants, and not necessarily the richest ones, who understood the need to reform land relations and supported the government’s desire to create a class of economically independent peasants in the countryside.

Provincial and district land management commissions controlled the exit of peasant farms from the community, their purchase of additional land plots, and conducted surveys of their economic situation.

The government of P. Stolypin was worried not only about the technical, but also about the financial side of the implementation of agrarian reform. The main lever for its implementation was the Peasant Land Bank, founded back in 1882. On August 12, 1906, this bank began selling a significant part of appanage lands to peasants, and on rather favorable terms for them. The following loan repayment periods were determined: 18, 18, 28, 41 and 55.5 years. The payment of interest depended on the period for which the loan was taken out. If before 1906 these percentages ranged from 11.5 (for the minimum period) to 6 (for the maximum), then according to Stolypin legislation - accordingly from 9.5 to 4.5.

An integral part of the Stolypin agrarian reform was the resettlement policy. Having received ownership of the land and sold it, peasants moved en masse to Asia. Only from Ukraine, where agrarian overpopulation dominated, during 1906-1912. Almost 1 million people left. True, many peasants returned without finding suitable living conditions.

So, at the beginning of the 20th century. The peasant economy not only survived, but also won the difficult competition with the landowner economy. It could have ousted him even more if the Stoly-Pin agrarian reform had been radical and had not proclaimed the inviolability of noble land ownership.

The time when the reform was carried out was also unfavorable: the country could not bear the double burden of financing deep socio-economic transformations and reimbursement of military expenses.

The “new owner” was left practically without state help, since the assistance of 32 million rubles, offered as a loan for farmers, cannot be considered effective, compared to 8.5 billion rubles, downloaded from agriculture by the state and landowners.

at the same time, the Stolypin agrarian reform, despite its inconsistency and incompleteness, was one of the most decisive steps of liberalism in all of Russian history. She contributed to the transformation of the medieval collectivist labor system of peasants into an individual one, the formation of farm-type farms. Already in that historical period, these farms revealed great potential opportunities. Agrarian reform contributed to the expansion of sown areas, increased agricultural productivity, and increased grain yields. Russia began massive exports of food products, which allowed new investments in industry. All its leading industries - metallurgy, steel production, oil production, agricultural engineering, etc. - developed intensively. The concentration of production increased, cartels, trusts, and concerns were created. Banking capital was concentrated in the six largest banks in the capital. Their own national industrial elite was formed, which tried to get rid of foreign dependence and had plans for economic penetration not only into the East - the traditional direction of Russian colonial policy, but also into Europe and Asia.

In May 1908, a law was approved on compulsory free primary education for children from 8 years of age. Increased allocations for public education made it possible to open 50 thousand new schools. However, their total number was half the actual needs of the population.

The reforms were carried out in conditions of brutal persecution of any opposition movement, disregard for social legislation, rampant chauvinistic sentiments, and outright conservatism. Of course, such a course could not relieve social tension in society. On the eve of the First World War, the opposition and revolutionary movement began to grow again.

The Third Duma was elected according to the electoral law on June 3, 1907, the majority in it was received by representatives of the ruling classes (representing 1% of the country's population, they had 67% of the seats). The Octobrists and nationalists had primacy. The opposition included Cadets, Social Democrats and Trudoviks - independent deputies who represented the interests of mainly peasants. 26 deputies were elected from the national outskirts, who created factions along national lines and sharply opposed the chauvinistic course of the government of P. Stolypin.

The Prime Minister relied on the Octobrists and Russian nationalists, who formed the Party of Russian Nationalists, which supported the demands of the national bourgeoisie and formed a support for the chauvinistic course of P. Stolypin. Russification of the “foreigners” became his political credo. P. Stolypin tried to limit the powers of the Finnish Sejm and the autonomy of Poland, where he closed all schools with the Polish language of instruction. Ukrainian national-cultural societies "Prosvita" were also closed, and the use of the Ukrainian language was limited. This policy outraged the intelligentsia, their resistance to the ruling regime intensified, national consciousness grew, national organizations were created (the Union for the Liberation of Ukraine, the Musavat Party in Azerbaijan, etc.), in which calls were made not only for cultural-national autonomy within Russia, but and to separation from the empire.

Revolutionary parties were weakened by arrests, and their leaders were forced to emigrate. Abroad, they tried to rethink the lessons of the revolution and develop new tactics to fight the regime. In the camp of the Social Democrats, the split begun by the Third Congress deepened. The Mensheviks abandoned active struggle with the government through strikes and armed uprisings, proposing to enter into an alliance with the bourgeoisie and help it fight for social reforms through legal means. Under their influence, workers created legal organizations, primarily aimed at carrying out broad social reforms. This tactic was criticized by the Bolsheviks, who abandoned the alliance with the “reactive” bourgeoisie and relied on the dictatorship of the proletariat, developing a strategy for the future revolutionary struggle. The Bolsheviks paid special attention to acts of expropriation - bank robbery. And although the stolen funds were supposedly used to support the party and prepare for the revolution, such activities turned them into criminals and alienated the intellectual elite from them.

However, the Bolsheviks were increasingly winning the favor of the lumpen workers. The number of strikers during Stolypin's rule dropped to 50 thousand. But dissatisfaction was brewing among the workers with the lack of any attempts by the government to resolve social issues. The 1906 law on the 10-hour working day was hardly implemented, there was no social insurance for workers, and trade unions were under strict government control.

The government's open disregard for the legislative body, chauvinistic policies, lack of social legislation, and conservatism of government deprived the autocracy of support and isolated it from Russian society. The unpredictable emperor quickly lost interest in the reformer Stolypin. In September 1911, Stolypin was killed in Kyiv by a terrorist due to the mysterious passivity of the security forces.

Since 1910, a new upsurge of the revolutionary movement began, caused by the shooting of striking workers at the Lena gold mines (more than 200 people were killed and 170 were wounded). In 1912 the number of strikers exceeded 200 thousand people, and in 1913 - 250 thousand people. The country was again on the verge of revolution. The government further aggravated the situation by proposing the dissolution of the Duma and introducing a state of emergency in the capital. In Moscow and St. Petersburg, there was a significant radicalization of political life, the influence of the Bolsheviks increased, who finally broke up with the Mensheviks, formed their own Central Committee, numerous regional underground committees, and carried out active propaganda work through the newspaper Pravda, the one-time circulation of which reached 40 thousand copies.

The intellectual environment of Russian society was in a state of “revaluation of values” - disappointment in the bourgeois ideology of individualism, in active political activity, attempts to contrast socialism and Marxism with nationalism and mysticism. Religious philosophy won more and more supporters. Solovyova. The political apathy of the intelligentsia was embodied in the aesthetics of “pure art,” which became the basis for the development of the Russian avant-garde in painting, literature, and theatrical art. The works of Russian artists of this period entered the golden treasury of world culture. The collections of articles “Vekhi” (1909) and “intelligentsia” (1910), in which famous philosophers, publicists, lawyers, public figures (N. Berdyaev, S. Bulgakov, S. Frank, B. Kistyakovsky, P. Milyukov). The main idea of ​​the collections was the problem of the responsibility of the intelligentsia for the modern political situation. Spiritual instability reigned in society and signs of approaching great trouble were found.

Europe split into two opposing camps - the Entente and the Triple Alliance. Armed conflicts and local wars broke out almost every year. Chauvinistic sentiments intensified. The arms race has acquired unprecedented proportions. Attempts of Russia at the end of the 19th century. The convening of an international disarmament conference was greeted without enthusiasm by European countries, which regarded it as an “ill-timed action.” The countries of Europe were preparing for war, militarizing, creating huge armies, re-equipping them with the latest weapons, and developing strategic plans for war. Russia had the largest army in the world (900 thousand people) and the third largest fleet. This fueled the aggressive ambitions of tsarism, which was supported by the national bourgeoisie.