4 ms·

They were successful by the late 30s (after lots of misery), but the Russian economy had been growing for a long time. I'm not sure the imperials or republicans

They were successful by the late 30s (after lots of misery), but the Russian economy had been growing for a long time. I'm not sure the imperials or republicans couldn't have pulled it off, Russia had lots of natural advantages, especially after winning WW2. GNP: Country 1890 1900 1913 1925 1938 Russia/USSR 21 180 32 000 52 420 32 600 75 964 Germany 26 454 35 800 49 760 45 002 77 178 Britain 29 441 36 273 44 074 43 700 56 103 France 19 758 23 500 27 401 36 262 39 284 They went from the second smallest economy in 1890 to the biggest in 1913 (imperials). The economy crashed after the revolution and bad economic experiments and then rebounded. Russia was late to the industrial revolution so a lot of that growth was just it kicking in, along with the Soviets removing anyone that got in the way. Hard to say how much can be attributed to either. They were holding their own late into WWI and actually had an agreement to obtain Istanbul, which the Bolsheviks revoked (hard to fault them) along with all that they gave up in the separate treaty with the Germans. Imagine them sticking it out to 1918 with gains from being on the allies and the revolution averted. They would have been as well positioned as anyone in Europe.

masonic 9y ago
The economy crashed after the revolution The loss of the war with Japan didn't help, either.
- sologoub 9y ago
  Source? I can’t find any evidence that there was any economic significance to that war aside from loss of the fleet and human life. Bruised imperial egos for sure and likely contributing to an image of a week government, but I’m hard pressed to see how it could have had any impact on the industrial output of the country.
  - ptaipale 9y ago
    You could surely say that the war with Japan didn't help. Well-known events like the Potemkin mutiny may be dismissed as not impacting industrial output, but there was a large-scale general strike which actually lead to "1905 revolution" [0]. The loss to Japan was of course only a partial factor, with bigger contributor being the overall economic downturn of early 1900's. There were some direct impacts from this revolution. There was large-scale unrest in Kingdom of Poland (the Russian-held part of partitioned Poland). Finland (then a Grand Duchy in the Russian empire) abolished Diet of Finland in favour of a new Parliament of Finland, with universal suffrage for both men and women. And in mainland Russia, the absolute monarchy was abolished in favour of a parliamentary monarchy. However, this was too late for the Russian empire to recover. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_Russian_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_Russian_Revolution
  - loblollyboy 9y ago
    Sergei witte basically saved Russia’s ass in the peace negotiations. He was one of at least two very good ministers fired by the tsar in a time when Russia really needed one.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
andrepd 9y ago
> They went from the second smallest economy in 1890 to the biggest in 1913 (imperials). What does it matter, if 90% of the population lived in near complete destitution?
baursak 9y ago
> Russia had lots of natural advantages, especially after winning WW2 What? How is having all your industrial infrastructure destroyed and 20 million of young, able-bodied males killed an advantage?
- ZenoArrow 9y ago
  I believe GP is referring to natural resources (oil, gas, etc...) rather than the human cost of war.

masonic 9y ago

The economy crashed after the revolution The loss of the war with Japan didn't help, either.

sologoub 9y ago
Source? I can’t find any evidence that there was any economic significance to that war aside from loss of the fleet and human life. Bruised imperial egos for sure and likely contributing to an image of a week government, but I’m hard pressed to see how it could have had any impact on the industrial output of the country.
- ptaipale 9y ago
  You could surely say that the war with Japan didn't help. Well-known events like the Potemkin mutiny may be dismissed as not impacting industrial output, but there was a large-scale general strike which actually lead to "1905 revolution" [0]. The loss to Japan was of course only a partial factor, with bigger contributor being the overall economic downturn of early 1900's. There were some direct impacts from this revolution. There was large-scale unrest in Kingdom of Poland (the Russian-held part of partitioned Poland). Finland (then a Grand Duchy in the Russian empire) abolished Diet of Finland in favour of a new Parliament of Finland, with universal suffrage for both men and women. And in mainland Russia, the absolute monarchy was abolished in favour of a parliamentary monarchy. However, this was too late for the Russian empire to recover. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_Russian_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_Russian_Revolution
- loblollyboy 9y ago
  Sergei witte basically saved Russia’s ass in the peace negotiations. He was one of at least two very good ministers fired by the tsar in a time when Russia really needed one.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

andrepd 9y ago

> They went from the second smallest economy in 1890 to the biggest in 1913 (imperials). What does it matter, if 90% of the population lived in near complete destitution?

baursak 9y ago

> Russia had lots of natural advantages, especially after winning WW2 What? How is having all your industrial infrastructure destroyed and 20 million of young, able-bodied males killed an advantage?

ZenoArrow 9y ago
I believe GP is referring to natural resources (oil, gas, etc...) rather than the human cost of war.