Edexcel history
To what extent do you agree that the survival of the Bolshevik regime from 1921 was primarily due
to the introduction of the New Economic Policy?
The policy of War Communism had a devastating impact on the Russian economy that generated
opposition across Russian society and within the Communist Party itself. The introduction of the NEP
reinvigorated the economy and reduced the general level of opposition to the regime. However, the
NEP itself was in some ways flawed and generated hostility. Therefore, a new wave of political
oppression was also needed to maintain the regime in power.
The failures of war communism meant that the introduction of the New economic policy was
necessary for the survival for the Bolshevik regime. For example Grain requisitioning caused
widespread opposition to the regime in rural areas, particularly after the poor harvest of 1920. Peasants’
resistance to the requisitioning squads became increasingly violent, with peasant bands murdering
Communist officials and soldiers. A peasant revolt in the Tambov region in 1920-21 threatened further
disruption to grain supplies to the cities. Small businesses were closed and private trade was banned
leading to shortages of food and goods in the cities. Due to the peasants’ increasing unwillingness to
supply grain due to the scarcity and growing cost of manufactured goods, at the beginning of 1921, the
bread ration was cut by a third, leading to food protests in the cities. The urban workers also objected to
the lack of free trade unions and the militarised factories that the Bolsheviks introduced to guarantee
supplies for the Red Army to win the war.
A faction – the Workers’ Opposition – emerged within the party. The Workers’ Opposition were angered
by the leadership’s attempts to control trade unions. The Kronstadt sailors were angered by fact that
ordinary workers lived on starvation rations while leading Bolsheviks enjoyed special privileges. In March
1921, the sailors mutinied, demanding ‘equal rations for all the working people’. The sailors were mainly
from peasant backgrounds and so also resented the grain requisitioning policy and the violence used
against those peasants who resisted. Therefore, they also called for ‘freedom for the peasants’. Kronstadt
sailors had supported the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 and so their opposition to the regime in 1921
came as a blow to its prestige. As the historian Orlando Figes stated, ‘this was a case of the Bolsheviks
being abandoned by their own favoured sons’.
The NEP quelled opposition to the Bolshevik rule by abolishing grain requisitioning which was
replaced by a “tax in kind”. This increased support and famously Lenin said, “let the peasants have
their little bit of capitalism as long as we keep power.” The ban on private trade was also removed
which allowed small businesses to reopen therefore food and goods could flow more easily between
the countryside and towns creating prosperity. As a result, it increased stability as it ended peasant
uprising meaning the peasants and the workers could return to work. This in turned revived the
agricultural economy especially with improved harvests due to the weather and seed grains from the
USA. By 1923 cereal production increased by 23% compared to 1920. The nep also created economic
improvement within factories for example factory output in by 200% between 1920 and 1923.
However, the nep managed to generate hostility as it was meant as a short-term measure to
reinflate the economy, but many Bolshevik members and supported felt betrayed. The
reintroduction of small businesses, private trade and the sale of grain, which led to the emergence
of a new merchant class nicknamed ‘nepmen’. The nepmen flaunted their wealth at the casinos,
restaurants and nightclubs that sprang up in the cities. For many workers, these symbols of
decadence and socio-economic inequality confirmed the principles of the revolution were being
To what extent do you agree that the survival of the Bolshevik regime from 1921 was primarily due
to the introduction of the New Economic Policy?
The policy of War Communism had a devastating impact on the Russian economy that generated
opposition across Russian society and within the Communist Party itself. The introduction of the NEP
reinvigorated the economy and reduced the general level of opposition to the regime. However, the
NEP itself was in some ways flawed and generated hostility. Therefore, a new wave of political
oppression was also needed to maintain the regime in power.
The failures of war communism meant that the introduction of the New economic policy was
necessary for the survival for the Bolshevik regime. For example Grain requisitioning caused
widespread opposition to the regime in rural areas, particularly after the poor harvest of 1920. Peasants’
resistance to the requisitioning squads became increasingly violent, with peasant bands murdering
Communist officials and soldiers. A peasant revolt in the Tambov region in 1920-21 threatened further
disruption to grain supplies to the cities. Small businesses were closed and private trade was banned
leading to shortages of food and goods in the cities. Due to the peasants’ increasing unwillingness to
supply grain due to the scarcity and growing cost of manufactured goods, at the beginning of 1921, the
bread ration was cut by a third, leading to food protests in the cities. The urban workers also objected to
the lack of free trade unions and the militarised factories that the Bolsheviks introduced to guarantee
supplies for the Red Army to win the war.
A faction – the Workers’ Opposition – emerged within the party. The Workers’ Opposition were angered
by the leadership’s attempts to control trade unions. The Kronstadt sailors were angered by fact that
ordinary workers lived on starvation rations while leading Bolsheviks enjoyed special privileges. In March
1921, the sailors mutinied, demanding ‘equal rations for all the working people’. The sailors were mainly
from peasant backgrounds and so also resented the grain requisitioning policy and the violence used
against those peasants who resisted. Therefore, they also called for ‘freedom for the peasants’. Kronstadt
sailors had supported the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 and so their opposition to the regime in 1921
came as a blow to its prestige. As the historian Orlando Figes stated, ‘this was a case of the Bolsheviks
being abandoned by their own favoured sons’.
The NEP quelled opposition to the Bolshevik rule by abolishing grain requisitioning which was
replaced by a “tax in kind”. This increased support and famously Lenin said, “let the peasants have
their little bit of capitalism as long as we keep power.” The ban on private trade was also removed
which allowed small businesses to reopen therefore food and goods could flow more easily between
the countryside and towns creating prosperity. As a result, it increased stability as it ended peasant
uprising meaning the peasants and the workers could return to work. This in turned revived the
agricultural economy especially with improved harvests due to the weather and seed grains from the
USA. By 1923 cereal production increased by 23% compared to 1920. The nep also created economic
improvement within factories for example factory output in by 200% between 1920 and 1923.
However, the nep managed to generate hostility as it was meant as a short-term measure to
reinflate the economy, but many Bolshevik members and supported felt betrayed. The
reintroduction of small businesses, private trade and the sale of grain, which led to the emergence
of a new merchant class nicknamed ‘nepmen’. The nepmen flaunted their wealth at the casinos,
restaurants and nightclubs that sprang up in the cities. For many workers, these symbols of
decadence and socio-economic inequality confirmed the principles of the revolution were being
