A Critical Assessment of Stalin’s Policy of Collectivization

3.2 History – III

Submitted By-

Ayush Gaur

SM0117012

Faculty in Charge

Ms. Namrata Gogoi

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, ASSAM

GUWAHATI
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1.Research Questions

1.2.Literature Review

1.3.Scope and Objective

1.4.Research Methodology

2. ECONOMIC POLICIES OF LENIN AND STALIN

3. COLLECTIVISATION

4. CRISIS OF COLLECTIVISATION AND PEASANTS REBELLION

5. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF COLLECTIVISATION

6. CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

2
 CHAPTER – 1

INTRODUCTION

Joseph Stalin or Josef Vissarionovich Djugashvili on December 18, 1878, in the

small town of Gori, Georgia, then part of the Russian empire. When he was in his 30s, he
took the name Stalin, from the Russian for “man of steel.” Joseph Stalin was the dictator
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) from 1929 to 1953. Under Stalin, the
Soviet Union was transformed from a peasant society into an industrial and military
superpower. However, he ruled by terror, and millions of his own ci tizens died during his
brutal reign. Born into poverty, Stalin became involved in revolutionary politics, as well
as criminal activities, as a young man.

After Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) died, Stalin outmaneuvered

his rivals for control of the party. Once in power, he collectivized farming and had
potential enemies executed or sent to forced labor camps. Stalin aligned with the United
States and Britain in World War II (1939-1945) but afterward engaged in an increasingly
tense relationship with the West known as the Cold War (1946 -1991). After his death, the
Soviets initiated a de-Stalinization process. The Soviet Union enforced the collectivization of
its agricultural sector between 1928 and 1940 (in West - between 1948 and 1952) during the
ascendancy of Joseph Stalin. It began during and was part of the first five-year plan. The policy
aimed to consolidate individual landholdings and labor into collective farms. The
Soviet leadership confidently expected that the replacement of individual peasant farms by
collective ones would immediately increase the food supply for the urban population, the supply
of raw materials for processing industry, and agricultural exports. Planners regarded
collectivization as the solution to the crisis of agricultural distribution

1.1 Research Questions

 What were the economic policies of Lenin and Stalin?

 How Stalin reversed the economic policies of Lenin?

3
 What was collectivization?

 How did people respond this policy of collectivization?

 To critically analyze Stalin’s the policy of collectivization?

1.2 Literature Review

 E.H CARR, A HISTORY OF SOVIET RUSSIA(1978).

This book helped in better understanding the Lenin and Stalin’s economic policy.it
also explains how stain completely reversed the policy of Lenin and up to what level
the Stalin’s policy was failure and in the long it turned out to be successful. As E. H.
Carr, the author in itself was an prominent English historian of the soviet era gives a
detail study of Soviet economic policy in this book.All the important matter to study
Stalin and the economic history of Russia is discussed briefly in this book and the
author has presented the most complicated work in the easiest language for better
understanding.

 Norman Lowe, Mastering modern world history (2013).

This book helped in understanding the Stalin’s five year plans, how these plans tend to
focus on the heavy industrialization and it also tells about the concept of
Collectivization. Other than this book gives an outline of historical event that gives a
balanced verifiable record of the procedures of the cutting edge world, going from the
French Revolution and Napoleon to the Cold War. The work evaluates significant
minutes and advances in European and world history, for example, the Enlightenment,
the Industrial Revolution, the American Civil War, and the World Wars of the
twentieth century. One of the essential goals of this book is to see how unrests, wars,
fascisms and domains have prompted long haul tries different things with patriotism,
majority rule government, progressivism, human rights, communism, practical
advancement, and worldwide peace

4
1.3 Scope and Objectives

The scope of this project is to know about Stalin’s policy of collectivization and why Stalin's
desire to modernize agriculture led him to collectivize the farms, amalgamating them and putting
them totally under state control and also how in the end, this did lead to more efficient farming
and increased production, but in the short term it involved him in a 'war' with the kulaks, and a
disastrous fall in output, which led to famine.

1.4 Research Methodology

In this project, the researcher has adopted Doctrinal research. Doctrinal research is essentially
a library-based study, which means that the materials needed by a researcher may be available
in libraries, archives, and other data-bases. Various types of books were used to get the
adequate data essential for this project. The researcher also used computer laboratory to get
important data related to this topic. The researcher also found several good websites which
were very useful to better understand this topic.

5
 CHAPTER – 2
ECONOMIC POLICIES OF LENIN AND STALIN

In soviet main agrarian policies come under two eminent leaders that are Lenin and
Stalin. These two leaders imposed many economic policies in order to promote the agrarian and
industrial developments.
 Economic policies under Lenin –
Lenin introduced the War Communism to combat the economic problems brought on by
civil war in Russia and it existed from 1918 to 1921. It was a combination of emergency
measures and socialist dogma. One of the first measures of War Communism was the
nationalization of land. Banks and shipping were also nationalised and foreign trade was
declared a state monopoly.1
Lenin introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP) after the failure of the War
Communism due to the famine of the 1921. The famine resulted from combined effects of
economic disturbance which had already started during World War I, and continued through the
disturbances of the Russian Revolution and Russian Civil War with its policy of War
Communism. The economic policies after the famine of the Soviet Union from 1921 to 1928,
representing a temporary retreat from its previous policies of extreme centralization and
doctrinaire socialism. The policy of War Communism, in effect since 1918, had by 1921 brought
the national economy to the point of total breakdown. The Kronshdat rebellion of March 1921
convinced the Communist Party and its leader, Vladimir Lenin, of the need to retreat from
socialist policies in order to maintain the party’s hold on power. Accordingly, the 10th Party
Congress in March 1921 introduced the measures of the New Economic Policy. 2 These measures
included the return of most agriculture, retail trade, and small-scale light industry to private
ownership and management while the state retained control of heavy industry, transport,
banking, and foreign trade. Money was reintroduced into the economy in 1922 (it had been
abolished under War Communism). The peasantry was allowed to own and cultivate their own

1
War Communism, The History Learning Site ( October 19,2018 4.00PM)
https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/russia-1900-to-1939/war-
communism/
2
New Economic Policy, Brittanica (October 19,2018 4.15PM)
https://www.britannica.com/event/New-Economic-Policy-Soviet-history

6
land, while paying taxes to the state. The New Economic Policy reintroduced a measure of
stability to the economy and allowed the Soviet people to recover from years of war, civil war,
and governmental mismanagement. The small businessmen and managers who flourished in this
period became known as NEP men.
The small shares of most of the peasants resulted in food shortages in the cities. Although
grain had nearly returned to pre-war production levels, the large estates which had produced it
for urban markets had been divided up. Not interested in acquiring money to purchase overpriced
manufactured goods, the peasants chose to consume their produce rather than sell it. As a result,
city dwellers only saw half the grain that had been available before the war. Before the
revolution, peasants controlled only 2,100,000 km² divided into 16 million holdings, producing
50% of the food grown in Russia and consuming 60% of total food production3
But the NEP was viewed by the Soviet government as merely a temporary expedient to
allow the economy to recover while the Communists solidified their hold on power. The NEP
was dogged by the government’s continuing inability to procure enough grain supplies from the
peasantry to feed its urban work force. In 1928–29 these grain shortages prompted Joseph Stalin,
by then the country’s paramount leader, to forcibly eliminate the private ownership of farmland
and to collectivize agriculture under the state’s control, thus ensuring the procurement of
adequate food supplies for the cities in the future. This abrupt policy change, which was
accompanied by the destruction of several million of the country’s most prosperous private
farmers, marked the end of the NEP. It was followed by the re-imposition of state control over
all industry and commerce in the country by 1931.

 Economic Policies under Stalin –

Stalin replaced the New Economic Policy of Stalin with the Five Year Plans because the
NEP was leading to weak industrial development in Russia and with the help of Five year plans,
Stalin can increase the industrial activities in Russia Leading to economic development. Stalin
introduced three Five year plans before the 2nd World War.
The first five year plan was introduced in the Stalin’s regime which emphasized on the
heavy industries – coal, oil, iron and steel to lay the foundation for the future industrial growth.

3
Leninist Agrarian Policy (1917-1928), Global Security (October 20, 2018 7.00AM)
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/cccp-ag-lenin.htm

7
Around 1500 new industrial plants were built and some unbelievable targets were set but
remarkable results were also received. The policy of collectivization was also introduced by the
Stalin due to which farming methods were changed and fewer people were required to work on
the land and the rest were employed in the factories. Efficient farming methods imply surplus
crops for export and the private ownership of land.
The second five was introduced in year 1932 in this policy the heavy industries
remained top priority and communications, especially railways, became important to link cities
and industrial centers because goods must be transported quickly and cheaply from one place to
another and USSR was a huge country. Thus Lines of communication were vital in order to link
mines with factories; factories with centres of population and to transport food from countryside
to towns. Therefore an important part of five year plan was to build roads and canals but rapid
industrialization and modernization of agriculture must go hand-in-handwith ‘communications’.
The Third Five-Year Plan was introduced in the year 1938 an it lasted 3 years as Russia
entered 2nd World War in 1941.More emphasized were placed on developing armaments i.e.
tanks, planes, weapons, etc.4

4
Dean Swift, Stalin’s Five Year Plans, General History (October 20,2018 8.00 AM)
http://general-history.com/stalins-five-year-plans/

8
 CHAPTER – 3
COLLECTIVISATION

Joseph Stalin with his new aim to erase the traces of capitalism that had entered in the
New Economic Policy and to transform the Soviet Union as soon as possible. Due to this aim
they the launched his economic policy in November 1927 by setting two goals for domestic
policy i.e. rapid industrialism and collectivization of agriculture.
Stalin's purpose in transforming the agricultural system was partly greater efficiency
and partly social. Russian agriculture was still carried on by primitive methods – wooden
ploughs, broadcast sowing, sickle harvesting – mostly on very small holdings. The peasants, who
by such methods had to raise Russia's basic food supplies, numbered about 85 per cent of the
whole population. One effect of Lenin's N.E.P. had been to enable some of the more enterprising
and better-off peasants to hire farm laborers and to acquire capital of their own. These relatively
prosperous and independent peasants were called kulaks. They were regarded as capitalists
within a Communist State; and they were especially hated because they refused to take their
grain to market until prices reached high levels, thus causing precious food for the rest of the
people. It was against them that Stalin's schemes were particularly directed, his method being the
collectivization of the land. 5
There were three main types of collective farms:-
 The Toz, where peasants owned their own land but shared machinery and co-operated in
activities like sowing and harvesting. This type of collective farm was common before
1930
 The Sovkhoz, which was owned and run by the state. The peasants who worked on this
state farm were paid a regular wage, very much like factory workers
 The Kolkhoz where all the land was held in common and run by an elected committee.
To form kolkhoz, between 50 and 100 households were put together. All land, tools and
livestock had to be pooled. Under the direction of the committee, the peasants farmed the
land as one unit. However each household was allowed to keep its own private plot up to
one acre. They could use this to grow vegetables and keep cow, a pig and fowl

5 th
Norman Lowe, Mastering modern world history 378 (5 ed. 2013).

9
 The original aim of collectivization was to create Sovkhozes but the kolkhoz with
private plots became the type most favors by the Communist in the collectivization process of
1950’s.6
This meant the grouping together of several peasant holdings so that each group would
be worked as one large agricultural unit. This would economize labor, facilitate the use of up-to-
date agricultural methods and machinery, and allow more efficient marketing of crops. Also it
would have the social effect of putting all the peasants on an equal status and so would eliminate
the kulaks. The Small farms were merged into large farms (kolkhoz) owned by peasants and the
government supplied the new farms with seed, tools and modern machinery. In return, the 90%
of products were sold to the state at low prices. The government infact used greater amount of
machinery which helped in reducing the labor needed on farms. Thus the excess labour that were
left were compelled to join the industries.

6
Was Collectivisation A Success?, MRbuddhistory (October 21, 2018 8.00AM)
http://www.mrbuddhistory.com/uploads/1/4/9/6/14967012/textbook_pages_on_collectivisation.pdf

10
 CHAPTER – 4
CRISIS OF COLLECTIVIZATION AND THE PEASANTS
REBELLION

Stalin with the help of Five Year Plans wanted to embark a program of rapid and heavy
industrialization which requires large surpluses to be extracted from the agriculture sector in
order to feed a growing industry workforce and to pay for imports of machinery by exporting
grains. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union had in no way been happy with private
agriculture and saw collectivization as the best way for the problem.

When in 1928 the Government began to introduce this scheme, the kulaks resisted
strongly as these collective farms deprived kulaks form their lands. Only 3 percent of total
agricultural land was collectivized by 1928 because of the kulaks objection, this led to the Crisis
of 1928. In 1928 there was a 2-million-ton shortfall in grains purchased by the Soviet Union
from neighbouring markets. Richer peasants withheld grain from the market, waiting for prices
to rise. Peasants also switched from producing grain to other agricultural commodities. For
example, in the Urals, while peasant grain sales to the state declined by a third, the sale of meat
rose by fifty percent, egg sales doubled, and bacon sales went up four times. Stalin claimed the
grain had been produced but was being hoarded by "kulaks. So the government adopted an
emergency measure of acquisitioning of 2.5 million tons of grains. This discouraged the peasants
and less grains was produced during 1928 and again the government resorted to requisitions,
much of the grain being requisitioned from middle peasants as sufficient quantities were not in
the hands of the "kulaks."

The next year, therefore, Stalin used sterner, more brutal measures. Whole villages were
compelled, by force of arms, to accept the collectivization of their holdings. Some 2 million
kulaks with their families perhaps 8 million people altogether were driven from their homes;
some were killed as they were being expelled; many starved to death; and many more were
driven into Siberia there to scrape whatever sort of living they could either from the land or in
mines or lumber-mills. Many, before giving up their holdings, did their best to defeat the
Government's plans: they slaughtered their livestock, smashed machinery, and burned crops. So
11
widespread was the peasants' resistance that in 1930 even Stalin had to make a few concessions.
In 1932, while agriculture was still disorganized, a crop failure spread a famine that was so
serious that 4 or 5 million peasants are said to have starved to death. Yet nothing was allowed to
interfere with the main Communist programme. In spite of the cost in human suffering and lives,
by 1939, 95 per cent of Russian farms had been collectivized. 7

The famine was its worst between the springs of 1932 to the summer of 1933. Much of it
was caused the decline of food production that accompanied collectivization. This in turn was
caused when the people who worked the land were driven away or killed. At the time of the
famine four fifth of the Soviet population was made up of peasant farmers. There was initially
plenty of food, but to fulfil the unrealistic quotas, nearly all of it was handed over the state. Some
farmers stopped growing grain. There was no incentive to grow it because they had to turn it
over to the state, with very little compensation. Those who didn’t turn over their grain were
accused of “hoarding” and imprisoned or killed. Marxist brigades searched houses for food;
peasant who looked healthy were singled out for intensive searches.8

The grain crisis of 1928 was a critical turning point in Soviet economic and political
history. Applying compulsion to the peasants rather than using economic incentives meant that
NEP was dead. Most significantly, the events of 1928 showed that Stalin saw the peasantry as
the enemy and established the context of a warlike crisis that would justify violence.

Peasants were reluctant to join the collectivization. The drive to collectivize came
without peasant support and was involuntary. The intent was to increase state grain procurements
without giving the peasants the opportunity to withhold grain from the market. Collectivization
would increase the total crop and food supply but the locals knew that they were not likely to
benefit from it. Peasants tried to protest through peaceful means by speaking out at
collectivization meetings and writing letters to the central authorities. When their strategies
failed, villagers turned to violence: committing arson, and lynching and murdering local
authorities, kolkhoz leaders, and activists. Others responded with acts of sabotage, including the
burning of crops and the slaughter of draught animals. According to Party sources, there were

7
S Reed Brett, The Stalinist System, Johndclare ( October 21, 2018 12.00 PM )
http://www.johndclare.net/Russ_Rev_Brett.htm#Collectivization%20of%20Land
8
Jefferey Hays, Economy Under Stalin, Facts and Details (October 21,2018 2.00 PM)
http://factsanddetails.com/russia/Economics_Business_Agriculture/sub9_7b/entry-5165.html

12
also some cases of destruction of property, and attacks on officials and members of the
collectives Fuelled by fear and anxiety, rumors spread throughout the villages leading to these
acts. Rumors associated the Soviet government with the Antichrist (godless and evil), threatened
an end to traditional ways of peasant life, and worked to unite the peasants to protest against
collectivization. Rumors circulated in the villages warning the rural residents that collectivization
would bring disorder, hunger, famine, and the destruction of crops and livestock. Readings and
reinterpretations of Soviet newspapers labeled collectivization as a second serfdom.9

More reason for peasants to believe collectivization was a second serfdom was that entry
into the kolkhoz had been forced. The government would take a majority of the crops and pay
extremely low prices. To them, this “second serfdom” became code for the Communist betrayal
of the revolution.

Women were the primary vehicle for rumors that touched upon issues of family and
everyday life. Fears that collectivization would result in the socialization of children, the export
of women’s hair, communal wife-sharing, and the notorious common blanket affected many
women, causing them to revolt.

Collectivization did not just entail the acquisition of land from farmers but also the
closing of churches, burning of icons, and the arrests of priests. The Communist assault on
religion and the church angered many peasants, giving them more reason to revolt. Riots
exploded after the closing of churches as early as 1929. The attacks on religion and the Church
affected women the most because they were upholders of religion within the villages

9
ibid

13
 CHAPTER – 5
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF COLLECTIVIZATION

The Stalin’s economic policy which led to the establishment of the Five Year Plan had
negative effects in the short run but in the long run these policies that were introduced by the
Stalin were very effective and led to the development of the Soviet Union making it a huge
industrial sector. In the First Five Year Plan Stalin called for the collectivization of only 20% of
the peasant’s households but by 1940 approximately 98% of private ownership was eliminated.
This forced collectivization helped Stalin to achieve its goal of heavy industrialization but
because of this around 14.5 million died in the years of 1930-37. Some 2 million kulaks with
their families perhaps 8 million people altogether were driven from their homes; some were
killed as they were being expelled; many starved to death; and many more were driven into
Siberia there to scrape whatever sort of living they could either from the land or in mines or
lumber-mills. But it had many of the positive effects too. The Grain production rose although the
numbers of animals were never recovered. Russia sold large quantities of grain to other
countries. Schools and hospitals were built and peasants could feel pride in achievement of their
kholkoz or collective farms10. Thus Stalin aims of making Russia modernized was achieved.
Some of the reasons why the collective farming was failure in the early stages are as follows:-

1. Opposition of kulaks- The kulaks were the capitalist class of the agrarian society, they
employs many farmers under them. Thus they would never want to have the Bolsheviks to have
control over the agriculture for this they killed their animas and destroyed their crops rather than
letting them go into the hands of the Bolsheviks. Due to this only 3% of the agriculture land was
collectivized by the 1928.

2. Insufficient new machinery in the collective farms- Despite the efforts at modernizing
farming there were not enough machineries .This lead to the need for manual labor. Thus not
many peasants could be moved over to work in the industries, leading to slow industrial
development. Even for the peasants who had adequate machines, they were not able to use the
machines properly. They don’t even know how to maintain the machines. As a result, the many

10
E.H Carr, A history of Soviet Russia 177 (1978)

14
machines were not used and eventually got rusty and needed repair; machines which were used
also were frequently under repair due to improper usage and maintenance.

3. People living standards dropped - As the 5 year plans emphasized on heavy industries.
This means that there was lack of industries in the Soviet Union. Consequently there would be
lack of consumer goods and the people working in the small number of the industries would have
low wages. Due to this the standard of living dropped way below to that of revolutions on 1917.

4. Workers were treated harshly- They were punished if work targets not met which
would lead to losing the jobs and housing and food ration cards too. There were rewards for
those who exceeded targets – higher pay, extra food, and special holidays. These targets were
used as an excuse to increase the other workers targets there were no proper tools and equipment
available in the industries. Due to these most of the workers were unable to reach their targets,
consequently making the people unhappy and resent the government

All these things tell that there was a lack of economic success, leading to failure of the
collectivization programme in the early stage. But while looking the collectivization in the long
run it definitely helped the Soviet Union. Some of the reasons how collectivization heped in long
run are as follows:-

1. It aided in introduction of modern farming methods in Russia. Collectivization made it

easier to introduce modern farming methods because many of the equipment and other facilities
were provided by the government. Modern machinery was also eventually introduced in the
collective farming like tractors and combined harvesters on the farms. These finally helped to
make farming more efficient

2. It aided in industrial development in Russia due to collectivization fewer people

required to work on farms and the freed up people moved into the cities to work in the industries
e.g. coal and electricity production increased 5 times between 1928 and1940. This meant that
Russia was able to develop its industries, leading to industrial development. By the end of 1930s,
the Soviet Union had become the second industrial power in the world after the USA.

3 Made USSR a more powerful country with the help of the industries they increased
their weapons, tanks and airplanes. The strong industry was the key factor in the defeat of

15
Germany in the 2nd World War. This led to USSR becoming a strong power, leading to it
becoming one of the two super powers together with USA

4. Provided jobs for the people- In Britain, France and USA, from 1929, there was
massive unemployment due to the Great Depression. In the Soviet Union, however, the 5 years
plan led to building of roads, canals, railways, factories and mines. This meant that many people
were required, leading to increase in employment. The unemployment rate in the USSR thus was
drastically reduced.

16
 CHAPTER– 6
CONCLUSION

The collectivization theory was all about elimination of private ownership. It was an aim
to produce enough food for everyone and free people to factory workers. It was thought that
fewer people would be able to produce more food under the system, but actually productivity
dropped and peasantry was destroyed as a class and a way of life. To satisfy the state's need for
increased food supplies, the First Five-Year Plan called for the organization of the peasantry into
collective units that the authorities could easily control. This collectivization program entailed
compounding the peasants' lands and animals into collective farms restricting the peasants'
movement from these farms. The effect of this restructuring was to reintroduce a kind of serfdom
into the countryside.

In spite of collectivization, production didn’t increase immediately. In fact, the bad

harvests of 1930–1933 led to one of the most devastating famines in Soviet history when over 4
million died. Thus the collectivization process does not led to the increase in production
immediately and was a more kind of failure in early stages due to the resistant of peasants and
kulaks because they do not want to give away their property to state. So many peasants resisted
the collectivization and this resistance was severely punished by exile and deporting many
peasants. But this process of collectivization helped in increase I production in future. Thus it
was success in long run but was a failure in the short run.

17
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 E.H CARR, A HISTORY OF SOVIET RUSSIA (1978)

 Norman Lowe, Mastering modern world history (2013)

Internet sources:

 https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/russia-1900-

to-1939/war-communism/

 https://www.britannica.com/event/New-Economic-Policy-Soviet-history

 http://www.johndclare.net/Russ_Rev_Brett.htm#Collectivization%20of%20Land

 http://factsanddetails.com/russia/Economics_Business_Agriculture/sub9_7b/entry-

5165.html

 www.mrbuddhistory.com/uploads/1/4/9/6/.../textbook_pages_on_collectivisation.pdf

 https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/cccp-ag-lenin.htm

 http://general-history.com/stalins-five-year-plans/

18