Complete collectivization of agriculture: goals, essence, results. Collectivization in the USSR: causes, essence, course and consequences Collectivization causes, results and consequences

The majority of the population of the newly formed USSR was represented mainly by peasants. The main task for the Bolsheviks was to prevent the independent agricultural activity of the peasantry, as it excluded the principles on which the economic reforms of that time were based: collective responsibility and strict centralization.

Prerequisites for collectivization

The collectivization of agriculture at its initial stage was very sluggish and represented a few communes. The Bolshevik government supported and encouraged such initiatives, but was in no hurry to force the peasants to unite farms.

The main deterrent for the Bolsheviks was that the main driving force behind the revolution was precisely the peasants, who were seeking the right to private land ownership. However, the authorities abandoned their liberal policy after the villagers began to massively organize cooperatives - private associations that are not controlled by the state.

Cooperation not only prevented centralization, but also the entire policy of the NEP. The Bolsheviks were forced to take radical measures, which consisted in the actual forcible collectivization of agriculture.

Course towards collectivization

In 1927, the failure of the NEP became obvious even to the ruling elite of the CPSU(b). In December of this year, at the 15th Party Congress, I.V. Stalin announced a course towards the complete collectivization of agriculture. At that time, this was the only way to replenish the empty state treasury.

Collective farms were supposed to become a reliable stronghold for the totalitarian regime of the communists. Such a policy did not find the support of some rather influential members of the party, who were aware of the consequences that forced collectivization would entail.

To eliminate such "undesirable elements", Stalin personally purged the party ranks - 15% of the communists - the Bolsheviks lost their party cards and were sent to Siberia.

The essence of collectivization in the USSR

Collectivization was the reformation of agricultural production. Farmers and private farmers were forced to combine their farms into a collective organization controlled by the state. Most of the manufactured products became state property.

Prosperous peasants who refused to run collective farms were deprived of all political and civil rights, sent into exile, and their property was confiscated and equally distributed between the state and the scammer.

The main indicator of the effectiveness of the collective farms was the level of grain that the peasants annually handed over to the state. In order to show their collective farm from the best side, local authorities began to forcibly take away bread from the peasants. Along with the grain, other products were selected: vegetables, fruits, cereals.

The supreme power, headed by Stalin, perfectly understood how local officials acted, but did not interfere with this in any way - the country needed money for the coming industrialization.

The result of the predatory policy of the Bolsheviks was a large-scale famine and millions of repressed, innocent "enemies of the state." The official end of the collectivization process is considered to be 1937, at that time more than 21 million peasant farms were collectivized, which became more than 95% of their total number.

The years of the revolution are moving further and further away from us, and at the same time, the younger generation understands the events of those years less and less. At history lessons in schools, a certain number of hours are allotted to study this difficult and tragic period of time in the life of our state. However, a complete understanding of what happened in 1917 and after it, unfortunately, is not among today's youth. Let's try once again to plunge into the post-revolutionary era and popularly consider at least such a phenomenon as the collectivization of agriculture.

The reasons for the collectivization of agriculture were rooted in the task of making an industrialization breakthrough, which was necessary for the Land of Soviets to assert itself among hostile foreign neighbors who did not want to perceive it as a reality. From the very first moment the Bolsheviks seized power, they welcomed the nationalization of all property that existed on the territory of the state. And collectivization was a form of appropriation of land, which turned into his sole possession. The creation of collective farms was not a one-time event announced in 1929. The process of transforming individual farms belonging to prosperous peasants into collective Bolsheviks was already preparing during the years of “war communism”. This is evidenced by the facts of the planting of communes, which appeared at that time, and the property there was only exclusively public. And although the transition to led to the collapse of the commune, still, long before the “year of the Great Turning Point”, a number of collective farms already existed, uniting almost 4% of the peasant farmsteads. These associations were called TOZs, i.e. partnerships for joint cultivation of the land.

Naming the reasons for the collectivization of agriculture, one cannot help but touch on the problem that erupted in the USSR in 1927. Only large agrarian associations, which were subordinate to the state, made it possible to seamlessly seize all the harvested grain and unquestioningly transfer the crop to the bins to provide the workers with bread. Betting on the creation of a new type of organization of agriculture, a precedent for which the world had not yet known, the Bolsheviks were able to correctly choose the main executor of their plans. It was the poor, radically opposed to the wealthy strata of the countryside. And in support of her, twenty-five thousandth communists were sent from the city - fans of the revolutionary movement, who firmly believed in the nobility of their mission. And this led to the fact that the complete collectivization of agriculture ended in the complete liquidation of the kulaks. In fact, under the motto of fighting against the enemies of the revolution, there was an extermination of a layer of the rural population, which knew the value of land and peasant labor.

The collectivization of agriculture divided the previously united village into two opposing camps. In one of them there were members who previously had nothing for their souls. And in the other - kulaks, who, in turn, were "sorted" into 3 more groups: counter-revolutionary kulaks who were arrested with all family members, large kulaks who were to be deported to the northern regions of the country and the rest - those who were resettled within that the region where they lived.

The criteria for dividing into these categories were very vague. However, from which agriculture ended, does not become less ambitious. In total, collectivization destroyed more than 1.1 million strong farms, on which the economy of the huge state, formerly called the Russian Empire, had actually been supported.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru

The essence and principles of collectivization

collectivization rural policy

Prerequisites for collectivization

The course of collectivization

The results of collectivization

Prerequisites for collectivization

The collectivization of agriculture in the USSR was a process of uniting small individual peasant farms into large collective farms through production cooperation.

Most leaders of the Soviet Union followed Lenin's thesis that small-scale peasant farming "daily, hourly, spontaneously and on a mass scale" gives rise to capitalism. Therefore, they considered it dangerous to base the dictatorship of the proletariat for a long time on two different foundations—state (socialist) large-scale industry and small-scale individual peasant farming. The opinion of the minority, who, following Bukharin, believed that the individual peasant, including the prosperous (kulak), could “grow” into socialism, was rejected after the boycott of grain procurements in 1927. The kulak was declared the main internal enemy of socialism and Soviet power. The economic necessity of collectivization was justified by the fact that the individual peasant was not able to meet the demand of the growing urban population with food, and industry with agricultural raw materials. The introduction in 1928 of the ration card system in cities strengthened this position. In a narrow circle of the party-state leadership, collectivization was considered as the main lever for pumping funds from the countryside for industrialization.

Forced industrialization and complete collectivization became two sides of the same course towards the creation of an independent military-industrial power with the maximum state economy.

Beginning of complete collectivization in 1929

On the twelfth anniversary of October, Stalin published in Pravda an article entitled "The Year of the Great Turn", in which he set the task of speeding up collective-farm construction and carrying out "complete collectivization." In 1928-1929, when under the conditions of the "emergency" the pressure on the individual farmer increased sharply, and the collective farmers were granted benefits, the number of collective farms increased 4 times - from 14.8 thousand in 1927 to 70 thousand by the autumn of 1929 The middle peasants went to the collective farms, hoping to wait out the difficult time there. Collectivization was carried out by a simple addition of peasant means of production. Collective farms of the "manufactory type" were created, not equipped with modern agricultural machinery. These were mainly TOZs - partnerships for the joint cultivation of the land, the simplest and temporary form of the collective farm. The November (1929) plenum of the Central Committee of the party set the main task in the countryside - to carry out complete collectivization in a short time. The plenum planned to send 25,000 workers (25,000 workers) to the countryside "to organize" collective farms. The collectives of factories that sent their workers to the countryside were obliged to take patronage over the created collective farms. To coordinate the work of state institutions created for the purpose of restructuring agriculture (Zernotrest, Kolkhoztsentr, Traktorotsentr, etc.), the plenum decided to create a new allied people's commissariat - the People's Commissariat of Agriculture, headed by Ya.A. Yakovlev, Marxist agrarian, journalist. Finally, the November plenum of the Central Committee ridiculed the "prophecies" of Bukharin and his supporters (Rykov, Tomsky, Ugarov, etc.) about the inevitable famine in the country, Bukharin, as a "leader and skirmisher" of the "right deviation" was removed from the Politburo of the Central Committee, the rest were warned that at the slightest attempt to fight against the line of the Central Committee, “orgmers” would be used against them.

On January 5, 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On collectivization and measures of state assistance to collective farm construction." It planned to complete the complete collectivization of grain regions in stages by the end of the five-year plan. In the main grain regions (the North Caucasus, the Middle and Lower Volga), it was planned to be completed in the autumn of 1930, in the other grain regions - in a year. The resolution outlined the creation of agricultural artels in areas of complete collectivization "as a form of collective farm transitional to the commune." At the same time, the inadmissibility of admitting kulaks to the collective farms was emphasized. The Central Committee called for the organization of a socialist competition for the creation of collective farms and a resolute struggle against "any attempts" to restrain collective farm construction. As in November, the Central Committee did not say a word about observing the principle of voluntariness, encouraging arbitrariness by default.

In late January - early February 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR adopted two more resolutions and instructions on the liquidation of the kulaks. It was divided into three categories: terrorists, resisters and others. All were subject to arrest or exile with confiscation of property. “Dispossession became an integral part of the collectivization process.

The course of collectivization

The first stage of complete collectivization, which began in November 1929, continued until the spring of 1930. Local authorities and "twenty-five thousand" began the compulsory unification of individual farmers into communes. Socialized not only the means of production, but also personal subsidiary plots and property. The forces of the OGPU and the Red Army evicted the "dispossessed" peasants, including all the dissatisfied. By decision of the secret commissions of the Central Committee and the Council of People's Commissars, they were sent to the special settlements of the OGPU to work according to economic plans, mainly in logging, construction, and mining. According to official data, more than 320,000 farms (more than 1.5 million people) were dispossessed; according to modern historians, about 5 million people were dispossessed and exiled throughout the country. The dissatisfaction of the peasants resulted in the mass slaughter of cattle, flight to the cities, and anti-collective farm uprisings. If in 1929 there were more than a thousand of them, then in January-March 1930 there were more than two thousand. Army units and aviation participated in the suppression of the rebellious peasants. The country was on the brink of civil war.

Mass indignation of the peasants forced collectivization forced the country's leadership to temporarily ease the pressure. Moreover, on behalf of the Politburo of the Central Committee, in Pravda on March 2, 1930, Stalin published an article “Dizziness from Success”, in which he condemned “excesses” and blamed local authorities and workers sent to create collective farms for them. Following the article, Pravda published a resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Grand Duchy of Lithuania (b) dated March 14, 1930, “On Combating Distortions in the Party Line in the Collective-Farm Movement.” Among the "distortions" in the first place was the violation of the principle of voluntariness, then - the "dispossession" of the middle peasants and the poor, looting, total collectivization, jumping from the artel to the commune, the closing of churches and markets. After the decision, the first echelon of local organizers of collective farms were subjected to repression. At the same time, many of the created collective farms were dissolved, their number was reduced by the summer of 1930 by about half, they united a little more than 1/5 of the peasant farms.

However, in the autumn of 1930, a new, more cautious stage of complete collectivization began. From now on, only agricultural artels were created, which allowed the existence of personal, subsidiary farms. In the summer of 1931, the Central Committee explained that "solid collectivization" cannot be understood primitively, as "total", that its criterion is the involvement in collective farms of at least 70% of farms in grain and more than 50% in other areas. By that time, the collective farms already united about 13 million peasant households (out of 25 million), i.e. more than 50% of their total number. And in the grain regions, almost 80% of the peasants were on collective farms. In January 1933, the country's leadership announced the eradication of exploitation and the victory of socialism in the countryside as a result of the liquidation of the kulaks.

In 1935, the II All-Union Congress of Collective Farmers took place. He adopted a new model charter for an agricultural artel (instead of the charter of 1930). According to the Charter, the land was assigned to collective farms for “perpetual use”, the main forms of labor organization on collective farms (brigades), its accounting and payment (by workdays), and the size of personal subsidiary plots (LPS) were established. The Charter of 1935 legally formalized the new production relations in the countryside, called by historians "early socialist". With the transition of the collective farm to the new Charter (1935-1936), the collective farm system in the USSR finally took shape.

The results of collectivization

By the end of the 30s. collective farms united more than 90% of the peasants. Collective farms were served by agricultural machinery, which was concentrated at the state machine and tractor stations (MTS).

The creation of collective farms did not lead, contrary to expectations, to an increase in agricultural production. In 1936-1940s. gross agricultural output remained at the level of 1924-1928, i.e. pre-collective farm village. And at the end of the first five-year plan, it turned out to be lower than in 1928. The production of meat and dairy products sharply decreased, for many years it was formed, according to the figurative expression of N.S. Khrushchev, "virgin meat". At the same time, the collective farms made it possible to significantly increase the state procurement of agricultural products, especially grain. This led to the abolition in 1935 of the card system in the cities and the growing export of bread.

The course towards the maximum extraction of agricultural products from the countryside led in 1932-1933. to deathly starvation in many agricultural areas of the country. There is no official data on the victims of artificial famine. Modern Russian historians estimate their number in different ways: from 3 to 10 million people.

The mass exodus from the countryside exacerbated the difficult socio-political situation in the country. To stop this process, as well as to identify fugitive "kulaks" at the turn of 1932-1933. a passport regime was introduced with a residence permit in a certain place of residence. From now on, it was possible to move around the country only with a passport, or a document that officially replaces it. Passports were issued to residents of cities, urban-type settlements, workers of state farms. Collective farmers and individual peasants were not issued passports. This attached them to the land and collective farms. From that time on, it was possible to officially leave the village through a state-organized recruitment for five-year construction projects, study, service in the Red Army, and work as machine operators in the MTS. The regulated process of formation of working personnel has led to a decrease in the growth rate of the urban population, the number of workers and employees. According to the 1939 census, with a total population of the USSR of 176.6 million people (historians give a figure of 167.3 million), 33% of the population lived in cities (against 18%, according to the 1926 census).

Bibliography

1. History of Russia. XX century. M, RGGU, 2012.

2. Munchaev Sh.M., Ustinov V. . History of Russia. M., 2006.

3. Reader on the history of the USSR. 1861 - 1917. M., 2000.

4. Reader on national history. 1914 - 1945 / Ed. A.F. Kiseleva. M., 1996.

5. Reader on the history of Russia. 1917 - 1940 / Comp. M.E. Glavatsky. M.,

6. Ionov I.N. Russian civilization. IX - beginning of XX century. M, 2009.

7. Derevyanko A.P., Shchabelshchikova N.A. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the XX century. M., 2010.

8. Domestic history. XX century / Ed. A.V. Ushakov. M., 1996

nine . Hosking J. History of the Soviet Union. 1917-1991. M., 2008.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Reasons for collectivization

In order to start any process in a country, the citizens of that country must be prepared. This is what happened in the USSR.

The inhabitants of the country were prepared for the process of collectivization and indicated the reasons for its start:

The country needed industrialization, which could not be carried out partially. It was necessary to create a strong agricultural sector that would unite the peasants into one.
At that time, the government did not look at the experience of foreign countries. And if abroad the process of the agrarian revolution began first, without the industrial revolution, then in our country it was decided to combine both processes in order to correctly build an agrarian policy.
In addition to being the main source of food supply, the village also had to become a conduit through which major investments and industrialization could be made.

All these conditions and reasons became the main starting point in the process of beginning the process of collectivization in the Russian countryside.

Goals of collectivization

As in any other process, before launching large-scale changes, it is necessary to set clear goals and understand what needs to be achieved from one direction or another. It is the same with collectivization.

In order to start the process, it was necessary to set the main goals and plan to go towards them:

The process was to establish socialist industrial relations. There were no such relations in the village before collectivization.
It was taken into account that in the villages almost every inhabitant had his own household, but it was small. Through collectivization, it was planned to create a large collective farm, uniting small farms into collective farms.
The need to get rid of the class of kulaks. This could be done only by exclusively using the dispossession regime. What did the Stalinist government do.

How was the collectivization of agriculture in the USSR

The government of the Soviet Union understood that the Western economy developed due to the existence of colonies, which were not in our country. But there were villages. It was planned to create collective farms according to the type and likeness of the colonies of foreign countries.

At that time, the Pravda newspaper was the main source from which the inhabitants of the country received information. In 1929, it published an article entitled "The Year of the Great Break". She was the start of the process.

In the article, the leader of the country, whose authority at that time was quite high, announced the need to destroy the individual imperialist economy. In December of the same year, the beginning of the New Economic Policy and the liquidation of the kulaks as a class were announced.

The developed documents characterized the establishment of strict deadlines for the implementation of the dispossession process for the North Caucasus and the Middle Volga. For Ukraine, Siberia and the Urals, a period of two years was set, three years was set for all other regions of the country. Thus, in the first five-year plan, all individual farms were to be converted into collective farms.

Processes were simultaneously going on in the villages: a course towards dispossession and the creation of collective farms. All this was done by violent methods, and by 1930, about 320 thousand peasants became poor. All property, and there was a lot of it - about 175 million rubles - was transferred to the ownership of collective farms.

1934 is considered the year of completion of collectivization.

Q&A rubric

Why was collectivization accompanied by dispossession?

The process of transition to collective farms could not have been carried out in any other way. Voluntarily, only poor peasants went to the collective farms, who could not donate anything for public use.
More prosperous peasants tried to keep their economy in order to develop it. The poor were against this process, because they wanted equality. Dispossession was caused by the need to start a general forced collectivization.

Under what slogan was the collectivization of peasant farms carried out?

"Complete collectivization!"

Which book vividly describes the period of collectivization?

In the 1930s and 1940s, there was a huge amount of literature describing the processes of collectivization. One of the first to draw attention to this process was Leonid Leonov in his work “Sot”. The novel "Shadows Disappear at Noon" by Anatoly Ivanov tells how collective farms were created in Siberian villages.

And of course, “Virgin Soil Upturned” by Mikhail Sholokhov, where you can get acquainted with all the processes that took place at that time in the village.

Can you name the pros and cons of collectivization?

Positive points:

the number of tractors and combines increased on the collective farms;
thanks to the food distribution system, during the Second World War it was possible to avoid mass starvation in the country.

Negative aspects of the transition to collectivization:

led to the destruction of the traditional peasant way of life;
the peasants did not see the results of their own labor;
a consequence of the reduction in the number of cattle;
the peasant class ceased to exist as a class of proprietors.

What are the features of collectivization?

Features include the following:

After the process of collectivization began, industrial growth took place in the country.
The association of peasants into collective farms allowed the government to manage the collective farms more effectively.
The entry into the collective farm of each peasant made it possible to begin the process of developing a common collective farm economy.

Are there films about collectivization in the USSR?

There are a large number of films about collectivization, and they were filmed during the period of collectivization. The events of that time are most clearly reflected in the films: "Happiness", "Old and New", "Land and Freedom".

The results of collectivization in the USSR

After the process was completed, the country began to count the losses, and the results were disappointing:

grain production decreased by 10%;
the number of cattle decreased by 3 times;
The years 1932-1933 were terrible for the inhabitants of the country. If earlier the village could feed not only itself, but also the city, now it could not even feed itself. This time is considered to be a hungry year;
despite the fact that people were starving, almost all grain stocks were sold abroad.

The process of mass collectivization destroyed the prosperous population of the countryside, but at the same time a large number of the population remained in the collective farms, which was kept in it by force. Thus, the policy of the formation of Russia as an industrial state was carried out.

Domestic History: Cheat Sheet Author unknown

82. THE ESSENCE OF COLLECTIVIZATION POLICY

The essence of the work carried out in the USSR in the late 1920s and early 1930s. collectivization policy consisted in the fact that the party-state apparatus sought to unite the entire peasant population of the country (in most cases against its will) into collective (collective farms) or Soviet (state farms) farms in order to provide cities with cheap agricultural products, and industry with material resources and free labor force. This policy was formalized in the documents of the beginning of 1930, when the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars "On the pace of collectivization ..." determined the terms for uniting peasants in collective farms in all regions of the country. The government of the USSR granted local authorities the right to apply in areas of complete collectivization "all necessary measures to combat the kulaks, up to the complete confiscation of the property of the kulaks and their eviction from certain regions and territories." In February 1930, a secret instruction "On measures for the eviction and dispossession of kulaks, the confiscation of their property" was adopted. The number of those evicted was determined in advance, i.e., in a planned manner, at 3-5% of all peasants, depending on the region. The means of production, livestock, household and residential buildings, and all other property, including household utensils, were confiscated from the evicted peasants. The confiscated was transferred to the fund of the formed collective farms and state farms.

The negative attitude of the peasants towards collectivization was manifested in the fact that after the appearance in the press of the article by I.V. Stalin's "Dizziness from success" began their mass exit from the collective farms. In a short time, the share of collective farms in the country fell from 55 to 24%. However, the continued policy of dispossession contributed to the fact that by 1933, up to 70% of all peasant farms were united in collective farms.

As a result of the forced collectivization of agriculture and the "liquidation of the kulaks as a class," the age-old way of life of the peasantry was broken. The lack of material incentives to work led to the fact that the created collective farms eked out a miserable existence, and in the fertile regions of the country in 1932-1933. famine broke out.

From the book Transition to NEP. Restoration of the national economy of the USSR (1921-1925) author Team of authors

2. The Essence of the New Economic Policy, Its Main Tasks and Principles In the works of V. I. Lenin, a deep characterization of the New Economic Policy is given - the only correct policy of the dictatorship of the proletariat in the period of transition from capitalism to socialism, -

From the book On Stalin and Stalinism author Medvedev Roy Alexandrovich

METHODS OF COLLECTIVIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION 1 After the introduction of the NEP, economic activity in all sectors and within all the economic structures that existed in the country was significantly revived. Industrial production was restored and expanded.

From the book Why Stalin is needed author Aksenenko Sergey Ivanovich

2.1. Was there an alternative to collectivization? Since perestroika, such a large-scale and controversial phenomenon as collectivization has been presented in the media, books, and Internet sites, usually with a minus sign. And even now, when the truth about our

author Rogovin Vadim Zakharovich

XIV From Emergency Measures to Forced Collectivization Immediately after the 16th Conference it became clear that all the previous measures taken under the pressure of the Bukharin group (raising the purchase prices for grain, increasing the mass of commodities sent to the countryside, reducing

From the book Power and opposition author Rogovin Vadim Zakharovich

XV First round of collectivization After the November plenum, Stalin did not convene a new plenum of the Central Committee for eight months. During this period, the first round of complete collectivization unfolded, with its adventurous beginning and shameful conclusion. All documents,

From the book Power and opposition author Rogovin Vadim Zakharovich

XVI Left Opposition on Collectivization In some journalistic and artistic works of the late 80s, it was argued that the implementation of complete collectivization and dispossession was the result of Stalin's perception and implementation of the ideas of the Left Opposition.

From the book Stalin in the memoirs of contemporaries and documents of the era author Lobanov Mikhail Petrovich

Documents on the results of collectivization and industrialization "PAPHOS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION" AND "FIRE THIRD" We have two documents in front of us: Resolution of the Joint Plenum of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission of the CPSU (b) and a story based on a genuine

From the book of Yezhov. Biography author Pavlyukov Alexey Evgenievich

Chapter 9 Weekdays of Collectivization The year 1929 went down in the history of the country as "the year of the great turning point." At the plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks held in November, the state of affairs in the countryside was considered and a decision was made to speed up the transition to the complete collectivization of agriculture. At the plenum

author Yarov Sergey Viktorovich

The Beginning of Collectivization The forerunner of the collective farms were partnerships for the joint cultivation of the land (TOZ). TOZs did not take root in the village, and the authorities treated them coolly - of course, encouraging them, but with rather small means. On the possibility of speeding up

From the book Russia in 1917-2000. A book for everyone interested in national history author Yarov Sergey Viktorovich

The results of collectivization Collectivization at first led to a sharp reduction in agricultural productivity, a decrease in the number of livestock, and a decrease in the intensity and productivity of labor. Such is the price of any agrarian revolution - both "socialist" and

author author unknown

80. THE ESSENCE OF THE NEW ECONOMIC POLICY The problem of relations with the peasantry was a central political issue in such an agrarian country as Russia. The beginning of an economic policy that takes into account the interests of the multi-million masses of the peasantry was laid

From the book Domestic History: Cheat Sheet author author unknown

83. THE ESSENCE OF THE POLICY OF INDUSTRIALIZATION The "commanding heights" of the economy, which were in the hands of the state, were to form the foundations of the socialist structure of society. The state enterprises of heavy industry, which remained untouched during the NEP period, could not

by Martens Ludo

The first wave of collectivization Stalin decided to rise to the challenge, to bring the socialist revolution to the countryside and to fight the last capitalist class in the Soviet Union - with the kulaks, the rural

From the book Another Look at Stalin by Martens Ludo

The Political Direction of Collectivization Simultaneously with organizational measures, the Central Committee drew up political measures and directives giving directions for the development of collectivization. It is important to note that there was a lively and

From the book Another Look at Stalin by Martens Ludo

The second wave of collectivization Between September and December 1930, a propaganda campaign was launched to join the collective farms. The management of collective farms distributed reports on its progress to single peasants in their area. Special meetings were held for those

From the book Trotsky against Stalin. Emigrant archive of L. D. Trotsky. 1929–1932 author Felshtinsky Yuri Georgievich

Remarks on Frank's work on collectivization 1. The work is very interesting, contains many valuable thoughts, some chapters and parts of chapters are well developed theoretically. The work is also successful in literary terms.2. Politically, work is very much like trying