Kailey McSteen

Mr. Malone

AP World History

May 23, 2018

Document Based Question

After revolutions occurred in a country, the country almost always instituted land

reforms. This was the case after the Mexican and Russian revolutions. Some widespread trends

that were occurring during the 1900’s include global conflicts, new conceptualizations of

economies and societies, and the development of new technologies to help the environment. This

is relevant to the prompt because global conflicts are what led to political instability and

revolutions. Without revolutions, land reforms would not be needed. Also, new environmental

technologies were used to farm the land. The Mexican and Russian revolutions were similar in

that governments wanted to redistribute a large portion of private owned land for the benefit of

the peasants or the working class, however the land reforms were different because the Mexicans

gave compensation for the taking of property and the Russians did not. Also, the Russians

wanted to kill the kulaks to accomplish their land reforms, but the Mexicans did not want to kill

anyone.

Both Mexico and Russia wanted to redistribute land to benefit the peasants. In document

five, the point of view is a Mexican president that knows land reforms have to be made or the

peasants will start another revolution. This is relevant to the argument because it shows that

Mexican leaders recognized the need for land reforms, and they realized the need to prove this to

the peasants by giving up their own land. The leaders wanted to give land to the peasants for
their benefit. In document seven, the point of view is a communist view of collective property

that claims it will guarantee prosperity for the peasants. This is relevant because it shows that the

government redistributed the land into collective farms to better the lives of the peasants.

Mexico and Russia had different views on compensation for the taking of private land.

Mexico supported compensation, and Russia did not. In document three, the point of view is a

communist view of land reform that pushes for the abolition of private property, and the taking

of private property would occur without compensation. This is relevant to the argument because

the Russian communist party did not show mercy for private property owners, so they paid them

no compensation. In document four, the purpose is to show that if private property is taken in

Mexico, then the person will receive compensation. This allowed for the redistribution of land

for the peasants, while the private property owners were not losing everything. This is relevant to

the argument because Mexicans did pay compensation to the private land owners. Both the

peasants and the former private land owners were receiving something in this option.

Russia wanted to kill kulaks during their land reforms while Mexicans did not want to

kill anyone in their reforms. In document 6, the purpose is to show that the new land reforms

were strictly against the kulaks, and they called for the demise of the kulaks. This is relevant

because the communists thought the only way to achieve their new land reforms was through

eliminating the kulaks. An outside piece of evidence is that the communist soldiers came to force

the kulaks into collective farms at gunpoint, and they also burned their crops. Over eight million

kulaks were arrested. In document ten, the audience is historians trying to find the truth about the

collective farm movement in Russia that occurred in the 1900s. This is relevant to the argument

because a fourteen-year-old reveals the harsh actions of the communists toward the kulaks. In

document one, the point of view is coming from a Mexican leader of a peasant rebellion that
supports land that will be given to the peasants. In this document, it says that landlords who

oppose the plan will have their property taken over by the government, but they will not be

killed. The Mexicans did not want to kill the private land owners.

There were many similarities and differences in land reforms that resulted from the

Mexican and Russian revolutions. An insightful connection across time periods is how the end of

serfdom relates to land reforms caused by revolutions. The Black Death reduced population and

increased the negotiating power of serfs. There were also peasant revolts. All of these things

contributed to the end of serfdom which resulted in land reforms. This is similar to how

revolutions and revolts caused land reforms to happen. In both cases, violence was used to push

for land reforms. Land reforms are a common pattern that has occurred all throughout history.