What is 1913 famous in history? For everyone and about everything

Sections of the site

Editor's Choice:

Advertising

home - Electric meters

In Soviet times, they liked to compare economic development indicators with 1913. This was justified, since it was the last year of peace before the First World War. In our time, a persistent historical myth has developed that the revolution cut off Russia at its economic and social takeoff. Wonderful display of statistics Russian Empire beginning of the 20th century. It is especially useful to get acquainted with it for those who are inclined to idealize our pre-revolutionary past. For ease of reading and assimilation, I took the liberty of breaking up the post of the respected felix_edmund in "Breakthrough" 1913, Russia which we lost into several parts

Here the other day, in the TV show “Time will tell”, from the heated anti-Soviet and anti-Leninist Petya Tolstoy, the “enlightened” liberal public told us, once again, their rosy myth about Russia in 1913, which we lost. A. Brusilov’s material came in very handy, in specific numbers and point by point, describing that “incredible breakthrough” of 1913 in industry and in the social sphere:

Tsarist Russia in numbers

I have been interested in history for a long time. Therefore, I am forced to criticize some authors who spoke about a prosperous and abundant Russia before 1917. Alas, the facts say the opposite.

Industry

First of all, Russia, even in terms of volume industrial production lagged behind the USA, England, Germany and France. Its share in the total industrial production of the five powers listed above was only 4.2%. In global production in 1913, the share of Russia was 1.72%, the share of the USA - 20, England - 18, Germany - 9, France - 7.2% (these are all countries with a population 2-3 times less than Russia ). And this despite the fact that in Russia in 1913 there was a record (80 million tons) grain harvest. In terms of gross national product per capita, Russia was inferior to the United States - 9.5 times, England - 4.5, Canada - 4, Germany - 3.5, France, Belgium, Holland, Australia, New Zealand, Spain - 3 times, Austria-Hungary - 2 times.

Russia not only “rushed”, but continued to lag behind - in 1913 its GNP correlated with Germany’s GNP as 3.3 to 10, while in 1850 the ratio was 4 to 10.

Volumes of industrial production in 1913:

General, billion rubles Per capita, rub.
USA 38.13 397.19
UK 15.5 336.96
Germany 12.4 182.35
France 10.54 263.5
Russia 7.75 44.29

At 24,472 factories there were only 24,140 electric, steam, diesel engines(with an average power of 60 hp). That is, not every plant had at least one engine. So much for “advanced technology”. In terms of power and mechanical equipment, Russia was 10 times behind the United States, 5 times behind England, and 4 times behind Germany, Belgium, and New Zealand. Let's add one more here interesting fact: in 1913, there were 3.035 million telephone network subscribers in the USA, 797 thousand in Germany, 536.5 thousand in England, 185 thousand in France, 110 thousand in Austria-Hungary, 102 thousand in Sweden ., in Denmark - 98 thousand, but in Russia - 97 thousand subscribers. And this is at Russian distances...

In 1913, Russia imported more than 1 million tons of steel and 8.7 million tons of coal from other countries.

Let's give a few more numbers. In 1913, the USA produced 25 million tons of steel, Russia - 4.2 million tons, over 5 years in the USA, steel production increased by 5 million tons, in Russia by 1.7 million tons (in on average by 1 million, and 0.34 million tons per year). 1% increase in steel production in the USA was equivalent to 200 thousand tons, in Russia it was only 25 thousand tons - 8 times less.

The level of labor productivity in industry in Russia was less than: in the USA - 9 times; in England - 5 times; in Germany - 4 times.

In 1909-1914. The British riveted 64 large surface ships, the Germans - 47, the French - 24, the Italians - 16, Russia, with efforts, completed and again created 10 surface ships of the battleship-cruiser class. And this despite the fact that in Russia military spending in 1908-1913. accounted for 32 - 33% of the total state budget.

Economic efficiency

Let's now take the state budget. How many curses were brought down on the heads of the Bolsheviks and the CPSU for “drunk” budgets, starting from the mid-70s. But what did we see in Tsarist Russia? Here are the "Statistical Yearbooks of Russia" (edited by the director of the Central Statistical Committee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs N.N. Belyavsky) for 1908-1913, the yearbooks of world statistics by S. Zap "Socio-political tables of all countries of the world" of the publishing house "Cooperation" Moscow.

The West had nothing to fear from Russia, which “rushed” forward. The more efficiently the Russian economy worked, the more income the banks of Western countries received. In 1887-1913. The West invested 1,783 million gold rubles in Russia. During the same period, net income was exported from Russia - 2326 million gold rubles (the excess of income over investments over 26 years was 513 million gold rubles). Annually, up to 500 million gold rubles were transferred abroad in interest payments and loan repayments (in modern prices this is 15 billion dollars).

For comparison: for a German worker, paying for food for a family took 20-25% of the salary (for one adult), for an English worker - 40%.

Summing up the industrial development of Russia in 1908-1914, we must also point out the following fact: in 1893-1900. the average annual increase in industrial production was 9%, and in 1908-1913. - 8.8%.

In parallel with the growth of industrial production, there was a process of rising prices. In 1908-1913. prices for consumer goods increased by 24%, while wages in Russia increased by an average of 34 rubles. (by 14.52%), thus we see that the real incomes of workers did not increase, but fell. Prices (wholesale) for wheat in 1901-1912. increased by 44%; for rye - by 63.63%; for pork - by 55.86%. Naturally, no less than wholesale prices have increased for bakery products and for meat in retail trade. As a result, in 1913 the real incomes of workers in Russia were 90% of the level in 1900.

Science and Engineering

What about cars? "Ford", "Mercedes-Benz", "Fiat", "Renault", "Peugeot". And where are the Russian companies that produce cars completely (from raw materials to the finished product) - they are not there.

Russian destroyers, cruisers and battleships had German and Swedish turbines, English gyrocompasses and rangefinders.

I analyze Russia’s lags in such detail not with the aim of savoring them. No. I am no less proud of D.I. Mendeleev, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, and many other talented scientists and engineers. I remember that the first diesel engines and motor ships were created in Kolomna, I remember that Novik-class destroyers and Russian steam locomotives were considered standard, I remember that Russia is the birthplace of radio, but, unfortunately, these were only rays of light in an overall bleak picture.

All this is analyzed in order to prevent the creation of a new mythology, because any myth ultimately turns against itself, as we saw in the example of the CPSU, when Suslov, Yakovlev, etc. and so on. They lied first in one direction and then in the other.

Economy of 1913

During 1894–1914, the country's state budget increased by 5.5 times, and its gold reserves by 3.7 times. Significant sums from the budget were allocated for the development of culture and education. The population from 1897 (when the first all-Russian census was carried out) to 1913 increased by a third, and before the First World War it was 165.7 million people (excluding Finland). This significant growth was achieved due to high level birth rate (in 1909–1913 there were 44 births per thousand population) and a decrease in mortality, which, however, in Russia was higher than in the most economically prosperous countries (in 1911–1913 we had 27.2 deaths per thousand people, in while, for example, in Denmark - 12.9, Norway - 13.5 in Holland - 13.6). There was a rapid growth of the urban population, although its share was still small.

Urban population of Russia

Already by the 1900s, Russia had the second largest network in the world railways. Intensive railway construction led to the development of industry, primarily heavy industry; Russian industry grew at the fastest pace in the world. In general, during the years of growth, industrial production in the country more than doubled, and the production of means of production increased almost three times.

However, already at the very end of the 1890s, the first symptoms of the industrial crisis appeared, which at the end of the decade entered an acute phase and then continued until 1903. The growth rate of industrial production collapsed (in 1902 the increase was only 0.1%), however, due to the different times in which the crisis affected individual industries, there was no overall decrease in the volume of output.

Also, the first decade of the 20th century turned out to be unfavorable for domestic industry. It is believed that its development was negatively affected by the Russo-Japanese War and the revolution of 1905–1907. However, industrial growth did not stop, amounting to an average annual rate of 5% for 1904–1909.

From 1910, the country entered a period of new industrial growth, which lasted until the outbreak of the First World War. The average annual increase in industrial output exceeded 11%, despite the fact that industries producing means of production increased production output over the same period by 83%, and light industry industries - by 35.3%. But Russia, even at this rate, continued to lag behind. During 1903–1914, the production of iron and steel increased from 135.3 million poods to 227.5 million, and world production of iron and steel in 1903–1911 increased from 2205.5 million poods to 3613.4 million, which reduced Russia’s share in their production from 6.1 to 5.6%.

This somewhat discouraging result of the breakthrough is not surprising, given that iron and steel are smelted from cast iron. The country was chronically lacking the latter (its per capita consumption in Russia was 10 times lower than in the USA, more than 5 times lower than in Germany and almost 4 times lower than in England or France). In addition, it should be taken into account that a significant part of the country’s iron industry worked to create a network of railways, and given our space and population, we needed much more roads than other countries. Meanwhile, in comparison with other large European countries, we were far behind on roads too.

Length of railways in Europe

The overall results of the country's development at that time look very impressive. In terms of industrial production, Russia in 1913 ranked fifth in the world. In some industries, it was ahead of almost everyone: for example, although the volume of industrial production in France was approximately twice that of Russia, its superiority was achieved mainly due to a number of branches of the light and food industries, and in steel smelting, rolling, mechanical engineering, cotton processing and Russia's sugar production was ahead of France. In 1913, Russia was second only to the United States in oil production.

And at the same time, on the eve of the First World War, in terms of the level of industrialization and economic potential as a whole, Russia, together with Japan, was only in the third group of industrially developing countries. Russia was inferior not only to the leading countries - the USA, Germany, Great Britain and France, but also to the second echelon industrially developed countries- Austria-Hungary and Italy, where the process of industrialization has not yet been fully completed.

Along with 29,400 enterprises of the factory and mining industries (3.1 million workers in the country, there were 150 thousand small establishments with the number of workers from 2 to 15 people, and in total they employed about 800 thousand people. And one more thing: with all the industrial Despite its successes, Russia remained an agrarian-industrial country. The gross output of agriculture and livestock farming in 1913 was 1.5 times higher than the gross output of large-scale industry.

The country lagged very significantly behind the most developed countries in the production of industrial goods per capita; according to this indicator, the USA and England in 1913 exceeded Russia by about 14 times, and France by 10 times. Thus, despite the exceptionally high rates of industrial growth, Russia was still inferior to other great powers in terms of economic development at the beginning of the First World War.

(It would be appropriate to recall that the territory of Russia is by no means redundant. It is just such that the country could survive as an equal in the structure of other countries. In fact, if the industrial centers - the Urals, Donetsk, Moscow and St. Petersburg - were not united into one country, neither separately nor together they could develop sufficiently to defend their interests on the world stage against any industrial power, much less against their union.)

Back in the 1880s, the first monopoly-type associations arose in the industries serving railway construction: “Union of Rail Manufacturers”, “Union of Rail Fastener Manufacturers”, “Union of Factories that Manufactured Railway Accessories”. In the 1890s, the process of industrial monopolization, the formation of cartels and syndicates quickly spread to the mining, metallurgical and oil industries, and the decisive stage in the formation of industrial monopolies in the country's economy came at the beginning of the 20th century, after the global economic crisis of 1900–1903.

The state actively intervened in this process of monopolization, with the equally active participation of foreign capital. The first cartels and syndicates arose in industries especially protected by the state, around emergency and significant government orders. During crises, the state widely financed faltering enterprises, became involved in their management, and bought them out, often with subsequent resale on preferential terms. This system of state capitalism led to the enrichment of narrow groups of entrepreneurs.

In the 1890s, a network of joint-stock commercial banks was formed; Over the decade, the capital and all liabilities of commercial banks more than doubled, but the banks’ ties with industry were still very fragile. But gradually banks switched to financing industry, and this marked the beginning of the process of merging banking and industrial capital. The largest banks acquired their own areas of interest in industry: for example, by 1900, the St. Petersburg International Bank was interested in more than 30, and the St. Petersburg Accounting and Loan Bank - in almost 30 enterprises. Banking groups began to emerge on the basis of joint financing of industry. During the crisis of 1900–1903, with a quantitative reduction in connections between banks and industry, the strength of surviving contacts increased.

The process of merging banks with industry and forming financial capital acquired significant proportions during the years of pre-war economic growth. In 1914, Russia already had a highly developed banking system, in which the main role was played by the State Bank and joint-stock commercial banks (the assets of the latter reached almost 5 billion rubles).

Banks also created monopolistic associations, for example, the Russian-Asian Bank acted as the organizer of a powerful military-industrial concern of eight metalworking enterprises controlled by it with a total share capital of 85 million rubles. This group controlled the entire private production of artillery in Russia, part of the production of ships for the Baltic Fleet, and a significant share of the production of shells and mines. Another example: under the auspices of the International Commercial Bank, the Kolomna-Sormovo trust was created, which monopolized shipbuilding in the Volga basin, as well as the Naval-Russud trust, which built ships for the Black Sea Fleet.

True, the Russian financial oligarchy was unable to penetrate the Moscow textile industry. The entrepreneurs operating here (some of them had their own banks), receiving particularly large profits (it was, for example, 14 times higher than the gross profit of all coal enterprises in the Donetsk basin) and having large personal fortunes, expanded their establishments at the expense of their own funds or the funds of relatives.

It should be especially noted that foreign investment played a significant role in the economic development of Russia at this time. By the end of the 19th century Western Europe there was a lot of free capital looking for profitable application, and the tsarist government sought to create favorable conditions for foreign investments. They would have come anyway: lower cost than in the West work force made Russia a very suitable investment destination in the eyes of foreign investors. Thus, according to modern data, by 1913 the net income of foreigners from investing in the Russian economy amounted to 2326.1 million rubles, exceeding by almost a quarter the amount of foreign direct investment over the previous 27 years, which is not surprising, since the average rate of profit on foreign commercial and industrial capital amounted to 12.9% in 1887–1913.

It is enough to look at the main branches of heavy industry created in Russia at the end of the 19th century to see the decisive role of foreigners. The modern coal and steel industries of Donetsk and Krivoy Rog were founded by the British, and they were financed by joint British, French and Belgian capital. The oil fields of the Caucasus were put into operation by English and Swedish entrepreneurs. The Germans laid the foundation for the Russian electrical and chemical industries. The share of foreign capital in mining, metalworking and mechanical engineering was 63%.

Weaving factories, founded by serf entrepreneurs in the central regions of the country, were the only industry actually created by the Russian people.

The rapid rise of Russian industrial production in the 1890s, which had no equal in pace either before or after, was not so much a natural continuation of Russia’s internal economic development as a consequence of the transplantation of Western capital, technology and, most importantly, Western industry organizers into it. Russia invested cheap labor according to the principle: low wages for us, high profits for you.

On the eve of the 20th century, foreign investments in heavy industry reached 3/5 of the total amount of capital investments; they were significant in banking and so on.

And Russian capitalists and merchants, as well as rich landowners, preferred to invest money in bonds of the imperial government, in the reliability of which they firmly believed, rather than take risks in commercial enterprises. Only after foreigners took on the main risk did Russian capital rush into heavy industry. As a result, before the revolution, a third of industrial capital investments in Russia and half of the banking capital in its largest banks were of foreign origin.

Foreign capital was represented by various financial groups, between which there was intense competition. Using this circumstance, Russian capital, despite its relative weakness, could act as a more or less equal partner of foreign financial centers.

After the economic crisis of 1900–1903, which caused significant damage to foreign companies operating in Russia joint stock companies, foreign dominance began to decline. Now foreign investors preferred to direct their investments to those Russian companies in which local capital was strong enough. During the period of pre-war economic growth, the share of Russian capital increased in almost all industries.

But if the dependence of the Russian national economy on foreign capital clearly weakened over time, the financial dependence of the tsarist government on the major powers, on the contrary, increased. By 1914 external state debt country amounted to 5.4 billion rubles. Russia's main creditor was France, which saved the autocracy with the help of a huge loan (843,750 thousand rubles) from financial collapse during the revolution of 1905–1907.

At the same time, Russia - itself an object of import of foreign capital - exported capital abroad, primarily to backward states of the East (China, Persia). However, mainly state or even borrowed capital was exported, and their placement in the respective countries was determined not so much by economic as by military-political considerations, as well as the desire to “stake out” foreign markets for the future.

In the 1890s, the Accounting and Loan Bank of Persia (actually a branch of the State Bank of Russia) and the Russian-Chinese Bank, which was controlled by the Russian government, were created.

The private capital of our country could not yet act actively in foreign markets - it was weak. In general, in 1905, only 12,377 people received an annual income from commercial and industrial activities in excess of 20 thousand rubles throughout the country.

A narrow layer of the Russian financial oligarchy was formed mainly at the expense of the St. Petersburg bourgeoisie, which formed mainly as a result of the “implantation” of capitalism from above and operated in the sphere of heavy industry. Representatives of this group of the Russian bourgeoisie - as a rule, came from the technical intelligentsia, bureaucrats, as well as foreign capitalists - were closely associated with the tsarist bureaucracy. But even in Moscow there were entrepreneurs (the Ryabushinskys, Morozovs, Mamontovs, etc.) who had multimillion-dollar fortunes and aspired to be the leaders of the Russian business world.

But even at this time, the nobility remained in the position of the first estate of the empire, retaining its privileged status, however economic impact this class has been steadily weakening.

According to the growth of industry, the number and importance of the industrial proletariat increased. In 1913, there were 4.2 million factory, mining and railway workers in the country, while the total number of proletarians reached 18 million people. The composition of the working class was heterogeneous: in large industry, hereditary workers predominated; in construction, in water transport, etc. there were many recent immigrants from the countryside. The share of highly skilled and, accordingly, highly paid workers was relatively small. Average earnings in the manufacturing industry in 1913 were about 24 rubles per month, while the cost of living even a decade earlier, in 1903, was 21 rubles in St. Petersburg for single people and 32 rubles for families, and in Moscow approximately 20 and 30 rubles .

Several million more peasants were engaged in manufacturing in their villages, without giving up farming. And there were two specific reasons for this: climate and financial.

Because of our climate, farming finds itself in worse conditions than in the West. It is necessary to do the same work on the ground in four months that in the West can be spread over seven, or even ten. But in the remaining eight months there is no business related to agriculture, and labor can be used for other activities.

And the financial reason is that agriculture does not provide income sufficient to cover the mandatory expenses of a peasant farm (primarily taxes). The entire central zone of Russia is in this situation; That is why domestic industry and waste trades, along with agriculture, have long become a necessary auxiliary resource for the peasant here.

For example, before the liberation of 1861, a Yaroslavl peasant received only 37 kopecks from agriculture itself out of every ruble he earned; he earned the remaining 63 kopecks from fishing. In the Volga regions, this share of income received from fishing reached 88 kopecks. Moreover, due to its simplicity - the manufacturer did not require almost any preliminary costs for premises, tools and materials - the craft was accessible to anyone.

It is clear that the developed Russian handicraft industry is not a “relic of ancient times,” but simply one of the forms in which the general revival of popular consumption and industrial life was expressed in the second half XVIII century. At first, such work preceded the appearance of the factory; then the manufacturer ordered the work from the handicraftsman. Even when the master worked at his own peril and risk, he was dependent on the merchant-buyer. Thus, this mass handicraft production, both in origin and in character, was from the very beginning a capitalist enterprise, and not “folk entertainment,” although, of course, the inhabitants of Russia have always been distinguished by an extraordinary inclination to keep their hands busy with something, and the natural scarcity of the soil encouraged them to become entrepreneurs.

By 1913, the factory began to displace artisans, giving jobs under its roof to those who had previously been given work at home. And yet we must not forget that throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and even at the beginning of the 20th century, a cottage industry flourished in Russia, whose leaders in their energy were not much different from the American entrepreneurs-nuggets. True, the combination of agricultural and non-agricultural occupations, imposed on the population by economic circumstances, hampered the development of commercial and industrial culture, because where commerce and industry were viewed only as a source of side income, they could not become independent industries.

But Russian residents have always had a need to earn extra money, if only to cover the interests of the state. As we have already seen, the government has never stopped its tax creativity. One can clearly imagine the process of such creativity using the example of the drinking monopoly introduced in 1895, when the government wanted to increase income from drinks. It was necessary to come up with a trick to maintain the drinking level of the population and increase income.

This story developed like this. In 1863, vodka was consumed, with an excise tax of 4 kopecks per glass, about 1.25 buckets per capita. Then in 1870, with an increase in the excise tax to 6 kopecks per degree, consumption fell to one bucket; in 1883–1886, with an excise tax of 8 kopecks, it dropped to 0.82, 0.75, and 0.67 buckets. The excise tax was then increased to 10 kopecks, but consumption fell again, to 0.49 buckets (1893), perhaps also because they began to make 40-proof vodka.

Then the government sale of drinks was tried, first of all, as an experiment in those areas where the drop in consumption was especially strong. At the same time, government revenue from wine was again increased compared to the previous excise tax to 15 kopecks per glass. After that, vodka consumption began to increase and reached its highest point in 1906, just at the saddest financial time, after the Japanese war and crop failure. Per capita it rose from half a bucket (0.51 in 1902) to almost two-thirds of a bucket (0.68 in 1906). But then there is a stop and decline again; The government again tried (1908) to compensate for the decrease in consumption by raising the price of vodka.

It ended, as we remember, with the introduction of Prohibition.

And at the end of this small review, let us once again return to the issue of grain exports. The table below (from the book by A. G. Kushnir) is compiled based on the materials of the “Collection of statistical and economic information on agriculture in Russia and foreign countries” (pp. 3, 6, 108, 111), published under the “old regime”, in 1917.

From the book The Forgotten History of the Russian Revolution. From Alexander I to Vladimir Putin author Kalyuzhny Dmitry Vitalievich

Economics of 1913 1912, April 4. – Shooting of a peaceful procession of striking workers at the Lena gold mines. June. – Approval of laws on work insurance. 15th of November. – Start of work of the IV State Duma. The emergence of the Progressive Party. 1913, February 21–23. –

From the book Intelligence and Counterintelligence author Lekarev Stanislav Valerievich

1913 January 11 - Leontine Cohen, future employee of the Soviet illegal intelligence Helen Kroger, was born. March 30 - Richard M. Helms, the future director of the CIA, was born. May 5 - Joseph Romualdovich Grigulevich, the future illegal of the Soviet intelligence, was born in Vilna. May 25 - born

From the book My Mission in Russia. Memoirs of an English diplomat. 1910–1918 author Buchanan George

Chapter 10 1912–1913 Austro-Russian relations. – Growing unrest in the Balkans. – Serbian-Bulgarian Treaty of February 1912. – Formation of the Balkan Confederation. – Balkan crisis. – Meeting at Balmoral. – First Balkan War. – Russia’s position towards the author Bogoslovsky Mikhail Mikhailovich

1913 1 The dissertation of E. G. Kagarov was published in 1913: Kagarov E. G. The cult of fetishes, plants and animals in ancient Greece. St. Petersburg, 1913.2 Bogoslovsky recalls his debates: on November 22, 1902, a debate took place on his master’s thesis “Regional Reform of Peter

From the book Historical description of clothing and weapons of Russian troops. Volume 14 author Viskovatov Alexander Vasilievich

From the book Hidden Tibet. History of independence and occupation author Kuzmin Sergey Lvovich

1913 Nepomnin, 2005.

From the book Discovery of Severnaya Zemlya in 1913 author Glazkov Dmitry

September 2, 1913 A month later, on September 2, both ships were 12 miles northeast of Cape Chelyuskin; the ice situation in the navigation area was very difficult. Sailors sawing ice around the hull of the ship From the memoirs of L. M. Starokadomsky: “At noon on September 2, icebreakers

From the book Mariinsky Theater author Kitlinsky Alexey Alekseevich

1913 Avrus Liina Shmulevna, 01/20/1896, class 43, 1913, N 434 Andreeva Tatyana, 07/5/1893, class 43, 1913, N 434 Babina Elena Vasilyevna, 02/1/1895, class 43, 1913, N 434 Barsov and Elena Pavlovna, 07/25/1894, issue 43, 1913, N 434 Berlinberg Etel Gershovna, 05/24/1896, issue 43, 1913, N 434 Bondar Dina

From the book Complete Works. Volume 23. March-September 1913 author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

1913 Historical destinies of the teachings of Karl Marx (1) The main thing in the teachings of Marx is the clarification of the world-historical role of the proletariat as the creator of a socialist society. Has the course of events throughout the world confirmed this teaching since it was stated?

author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

1913 Marxism and reformism Marxists, unlike anarchists, recognize the struggle for reforms, that is, for such improvements in the position of the working people that leave power still in the hands of the ruling class. But at the same time, Marxists are waging the most decisive struggle

From the book Complete Works. Volume 24. September 1913 - March 1914 author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

Resolutions of the summer 1913 meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP with party workers (26) Written in September 1913. Printed in December 1913 in the brochure “Notice and resolutions of the summer 1913 meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP with party workers,” published in Paris by the Central Committee

author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

From the book Complete Works. Volume 22. July 1912 - February 1913 author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

Materials of the Krakow meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP with party workers. December 26, 1912 – January 1, 1913 (January 8–14, 1913) 1. Initial draft of the resolution “On the Duma Social-Democratic. factions" Not for publication(?) 6 and 7: equality of representation and goals.(?) exit from "Luch"...(?)

From the book Complete Works. Volume 22. July 1912 - February 1913 author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

Capitalism, as a total political-economic system, does not correspond to the character and mentality of the Russian people, whose civilization was formed on other political, economic and cultural foundations. Any attempt to reproduce a Western-style capitalist system in Russia is doomed to failure. In case of its “success”, i.e. forced capitalization of Russia, the result will be either the colonization of the country by the Western world, or simply the destruction of the Russian people as a representative of a unique civilization.

Among sincere supporters of the capitalist path in Russia, there was a belief that in the period from 1861 to 1917. Tsarist Russia developed rapidly on a capitalist basis, thereby, as it were, demonstrating the possibility of becoming a “normal” capitalist country. And if, they say, it were not for the Bolsheviks with their October Revolution, then Russia could have joined the ranks of “civilized” states and formed part of the current “golden billion”.

The current ideological subtext of supporters of such reasoning boils down to the fact that there is no need to look for some special, say, “third way” for Russia, but we must continue the search optimal option, at a minimum, to keep the country on capitalist tracks, and at a maximum, to deepen capitalism, since before October 1917 we were well on this path.

In answer to the simple question: why, despite this, the capitalist path of development led to the socialist revolution, they answer differently. Some say that the Bolsheviks were “helped” by the First World War, others say that the revolution actually happened by accident (according to A.N. Yakovlev, it “happened” illegally), and others don’t answer at all.

In any case, domestic political literature devoted to this period describes smart capitalists and politicians Tsarist Russia (Putilov, Purishkevich, Witte, Stolypin, Miliukov, Kerensky, Guchkov, etc.), caring for the good of the people and the fatherland. Well, an aura of a saint was generally created around Tsar Nicholas II, the reburial of whose remains was turned almost into a world-historical event.

From all this literature, it is still not clear why, despite such a crowd smart people Three revolutions took place in the ruling circles of Tsarist Russia. If because of the wars, why didn’t similar revolutions happen in England, France, Germany (in the latter, however, there was a small revolutionary outbreak in 1918, but this was already a reaction to the Russian revolution of 1917). Why didn't such an accident happen in other capitalist countries? Why did we lose the war with Japan, and why did we get involved in the first world war?

The answers to these questions can be found in the official party historical literature of the Soviet period. However, due to very big dislike throughout the Soviet period, our liberal democrats will immediately point out that all this literature is falsified. But if this is so, then it is “rigged” in favor of the current guardians of capitalism. The fact is that Soviet literature describes in detail precisely the rapid development of capitalism in Russia, especially in the period between 1880 - 1914. This was necessary in order to prove the naturalness of the socialist revolution. Party scientists had to show that capitalism gave birth to the proletariat, which, in accordance with Marxist views, buried its “parent”. In fact, in my opinion, capitalism in Russia destroyed not the proletariat, but capitalism itself in the process of destroying Russia as a sovereign state. In other words: the development of capitalism in Russia leads to the destruction of the Russian people and the collapse of the state. The proletariat, or rather, the forces that carried out the revolution in October 1917, destroying capitalism, contrary to their expectations, saved Russia.

But we will strictly adhere to the numbers, whatever they may be.

For 1880-1916. At least 158 million children died, of which 96.8 million died under the last tsar. If we add to them the adult population who did not live up to the average statistical level, the total figure will rise to 176 million people.

During the years of revolutions and riots, 3 million people were killed, during the Russo-Japanese War - 1 million, including those who died from wounds and died in captivity. In the First World War, 2.5 million were killed, and another 6.5 million people died from wounds, hunger and cold.

According to official statistics of those years, 3-4 million people died annually from industrial injuries, poisonings and suicides; as a result, in the 36 years before the revolution this amounted to 108-144 million people.

In general, in 1880-1916. Russia lost about 308 million people from hunger, disease, murder, war, and work-related injuries.

Prosperous Russia before the "Bolsheviks"

To begin with, as an example, we can cite the hymn to the development of Russia before the “Bolsheviks”, glorified on the pages of the thick monograph by Heller and Nekrich. With reference to the French economist Edmond Théry, they say: for the five-year period 1908-1912. Coal production increased by 79.3% compared to the previous five years, iron - by 24.8%, steel and metal production - by 45.9%. From 1900 to 1913 Heavy industry output increased by 74.1% even when taking into account inflation. The railway network increased from 24 thousand km in 1890 to 61 thousand km in 1915 (r. 15). “Industrial progress helped reduce Russia’s dependence on foreign capital” (p. 15), the authors could not resist noting. And not by chance, since this is a very sore subject. The fact is that the degree of dependence on foreign capital determined the behavior of tsarism within the country and in the international arena. Therefore, democrats and pro-capitalists are trying to prove that although foreign dependence existed, it was not so significant as to have a great influence on the behavior of the ruling camp.

In this regard, Heller and Nekrich “catch” Soviet authors in contradictions. Thus, they write that the textbook “History of the USSR. The Age of Socialism” (M., 1975, p. 16) speaks of the “specific weight” of foreign capital, which by 1914 reached 47% of the Russian economy, and in another source - L.M. Spirin. “Classes and Parties in the Civil War in Russia” (M., 1968, p. 36), foreign investments accounted for about “one third of all investments” (p. 15-16). To deepen the thesis of little dependence, the authors, citing the English writer Norman Stone ("Eastern Front. 1914-1917". London, 1975, p. 18) write that before the First World War, foreign investment fell from 50% in the period 1904-1917. 1905 to 12.5% in 1913 (p. 16).

But an experienced reader will immediately detect falsification in terms: dependence on foreign capital is not equal to dependence on foreign investment. In the first case, capital can extend, including to the banking sector; in the second case, only investments in industry are meant. But since there is no difference for the ordinary reader, which is what the authors were counting on (and perhaps they really did not distinguish between these terms themselves), then the job is done.

The authors attach great importance to the fact of grain export as evidence of the prosperity of Tsarist Russia. Figures: from 1908 to 1912 the wheat harvest increased by 37.5% compared to the previous five-year period, rye - by 2.4%, barley - by 62.2%, oats - by 20.9%, corn - by 44.8% (p. 16). In good harvest years - 1909 and 1910 - wheat exports reached 40% of world wheat exports. Even in bad years - 1908 and 1912 - it reached 11.5% (p. 16).

Indicate success in education. In 1908, a law on compulsory primary education was adopted. Government spending on education increased between 1902 and 1912 by 216.2%. In 1915, 51% of all children aged 8 to 11 attended school, and 68% of recruits could read and write (ibid.).

Then the authors, with reference to Soviet authors, write that when the war began (which for some reason was unexpected for everyone), the defeat Russian army occurred due to poor generals, government, weapons, etc., however, industry continued to develop (1913 = 100%, 1914 - 101.2, 1915 - 113.7, 1916 - 121.5%) (p.21).

Despite all these dynamics, the revolution occurred: due to the bad tsarist government, opposition parties, then the indecision of the Provisional Government, and, of course, because of the Bolsheviks. In other words, the economy of capitalism was developing well, but the war began, and the government was unable to cope with either the war or the revolutions. This version of descriptions of events is one of the most common both in the West and in the national-bourgeois literature of modern Russia. Moreover, it naturally does not analyze the socio-political situation of either workers or peasants. Savoring personal life the king and his family seem more interesting for such analysts.

In fact, all the figures given can only make any sense when compared with other major countries that have played key roles in world politics. It's about about the five European states (Great Britain, Germany, France, Austria-Hungary and Italy) and the USA, which determined the structure and dynamics of international relations at the beginning of the 20th century. My task is precisely to find out how we “looked” against the background of the named states, i.e. To begin with, determine the place and then the role of Russia in world politics, which at that time was actually concentrated on Europe.

So, there is no arguing with the numbers. And they argue that after 1861 (the liberation of the peasants), Russia really began to emerge from feudal stagnation, and from the beginning of the 80s of the last century to rapidly enter capitalism. Dynamics were demonstrated by all sectors of industry, foreign trade, and even, to some extent, our constant pain - agriculture. In this regard, a lot of impressive figures are cited. It makes sense to remind them.

Industry

First of all, Russia, even in terms of industrial production, lagged behind the USA, England, Germany and France. Its share in the total industrial production of the five powers listed above was only 4.2%. In global production in 1913, the share of Russia was 1.72%, the share of the USA - 20, England - 18, Germany - 9, France - 7.2% (these are all countries with a population 2-3 times less than Russia ). And this despite the fact that in Russia in 1913 there was a record (80 million tons) grain harvest. In terms of gross national product per capita, Russia was inferior to the United States - 9.5 times, England - 4.5, Canada - 4, Germany - 3.5, France, Belgium, Holland, Australia, New Zealand, Spain - 3 times, Austria-Hungary - 2 times.
Russia not only “rushed”, but continued to lag behind - in 1913 its GNP correlated with Germany’s GNP as 3.3 to 10, while in 1850 the ratio was 4 to 10.
Volumes of industrial production in 1913:

General, billion rubles per capita, rub.
USA 38.13 397.19
UK 15.5 336.96
Germany 12.4 182.35
France 10.54 263.5
Russia 7.75 44.29

At 24,472 factories there were only 24,140 electric, steam, and diesel engines (with an average power of 60 hp). That is, not every plant had at least one engine. So much for “advanced technology”. In terms of power and mechanical equipment, Russia was 10 times behind the United States, 5 times behind England, and 4 times behind Germany, Belgium, and New Zealand. Let's add here another interesting fact: in 1913, there were 3.035 million telephone network subscribers in the USA, 797 thousand in Germany, 536.5 thousand in England, 185 thousand in France, 110 thousand in Austria-Hungary ., in Sweden - 102 thousand, in Denmark - 98 thousand, but in Russia - 97 thousand subscribers. And this is at Russian distances...

In 1913, Russia imported more than 1 million tons of steel and 8.7 million tons of coal from other countries.
Let's give a few more numbers. In 1913, the USA produced 25 million tons of steel, Russia - 4.2 million tons, over 5 years in the USA, steel production increased by 5 million tons, in Russia by 1.7 million tons (in on average by 1 million, and 0.34 million tons per year). 1% increase in steel production in the USA was equivalent to 200 thousand tons, in Russia it was only 25 thousand tons - 8 times less.
The level of labor productivity in industry in Russia was less than: in the USA - 9 times; in England - 5 times; in Germany - 4 times.

Economic efficiency

So, 1908-1913. the total amount of income received by the budget amounted to: 14987 million rubles, including income from the vodka monopoly: 3993 million rubles. (26.64%), direct taxes: 1115 million rubles. (7.44%), indirect taxes: 3111 million rubles. (20.76%), duties: 943 million rubles. (6, 29%)
The West had nothing to fear from Russia, which “rushed” forward. The more efficiently the Russian economy worked, the more income the banks of Western countries received. In 1887-1913. The West invested 1,783 million gold rubles in Russia. During the same period, net income was exported from Russia - 2326 million gold rubles (the excess of income over investments over 26 years was 513 million gold rubles). Annually, up to 500 million gold rubles were transferred abroad in interest payments and loan repayments (in modern prices this is 15 billion dollars).

Life in Russia was also not cheap. So a worker’s family of 4 people in St. Petersburg spent about 750 rubles. in year. At the same time, food costs amounted to up to 100% of the wages of the head of a family of 4 people, and, as a rule, everyone worked, including children. Of the remaining amount, up to 45% went to pay for housing, and up to 25% to clothes and shoes.
For comparison: for a German worker, paying for food for a family took 20-25% of the salary (for one adult), for an English worker - 40%.
Summing up the industrial development of Russia in 1908-1914, we must also point out the following fact: in 1893-1900. the average annual increase in industrial production was 9%, and in 1908-1913. - 8.8%.

People's health

Not all was well in the areas of education and healthcare.
According to statistics, in 1913 in Russia more than 12 million people (7.26% of the population) were affected by epidemics of cholera, diphtheria, anthrax, and scabies. Another 9 million people suffered from malaria, trachoma, whooping cough, etc. In total, 21,877,869 people (13.2% of the country's population) were chronically ill with infectious diseases.

Per 10,000 people in Russia there were 1.6 doctors, 1.7 paramedics, 1.7 obstetricians and midwives. In rural areas there was 1 doctor per 26 thousand people.
In the USA there were 4 times more doctors per 10,000 people, in Germany - 2.7, in England - 3.5, in Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Holland - 3.2 times more.

Out of every 1000 newborns under the age of 1 year in Russia, 263 children died. For comparison: in Sweden, 70 children under 1 year of age died for every 1000 births, in England - 108, in the USA and France - 112-115. in Italy - 138, in Germany - 151. That is. Russia exceeded the countries of Europe and the USA in infant mortality by 1.74 - 3.76 times.
In Russia in 1913, the number of students in all types educational institutions(including spiritual and military) was 9.7 million people (60.6 people per 1000 inhabitants). 70% of children and adolescents were deprived of the opportunity to study. In Russia, according to the Statistical Yearbook of Russia, among the population over 9 years old (the age of entry to study), 27% were literate (excluding Transcaucasia and Central Asia). For comparison: in the USA, even among the black population, literacy reached 56%. In the United States in 1913 there were 18.3 million students (190.6 students per 1000 inhabitants).

For comparison with Russia, which had 227-228 literate people per 1000 population (excluding children preschool age) Belgium had 998 literates per 1000 population, Germany - 980, England - 816, France - 930, Australia - 816, Austria - 644, Hungary - 524, Argentina - 495, Italy - 440, Portugal - 214 people.
Even within Russia there was inequality: in Finland there were 988 literate people per 1000 people (excluding preschool children), in Poland - 305, in the Caucasus - 124, in Central Asia - 53 people. Great Russia, Little Russia, Belarus, Siberia - 268 people.

In 1913, 127,423 people studied in Russian universities, 258,000 in the USA (twice as many as in Russia). In the USA there were several dozen university-level universities, in England - 18 universities, in Germany - 22, in France - 14, in Russia - 8 universities. There were about 20 million inhabitants per university in Russia, 2.5 million in England, 2.8 million in France, and 3 million inhabitants in Germany. In Russia there were 1.7 teachers per 1000 people, in the USA there were 5.45 teachers - more than 3 times more. Thanks to the well-known circular of the Minister of Education Delyanov (during the reign of Alexander III) “0 cook’s children,” access to education was blocked for persons from the peasant and bourgeois classes. And although in 1911-1914, the circular was not actually in effect, nevertheless, out of 119,000 people studying in gymnasiums, people from peasant families accounted for 18,000 people (15.12%). In all educational institutions of the Ministry of Education (including professional, commercial, etc.), peasants made up about 15% of the students (and this in a country where 80% of the population was peasant!!!). IN cadet corps, military schools did not allow people from peasant families at all.

Agriculture

Now let's look at what many apologists of Tsarist Russia are proud of - agriculture. “Russia was well-fed and abundant!” they proclaim. Unfortunately, I have to admit that this is not so. In the 19th century Russia has experienced 40 hunger strikes. In the 20th century were hungry in 1901/02, 1905; 1906; 1907; 1908; 1911/12 In 1901-1902, 49 provinces went hungry, in 1905; 1906; 1907;1908 From 19 to 29 provinces were starving in 1911-1912. In 2 years, famine affected 60 provinces. 30 million people were on the verge of death. According to various estimates, in 1901-1912. About 8 million people died from the famine and its consequences. The tsarist government was most concerned with how to hide the scale of the hunger strikes. In the press, censorship prohibited the use of the word hunger, replacing it with the word “famine.”

If under Alexander II, during the major famine of 1871, zemstvos, the Red Cross and other organizations were actively involved in helping the starving, then Nicholas II sharply curtailed the rights of zemstvos to combat hunger, and in 1911 and 1912 completely banned the participation of zemstvos, Red Cross and charities in providing famine relief.

Obtaining famine relief (“famine loans”) was also fraught with difficulties. The “hunger loan” amounted to 1 pood of flour per month per adult and 1/2 pood of flour per child. At the same time, adults aged 18 to 55 years were not entitled to receive a “hunger loan” (they say, there is no point in feeding parasites, they will get out on their own). Ownerless peasants were excluded from the recipients of the “hunger loan” (and there were 3.5 million such families in Russia , these were usually farm laborers)) widows and orphans, whom rural society had to feed “from surplus aid.” What! The most defenseless sections of society were doomed to starvation. Where does a starving village get its “surplus”?

Moreover, the received “hunger loan” subsequently had to be repaid. In 1911, over 20 million rubles were collected from the starving Samara province. arrears for the “famine loans” of previous years. How many people in 1911-1912? killed the "famine loans" received in 1901-1902. 1905, 1906, 1907, 1908....
And, despite the famine, grain flowed from Russia to Europe. The slogan of the Tsarist Minister of Finance Vyshnegorodsky - “we ourselves are undernourished, but we will take it out” - was put into practice.

Russia was not a leader in world agricultural production either. The vast expanses of Russia allowed it to produce large quantities of grain, but the level of agriculture, yields and productivity were low. In 1913, having received a record grain harvest - 80 million tons - Russia had about 471 kg of grain per capita. England, France, Germany had about 430-440 kg, the USA - over 1000 kg, Canada - about 800 kg, Argentina 1200 kg. Where do the claims come from that Russia produced more grain than other countries combined? After all, the USA produced 96 million tons of grain - more than Russia. If you take total production agricultural products, then it had the following form (in rubles).
agricultural production, billion rubles per capita, rub.

US 15, 162 157, 83
Germany 7,727 113, 63
UK 4,262 92.22
France 7,727 193.18
Russia 10 57, 06

If in total production volumes Russia was in 2nd place after the United States, then per capita production put it in 5th place. If we take other European countries, Australia, Canada, then Russia is dropped into the second ten and even lower. It is necessary to pay attention to the figures characterizing grain production per capita. England, France, Germany, producing grain less than 500 kg per capita, were its importers. The USA, Canada, Argentina, producing 800-1200 kg of grain per capita, exported it. And only Russia, producing less than 500 kg (the norm for self-sufficiency in industrial grain) of grain per capita, exported it. Those. exports came at the expense of dooming part of the population to malnutrition and hunger. Even tsarist officers and generals testified that 40% of conscripts at the beginning of the twentieth century. For the first time in my life I ate meat in the army.

The level of technical equipment in agriculture was low. More than 52% of peasant farms did not have plows, cultivating the land with plows and roe deer. In 1913, there were only 152 tractors in Russia (in the USA, Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, and Denmark there were thousands and tens of thousands of tractors). 80% of agricultural work was carried out manually (although in 1908-1913 the fleet of agricultural machines increased significantly).

Due to chronic landlessness, every year up to 2 million peasants from the central non-black soil provinces were forced to go to work in the southern provinces in the summer months, hiring themselves out as farm laborers to kulaks and landowners.
The chronic crisis in livestock farming continued in Russia. So the number of working horses in agriculture per 100 rural population fell from 38 in 1870 to 30 in 1911. Per 100 population, the number of livestock (cattle and pigs) decreased from 67 heads in 1896-1898. up to 65 goals in 1899-1901. and up to 55 goals in 1911-1913.
In 1914, in Russia there were 293 heads of cattle per 1000 inhabitants, in the USA - 622, in Denmark - 888 heads.
The productivity of a dairy cow in 1913 was: in Russia - 28 rubles, in the USA - 94, (1: 3.36), in Switzerland 150 rubles. (1:5,36). Russia was also inferior in the productivity of grain production per hectare (tithe).
So the yield in 1913 per tithe was,
poods: wheat rye
Russia 55 56
Austria 89 92
Germany 157 127
Belgium 168 147

Science and Engineering

And again I will return to industry. Remember which planes Utochkin and Nesterov shone on? Nieuport, Farman, Bristol Bulldog, Sopwith, Fokker. England, France, Belgium..., but not Russia. For 1914-1917 Only 94 “Ilya Muromets” were assembled, and the engines and instruments were imported.
What about cars? "Ford", "Mercedes-Benz", "Fiat", "Renault", "Peugeot". And where are the Russian companies that produce cars completely (from raw materials to the finished product) - they are not there.

Russian destroyers, cruisers and battleships had German and Swedish turbines, English gyrocompasses and rangefinders.
I analyze Russia’s lags in such detail not with the aim of savoring them. No. I am no less proud of D.I. Mendeleev, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, and many other talented scientists and engineers. I remember that the first diesel engines and motor ships were created in Kolomna, I remember that Novik-class destroyers and Russian steam locomotives were considered standard, I remember that Russia is the birthplace of radio, but, unfortunately, these were only rays of light in an overall bleak picture.

Let us remember that Mendeleev and Sechenov (the pride of Russia!!!) were voted out of the Academy of Sciences (if only they were Germans...), the inventor of radio communications, Popov, remained a modest teacher at a naval school.
All this is analyzed in order to prevent the creation of a new mythology, because any myth ultimately turns against itself, as we saw in the example of the CPSU, when Gorbachev, Yakovlev, etc. and so on. They lied first in one direction and then in the other.

Moral

After all, Russia was by no means a quiet and God-fearing country of high Christian morality and legality (immediately after the February Revolution in 1917, when the Provisional Government abolished compulsory attendance at prayer services, in the Russian army, which consisted mainly of peasants, 70% of the soldiers stopped attending church) .
In St. Petersburg in 1913, the number of higher educational institutions was equal to the number of officially registered brothels.

Let us remember Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich, who stole funds allocated for the construction of battleships of the Borodino type, as a result of which Russia by 1904, instead of 10 battleships of this type in service, had only 5. And even then only on stocks.
If we want to get a more complete impression of the life of Russia in those times, then, really, it is worth turning to the works of such writers as L. Tolstoy, A. Chekhov, I. Shmelev, V. Zasodimsky, I. Zlatovratsky, G. Uspensky, D. .Mamin-Sibiryak, F.Reshetnikov, M.Gorky, I.Bunin.

And finally, I will offer a statement by the Prime Minister of the Tsarist Government Kokovtsev for the deputies of the 4th State Duma: “Talk about Russia catching up with countries with advanced culture in 15-20 years is, gentlemen, a demand that is not serious.” And Kokovtsev knew what he was saying...
As sad as this sounds for those who try to imagine Russia as a country where patriarchal silence and universal brotherhood between rich and poor reigned, it should be noted that there was a stubborn struggle in the country, the mention of which is so unfashionable now, and which is called the class struggle.

According to the 4th State Duma, from 1901 to 1914. Tsarist troops opened fire more than 6,000 times, including artillery, on rallies and demonstrations of workers, as well as on gatherings and processions of peasants. And this is only for peaceful rallies, processions, and gatherings. The number of victims ranged from 9 to a thousand people. In total, the number of victims of this kind of “shooting” exceeded 180 thousand. In 1907-1910. Over 40 thousand people died in convict centers.
Everything written in this material should give us a clear picture of why events inevitably moved towards 1917 and who took advantage of it, why military assistance England, France, the USA, Japan, granted to Kolchak, Denikin, Yudenich, Miller, direct foreign military intervention could not break the Bolsheviks. This material provides an answer to why the white movement, having controlled up to 4/5 of the territory of Russia in the summer of 1918, was ultimately defeated.

E.V.: A barrel of ice water on the heads of those who tell fairy tales about Russia in 1913, which they say we lost... Supertext...

Tsarist Russia in numbers

I have been interested in history for a long time. Therefore, I am forced to criticize some authors who spoke about a prosperous and abundant Russia before 1917. Alas, the facts say the opposite.

Industry

Russia not only “rushed”, but continued to lag behind - in 1913 its GNP correlated with Germany’s GNP as 3.3 to 10, while in 1850 the ratio was 4 to 10.

Volumes of industrial production in 1913:

Total, billion rubles Per capita, rub.

USA 38.13 397.19

UK 15.5 336.96

Germany 12.4 182.35

France 10.54 263.5

Russia 7.75 44.29

In 1913, Russia imported more than 1 million from other countries. tons of steel and 8.7 million tons of coal.

The level of labor productivity in industry in Russia was less than: in the USA - 9 times; in England - 5 times; in Germany - 4 times.

Economic efficiency

For comparison: for a German worker, paying for food for a family took 20-25% of the salary (for one adult), for an English worker - 40%.

People's health

Not all was well in the areas of education and healthcare.

According to statistics, in 1913 in Russia more than 12 million people (7.26% of the population) were affected by epidemics of cholera, diphtheria, anthrax, and scabies. Another 9 million people suffered from malaria, trachoma, whooping cough, etc. In total, 21,877,869 people (13.2% of the country's population) were chronically ill with infectious diseases.

Per 10,000 people in Russia there were 1.6 doctors, 1.7 paramedics, 1.7 obstetricians and midwives. In rural areas there was 1 doctor per 26 thousand people.

In the USA there were 4 times more doctors per 10,000 people, in Germany - 2.7, in England - 3.5, in Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Holland - 3.2 times more.

In Russia in 1913, the number of students in all types of educational institutions (including religious and military) was 9.7 million people (60.6 people per 1000 inhabitants). 70% of children and adolescents were deprived of the opportunity to study. In Russia, according to the Statistical Yearbook of Russia, among the population over 9 years of age (the age of entry to study), 27% were literate (excluding Transcaucasia and Central Asia). For comparison: in the USA, even among the black population, literacy reached 56%. In the United States in 1913 there were 18.3 million students (190.6 students per 1000 inhabitants).

For comparison with Russia, which had 227-228 literate people per 1000 population (excluding preschool children), Belgium had 998 literate people per 1000 population, Germany - 980, England - 816, France - 930, Australia - 816, Austria - 644, Hungary - 524, Argentina - 495, Italy - 440, Portugal - 214 people.

Even within Russia there was inequality: in Finland there were 988 literate people per 1000 people (excluding preschool children), in Poland - 305, in the Caucasus - 124, in Central Asia - 53 people. Great Russia, Little Russia, Belarus, Siberia - 268 people.

In 1913, 127,423 people studied in Russian universities, 258,000 in the USA (twice as many as in Russia). In the USA there were several dozen university-level universities, in England - 18 universities, in Germany - 22, in France - 14, in Russia - 8 universities. There were about 20 million inhabitants per university in Russia, 2.5 million in England, 2.8 million in France, and 3 million inhabitants in Germany. In Russia there were 1.7 teachers per 1000 people, in the USA there were 5.45 teachers - more than 3 times more. Thanks to the well-known circular of the Minister of Education Delyanov (during the reign of Alexander III) “0 cook’s children,” access to education was blocked for persons from the peasant and bourgeois classes. And although in 1911-1914, the circular was not actually in effect, nevertheless, out of 119,000 people studying in gymnasiums, people from peasant families accounted for 18,000 people (15.12%). In all educational institutions of the Ministry of Education (including professional, commercial, etc.), peasants made up about 15% of students (and this in a country where 80% of the population was peasant!!!). People from peasant families were not allowed into cadet corps or military schools at all.

Agriculture

And, despite the famine, grain flowed from Russia to Europe. The slogan of the Tsarist Minister of Finance Vyshnegorodsky - “we ourselves are undernourished, but we will take it out” - was put into practice.

Russia was not a leader in world agricultural production either. The vast expanses of Russia allowed it to produce large quantities of grain, but the level of agriculture, yields and productivity were low. In 1913, having received a record grain harvest - 80 million tons - Russia had about 471 kg of grain per capita. England, France, Germany had about 430-440 kg, the USA - over 1000 kg, Canada - about 800 kg, Argentina 1200 kg. Where do the claims come from that Russia produced more grain than other countries combined? After all, the USA produced 96 million tons of grain - more than Russia. If we take the total production of agricultural products, it had the following form (in rubles).

agricultural production, billion rubles per capita, rub.

US 15, 162 157, 83

Germany 7,727 113, 63

UK 4,262 92.22

France 7,727 193.18

Russia 10 57, 06

The chronic crisis in livestock farming continued in Russia. Thus, the number of working horses in agriculture per 100 rural population fell from 38 in 1870 to 30 in 1911. Per 100 population, the number of livestock (cattle and pigs) decreased from 67 heads in 1896-1898. up to 65 goals in 1899-1901. and up to 55 goals in 1911-1913.

In 1914, in Russia there were 293 heads of cattle per 1000 inhabitants, in the USA - 622, in Denmark - 888 heads.

The productivity of a dairy cow in 1913 was: in Russia - 28 rubles, in the USA - 94, (1: 3.36), in Switzerland 150 rubles. (1:5,36). Russia was also inferior in the productivity of grain production per hectare (tithe).

So the yield in 1913 per tithe was,

poods: wheat rye

Russia 55 56

Austria 89 92

Germany 157 127

Belgium 168 147

Science and Engineering

Russian destroyers, cruisers and battleships had German and Swedish turbines, English gyrocompasses and rangefinders.

Moral

In St. Petersburg in 1913, the number of higher educational institutions was equal to the number of officially registered brothels.

If we want to get a more complete impression of the life of Russia in those times, then, really, it is worth turning to the works of such writers as L. Tolstoy, A. Chekhov, I. Shmelev, V. Zasodimsky, I. Zlatovratsky, G. Uspensky, D. .Mamin-Sibiryak, F.Reshetnikov, M.Gorky, I.Bunin.

Vladimir Nikolaevich Kokovtsev

And finally, I will offer a statement by the Prime Minister of the Tsarist Government Kokovtsev for the deputies of the 4th State Duma:

“Talk about Russia catching up with countries with advanced culture in 15-20 years is, gentlemen, a demand that is not serious.” And Kokovtsev knew what he was saying...

As sad as this sounds for those who try to imagine Russia as a country where patriarchal silence and universal brotherhood between rich and poor reigned, it should be noted that there was a stubborn struggle in the country, the mention of which is so unfashionable now, and which is called the class struggle.

Everything written in this material should give us a clear picture of why events inevitably moved towards 1917, why military assistance from England, France, the USA, Japan, provided to Kolchak, Denikin, Yudenich, Miller, and direct foreign military intervention could not break the Bolsheviks. This material provides an answer to why the white movement, having controlled up to 4/5 of the territory of Russia in the summer of 1918, was ultimately defeated.

The terror of the Cheka was not the reason for this. Peasant Russia entered into an unspoken agreement with the Bolsheviks - it agreed to tolerate surplus appropriation, the Cheka, ChON, committees of poor people, etc. etc., but on the condition that the Bolsheviks GUARANTEE THE NON-RETURN OF THE OLD ORDERS. And this turn of the peasantry towards the Bolsheviks in 1918 ensured the collapse of the white movement. The peasant, seeing Kolchak and Denikin, the White Czechs and Krasnov, realized what awaited him and made his choice. And the result of this choice was the Victory Parade, there was Gagarin’s flight, there was one of TWO superpowers - the USSR.

You cannot mythologize the past. Otherwise, the truth about him turns into an all-destroying battering ram.

Test by general history The First World War (1914-1918) with answers for 9th grade students. The test consists of 21 questions and is designed to test knowledge on a relevant topic.

1. Which of the following happened in 1913?

1) Second Balkan War
2) creation of the Triple Alliance
3) signing of an agreement between Great Britain and France (the beginning of the Entente)
4) Spanish-American War

2. Which of the following happened in 1916?

1) signing by Soviet Russia of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with Germany
2) failure of the German plan for a lightning war
3) the battle of Verdun
4) signing of the Compiegne Truce

3. Which of the following events happened before all the others?

1) Battle of the Marne
2) Brusilovsky breakthrough
3) entry into the war on the side of the Entente
4) assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo

4. The Compiegne Truce, which ended the fighting on the fronts of the First World War, was signed in

1) 1916
2) 1917
3) 1918
4) 1919

5. Place the events in chronological order. Write down the resulting sequence of numbers.

1) the battle of Verdun
2) signing of the Compiegne Truce
3) assassination attempt in Sarajevo
4) Russia’s exit from the world war

6. Which of these concepts is associated with A. von Schlieffen's plan?

1) trench warfare
2) escalation
3) indemnity
4) blitzkrieg

7. In 1914, Germany entered World War I as an ally.

1) Austria-Hungary
2) Belgium
3) Great Britain
4) Italy

8. At the beginning of the First World War in European countries

1) the propaganda of socialist internationalists intensified
2) a wave of national-patriotic sentiments arose
3) peasant uprisings unfolded
4) the political struggle of workers intensified

9. At the initial stage of the First World War, the workers' parties put forward the slogan

1) civil world
2) the development of the socialist revolution
3) proletarian internationalism
4) fight against monopolies

10. During the First World War in the countries at war

1) connections with the colonies expanded significantly
2) free market trade was encouraged
3) state regulation of the economy was carried out
4) universal suffrage was introduced

11. Indicate the extra name in the row.

1) Waterloo
2) Verdun
3) Compiegne
4) Marne

12. Which two of these means of warfare were first used on the fronts of the First World War? Write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) grenades
2) gas shells
3) tanks
4) machine guns

13. Which three of these battles took place on the Western Front? Write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) near the lake Naroch
2) on the river Marne
3) near Verdun
4) near Lodz
5) on the river Somme

14. Which three of these concepts and terms appeared during the First World War? Write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) state regulation of the economy
2) card system
3) pacifism
4) black market
5) emigration

15. Which three of the names given belong to famous military leaders of the First World War? Write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) O. Bismarck
2) A.F. Peten
3) P. Hindenburg
4) A.A. Brusilov
5) M.D. Skobelev

16. Which of the following refers to the results of the First World War? Give three correct statements. Write down the numbers under which they are indicated.

1) victory of Germany and its allies
2) division of Europe into spheres of influence
3) Russia’s exit from the war
4) victory of the Entente states
5) the rise of the liberation struggle of peoples

17. Establish a correspondence between the names of historical figures who were engaged in the same type of activity and were colleagues.

A) Wilhelm II
B) F. Foch
B) R. Poincaré

1) D. Lloyd George
2) Franz Joseph
3) W. Liebknecht
4) P. Hindenburg

18. Establish a correspondence between historical events and the names of the states that were their main participants.

A) crisis after the assassination attempt in Sarajevo
B) signing of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty
B) signing of the Compiegne Truce

States

1) Germany, France
2) UK, Italy
3) Austria-Hungary, Serbia
4) Russia, Germany

19. Read an excerpt from the memoirs of the famous Russian diplomat S.D. at the beginning of the 20th century. Sazonov and answer the questions.

“The declaration of war on Serbia, which followed forty-eight hours after the delivery of the ultimatum in Belgrade, made the continuation of any negotiations extremely difficult. The brevity of the deadline appointed in Vienna had precisely this goal in mind.
However, I continued to use every effort to prevent them from breaking. Our allies and friends provided me with energetic support in this direction. I could fully count on the help of the French government, knowing the peace-loving trends that had invariably prevailed in Paris from the very beginning of the Balkan Wars. But it was even more important for me to achieve, without any delay, an open statement by the British Government of its solidarity with Russia and France in the Austro-Serbian conflict. From the very first minute it was clear to me that, although the attack was directed from Vienna, it was necessary to act on Berlin in order to prevent the terrible danger that threatened the peace of Europe.”

1) When and in connection with what did the events that the author of the memoirs writes about take place?

2) Using source information and course knowledge, explain how Russia and other European states related to the conflict being described.

3) How did the described events end?

20. Read an excerpt from the memoirs of R. Poincaré and answer the questions.

“At 5 o’clock the stunning roar of guns began, and heavy shells began to explode dully over __________ and over many villages that had previously been rarely or even not fired upon. The nostrils of the people closer to the front drew in the smell of some kind of hellish essence. Those who were closer to the northern trenches ahead __________ saw two strange ghosts of greenish-yellow fog, slowly creeping and gradually blurring until they merged into one, and then, moving on, dissolved into a bluish-white cloud.
This cloud hung over the front of two French divisions (Algerian and territorial), adjacent to the British units and holding the left sector. Soon, officers behind the British front and near the canal bridges were shocked to see a stream of panicked people running to the rear. The Africans, neighbors of the British, coughed and pointed at their throats while running; Interspersed with them, convoys and carts rushed along. The French guns were still firing, but by 7 pm they too suddenly and ominously fell silent.
The fugitives left behind them at the front a gap more than 4 miles wide, filled only with the dead or half-dead, who, suffocating, agonized, poisoned by chloride poison. Both French divisions almost completely ceased to exist."

1) What events are we talking about, where did they take place? Fill in the missing name of the river.

2) What was the military significance of these events?

21. Read an excerpt from a story by a factory owner in the English city of Birmingham (1917) and answer the questions.

“Typical cases that I have personally observed show that women prefer factory life. They enjoy freedom, the spirit of independence encouraged by their newfound ability to earn money, and social life. They say their children have Better conditions“We are better provided with food, housing, and clothing than before.”

1) Drawing on knowledge from the history course, explain under what circumstances the women in question came to factory production.

2) What was the “downside” of the active involvement of women in work at industrial enterprises at the time in question?

Answers to the General History Test World War I
1-1, 2-3, 3-4, 4-3, 5-3142, 6-4, 7-1, 8-2, 9-1, 10-3, 11-1, 12-23, 13-235,
14-124, 15-234, 16-345, 17-241, 18-341
Task 19
1) We are talking about the events of the summer of 1914. After the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne, Franz Ferdinand, by the Serb G. Princip, Austria presented an ultimatum to Serbia, and then declared war.
2) Russia, speaking in defense of Serbia, sought to resolve the conflict peacefully. Great Britain and France, which Sazonov mentions, were allies of Russia in the Entente. And Germany, together with Austria-Hungary, was part of another bloc - the Triple Alliance.
3) The events described led to the outbreak of the First World War (Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia and then Russia, and Germany declared war on Russia and France).
20 task
1) We are talking about the first use of poison gas by the Germans on the Western Front. From the name of the Ypres River, where this event took place, it became known as mustard gas.
2) The military significance of the event is the use of a new type of weapon - chemical shells.
21 tasks
1) Women came as workers to factories and factories during the First World War, replacing men who went to the front.
2) The negative consequences include the fact that in military production women performed hard work that was beyond their strength, which destroyed their health.

Read:

Pork roll with filling Soup with melted cheese and chicken breast Step-by-step recipe for cooking broccoli in batter with photo Broccoli batter Lush sweet buns (7 recipes) Tortilla - what kind of Mexican dish is it and how to properly prepare it at home with photos