‘Social conditions and freedoms were consistently poor and restrictive in the period 1855-1964.’ How far do you agree with this statement? (Russia period study)

Introduction: That social conditions and freedoms are to be considered ‘consistently’ poor and restrictive for Russian people is an apt reflection of the repressive governance of both the Tsars and Communists. Through a turbulent time of political change in this period, it can be acknowledged there was a paucity of freedom under the Provisional Government but this does not necessarily mean it is maintained for the whole period. In order to answer this statement adequately, the working conditions and the living conditions must be assessed. Religious freedom is another factor which must be acknowledged in restricting the right to practice and have beliefs. Personal and political freedoms too must be assessed in the restriction of the Russian people.
Opening line and concluding line of argument:
Both Tsars and communists controlled personal freedoms extensively through the legal system, the police, army, propaganda and censorship.....Therefore, it can be seen that the personal and political freedoms fluctuated over the period meaning it wasn’t consistent over the period but still remained ‘poor’ in comparison to their European counterparts. As the Tsars were losing their grasp on control to avoid a revolution they needed to hand over more powers whereas communists maintained tight control on the population meaning that there was marginally more freedom under some rulers but this was never maintained giving more weight to the argument that freedoms were poor and restrictive however the consistency of this should not be exaggerated. 
Religion is important in the consideration of freedoms as it was a practice which was heavily controlled by both Tsars and communists- supporting the statement that it was ‘consistently’ restrictive. . Therefore, whilst the beliefs were different between Tsars and communists, there was a continuity of using religion as a tool of control thus supporting the statement it was ‘consistently poor and restrictive’ as it was repressive under both Tsars and communists.
The living and working conditions in Russia too are not to be overlooked- giving credibility to the statement that ‘conditions were consistently poor and restrictive’....The freedom to farm and individual enterprise was restricted by Stalin’s collectivisation policies and a huge deficiency in food intake than under the Tsars as all grain was given towards the common cause. Thus, under the communists there was continuity of poor conditions However, for both urban workers and peasants the conditions were merciless with poor pay and harsh conditions thus underpinning the statement that social conditions were ‘poor and restrictive’. 

Conclusion: To conclude, this essay agrees to a considerable extent that the social conditions and freedoms were ‘consistently poor and restrictive’ over the period. However, to say that it was ‘consistently’ poor does not give an accurate analysis of the period as there were leaders such as Alexander II or the Provisional Government who were willing and chose to undertake steps to grant greater freedom to the people. However, when evaluating the time period, it is correct to see that for the majority of the rule of both Tsars and communists that social conditions were abysmal and the religious, personal and political freedoms were hugely restricted. This assesment concludes that social conditions and freedoms were ‘consistently poor and restrictive’ however this is not wholly representative and accurate of the whole period.