Reincarnated as Nikolai II

The Soviet Union, as a communist state, lacked developed capital and private investment. Among the three elements of industry - production, distribution, and consumption - it lacked distribution and consumption.

Then how did this country, with practically nothing, manage to become the world's leading industrial nation in the 1920s?

First, investment - in other words, capital.

While in other countries, wealthy men in suits would naturally establish companies, develop technology, hire workers, and pioneer markets, then generate profits to pay taxes to the national treasury.

The poor Soviet Union's solution was simple.

They abolished private property and markets in rural areas, and the government set low prices for agricultural products, investing the profits generated from the distribution process into manufacturing.

Simply put, since it was an agricultural country, they squeezed the farmers.

Although they did make the farmers independent, there was a reason why millions died of starvation every year.

Industrial expansion.

While Western companies experienced organic industrial growth through a self-reinforcing cycle of profit generation and reinvestment, the Soviet Union took a radically different approach. In the West, as companies pioneered new markets and products, their profits allowed them to invest in research, better equipment, and expanded production capacity. This in turn led to improved products, wider distribution, and greater market penetration - generating even more profits that could be reinvested. This virtuous cycle created sustainable, market-driven industrial expansion over many decades.

The Soviet Union, lacking market mechanisms and private enterprise, could not harness this natural process of profit-driven growth and reinvestment. Instead, the Communist state pursued a dramatically different path: rapid, forced industrialization through central planning. Between 1925 and 1930, the Soviet leadership under Stalin implemented an unprecedented program of complete industrial and agricultural collectivization. This involved the state seizing control of all major industries, from steel mills to farming collectives, and directing their operations through rigid five-year plans.

This country simply and conveniently industrialized and collectivized everything from agriculture to heavy industry in the five years between 1925 and 1930.

Yes, despite destroying the mir system by their own hands, the Soviets applied this mir system to industry.

Collective farms.

Collective mines.

Collective factories.

Collective construction.

..

.

Well, they probably followed the mir-style labor since it perfectly matched the system required by communism.

I suppose to the Soviets, land was just a means of production like factories.

While this was an unimaginable oppression and madness in Western society where free markets existed for both labor and capital, it had its advantages.

The industrial structure is simple and that industry expands immediately.

Often, mine supervisors pressing miners to meet 'quotas' is part of such an industrial structure.

Consumer market that ensures industrial sustainability?

Ah, since the state is the consumer, no market is needed. Policy is the market.

Still, such questions arise.

Even if Soviet-led heavy industrial development succeeded in the 20s, how did it continue to grow and develop steadily through the 30s and 40s?

In Western society, if a business fails to make money, only the managers and investors go completely bankrupt, but since the Soviet state was the business entity, did they just hang on while burning through capital extracted from agriculture?

Absolutely not.

The Soviet Union achieved consumption of this heavy industry through constant exchange with surrounding countries.

Since the dawn of industry, no country had ever skipped agriculture and light industry to jump straight to heavy industry.

As a result, they managed considerable exports to markets in Eastern Europe and Asia with their preemptively developed heavy industry, and above all, they were the biggest consumer of heavy industry themselves in building up their military.

If there hadn't been an enormous consumption period like World War II, no one knows how the history of Soviet industrial development would have changed.

Of course, this side effect did lead to Khrushchev scrambling to develop light industry in the 50s.

Soviet industrial development.

With just a little study, it's truly impressive, ingenious, and out of sync with its time.

Since there was no history of such state-led industrial development except for the Soviet Union until the post-World War II reconstruction era, it's unavoidable that their development speed stood out compared to contemporary nations.

Now, let's return to my empire.

What should we do?

"We can't tell farmers overnight to take out loans to buy expensive tractors. Also, forcing production beyond what the domestic market can handle will only increase side effects."

"Then what do you plan to do?"

Soviet-style industrial development?

Or Western-style industrial development?

While both have clear pros and cons... neither is right.
Discover hidden tales at My Virtual Library Empire

The development I wanted from the start was one thing.

"First, we'll start with government consumption in areas like the military, but ultimately make the people consume. In other words, the most important task is moving the market entity from the state to the people."

The Nazi-style heavy industry growth.

Using South Korea's development method this time would be premature for the empire.

In other words, it won't be simply resolved by establishing legal grounds like the Six Nurture Laws and providing loans.

After all, South Korea was fast because it was a latecomer who studied numerous leading cases before following, not a pioneer.

However, despite insufficient private investment due to the Great Depression.

Despite inadequate markets and low consumption.

The Nazis succeeded in industrial development in a short period rivaling the Soviet Union.

I believe the starting point was when the Nazis changed one law as soon as they took power.

1933, Act of the Formation of Compulsory Cartels.

Want to create a cartel where only a few take everything?

Want to maximize profits through monopolistic positions because you're so greedy?

Fine. The state will help.

We'll privatize state industries and put them in your mouth, and even stuff the funds gained from privatization back in your mouth.

However.

"From now on, all monopoly position companies and cartels will be treated as public corporations."

"The resistance in that process..."

"If they resist, we'll just find another owner. If they don't like state intervention, they should rise up through free competition."

They'll have to choose.

Whether to maintain their monopoly position at the top while receiving state interference, or to come back down freely to compete.