"Given time, Stolypin’s work might have saved Tsarism." How far do you agree?

Caroline Henderson

During his period in office from 1906 – 1911 Russian Prime Minister, Petr Stolypin, faced a number of difficulties, which threatened the position of Tsarism in his country. Stolypin set in motion a number of policies aimed at maintaining the established order. His assassination in 1911 curtailed his work however even had this not occurred his policies would not have been able to save Tsarism. To succeed he needed the support of the people: the peasantry; the gentry; the workers and perhaps most importantly the Tsar himself. However even with more time the opposition he faced from this varied group would have proved too great for him to overcome.

The son of a landowner, Stolypin had the reputation of being an uncompromising opponent. He held strong beliefs. He thought that the Duma had to be developed as a vital part of the Tsarist system of Government, and that the situation of Russia’s peasants required urgent attention in order that they would no longer support revolutionaries. He believed that Russification was desirable to ensure that the Tsar’s subjects were loyal, and that Russian Orthodoxy should be spread throughout the empire. Stolypin’s failure to save Tsarism lie in his relationships with industry, the nationalities and the Dumas, and his policies on land reform and terrorism.

Stolypin had particularly strong policies on land reform. He wanted to create a class of landowning peasants because he thought it would boost the market for industrial goods. They would owe their wealth and position in society to the state, therefore opposition among the peasants would be weakened. These richer peasants, or Kulaks, would control the others and so stop revolution in the countryside. The poorer peasants would become labourers and provide cheap labour for the Kulaks and the factories. These policies were unlikely to work however, as the people did not support them. 140 million acres of land were owned by the nobility and the peasants saw the nationalisation of this land as a simple solution to their problems. By 1914 only 10% of land was converted into farms and the rest continued to use the old strip system. Without the support of these people it would have been impossible for Stolypin to achieve his aims. Also, creating a class of rich landowning peasants would have been extremely difficult. Agricultural techniques remained backward, and even the better-off peasants could not afford new technology - that is, if it was available at all. In fact, less than 50% of the peasant farms owned an iron plough. The opinions of a professional historian echo this:

There is doubt whether, even had he not been murdered and Russia had not entered the war, his peasant policy would have succeeded. The deep conservatism of the Russian peasants made them slow to respond. The peasants were reluctant to leave the security of the commune for the uncertainty of individual farming.

Other historians believe that Stolypin’s land reform policies were unsuccessful in the long term because he needed 20 years of peace for them to work. In their view his assassination in 1911 along with the outbreak of World War One in 1914 ended his chances of success. However, to be successful in the long term he would have still needed to win over the peasants.

During the Stolypin years, industry did grow by 6% per year, but this was within the context of the European arms race, thus a false impression. Stolypin wasn’t able to improve industry and therefore placate the people and restore their faith in Tsarism. Factory inspections were few, the employers exploited the employees, and large factories were a breeding ground for discontent. The St. Petersburg workforce had grown by a third between 1907 and 1912. The city could not cope and workers had to squeeze into the existing shanty dwellings thrown up beside the factories. Stolypin could never expect to gain support of the workers when they were living in such terrible conditions. Nevertheless, he did make trade unions legal in 1906, which would have been a step forward for the workers had the unions’ activities not been severely limited. They were not allowed a strike fund, consequently the employers refused to negotiate with them knowing that long-term strikes were not feasible. Some consider the Stolypin years to be calm in terms of industrial action as the strike levels dropped during his years in office. However this was a false impression given that strikes were made impractical. After Stolypin's assassination strike levels rose to pre 1906 level showing that the underlying problems had not been solved. Stolypin’s efforts to save Tsarism failed as discontented workers now turned to the revolutionary political parties.

Another factor in Stolypin’s failure to gain the people’s support and thus save Tsarism was his attitude to terrorism. He was prepared to suppress all opponents to the Tsar using as much violence as necessary. This was obviously unpopular with the people, who replied with a wave of strikes, mutiny in parts of the armed forces and with the activities of the Socialist Revolutionary Death Squad. Stolypin met violence with violence further alienating the people. He introduced special military courts, which had the power to try and execute suspects. Between September 1906 and May 1907 nearly 1,200 suspects were executed under order of these courts. It is necessary to comprehend however that over 3,000 people were murdered by terrorists in 1907. He also placed the provinces under martial law, closed down 1,000 newspapers and dispensed with 600 trade unions between 1906 and 1911. Even though the people resented these policies, they were successful in uniting the activities of the Tsar’s opponents.

Stolypin did not have a good relationship with the Nationalities. They had little or no representation in the third or fourth Duma after having about 60 representatives in the first Duma. The Jews continued to be scapegoats for government failures. They were persecuted frequently and had their educational opportunities limited. Moslems were able to assert themselves in some areas but this was due to disagreements and divisions within the Russian Orthodox Church. Only the Baltic Germans became better off because they showed loyalty to the Tsar in 1905-6. However, they were looking to the new, stronger Germany to protect them. Russian citizens were dominant to the extent that Russian peasants took priority over Polish landowners in the Polish Zemstvo. Stolypin never particularly endeared himself to the nationalities, thus they resented the Tsar.

Stolypin also didn’t have the support of the Dumas, and ultimately the Tsar himself. The first two Dumas were dominated by groups critical of the autocracy that demanded further reform. Stolypin could not work successfully with the first two Dumas and he changed the voting arrangements in order to create a less critical body. Throughout this, the Tsar was becoming more and more worried by Stolypin’s apparent move towards liberal reform. He thought that Stolypin was trying to overthrow him. Without the support of either the Duma or the Tsar Stolypin would have severely struggled to save Tsarism.

In conclusion, there were many factors that led to Stolypin’s failure to save Tsarism. His policies on land reform were idealistic and were unlikely to succeed due to lack of support from the people and the lack of agricultural tools. It would be true to say that industry did grow in the Stolypin years, but it is essential to understand that this was in the context of the European arms race. However, Stolypin was unable to regain the workers faith in Tsarism after working in such terrible conditions in St. Petersburg. Stolypin’s aggressive attitudes towards terrorism again led to discontent, as many of the Tsar’s opponents were violently suppressed. The Nationalities were underrepresented, therefore they had no reason to believe in the Tsar. Through Stolypin’s policies on the Duma, the Tsar himself lost belief in Stolypin and this was signalled the end. Finally, opposition to Stolypin was so strong that even given time he could not have saved Tsarism.