Individuals were key to driving change, though often because of the influence of other factors. Tsar Alexander II instigated one of the biggest changes in Russian society: the Emancipation of the Serfs. Prior to this one third of the Russian population were serfs, thus the Emancipation changed Russian society completely. Lynch argues that Alexander’s training “from an early age” for government instilled in him that autocracy must continue, and Kochan writes that Alexander was “The best prepared heir the Russian throne ever had” . Therefore, both suggest that Alexander’s education and personal aim of protecting Tsardom was key to the Emancipation . However, it was the weak economy itself that made The Emancipation imperative, and the War generated reform as it …show more content…
Therefore, his paranoia was important in generating more rapid change than anyone had thought possible. As an individual, Khrushchev managed to reverse the social changes of Stalin that had repressed Russia. Oxley’s convincing argument that de-Stalinization would enable Russia to “set a new course” to reform “industry and agriculture” shows how Khrushchev created a backlash against Stalin to ease the repression that was stunting Russia, both nationally and internationally. Khrushchev’s secret speech enabled him to distance himself from Stalin’s terror and drive reform. Khrushchev was pushed to this by his political opposition Malenkov, therefore opposition is a more important factor than the individual in de-Stalinization. The “Thaw” Krushchev implemented was also due to the Cold War and the need to improve the Soviet image to avoid conflict with the West, therefore war was a driving factor. Overall, strong individuals were key, but the backward economy was the reason they forced the largest changes, therefore was the most important