Revolutions, whether in Russia (1917) or in China (1949), are a disastrous way of transforming a country. Comment.

Answer:

The Russian (1917) and Chinese (1949) revolutions transformed two vast societies. Whether they were "disastrous" is debatable, for they brought both great human cost and far-reaching change.

The Case for 'Disastrous'

• Enormous violence and loss of life — civil war, purges and, later, famines (collectivisation in the USSR; the Great Leap Forward in China).
• Suppression of dissent, one-party dictatorship and denial of civil liberties.
• Economic disruption and coercion in the early phases.

The Other Side

• Both revolutions ended semi-feudal and foreign-dominated orders and asserted national sovereignty.
• Rapid industrialisation, land reform, spread of literacy, health care and social welfare.
• They lifted the two countries into major world powers.

Assessment

• The human cost was heavy, but supporters argue that peaceful reform had failed to address deep inequality and oppression.

Therefore, while the Russian and Chinese revolutions involved great suffering and authoritarianism, they also produced profound modernising change — so calling them simply "disastrous" is only a partial judgment.