How Far Was Stolypin Effective In Stabilising Russia

To what extent was Stolypin effective in stabilising Russia between 1906 and 1911?
The period previous to 1906 was one of great instability in Russia, 1905 saw a failed revolution after long term tensions. Stolypin was effective yet ruthless in his peasant control in the 1905 revolution and due to this he soon became chairman of ministers in 1906. He introduced many new policies in an attempt to stabilise Russia, though as to if these were effective remains debatable. Stabilising Russia would surely mean a stronger economy, few or no uprisings, modernised methods in both government and agriculture and workers in towns and the country would see an improvement to their lives.
Many of Stolypin’s reforms were made to the field of agriculture
Stolypin tried to control revolutionary opinion by killing liberals and anyone else that dared to rise up. This may have stopped certain individuals from being able to rise up against the government but it also highlighted the ruthlessness of the government and left the Russian people feeling that the government was going against its own people. Lenin saw Stolypin’s reforms as a potential threat to gaining support from peasants in any future revolutions, this shows that the revolutionary leaders were worried by his reforms. Though this may have driven them to be more radical in their
The Duma was the first elected body that Russia had seen, with members including those who weren’t just royalty or noblemen, some members of revolutionary groups even joined. The first Duma was boycotted by the social revolutionaries, even though it was on broad franchise, the main groups that it included were the Trudovics, a loose peasant supporting group and the Progressevists, a group consisting of mainly middle class businessmen. However they wanted too much reform in demanding the release of political prisoners and further land reform, they were quickly dissolved. The second Duma had less Kadets, due to the Vyborg manifesto, though some social revolutionaries and social democrats gained seats. This group was also dissolved, after only three months this time, as they criticized the way the Tsar was running the army. This lack of cooperation between the Duma and the Tsar shows that the Duma wasn’t really a parliament, it had no real power as the fundamental law stated that the Tsar had final say and that he could dissolve them when he wanted. This may have stopped revolutionaries going underground at first, if they felt that they could talk to the Tsar and that they were having a say in political issues. Though as the Tsar kept dissolving the Dumas, the revolutionary groups became aggravated, and