A brief summary of Stolypin's socio-economic reforms. Stolypin's reform in brief

In short, Stolypin’s reform in the agrarian sector was a set of certain measures that were carried out with the aim of improving the situation of peasants in the country, as well as revitalizing the economic life of the state.

About the prerequisites for reforms (briefly)

It implied a comprehensive modernization of public,

political and economic life of the state. The point is that already in late XIX- the first decade of the 20th century clearly revealed the lag Russian Empire from developed European countries. And although the royal court continued to shine with magnificent balls and ostentatious luxury, a painful crisis was brewing in the country. Commodity-economic relations developed weakly, the formation of the bourgeoisie and the working class was hopelessly behind the Western pace, just like centuries ago, and relied on the most primitive manual labor, which sharply contrasted with the results of France and even Germany. Moreover, the aristocracy itself in Russia, for the most part, was in no hurry to transfer the economy of its farms to a capitalist track, continuing to squeeze the juice out of the peasants. What can we say about the latter? Serfdom was abolished half a century ago, but its relic, the rural community, was never eliminated. The empire, weakening from within, risked repeating the sad path of Iran or Turkey, which

At this time they turned into semi-dependent raw material appendages of Europe. (we will discuss it briefly below), as well as transformations in other sectors of the state economy were clearly brewing. The head of government himself came to power in the turbulent year of 1906, when the throne began to shake for the first time under Nikolai Romanov.

Stolypin's reforms: summary

Pyotr Arkadyevich’s transformations concerned several public spheres. In particular, it assumed a wider distribution throughout the country of zemstvo self-government bodies, which were supposed to replace the reactionary noble and gentry (in Ukraine) authorities. Industrial reform introduced new rules, which were extremely necessary in the conditions of the emerging classes of industrial capitalists and workers. However, the most important in the activities of the tsarist government were transformations in agriculture.

On the goals and implementation of agrarian reform (briefly)

Stolypin's reform in agriculture was aimed at creating a strong class of independent peasant farms (following the example of American farmers), as well as at developing the vast expanses of Siberia. For the first purpose, with the support of the state, the credit bank massively issued loans to all peasants who wanted to leave the community to create their own farm. To the credit of the government, it is worth noting that the percentage was very low and manageable. However, if this loan was not repaid, the purchased land was taken away and put up for sale again. Thus

economic activity was further stimulated. In Siberia, land was allocated by the government free of charge to everyone, according to the second reform program. The Cabinet of Ministers did its best to stimulate the movement of peasants to the east of the country and the development of infrastructure there. For these purposes, the so-called “Stolypin carriages” were created.

About the results of agrarian reform (briefly)

Stolypin's reform actually began to produce positive results. However, it was slowed down by the death of Pyotr Arkadyevich in 1911, and then completely interrupted by the First World War. At the same time, a little more than 10% of the peasant class left the communities, developing independent economic activity market oriented. In modern historiography, the activities of Pyotr Stolypin are generally assessed positively.

Stolypin's reforms (briefly)

Stolypin carried out his reforms from 1906, when he was appointed prime minister, until his death on September 5, caused by assassins' bullets.

Agrarian reform

In short, the main goal of Stolypin's agrarian reform was to create a wide stratum of rich peasants. Unlike the 1861 reform, the emphasis was on the individual owner rather than the community. The previous communal form fettered the initiative of the hard-working peasants, but now, freed from the community and not looking back at the “poor and drunk,” they could dramatically increase the efficiency of their farming. The law of June 14, 1910 stated that from now on, “every householder who owns an allotment of land on a communal basis may at any time demand that the part due to him from the said land be strengthened as his personal property.” Stolypin believed that the wealthy peasantry would become the real support of the autocracy. An important part of the Stolypin agrarian reform was the activity of the credit bank. This institution sold land to peasants on credit, either state-owned or purchased from landowners. Moreover, the interest rate on loans for independent peasants was half that for communities. Through a credit bank, peasants acquired in 1905-1914. about 9 and a half million hectares of land. However, measures against defaulters were harsh: the land was taken away from them and put back on sale. Thus, the reforms not only made it possible to acquire land, but also encouraged people to actively work on it. Another important part of Stolypin's reform was the resettlement of peasants to free lands. The bill prepared by the government provided for the transfer of state lands in Siberia to private hands without redemption. However, there were also difficulties: there were not enough funds or surveyors to carry out land survey work. But despite this, resettlement to Siberia, as well as Far East, Central Asia And North Caucasus picked up pace. The move was free, and specially equipped “Stolypin” cars made it possible to transport railway livestock The state tried to improve life in resettlement areas: schools were built, medical stations and so on.

Zemstvo

Being a supporter of zemstvo administration, Stolypin extended zemstvo institutions to some provinces where they had not existed before. It was not always politically simple. For example, the implementation of zemstvo reform in the western provinces, historically dependent on the gentry, was approved by the Duma, which supported the improvement of the situation of the Belarusian and Russian population, which constituted the majority in these territories, but was met with sharp rebuff in the State Council, which supported the gentry.

Industry reform

The main stage in resolving the labor issue during the years of Stolypin's premiership was the work of the Special Meeting in 1906 and 1907, which prepared ten bills that affected the main aspects of labor in industrial enterprises. These were questions about rules for hiring workers, insurance for accidents and illnesses, working hours, etc. Unfortunately, the positions of industrialists and workers (as well as those who incited the latter to disobedience and rebellion) were too far from each other and the compromises found did not suit either one or the other (which was readily used by all kinds of revolutionaries).

National question

Stolypin perfectly understood the importance of this issue in such a multinational country as Russia. He was a supporter of unification, not disunity, of the peoples of the country. He proposed creating a special ministry of nationalities that would study the characteristics of each nation: history, traditions, culture, social life, religion, etc. - so that they flow into our great power with the greatest mutual benefit. Stolypin believed that all peoples should have equal rights and responsibilities and be loyal to Russia. Also, the task of the new ministry was to counteract the internal and external enemies of the country who sought to sow ethnic and religious discord.

P.A. Stolypin first served as Minister of Internal Affairs, and then was appointed Prime Minister. His reforms were aimed at developing the country. The revolution that took place in 1905-1907 showed the problems that prevent Russia from becoming a strong power. The ruling class could not decide which way to develop the country; faith in the monarchy was undermined. Stolypin wanted to see Russia as a modern, developed and strong country. That is why he carried out his reforms, which in a few years should have yielded results and changed the country for the better.

During Stolypin's lifetime, his reforms were criticized, and his proposals met resistance in ruling circles. Disputes about his policies took place during the life of the reformer and for many years after his death. Modern historians consider the course of his actions to be correct. Several attempts were made on Pyotr Arkadyevich's life. As a result of the assassination attempt in 1906, the prime minister's children were injured, especially his daughter; she had severe leg injuries. He changed a lot after this assassination attempt. When they told him that earlier he seemed to reason differently, he replied: “Yes, that was before the bomb on Aptekarsky Island. And now I have become a different person.”

We present to your attention a table of Stolypin’s reforms, which displays their essence and results.

Pyotr Arkadyevich died as a result of an assassination attempt in September 1911. Shortly before his death, he said the following: “After my death, one leg will be pulled out of the swamp - the other will get stuck.” The assessment of Stolypin's reforms is ambiguous; they did not materialize as planned. Some people consider only the negative aspects, while others believe that he really could have made Russia a powerful, developed state and saved it from subsequent wars. A class of small landowners was never created, but agriculture developed.

Prime Minister Stolypin was a brutal politician who uncompromisingly fought the revolutionary movement. He thought out a fairly coherent program for the development of Russia. The agrarian question occupied a central place. But in addition to agrarian reform, he developed:

1. social legislation

2. project for the creation of an interstate parliament

3. draft legislation in the field of relations between employers and employees

4. the gradual transformation of Russia into a rule of law state.

Stolypin's views were progressive for that time and he saw how his program would lead to an advanced Russia. He believed that it was unacceptable to destroy landownership. It must be placed in conditions of economic competition, and then the majority of small landowners themselves will go bankrupt. In the political field, he considered it not parliament that was more important for Russia, but local self-government, which teaches citizen-owners that the people cannot immediately be given all the rights and freedoms without first creating a broad middle class, otherwise the lumpen, having received freedom, will lead to anarchy and a bloody dictatorship. Stolypin was a Russian nationalist, but he did not allow insults to other nations. It assumed that the future people of Russia would present a national cult. autonomy. But they did not understand Stolypin. He touched the interests of almost everyone social strata. There was no support from the king. 1911 killed in a terrorist attack. The reforms are not completed, but the fundamentals of agrarian reform have nevertheless been put into practice,

The reform was carried out using several methods:

1. the decree of November 9, 1906 allowed the peasant to leave the community, and the law of June 14, 1910 made exit mandatory

2. the peasant could demand the consolidation of allotment plots into a single plot and even move to a separate farm

3. a fund was created from part of the state and imperial lands

4. for the purchase of these and landowners’ lands, the Peasant Bank gave cash loans

5. encouraging the resettlement of peasants beyond the Urals. The settlers were given loans to settle in a new place, but there was not enough money.

The purpose of the reform was to preserve landownership and accelerate bourgeois evolution Agriculture, overcome communal limitations and educate the peasant as an owner, creating in the village a support for the government in the person of the rural bourgeoisie.

The reform contributed to the rise of the country's economy. The purchasing power of the population and foreign exchange earnings associated with the export of grain increased.

However, social goals were not achieved. Only 20-35% of the peasants left the community, because... the majority retained collectivist psychology and traditions. Only 10% of householders started farming. Kulaks left the community more often than the poor. The poor went to the cities or became farm laborers.

20% peasants. who received loans from the Peasant Bank went bankrupt. 16% of migrants were unable to settle in their new place; returned to central areas. The reform accelerated social stratification - the formation of the rural bourgeoisie and proletariat. The government did not find a strong social support in the village, because did not satisfy the peasants' needs for land. Unfortunately, not much happened due to the First World War.

Nevertheless, the reform had positive consequences:

1. peasant farm required industrial goods => production of industrial goods.

2. revival financial sector, strengthening of the ruble, growing share of Russian capital in the economy

3. growth in agricultural production of marketable bread, bread exports => currency growth

4. the problem of relocation of the center has decreased

5. increasing the influx of workers in industry

in 1909-1913 there is an industrial boom. The pace of industrialization and railway construction accelerated, production increased 1.5 times, and the industrial growth rate over 5 years was 10%.

Stolypin's reforms (1906-1911)

• On the introduction of freedom of religion
• On the establishment of civil equality
• On the reform of higher and secondary schools
• On reforming local government
• On the introduction of universal primary education
• On income tax and police reform
• On improving the material support of public teachers
• On carrying out agrarian reform

Stolypinskaya agrarian reform 1906—1910 (1914,1917)

Goals of the Stolypin Reform:

1. Strengthening social support in the person of strong peasant owners

2) Create conditions for successful economic development

3) Eliminate the causes that gave rise to the revolution. Distract from the idea of ​​abolishing landed estates

Stolypin reform measures

1. The main event is the destruction of the peasant community (the way of life of the peasants, the land is the property of the community, striped land) - the transfer of land into private ownership in the form of cuts - a plot of land allocated to the peasant upon leaving the community with the preservation of his yard in the village, and a farm - a plot of land allocated to a peasant upon leaving the community and moving from the village to his own plot. By 1917, 24% of the peasants left the community. 10% left to become strong owners (but very few of them became)

2) Acquisition of land by peasants through a peasant bank

3) Organization of resettlement of land-poor peasants to empty lands (Siberia, Caucasus, cf. Asia, Far East)

Results of Stolypin's Reforms

1. The king's support was not created on wealthy peasants.
2. Failed to prevent a new upsurge of revolutionary activity
3. Second social The war in the villages further complicated the discontent of the villages. reform
4. It was possible to create impulsive economic development.
5. High rates of economic growth.
6. The development of the early developed regions was not carried out politically and socially.

Agrarian reform (in short - Stolypin's reform) is a generalized name for a whole set of measures that have been carried out in the field of agriculture since 1906. These changes were led by P. A. Stolypin. The main goal of all events was to create conditions for attracting peasants to work on their land.

In past years, the system of such transformations (the reforms of P. A. Stolypin - briefly) was criticized in every possible way, but nowadays it is customary to praise it. At the same time, no one strives to fully understand it. We should also not forget that Stolypin himself was not the author of the agrarian reform, it was only part of common system the transformations he planned.

Stolypin as Minister of Internal Affairs

The relatively young Stolypin came to power without much struggle or labor. His candidacy was nominated in 1905 by Prince A.D. Obolensky, who was his relative and chief prosecutor of the Synod. The opponent of this candidacy was S. Yu. Witte, who saw another person as Minister of Internal Affairs.

Having come to power, Stolypin failed to change the attitude of the cabinet of ministers. Many officials never became his like-minded people. For example, V.N. Kakovo, who held the post of Minister of Finance, was very skeptical about Stolypin’s ideas regarding solving the agrarian issue - he spared money for it.

In order to protect himself and his family, Stolypin, at the Tsar’s suggestion, moved to the Winter Palace, which was reliably guarded.

Most difficult decision for him it was the adoption of a decree on courts-martial. He later admitted that this “ heavy cross"he was forced to bear against his own will. The following describes Stolypin's reforms (briefly).

General description of the modernization program

When the peasant movement began to decline by the autumn of 1906, the government announced its plans regarding the agrarian question. The so-called Stolypin program began with a decree of November 9, 1906. Stolypin's agrarian reform followed, which is briefly described in the article.

While still the governor of Saratov, the future minister wanted to organize assistance for the creation of strong individual farms for peasants on the basis of state lands. Such actions were supposed to show the peasants new way and encourage them to abandon communal land tenure.

Another official, V.I. Gurko, developed a project whose goal was to create farms on peasant lands, and not on state ones. The difference was significant. But even this Gurko considered not the most important. His main goal was the consolidation of allotment land in the ownership of peasants. According to this plan, any member of the peasant community could take away their allotment, and no one had the right to reduce or change it. This would allow the government to split the community. The unfavorable situation in the empire required the implementation of Stolypin's reform (in short, the agrarian reform).

The situation in the country on the eve of the reform

In 1905-1907, as part of the revolution, peasant unrest took place in Russia. Along with problems within the country, Russia lost the war with Japan in 1905. All this was said about serious problems that needed to be addressed.

At the same time, work begins The State Duma. She gave the go-ahead for the reforms of Witte and Stolypin (in short - agrarian).

Directions

The transformations were supposed to create strong economic holdings and destroy collective ownership of land, which was slowing down further development. It was necessary to eradicate outdated class restrictions, encourage the purchase of land from landowners, and increase the pace of running one’s own household through lending.

Stolypin's agrarian reform, which is briefly described in the article, was aimed at improving allotment land ownership and practically did not touch private property.

Main stages of modernization

By May 1906, a congress of noble societies was held, at which D. I. Pestrzhetsky made a report. He was one of the officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs who developed the agricultural project. His report criticized possible land reforms. It stated that throughout the country the peasants had no problems with a shortage of land, and the nobles had no reason to alienate it. It was proposed to solve certain cases of land shortage by purchasing plots through a bank and relocating to the outskirts of the country.

The report caused mixed opinions among the nobles on this matter. The views on the reforms of Witte and Stolypin (in short - agrarian reform) were equally ambiguous. There were also those (Count D. A. Olsufiev) who proposed to compromise with the peasants. This meant selling them the land, leaving the main part for themselves. But such reasoning did not meet with support or at least sympathy from the majority of those present.

The only thing that almost everyone at the congress was unanimous about was the negative attitude towards the communities. K. N. Grimm, V. L. Kushelev, A. P. Urusov and others attacked peasant communities. Regarding them, the phrase was said that “this is a swamp in which everything that could be in the open gets bogged down.” The nobles believed that for the benefit of the peasants the community must be destroyed.

Those who tried to raise the issue of alienation of landowners' lands did not receive support. Back in 1905, when the land management manager N.N. Kutler proposed to the tsar to solve the problem of peasants' lack of land in this way, the ruler refused him and sent him into retirement.

Stolypin was also not a supporter of the forced alienation of land, believing that everything was going on as usual. Some of the nobles, fearing revolution, sold land to the Peasant Bank, which divided it into small plots and sold it to those peasants who were cramped in the community. This was the main meaning of Stolypin's reform briefly.

During 1905-1907, the bank bought more than 2.5 million acres of land from landowners. However, peasants, fearing the liquidation of private land ownership, practically did not purchase land. During this time, the bank sold only 170 thousand dessiatines. The bank's activities caused discontent among the nobles. Then land sales began to increase. The reform began to bear fruit only after 1911.

The results of Stolypin's reforms

Brief statistics on the results of agrarian reform:

• more than 6 million households filed a petition to secure plots of land as private property;
• by the February Revolution, about 30% of the land was transferred to the ownership of peasants and partnerships;
• with the help of the Peasant Bank, peasants acquired 9.6 million dessiatines;
• landed estates lost their significance as a mass phenomenon; by 1916, almost all land sowing was carried out by peasants.