5 ms·
You have to check facts > In search of a way out of this difficult situation, the government made deliberate efforts that led to an unprecedented industrial b
by sergeykish 6y ago
You have to check facts
> In search of a way out of this difficult situation, the government made deliberate efforts that led to an unprecedented industrial boom that began in 1893. The years of this boom were a time of economic modernization of Russia under the auspices of the state.
+----------------+-----------+-----------+------+
| Сountry | 1881–1885 | 1896–1900 | 1913 |
+----------------+-----------+-----------+------+
| United States | 28.6 | 30.1 | 35.8 |
| United Kingdom | 26.6 | 19.5 | 14.0 |
| Germany | 13.9 | 16.6 | 15.7 |
| France | 8.6 | 7.1 | 6.4 |
| Russia | 3.4 | 5.0 | 5.3 |
+----------------+-----------+-----------+------+
> Also, in 1915–1917, a large-scale modernization of industry was carried out, and, unlike the pre-war period, most part of the equipment was produced by domestic enterprises
> On the eve of the revolution, the country's national income was 16.4 billion rubles (7.4% of the world total). According to this indicator, the Russian Empire ranked fourth after the United States, Germany and the British Empire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrialization_in_the_Russian_Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrialization_in_the_Russi...
- RobertoG 6y agoFair enough, I regret expressing it that way. Anyway, In 1917, it was the poorest country per capita of Europe except Portugal and suffered the revolution and the first and the second world war. I think is kind of surprising that, starting in that position, they could keep the pace in a race with the USA.
- zhte415 6y agoDostoevsky, Crime and Punishment, a fascinating read, not an easy read either, but if any HN reader is looking for something... a masterpiece that is true to today across countries and cultures.
- sergeykish 6y agoI can't see how per capita helps in comparison. I think there were a lot of non industrial states in US, industrial centers and workforce pool is all that matters. French First Republic too suffered from revolution yet two decades later it (First Empire) conquered much of the Europe. There was no other choice for USSR. All wealth flooded into militaristic complex. System could effectively produce weapon but it could not solve citizens needs.
- jariel 6y agoRoberto is essentially correct, even by your own data. Russia has been 'behind' for literally centuries, even to this day. In 1910 'Russian Empire' was 170 Million people, the US was 100 Million people. We're talking about 10x GDP per capita. That would be like the US vs. Morocco today. Today GDP per capita is $66K US vs. $12K Russia which is substantial. Russia has, for a long time, hard 'fairly large, inefficient economic base'. They have power mostly because of their size, and their 'acute' ability to produce things (they have very smart people), and of course their aggressive Imperial view of things.
- sergeykish 6y agoI would not mix Russian Empire, USSR and Russia. Serfdom abolished in 1861, by 1917 forth country by GDP. Table I've cited shows increase of share in world production while shares of UK, Germany and France were decreasing. It occupied a leading position in world agriculture. USSR reintroduced serfdom, peasants had no passports, they could not move into town without permissions [1]. USSR had famines in 1921–1923 and 1932–33, about ten of millions died. Total mismanagement. There was rebirth after Stalins death, if only they've introduced reforms like later in China. Russia today is mostly resource-based economy [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport_system_in_the_Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport_system_in_the_Soviet_... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia#/media/File:Russia_-_Exports_-_2016.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia#/media/File:...
- jariel 6y ago1) Yes, 'Russian Empire' is different than 'Russia' is different than 'USSR' - but in 1910 it was 'The Russian Empire' so I used that as a basis of comparison. 2) It doesn't matter that much if 'Russia version X' share of world economy was 'growing' for some range of a few decades if it's literally 1/10th the per capita economic power of those other nations. It's still a 'way behind'. In fact, the 'further behind' the quicker growth should be. Most of the 'very poor' nations of the world today are growing very quickly. 'Russia Version X' has always been quite far behind, it's been that way for centuries, since the dawn of what we might even call 'Russia'.
- baybal2 6y agoYou miss the fact that Russian empire had incomparably more people. It had like 4-5 times the populations of Britain, or France.