Imperial Russian institutions compared to Soviet - any holdovers?

[Henry IX]

Why are you retelling dusty soviet textbooks from 1930s? Education expenditure kept rising, number of students rising (more university students than in Germany in 1914), SURPRISINGLY without mass murder and comrades with revolvers.

Russian literacy rates were around 25% compared with 85% in Germany. The Russian education system was reasonably effective for the upper tiers of Russian society, hence large numbers of university students, but had virtually no penetration within the peasant population. The communists largely achieved basic universal literacy for people born after the revolution. This was a huge achievement, and should not be underestimated (but is also no excuse for the repression and murderous policies of regime).

In terms of hold over institutions between the Tsarist and Communist regimes, the only ones I could think of were Siberian exile and mass conscription. The secret police were a cultural hold over, but in terms of institutions were a distinct break with the Tsarist regime (the Cheka and the Okhrama were distinct entities, although they shared a lot of common methodologies)

As the Communist regime aged and come under pressure during WW2 it gradually reintroduced a number Tsarist ideas and institutions, including a separate and distinct officer corp, the Orthodox church and an incomprehensible and incompetent bureaucracy.

 

[chepaeff]

The communists largely achieved basic universal literacy for people born after the revolution. This was a huge achievement, and should not be underestimated (but is also no excuse for the repression and murderous policies of regime).

All revolution did was delay a mass literacy program by 10-15 years. Great success. This is not the only case. The widely propagandised GOERLO plan was presented by bolsheviks (and soviet historiography afterwards) as amazingly successful and daring electrification plan conducted in an backwards, agrarian country. The result was restoring 1916 level of electricity production by the end of 20s. That's what's revolution was about - leave ruin, destruction and murder on mass scale and setting Russia back in all fields - from personal freedom all the way up to high institutions like judicial system. Imperial judicial system was an unachievable level of judicial freedom for any 1920-1990s soviet court. And this is the case with literally everything - you compare it to soviet and shudder in horror just how shitty everything became.

 

[fr-rein]

And this is the case with literally everything - you compare it to soviet and shudder in horror just how shitty everything became.

Just to be fair, Russian Empire was in financial ruin way before WWI, with it finishing it off. A lot of systematic damage was done before and would be around even without revolution.

I do agree with most of those points tho.

 

[loup99]

All revolution did was delay a mass literacy program by 10-15 years. Great success. This is not the only case. The widely propagandised GOERLO plan was presented by bolsheviks (and soviet historiography afterwards) as amazingly successful and daring electrification plan conducted in an backwards, agrarian country. The result was restoring 1916 level of electricity production by the end of 20s. That's what's revolution was about - leave ruin, destruction and murder on mass scale and setting Russia back in all fields - from personal freedom all the way up to high institutions like judicial system. Imperial judicial system was an unachievable level of judicial freedom for any 1920-1990s soviet court. And this is the case with literally everything - you compare it to soviet and shudder in horror just how shitty everything became.

No one questions the existence of propaganda or the fact that new research can challenge Soviet historiography, but the level of the reasoning at this point is astonishing. So because Tsarist Russia was a backwards agrarian aristocratic society the Soviets are to be held responsible for late electrification? Because Tsarist Russia had disastrous literacy rates the Russian Revolution is responsible for the illiteracy? What next? Are you going to claim Tsarist Russia had in reality planned to implement new rights for women but the Bolsheviks delayed it? That the Tsar was about to do an agrarian reform before the October Revolution prevented him from doing so? That peace was would have been signed within days by Kerensky, but the Bolsheviks delayed? Your blatant fallacy amounts to the "ruin, destruction and murder" of facts "on mass scale".

 

[Henry IX]

All revolution did was delay a mass literacy program by 10-15 years. Great success.

In 10-15 years the communists increased literacy to around 75%. That's not a delay. That IS a great success. A regime can be bad and still manage significant achievements.

 

[Omogoy]

No one questions the existence of propaganda or the fact that new research can challenge Soviet historiography, but the level of the reasoning at this point is astonishing. So because Tsarist Russia was a backwards agrarian aristocratic society the Soviets are to be held responsible for late electrification? Because Tsarist Russia had disastrous literacy rates the Russian Revolution is responsible for the illiteracy? What next? Are you going to claim Tsarist Russia had in reality planned to implement new rights for women but the Bolsheviks delayed it? That the Tsar was about to do an agrarian reform before the October Revolution prevented him from doing so? That peace was would have been signed within days by Kerensky, but the Bolsheviks delayed? Your blatant fallacy amounts to the "ruin, destruction and murder" of facts "on mass scale".

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the level of education in Russia returns to the pre-revolutionary state

 

[Henry IX]

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the level of education in Russia returns to the pre-revolutionary state

Ummm, no. The current literacy rate for basic literacy (able to read and write simple sentences) in Russia is around 99%. Pre-revolutionary Russia had a basic literacy rate of about 50% (depending on the source and how they measure literacy, many quote a figure half that), so current literacy rates are around double those of pre-revolutionary Russia.

 

[Omogoy]

Ummm, no. The current literacy rate for basic literacy (able to read and write simple sentences) in Russia is around 99%. Pre-revolutionary Russia had a basic literacy rate of about 50% (depending on the source and how they measure literacy, many quote a figure half that), so current literacy rates are around double those of pre-revolutionary Russia.

I meant that most of those who study in modern Russia cannot read books. Their horizons are too limited, they live by instincts, in contrast to the well-read Soviet citizens. Exams are passed by using the Internet under a desk, or by bribing teachers. This is already a partial return to the past. But those ancient people in Tsarist Russia had the skills of physical labor, they could survive in the harsh conditions of the Arctic, so the plus is not in favor of modern citizens of Russia.
I think that the next generation of citizens will refuse to attend school. Will study remotely.

 

[pithorr]

I meant that most of those who study in modern Russia cannot read books. Their horizons are too limited, they live by instincts, in contrast to the well-read Soviet citizens. Exams are passed by using the Internet under a desk, or by bribing teachers. This is already a partial return to the past. But those ancient people in Tsarist Russia had the skills of physical labor, they could survive in the harsh conditions of the Arctic, so the plus is not in favor of modern citizens of Russia.
I think that the next generation of citizens will refuse to attend school. Will study remotely.

I think it's not only the Russian problem...

 

[chepaeff]

In 10-15 years the communists increased literacy to around 75%. That's not a delay. That IS a great success. A regime can be bad and still manage significant achievements.

I doubt figures were that high, since the number of schools and pupils (as well as financing) in them stagnated compared to pre-war for several years. In other words perfectly achievable by Russian Empire. Granted, a great emphasis was placed on teaching older people to read, because reading Pravda is what truly matters.

So because Tsarist Russia was a backwards agrarian aristocratic society the Soviets are to be held responsible for late electrification? Because Tsarist Russia had disastrous literacy rates the Russian Revolution is responsible for the illiteracy?

What? How did you even read that from my posts? Russian Empire was rapidly modernizing, as evidenced in all areas, from industry and infrastructure to social structure and education. There is nothing to suggest that Russian Empire could not achieve the things bolsheviks are praised for in a normal, civilized manner. Which brings us to original question - the institutions governing those processes were reasonable and competent, and what's more people in them cared for Russia (as well as not being bloodthirsty maniacs). For bolsheviks Russia was at best a useful land to experiment on and at worst a pile of firewood to lit up the world revolution.

Are you going to claim Tsarist Russia had in reality planned to implement new rights for women but the Bolsheviks delayed it?

Considering how fast female education was growing in Russia I doubt it would've lagged behind other countries

That the Tsar was about to do an agrarian reform before the October Revolution prevented him from doing so?

You never heard of 1906 agrarian reform?

That peace was would have been signed within days by Kerensky, but the Bolsheviks delayed?

Kerensky was an idiot and arguably worse than Lenin.

Your blatant fallacy amounts to the "ruin, destruction and murder" of facts "on mass scale".

Imagine all power structures from the top to bottom are destroyed. All businesses are nationalized (a "comrade" suddenly appears at your job/business and proceeds to "supervise", despite not understanding a thing) all bank accounts are stolen closed, newspapers are closed as well. A vast layer of people are "disenfranchised", arrested, executed or forced to exile. All of that amidst a huge crime wave, because someone released criminals from prisons and also because police is demoralized since they were proclaimed counter-revolutionary and were routinely hanged on the streets by "comrades" in previous months. Meanwhile a new leader of your country sends out messages from the capital to random cities demanding immediate execution of random "bourgeoise". And that's just the first year of bolshevik rule.

Just what kind of reforms do you think could sprang from that? Just how competent the people who used to rob banks and then busied themselves executing "enemies" (generic bolshevik biography) were? And what kind of organizations these brilliant folks could create?

 

[Henry IX]

There is nothing to suggest that Russian Empire could not achieve the things bolsheviks are praised for in a normal, civilized manner.

Except that it was the Russian empire, for which neither normal or civilized are suitable descriptives. And they had manifestly failed to achieve those things over the previous century. But other than that, sure.

 

[Omogoy]

There were castes in the Russian Empire. The lower castes were peasants, Jews, foreigners, Muslims. Even after the abolition of serfdom, the upper castes oppressed and violated the rights of the peasants. Jews were not taken into the army, they were forbidden to settle in cities. Nobody was going to re-educate anyone and make a person of a new type. There was no social mobility for which the Soviet Union was famous. After the Soviet Union, the selection system for talented youth radically changed, now everything has become built on money, that is, new castes have appeared: at the very top, the oligarchs, who are called the new Russians, in the past they had criminal experience, at the very bottom there are so-called homeless people turned 10% of the citizens of Russia. Homeless people now occupy a niche of peasants.
Science in Russia was destroyed in the 1990s. Now a person who is engaged in science in Russia is a symbol of a loser, they work for scanty money. Many chose to go abroad, this phenomenon was called brain drain.
There are no prospects for young people in Russia, because there are cosmic figures at home. For comparison, in the USSR, a lot of attention was paid to children, regardless of race or class, everyone was equal. Now the caste system has affected the citizens of Central Asia, they are now viewed with undisguised hostility, they work hard without social security. The new Russians are saving, so they are gaining cheap slave power.

 

[Omogoy]

In the Soviet Union, apartments were inexpensive, or given out for free. The goods were inexpensive, everyone had the opportunity to travel for free to resorts on the Black Sea coast.
Medicine is free. Education is free, kindergartens are free, public transport is free.
Speculation was severely punished. Therefore, a notebook, books, a TV set, a car cost the same in Moscow, Ashgabat or Anadyr (Chukotka), the price was always indicated on the goods. There was strict state control over the quality of the goods. Now this is not, now for the sake of profit they are ready to change the expiration date, no one controls anyone.
There was censorship in television, cursing and filming of pornographic films were prohibited. Now every clip in Russia is pornography. This is the so-called freedom that appeared with the coming to power of Yeltsin.
Cities grew in the Far East. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the authorities began to look at profitability, remote cities lost their security, they were evacuated, so the Arctic and the Far East are abandoned. A new generation of Russians began to think about destroying national autonomies, that is, forceful coercion of Moscow. Putin never knew how to negotiate, he actually destroyed medicine in Russia, made it paid and introduced rules that only apply to the city of Moscow, that is, they do not take into account remote villages and districts. Of course, he enriched his friends, he doesn't care about the rest of the population, let them die.
Yes, of course, in the Soviet Union, the issuance of loans was certainly considered a crime for the sake of profit. And there was no need to get it, but you had to stand in line to get an inexpensive car or apartment. But WWII veterans and orphans got it out of turn.

 

[Herbert West]

Not to disparage the achievements of universal basic literacy, but that was a common thing everywhere in Europe in the 1920-1930 period.

For example, my motherland, Hungary, has its own mythologised figure of Kuno Klebelsberg, who more or less put down schools on a map with a drawing compass, increasing adult literacy to almost 100% by the end of his ministerial position in 1930.

So the USSR is certainly to be congratulated for educating their population, but their achivements are by no means unique.

 

[Omogoy]

Not to disparage the achievements of universal basic literacy, but that was a common thing everywhere in Europe in the 1920-1930 period.

For example, my motherland, Hungary, has its own mythologised figure of Kuno Klebelsberg, who more or less put down schools on a map with a drawing compass, increasing adult literacy to almost 100% by the end of his ministerial position in 1930.

So the USSR is certainly to be congratulated for educating their population, but their achivements are by no means unique.

The USSR, of course, shared its experience. The Hungarians formed the backbone of the Red Army in the Russian Civil War. The Hungarians of the Red Army were numerically larger than Latvians, Chinese and other internationalists. Therefore, Russian whites talked about the occupation of Russia by foreign power.

 

[chepaeff]

Except that it was the Russian empire, for which neither normal or civilized are suitable descriptives.

There is really no objective need to consume soviet propaganda in 2021. Pls stop

 

[Herbert West]

The USSR, of course, shared its experience. The Hungarians formed the backbone of the Red Army in the Russian Civil War. The Hungarians of the Red Army were numerically larger than Latvians, Chinese and other internationalists. Therefore, Russian whites talked about the occupation of Russia by foreign power.

Going to need some timeframe, reference, and common sense for that claim.

Likewise, I fail to see what relevance the contribution of Hungarian volunteers in the early days of the RCW has to the achievements of a distinctly non-Red Hungarian government and its educational achievements.

 

[Omogoy]

Going to need some timeframe, reference, and common sense for that claim.

Likewise, I fail to see what relevance the contribution of Hungarian volunteers in the early days of the RCW has to the achievements of a distinctly non-Red Hungarian government and its educational achievements.

The thing is that the size of the Hungarian Army, which fought against the whites, is almost 4-5 times larger than the modern Hungarian army. 80-100 thousand people against 22 thousand people.
Here is what Sergei Melgunov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Melgunov writes:
Better armed, significantly exceeding the People's Army in number, technical equipment - artillery, armored cars, steamers - the Bolshevik army on the Volga was not yet a serious active force. The Soviet government really had to rely on the international army of Latvians, Chinese, Magyars and volunteer communists. Only these units fought well.
It is worth recalling that the cause of the Civil War in Russia was a clash between a Magyar and a Czech.
Jacques Sadoul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Sadoul_(politician):
During a fight with a Hungarian prisoner, a Czech soldier was killed. His comrades avenged him. But the local authorities intervened, and the Czechs killed several members of the Council, after which hostilities began in several places - echelons stretched between Penza and Omsk.
Thus, it turns out that Soviet Russia was dying, and the Hungarians saved them.

 

[Henry IX]

There is really no objective need to consume soviet propaganda in 2021. Pls stop

In what way do I sound like I consume Soviet propaganda? I have repeatedly condemned the Soviet government for the things it should be condemned for e.g. brutal repression of its own people and a disastrous agricultural policy etc.

None of this changes the fact that the Tsarist regime was profoundly corrupt, incompetent, repressive and brutal. The large majority of the population lived in profound poverty in conditions almost identical to the serfdom of the recent past. None of this is controversial or disputed by historians. None of this is communist propaganda.

 

[cpreston5]

It's quite a wild twist to say that badmouthing the Russian Empire is Soviet propaganda, when people like Abraham Lincoln in his speeches used Russia as an example of despotism in its purest form.

Even within its own time the Russian Empire was perceived as abnormally backward and repressive. You can argue whether this was an exaggerated or unfair view of the empire, but nonetheless it was a widely-held view long before the USSR existed.