Introduction
Defronzo’s theory of revolution focuses on the revolution of industrial Russian and agricultural China. The theory is presented by James Defronzo who is a sociologist in the University of Connecticut with the aim of evaluating social, political, economic, and religious factors which contributed to a revolution in the China and Russia. It is important for evaluation and assessment of systems before and after evolution. The theory describes the events and conditions of the countries before the revolution, and its contribution is valid and relevant to the growth and development of the nations to their current status in the world today. Defronzo’s theory of revolution is applicable to the explanation of the current socio-economic and political status of Russia and China as it discusses the factors that affected these countries before and after their respective revolutions, and how they contributed in the growth and development of systems.
Theory Validation on Industrial Russia
Defronzo’s theory of revolutions on industrial Russia is useful for explaining the revolution of Russia .It is based on the discussion of fundamental issues which includes the establishment of an authoritarian government structure by Stalin. The theory supports and explains industrialization in urban areas from the industrial working class. Defronzo argues that the establishment of the communist party allowed political self-determination (DeFronzo, 2011). It also explains the rise of Czar’s rule and the various factors which revolutionary groups used to mobilize the populations. Defronzo’s argument is based on a specific argument on the role of industrial workers who formed fifteen percent of the urban population. Initially they had been peasant farmers or had relations with peasants and hence were significant in mobilization by convincing the discontented peasants to support industrialization.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The theory explores the peasants’ lack of civil liberties and political freedom of the Russian nationals in general. The approach presents a valued argument on a nomadic lifestyle of the citizens who traveled in search for fertile lands which lead to the establishment of serfdom to limit movement (DeFronzo, 2011). The arguments outline factors that facilitated the Russian revolution such as payment of redemption fees for land and heavy taxes charged form peasants as contributors to the fall of Czar (Foran, 2005). Many peasants became dependent and fell into debt and desperation due to economic hardships which triggered their discontentment and the emergence and massive support of the communist party.
The theory outlines the cases and exposes the causes of deportations and the death of many Russian people in the industrial revolution. The argument justifies the violent attacks on the Czar’s government as helpful in overthrowing his dictatorship. The organization, which carried out assassinations and terrorist activities against the government are seen as an influential group referred to as the Peoples Will which led to industrial revolution through the creation of economic and political freedom (Goldstone, 2002). The arguments validity is based on its ability to explain the end of dictatorship and restoration of the country to a neutral social, political, and economic state.
The theory has successfully outlined the use of Marxism and application of Marxist strategies for achieving industrialization. Revolutionary leaders such as Lenin concentrated on the industrial workers as the basis of the change which caused the establishment of a revolution. Marxism led to development of workers in knowledge through the process of trade consciousness by lobbying for an increase in wages and benefits. Marxism also called for minimization of working hours and improvements of the working conditions to successfully incorporate Defronzo’s theory in revolutions and achievement of an industrialized society (Goldstone, 2002).
However, the theory fails to outline the systematic moral deformation of the Russian people in the industrialization process and the revolution. The approach lacks in evidence of killings and arguments on the lives lost. The theory only acknowledges using few notes to denote and state that thousands were killed and many deported to remote regions without outlining the consequences or demonstrating the value and cost of revolution regarding human life. Defronzo’s theory also presents unconvincing arguments for the rise of the cold war (DeFronzo, 2011). He argues that the cold war arose due to intolerance of the US on the development of independent national movements thus interference with their internal political affairs triggered the war. Defronzo also claims that the cold war rose almost immediately after the world war 2 when the Soviet Union was confronted with reinforced hostility from the major capitalist powers thus the proposition is shallow and unconvincing (Foran, 2005). The theory is further compromised by the statement of little bloodshed during the Bolshevik leadership when local villages were instructed to seize property.
Theory’s Contribution to the Revolution of Agricultural China
Defronzo’s theory provides firm and valid arguments on the Chinese revolution from its reliance on agriculture to its development of industrialization and manufacturing. The theory describes the emergence of a robust revolutionary ideology that leads to the discontent of the rural populations which spurred the revolution. The discontent inspired a transformation not only to the government but to the social, economic, and political systems that had controlled agricultural China by changing the basic structure of the country (DeFronzo, 2011). The evaluation of the factors that hindered agrarian production and functioning of the political, economic, and social functions such as unequal distribution of resources and the effect of natural calamities on the population presents a valid argument on the need for a revolution.
The theory has a profound outline on the gain of the Mao great leap forward. According to Defronzo’s theory of revolution, China acted as an influence on other less development agrarian societies. The massive support of Mao Zedong doctrine based on rural welfare and the redistribution of land among the peasants serves as an explanation of the emergence of an agrarian economy after the revolution as a significant economic power in the world (DeFronzo, 2011). The formation of principles relating directly to the people which included independence, nationalism, democracy, and development of people livelihoods presents a straightforward presentation of important procedures in pursuit of political and economic stability (Amineh, 2007). The analysis of the revolution brought through the Chinese communist party is revealed I n the theory by presentation of accurate facts and research. The theory serves as a useful contribution through provision of information on the emergence of agricultural China.
However, the theory can be discredited due to its failure to outline the effects of human made famine which affected chin after the World War 2 that killed millions. Instead, the theory concentrates on Mao’s initiative and described it as having consequences which outweighed the gains. The Mao Great Leap Forward initiative was an idea triggered by the adoption of models that would increase production and facilitate rapid growth of workers skills and knowledge. However, it had more adverse consequences for China population and the revolution process (Amineh, 2007).
The Defronzo theory effectively explains both the cause and the conduct of the Russian industrial revolution and the Chinese agricultural revolutions by highlighting the factors attributed to revolution, consequences and outcomes, and how they affected the countries’ population and the administrative functions with a specific focus on the political, social, and economic systems. The theory shortcomings can be analyzed in its failure to reveal the adverse effects of actions conducted during the revolution which affected the population such as negligence of citizen’s needs, and oppression of workers in wages and salaries. The theory also omits other important factors including the role of the government and outside relations which contributed to the revolution of both Russia and China. The theory has also failed to incorporate previous research and writings. It fails to build on the previous foundation and verification of facts based on scientific research to arrive at valid conclusions
Conclusion
Defronzo’s theory serves as a validation of the historical and prerevolutionary settings of the Russia and China before the revolution. It carefully examines the factors that contributed to the revolution and analysis of how the social political and economic systems are transformed to achieve a transformation in the countries performance and development. The theory, however, has various shortcoming and assumptions which compromises its validity as outlined above. However, the theory plays a significant role and perspective in familiarizing revolution by assembling ideas and occurrences into the countries which functioned in transformation and revolution. It provides a comparison and outline of the process before the revolution and the current status of Russia and China in industrialization and agriculture respectively.
References
Amineh, M. (2007). The Greater Middle East in Global Politics: Social Science Perspectives on the Changing Geography of the World Politics . Boston: BRILL.
DeFronzo, J. (2011). Revolutions and revolutionary movements . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Foran, J. (2005). Taking power: On the origins of Third World revolutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldstone, J. A. (2002). Revolutions: Theoretical, comparative, and historical studies. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth.
