What are the causes of collectivization in the USSR. Collectivization results in the ussr
AGRICULTURE COLLECTIVIZATION
The reasons for collectivization. The implementation of grandiose industrialization required a radical restructuring of the agricultural sector. In Western countries, the agrarian revolution, i.e. the system for improving agricultural production preceded the industrial revolution. In the USSR, both of these processes had to be carried out simultaneously. At the same time, some party leaders believed that if the capitalist countries created industry at the expense of the funds received from the exploitation of the colonies, then socialist industrialization could be carried out by exploiting the "inner colony" - the peasantry. The village was considered not only as a source of food, but also as the most important channel for replenishing financial resources for the needs of industrialization. But it’s much easier to pump out funds from several hundred large farms than to deal with millions of small ones. That is why, with the beginning of industrialization, a course was taken towards the collectivization of agriculture - "the implementation of socialist transformations in the countryside."
In November 1929, Pravda published an article by Stalin entitled “The year of the great turning point,” which said “about a fundamental turning point in the development of our agriculture from small and backward individual farming to large and advanced collective farming”. In December, Stalin announced the end of the NEP and the transition to a policy of "eliminating the kulaks as a class." January 5, 1930 issued a decree of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks "On the pace of collectivization and measures to help the state collective farm construction." It set strict deadlines for the completion of collectivization: for the North Caucasus, Lower and Middle Volga - autumn 1930, in extreme cases - spring 1931, for other grain regions - autumn 1931 or no later than spring 1932. All other regions had to "solve the problem of collectivization within the five-year period." Such a formulation oriented toward the end of collectivization by the end of the first five-year plan.
However, this document did not answer the basic questions: what methods of collectivization, how to carry out dispossession, what to do next with dispossessed? And since the village has not yet cooled down from the violence of grain procurement campaigns, the same method, violence, was adopted.
Dispossession. In the village there were two interconnected violent processes: the creation of collective farms and dispossession. The “liquidation of the kulaks” had as its goal, first of all, the provision of a material base for collective farms. From the end of 1929 until the middle of 1930, over 320 thousand peasant farms were dispossessed. Their property worth more than 175 million rubles. transferred to collective farms.
However, the authorities did not give a precise definition of who should be considered fists. In the generally accepted sense, the fist is the one who used hired labor, but the middle peasant who had two cows, or two horses, or a good house could be included in this category. Each district received a dekulakization rate, which amounted to an average of 5-7% of the number of peasant households, but the local authorities, following the example of the first five-year plan, tried to exceed it. Often, not only the middle peasants were written in their fists, but also for some reason of the objectionable poor. To justify these actions, the ominous word was coined. In some areas, the number of dispossessed reached 15-20%.
The elimination of the kulaks as a class, depriving the village of the most enterprising, most independent peasants, undermined the spirit of resistance. In addition, the fate of the dispossessed was to serve as an example to the rest, those who did not want to voluntarily go to the collective farm. Fists were evicted with families, infants, and the elderly. In cold, unheated wagons, with a minimum amount of home belongings, thousands of people traveled to remote areas of the Urals, Siberia, and Kazakhstan. The most active "anti-advisers" were sent to concentration camps.
To assist the local authorities, 25 thousand city communists were sent to the village (“twenty-five thousandths”).
"Dizziness from success." In many areas, especially in Ukraine, the Caucasus and Central Asia, the peasantry resisted mass dispossession. To suppress peasant unrest, regular units of the Red Army were brought in. But most often the peasants used passive forms of protest: they refused to join collective farms and destroyed livestock and equipment in protest. Terrorist acts were also committed against the “twenty-five thousandths” and local collective farm activists. Collective farm holiday. Artist S. Gerasimov.
By the spring of 1930, it became clear to Stalin that the insane collectivization begun at his call threatened with catastrophe. Discontent began to penetrate the army. Stalin made a well-calculated tactical move. On March 2, in Pravda, his article, Vertigo of Success, was published. He laid all the blame for the situation on the performers, local workers, saying that "collective farms cannot be planted by force." After this article, most peasants began to perceive Stalin as a national intercessor. The mass exodus of peasants from collective farms began.
But a step back was made only in order to immediately take a dozen steps forward. In September 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks sent a letter to local party organizations condemning their passive behavior, fear of "excesses" and demanded "to achieve a powerful upsurge in the collective farm movement." In September 1931, collective farms united already 60% of peasant households, in 1934 - 75%.
The results of collectivization. The policy of continuous collectivization led to disastrous results: for 1929-1934. gross grain production decreased by 10%, the number of cattle and horses in 1929-1932. decreased by one third, pigs - 2 times, sheep - 2.5 times.
The extermination of livestock, the ruin of the village by incessant dispossession, the complete disorganization of the work of collective farms in 1932-1933. led to an unprecedented famine, affecting about 25-30 million people. To a large extent, it was provoked by the policy of the authorities. The country's leadership, trying to hide the scale of the tragedy, banned the mention of hunger in the media. Despite its scale, 18 million centners of grain were exported abroad to receive currency for the needs of industrialization.
However, Stalin celebrated the victory: despite the reduction in grain production, its supply to the state doubled. But most importantly, collectivization created the necessary conditions for the implementation of plans for the industrial leap. She put at the disposal of the city a huge number of workers, simultaneously eliminating the agrarian overpopulation, and with a significant decrease in the number of employees, she kept agricultural production at a level that did not allow prolonged hunger and provided industry with the necessary raw materials. Collectivization not only created the conditions for the transfer of funds from the village to the city for the needs of industrialization, but also fulfilled an important political and ideological task, destroying the last island of a market economy - a privately owned peasant economy.
Collective farm peasantry. Village life of the early 30s. proceeded against the background of the horrors of dispossession and the creation of collective farms. These processes led to the elimination of the social gradation of the peasantry. In the village, the kulaks, the middle peasants, and the poor disappeared, as did the generalized concept of the peasant individual. New concepts were introduced into everyday life - the collective farm peasantry, collective farmer, collective farmer.
The situation of the population in the village was much more complicated than in the city. The village was perceived primarily as a supplier of cheap grain and a source of labor. The state was constantly increasing the rate of grain procurements, taking almost half of the harvest from collective farms. The calculation for the grain supplied to the state was made at fixed prices, which during the 30s. remained almost unchanged, while prices for manufactured goods increased by almost 10 times. The remuneration of collective farmers was regulated by the system of workdays. Its size was determined based on the income of the collective farm, i.e. that part of the crop, which remained after settlement with the state and machine-tractor stations (MTS), which provided the collective farms with agricultural equipment. As a rule, collective farm incomes were low and did not provide a living wage. For workdays, peasants received payment in grain or other manufactured products. The collective farmer’s labor was hardly paid for with money.
At the same time, as industrialization progressed, more tractors, combines, cars and other equipment, which was concentrated in MTS, began to enter the village. This helped to partially mitigate the negative consequences of the loss of livestock in the previous period. Young specialists appeared in the village - agronomists, machine operators, who were trained by the country's educational institutions.
In the mid 30s. the situation in agriculture has somewhat stabilized. In February 1935, the government allowed the peasants to have a household plot, one cow, two calves, a pig with piglets, and 10 sheep. Individual farms began to supply their products to the market. The card system has been canceled. Life in the village began to improve gradually, which Stalin did not hesitate to take advantage of, declaring to the whole country: "Life has become better, life has become more fun."
The Soviet village reconciled with the collective farm system, although the peasantry remained the most disenfranchised category of the population. The introduction of passports in the country, which peasants were not supposed to, meant not only the erection of an administrative wall between town and country, but also the actual attachment of peasants to their birthplace, deprivation of their freedom of movement, choice of occupation. From a legal point of view, a collective farmer who did not have a passport was attached to the collective farm in the same way as he once was a serf on the land of his master.
The direct result of forced collectivization was the indifference of collective farmers to socialized property and the results of their own labor.
DECORATION OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF THE USSR In the 1930s
The formation of a totalitarian regime. The grandiose tasks set before the country, requiring centralization and tension of all forces, led to the formation of a political regime, which was later called totalitarian (from the Latin word "integral", "complete"). Under this regime, state power is concentrated in the hands of any one group (usually a political party), which has destroyed democratic freedoms in the country and the possibility of the emergence of the opposition. This ruling group completely subordinates the life of society to its interests and retains power through violence, mass repression, and spiritual enslavement of the population.
In the first half of the XX century. similar regimes were established not only in the USSR, but also in some other countries, which also solved the problem of the modernization spurt.
The core of the totalitarian regime in the USSR was the Communist Party. Party bodies were in charge of the appointment and removal of officials, and nominated candidates for deputies of Soviets at various levels. Only party members occupied all responsible government posts, stood at the head of the army, law enforcement and judicial authorities, and led the national economy. No law could be passed without prior approval by the Politburo. Many state and economic functions were transferred to the party authorities. The Politburo determined the entire foreign and domestic policy of the state, resolved issues of planning and organization of production. Even party symbols acquired official status - the red flag and the party anthem "International" became state ones.
By the end of the 30s. the appearance of the party has also changed. She finally lost the remnants of democracy. In the party ranks, complete "unanimity" reigned. Ordinary party members and even most members of the Central Committee were excluded from the development of party politics, which became the prerogative of the Politburo and the party apparatus.
The ideologization of public life. Party control over the media played a special role, through which official views were disseminated and explained. With the help of the Iron Curtain, the problem of penetrating other ideological views from the outside was solved.
The education system has undergone changes. The structure of the curriculum and the content of the training courses were completely rebuilt. They were now based on the Marxist-Leninist interpretation of not only social science courses, but sometimes also the natural sciences.
Under the undivided party influence was the creative intelligentsia, whose activities, along with the organs of the CPSU (b), were controlled by creative unions. In 1932, the Central Committee of the party adopted a resolution "On the restructuring of literary and artistic organizations." It was decided "to unite all writers who support the platform of Soviet power and aspire to participate in socialist construction, into a single union of Soviet writers. To carry out similar changes in the direction of other forms of art." In 1934, the First All-Union Congress of the Union of Soviet Writers took place. He adopted the charter and elected a board headed by A. M. Gorky.
Work began on the creation of creative unions of artists, composers, filmmakers, who were supposed to unite all professionally working in these areas in order to establish party control over them. For "spiritual" support, the government provided certain material benefits and privileges (using creative houses, workshops, receiving advances during long creative work, providing housing, etc.).
In addition to creative intelligentsia, official mass organizations also covered other categories of the population of the USSR. All employees of enterprises and institutions were in trade unions, which were completely under party control. From the age of 14, young people were united in the ranks of the All-Union Leninist Communist Youth Union (Komsomol, Komsomol), which was declared a reserve and party aide. The younger schoolchildren were members of the October Revolutionary, and the older ones were members of the pioneer organization. Mass associations were created for rationalizers, inventors, women, athletes and other categories of the population.
The formation of the personality cult of Stalin. One of the elements of the political regime of the USSR was the cult of personality of Stalin. December 21, 1929 he was 50 years old. Until that date, it was not customary to publicly celebrate the anniversaries of party and state leaders. Lenin's anniversary was the only exception. But on this day, the Soviet country learned that it had a great leader - Stalin was publicly declared the "first student of Lenin" and the only "leader of the party." The newspaper Pravda was filled with articles, greetings, letters, telegrams from which a stream of flattery poured. The initiative of Pravda was picked up by other newspapers, from metropolitan to regional, magazines, radio, and cinema: the organizer of the October Revolution, the creator of the Red Army and the outstanding commander, the winner of the armies of the White Guards and interventionists, the keeper of the Leninist "general line", the leader of the world proletariat and the great strategist of the five-year plan ...
Stalin began to be called "wise," "great," "brilliant." A "father of peoples" and "best friend of Soviet children" appeared in the country. Academics, artists, workers and party workers challenged each other's palm in praise of Stalin. But everyone was surpassed by the national Kazakh poet Dzhambul, who in the same Pravda lucidly explained to everyone that "Stalin is deeper than the ocean, higher than the Himalayas, brighter than the sun. He is a teacher of the Universe."
Massive repression. Along with ideological institutions, the totalitarian regime also had another reliable support - a system of punitive organs for persecuting dissidents. In the early 30s. the last political processes took place over the former opponents of the Bolsheviks - the former Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries. Almost all of them were shot or sent to prisons and camps. At the end of the 20s. The “Shakhty affair” served as a signal for the development of a struggle against “pests” among the scientific and technical intelligentsia in all sectors of the national economy. Since the early 1930s a massive repressive campaign was launched against the kulaks and the middle peasants. On August 7, 1932, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars adopted the law “On the Protection of Property of State Enterprises, Collective Farms and Cooperation and the Strengthening of Public (Socialist) Property” written by Stalin, which went down in history as the “Five Spikelets” law, according to which even for minor thefts from the collective farm Fields relied on the execution.
Since November 1934, a special meeting was formed at the People's Commissar of Internal Affairs, which was vested with the right to administratively send "enemies of the people" to exile or to labor camps for up to five years. At the same time, the principles of legal proceedings that protected individual rights in the face of the state were discarded. The special meeting was given the right to consider cases in the absence of the accused, without the participation of witnesses, a prosecutor and a lawyer.
The reason for the unfolding of mass repressions in the country was the murder on December 1, 1934 in Leningrad of a member of the Politburo, first secretary of the Leningrad Regional Committee of the CPSU (B.) S. M. Kirov. A few hours after this tragic event, a law was passed on a “simplified procedure” for considering cases of terrorist acts and organizations. According to this law, the investigation was to be conducted in an expedited manner and to finish its work within ten days; the indictment was handed over to the accused one day before the trial in court; cases were heard without the participation of the parties - the prosecutor and the defense attorney; requests for clemency were prohibited, and sentences of execution were carried out immediately after they were announced.
Following this act, other laws followed, toughening punishments and expanding the circle of people subjected to repression. Monstrous was a government decree of April 7, 1935, which ordered "minors, from the age of 12, convicted of theft, violence, bodily harm, murder or attempted murder, to be prosecuted by all means criminal punishment, "including the death penalty. (Subsequently, this law will be used as a method of pressure on the defendants in order to persuade them to give false testimonies in order to protect their children from reprisal.)
Demonstrative lawsuits. Finding a good reason and creating a "legal foundation", Stalin proceeded to the physical elimination of all those dissatisfied with the regime. In 1936, the first of the largest Moscow trials of the leaders of the inner-party opposition took place. The closest associates of Lenin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, and others, appeared on the dock. They were accused of killing Kirov, of trying to kill Stalin and other members of the Politburo, and also to overthrow the Soviet regime. Prosecutor A. Ya. Vyshinsky said: "I demand that I infuriate dogs to be shot - all to one!" The court granted this claim.
In 1937, a second process took place, during which another group of representatives of the "Leninist Guard" was convicted. In the same year, a large group of senior officers was repressed, led by Marshal Tukhachevsky. In March 1938, the third Moscow trial took place. The former head of government Rykov and the party’s “favorite” Bukharin were shot. Each of these processes led to the unwinding of the flywheel of repression for tens of thousands of people, especially for relatives and acquaintances, colleagues, and even just house neighbors. Only in the top leadership were the armies destroyed: out of 5 marshals - 3, out of 5 commanders of the 1st rank - 3, out of 10 commanders of the 2nd rank - 10, out of 57 commanders of the corps - 50, out of 186 divisional commanders - 154. After them, 40 thousand were repressed . officers of the Red Army.
At the same time, a secret department was created in the NKVD, which was engaged in the destruction of political opponents of the government who found themselves abroad. In August 1940, on the orders of Stalin, Trotsky was killed in Mexico. The victims of the Stalinist regime were many figures of the white movement, monarchist emigration.
According to official, clearly underestimated data, in 1930-1953. 3.8 million people were repressed on charges of counter-revolutionary, anti-state activity, of which 786 thousand were shot.
The constitution of "victorious socialism." The Great Terror played the role of a monstrous mechanism by which Stalin tried to eliminate the social tension in the country caused by the negative consequences of his own economic and political decisions. It was impossible to admit the mistakes made, and in order to hide the failure, and therefore to maintain his unlimited dominance over the party, the country and the international communist movement, it was necessary by all means of intimidation to wean people from doubting, to accustom them to see what actually did not exist. The logical continuation of this policy was the adoption of the new Constitution of the USSR, which served as a kind of screen designed to cover up the totalitarian regime with democratic and socialist clothes.
The new constitution was adopted on December 5, 1936 at the VIII All-Union Extraordinary Congress of Soviets. Stalin, justifying the need to adopt a new constitution, said that Soviet society "has implemented what Marxists call the first phase of communism - socialism." The economic criterion for building socialism, the "Stalinist constitution" proclaimed the abolition of private property (and therefore the exploitation of man by man) and the creation of two forms of ownership - state and collective-farm cooperative. The political basis of the USSR were recognized by the Soviets of Workers' Deputies. The Communist Party was assigned the role of the leading core of society; Marxism-Leninism was declared an official, state ideology.
The Constitution provided all citizens of the USSR, regardless of their gender and nationality, with basic democratic rights and freedoms — freedom of conscience, speech, press, assembly, inviolability of person and home, as well as direct equal suffrage.
The supreme governing body of the country was the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, consisting of two chambers - the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities. Between its sessions, executive and legislative powers were to be exercised by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. The USSR included 11 union republics: Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Azerbaijan, Georgian, Armenian, Turkmen, Uzbek, Tajik, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz.
But in real life, most of the norms of the constitution turned out to be an empty declaration. And socialism “in the Stalinist way” had a very formal resemblance to a Marxist understanding of socialism. Its purpose was not to create economic, political and cultural prerequisites for the free development of each member of society, but to build up the power of the state by infringing on the interests of most of its citizens.
NATIONAL POLICY AT THE END OF THE 1920-1930s
Offensive to Islam. In the second half of the 20s. the attitude of the Bolsheviks towards the Muslim religion has changed. Church land holdings, the proceeds of which went to the maintenance of mosques, schools and hospitals, were abolished. The lands were transferred to the peasantry, schools that gave religious education (madrassas) were replaced by secular ones, and hospitals were included in the state healthcare system. Most mosques were closed. Sharia courts were also abolished. The clergymen removed from their duties were forced to publicly repent that they "deceived the people."
In the cities, as directed by the Center, a campaign has begun to eradicate Muslim traditions that do not meet the norms of "communist morality." In 1927, on International Women's Day on March 8, the women gathered for the rally defiantly tore off the burqa and threw it right into the fire. For many believers, this sight was a real shock. The fate of the first representatives of this movement was deplorable. Their appearance in public places caused an explosion of indignation, they were beaten, and sometimes killed.
Noisy propaganda campaigns were conducted against ritual prayers and the celebration of Ramadan. An official decree on this subject said that these humiliating and reactionary customs did not allow workers to "take an active part in building socialism," because they contradict the principles of labor discipline and the planned principles of the economy. Polygamy and the payment of kalym (ransom for the bride) were also banned, as incompatible with Soviet family law. Making a pilgrimage to Mecca, which every Muslim is obligated to make at least once in a lifetime, has become impossible.
All these measures caused fierce discontent, which, however, did not take on the scale of mass resistance. Nevertheless, several Chechen imams declared a holy war against the enemies of Allah. In the years 1928-1929. uprisings broke out among the highlanders of the North Caucasus. In Central Asia, the Basmach movement again raised its head. These speeches were suppressed with the help of army units.
The repression that hit Muslims led people to stop openly demonstrating their commitment to Islam. However, Muslim faith and customs never disappeared from family life. Underground religious brotherhoods arose, whose members secretly performed religious rites.
Sovietization of national cultures. In the late 1920s and 1930s the course on the development of national languages \u200b\u200band culture was curtailed. In 1926, Stalin reproached the Ukrainian People’s Commissar for Education that his policy led to a separation of Ukrainian culture from the Soviet culture, which is based on Russian culture with "its highest achievement - Leninism."
First of all, the use of local languages \u200b\u200bin state institutions was abolished in national education systems. In primary and secondary schools, compulsory study of the second, the Russian language, was introduced. At the same time, the number of schools where teaching was conducted only in Russian increased. Higher education teaching was translated into Russian. The only exceptions were Georgia and Armenia, whose peoples jealously guarded the primacy of their languages.
At the same time, the official languages \u200b\u200bof the Caucasus and Central Asia went through a double reform of the alphabet. In 1929, all local writing systems, mainly Arabic, were translated into Latin script. Ten years later, the Cyrillic alphabet was introduced - the Russian alphabet. These reforms virtually nullified previous efforts to spread literacy and written culture among the population.
Another source of familiarization with the Russian language was the army. In the 1920s, with the introduction of universal military service, attempts were made to create ethnically homogeneous units. However, even then, the commanders were usually either Russians or Ukrainians. In 1938, the practice of forming national military units was eliminated. Recruits were sent to compounds with a mixed ethnic composition, housed far from their homeland. Russian became the language of military training and command.
The recognition of the Russian language as the official language of the USSR pursued not only ideological goals. Firstly, it facilitated the possibility of interethnic communication, which was important in the context of the ongoing economic modernization. Secondly, this facilitated the life of the Russian population in the national republics, the number of which increased significantly in connection with the implementation of the five-year plans.
And, thirdly, this made it possible for parents who had far-reaching plans for the future of their children to send them to schools where they could become familiar with the state language and thus gain advantages over their compatriots. Therefore, national elites did not protest against language innovations.
However, raising the status of the Russian language did not at all mean a return to the tsarist policy of Russification. The anti-religious campaign and collectivization of agriculture dealt a crushing blow to all national cultures, which were predominantly rural and contained a strong religious element, including Russian culture. Most of the Russian villages lost Orthodox churches, priests, believers, hardworking peasants, the traditional land tenure system, lost the most important elements of Russian national culture. The same can be said about Belarus and Ukraine. In addition, the Russian language has now become the spokesman of the multinational party Soviet culture, and not Russian in its traditional sense.
"Leveling the economic level of national suburbs." Destruction of national personnel. One of the main tasks of industrialization and collectivization, the party proclaimed raising the level of economic development of national suburbs. To accomplish this task, the same universal methods were used, which often completely did not take into account national traditions and features of the economic activities of different peoples.
A case in point was Kazakhstan, where collectivization was primarily associated with intensified attempts to force the nomadic people to switch to arable farming. In the years 1929-1932. cattle, and especially sheep, were literally destroyed in Kazakhstan. The number of Kazakhs involved in cattle breeding, from 80% of the total population decreased to almost 25%. The actions of the authorities were so inconsistent with national traditions that the response to them was fierce armed resistance. The Basmachis, who disappeared in the late 1920s, reappeared. Now they were joined by those who refused to join the collective farms. The rebels killed the collective farm authorities and party workers. Hundreds of thousands of Kazakhs with their herds went abroad to Chinese Turkestan.
By proclaiming a policy of "leveling the economic level of the national suburbs," the central government at the same time demonstrated colonial manners. The first five-year plan, for example, included a reduction in cereal crops in Uzbekistan, and cotton production expanded to an incredible size. Most of it was to become raw materials for the factories of the European part of Russia. Such a policy threatened to turn Uzbekistan into a raw materials appendage and provoked strong resistance. The leaders of the Uzbek Republic developed an alternative plan for economic development, which suggested greater independence and versatility of the republican economy. This plan was rejected, and its authors were arrested and shot on charges of "bourgeois nationalism."
With the beginning of industrialization and collectivization, the principle of “indigenousization” has also undergone adjustment. Since policy changes in the economy and centralization of management were by no means always met with joy by local leaders, they increasingly began to send managers from the Center. Leaders of national entities and cultural figures who tried to continue the policies of the twenties were repressed. In 1937-1938 In fact, the party and economic leaders of the national republics were completely replaced. Many leading figures in education, literature and art were repressed. Usually, local leaders were replaced by Russians sent directly from Moscow, sometimes by more “intelligent” representatives of indigenous peoples. The most egregious was the situation in Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, where the republican political bureau disappeared in full force.
Industrial construction in national areas. Nevertheless, the economic modernization that began in the country changed the face of national republics. The policy of creating industrial centers based on local raw materials has brought positive results.
In Belarus, mainly woodworking, paper, leather and glass enterprises were built. Already in the years of the first five-year plan, it began to turn into an industrial republic: 40 new enterprises were built, mainly for the production of consumer goods. The share of industrial production in the national economy of the republic was 53%. During the years of the second five-year plan, new industries were created in Belarus: fuel (peat), machine-building, and chemical.
Over the years of the first five-year plan, 400 enterprises were commissioned in the Ukrainian SSR, among them the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station, the Kharkov Tractor Plant, the Kramatorsk Heavy Engineering Plant, and others. The share of industrial production in the republic’s economy grew to 72.4%. This testified to the transformation of Ukraine into a highly developed industrial republic.
In Central Asia, new ginneries, silk factories, food factories, canneries and others were built. Power plants were built in Ferghana, Bukhara and Chirchik. The Tashkent factory of agricultural machinery began to work. A sulfur plant was built in Turkmenistan and the production of mirabilite in the Kara-Bogaz-Gol Bay began.
An important role in the industrialization was played by the Turkestan-Siberian Railway. Its construction was completed in 1930. Turksib connected Siberia, rich in bread, wood and coal, with cotton growing regions of Central Asia and Kazakhstan.
In the RSFSR, much attention was paid to the development of industry in the autonomous republics: Bashkir, Tatar, Yakutsk, Buryat-Mongol. While investments in the industry of the RSFSR as a whole during the first five-year period grew 4.9 times, in Bashkiria - 7.5 times, in Tatarstan - 5.2 times. During the years of the second five-year plan, even more significant funds were allocated for the development of autonomous republics, regions, and national districts. A powerful woodworking industry was created in the Komi Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, industrial exploitation of the oil and coal wealth of the region began, and oil wells were built in Ukhta. The development of oil reserves in Bashkiria and Tatarstan has begun. Extraction of non-ferrous metals in Yakutia, development of the natural resources of Dagestan, North Ossetia expanded.
Often, industrial enterprises in the national suburbs were built by the whole country. Workers and builders arrived here from Moscow, Leningrad, Kharkov, from the Urals and from other large industrial centers. The internationalism proclaimed by the party was not just a propaganda slogan. Representatives of various nationalities grew, studied, worked, and created families nearby. In the 30s. In the USSR there was a multinational community of people with their social and cultural specifics, behavioral stereotype, and mentality. The artistic expression of the spirit of internationalism that reigned in Soviet society was the most popular film "Pig and Shepherd", which tells about the love of a Russian girl and a guy from Dagestan.
SOVIET CULTURE 1930s
Education Development. The 30s entered the history of our country as a period of the implementation of the "cultural revolution". By this concept was meant not only a significant increase, compared with the pre-revolutionary period, of the educational level of the people and the degree of their involvement in the achievements of culture. Another component of the "cultural revolution" was the undivided supremacy of Marxist-Leninist teaching in science, education and all areas of creative activity.
In the context of the economic modernization carried out in the USSR, special attention was paid to improving the professional level of the population. At the same time, the totalitarian regime demanded to change the content of school education and upbringing, for pedagogical "liberties" of the 1920s. were unsuitable for the mission of creating a "new man."
In the early 30s. The Central Committee of the party and the Council of People's Commissars adopted a number of resolutions on the school. In the 1930/31 school year, the country began the transition to universal compulsory primary education in the amount of 4 classes. By 1937, seven-year education became mandatory. The old methods of training and education condemned after the revolution were returned to school: lessons, subjects, a solid schedule, grades, strict discipline and a whole gamut of punishments, up to and including exclusion. School programs were revised, new stable textbooks were created. In 1934, the teaching of geography and civil history was restored on the basis of Marxist-Leninist assessments of events and phenomena.
School construction was widely deployed. Only during the years 1933-1937. more than 20 thousand new schools opened in the USSR, about the same as in tsarist Russia over 200 years. By the end of the 30s. over 35 million students attended school desks. According to the 1939 census, literacy in the USSR was 87.4%.
The system of secondary specialized and higher education was developing rapidly. By the end of the 30s. The Soviet Union came out on top in the world in the number of pupils and students. Dozens of secondary and higher educational institutions arose in Belarus, the republics of Transcaucasia and Central Asia, and the centers of the autonomous republics and regions. The circulation of books in 1937 reached 677.8 million copies; books were published in 110 languages \u200b\u200bof the peoples of the Union. Mass libraries were widely developed: by the end of the 30s. their number exceeded 90 thousand.
Science under the ideological press. However, both education and science, as well as literature and art, were ideologically attacked in the USSR. Stalin said that all sciences, including natural and mathematical, are political in nature. Scientists who disagree with this statement were persecuted in the press and arrested.
A bitter struggle unfolded in biological science. Under the guise of protecting Darwinism and Michurin theory, a group of biologists and philosophers, led by T. D. Lysenko, opposed genetics, declaring it to be "bourgeois science." The brilliant designs of Soviet geneticists turned out to be curtailed; subsequently, many of them (N. I. Vavilov, N. K. Koltsov, A. S. Serebrovsky, etc.) were repressed.
But Stalin paid close attention to historical science. He took personal control of textbooks on the history of Russia, which began to be called the history of the USSR. According to Stalin's instructions, the past began to be interpreted solely as a chronicle of the class struggle of the oppressed with the exploiters. At the same time, a new branch of science appeared, which became one of the leading in the Stalinist ideological construction - the "history of the party." In 1938, the Short Course on the History of the CPSU (B.) Was released, which Stalin not only carefully edited, but also wrote one of the paragraphs for him. The publication of this work laid the foundation for the design of a single concept for the development of our country, which all Soviet scientists should have followed. And although some facts in the textbook were rigged and distorted in order to exaggerate the role of Stalin, the Central Committee of the party in its resolution rated the Short Course as "a guide representing an official, verified Central Committee of the CPSU (b) interpretation of the main issues of the history of the CPSU (b) and Marxism- Leninism, which does not allow any arbitrary interpretation. " Every word, every provision of the Short Course should have been perceived as the ultimate truth. In practice, this led to the defeat of all existing scientific schools, a break with the traditions of Russian historical science.
The successes of Soviet science. Ideological dogmas and strict party control have most negatively affected the state of the humanities. But the representatives of the natural sciences, although they experienced the negative consequences of the intervention of party and punitive bodies, still managed to achieve noticeable successes, continuing the glorious traditions of Russian science.
The Soviet physical school, recognized by the names of S. I. Vavilov (problems of optics), A. F. Ioffe (study of the physics of crystals and semiconductors), P. L. Kapitsa (research in the field of microphysics), L. I. Mandelstam ( works in the field of radiophysics and optics) and others. Soviet physicists began an intensive study of the atomic nucleus (L. D. Mysovsky, D. D. Ivanenko, D. V. Skobeltsyn, B. V. and I. V. Kurchatov, etc.) .
A significant contribution to applied science was made by the work of chemical scientists N. D. Zelinsky, N. S. Kurnakov, A. E. Favorsky, A. N. Bakh, S. V. Lebedev. A method for the production of synthetic rubber was discovered, the production of artificial fibers, plastics, valuable organic products, etc. began.
The world achievements were the work of Soviet biologists - N. I. Vavilov, D. N. Pryanishnikov, V. R. Williams, V. S. Pustovoit.
Significant successes were achieved by Soviet mathematical science, astronomy, mechanics, and physiology.
Widespread geological and geographical research. Mineral deposits were discovered - oil between the Volga and the Urals, new coal reserves in the Podmoskovny and Kuznetsk basins, iron ore in the Urals and in other areas. Actively explored and mastered the North. This allowed a sharp reduction in the import of certain types of raw materials.
Socialist realism. In the 30s. The process of eliminating disagreement in artistic culture was completed. Art, completely subordinate to party censorship, was obliged to follow one artistic direction - socialist realism. The political essence of this method was that the masters of art had to reflect Soviet reality not as it really was, but as the powers that be idealized.
Art enforced myths, and most Soviet people readily accepted them. After all, since the revolution, people have lived in an atmosphere of belief that a grandiose social upheaval should bring about a beautiful “tomorrow”, although “today” was difficult, painfully difficult. And art, along with Stalin's encouraging promises, created the illusion that a happy time had already come.
In the minds of people there was a blurring of the boundaries between the desired "bright future" and reality. This state was used by the authorities in order to create a socio-psychological monolithic society, which, in turn, made it possible to manipulate it, constructing either labor enthusiasm, or mass indignation towards "enemies of the people", or popular love for its leader.
Soviet cinema. A particularly significant contribution to the transformation of people's consciousness was made by cinema, which has become the most popular form of art. Events of the 20s, and then the 30s. reflected in the minds of people not only through their own experience, but also through their interpretation in the movies. The documentary chronicle was watched by the whole country. It was seen by spectators, sometimes unable to read, unable to analyze events deeply, they perceived the surrounding life not only as cruel visible reality, but also as joyful euphoria pouring from the screen. The stunning effect of Soviet documentary films on mass consciousness is also explained by the fact that brilliant masters worked in this field (D. Vertov, E.K. Tisse, E.I. Shub).
Not far behind documentary and art cinema. A significant number of feature films were devoted to historical and revolutionary topics: "Chapaev" (dir. Brothers Vasiliev), a trilogy about Maxim (dir. G. M. Kozintsev and L. 3. Trauberg), "We are from Kronstadt" (dir. E. L. Dzigan).
In 1931 the first Soviet sound film “A ticket to life” (dir. N.V. Ekk) was released, telling about the upbringing of the new Soviet generation. The films of S. A. Gerasimov "The Seven Brave", "Komsomolsk", "Teacher" were devoted to the same problems. In 1936, the first color film "Grunya Kornakova" appeared (dir. N.V. Ekk).
In the same period, the traditions of Soviet children's and youth cinema were laid. Film versions of the famous works of V.P. Kataev ("The Lone Sail Whitens"), A.P. Gaidar ("Timur and His Team"), A.N. Tolstoy ("The Golden Key") appear. For children, wonderful animated films were produced.
G.V. Aleksandrov’s musical comedy films “Circus”, “Cheerful Guys”, “Volga-Volga”, I. A. Pyryeva - “Rich Bride”, “Tractor Drivers”, “Pig and Shepherd” were especially popular among people of all ages. .
The favorite genre of Soviet filmmakers became historical paintings. The films “Peter I” (dir. V. M. Petrov), “Alexander Nevsky” (dir. S. M. Eisenstein), “Minin and Pozharsky” (dir. V. I. Pudovkin) and others were very popular.
Vivid images in films of the 30s were created by the talented actors B. M. Andreev, P. M. Aleinikov, B. A. Babochkin, M. I. Zharov, N. A. Kryuchkov, M. A. Ladynina, T. F. Makarova, L.P. Orlova, etc.
Musical and visual arts. The country's musical life was connected with the names of S. S. Prokofiev, D. D. Shostakovich, A. I. Khachaturian, T. N. Khrennikov, D. B. Kabalevsky, I. O. Dunaevsky. Groups were created that later glorified the Soviet musical culture: the Quartet them. Beethoven, the Big State Symphony Orchestra, the State Philharmonic Orchestra, etc. At the same time, any pioneering searches in opera, symphony, chamber music were resolutely suppressed. When assessing certain musical works, personal aesthetic tastes of party leaders, which were extremely low, affected. This is evidenced by the rejection of the "top" music of D. D. Shostakovich. The opera Katerina Izmaylova and the ballet The Golden Age were subjected to harsh criticism in the press for “formalism”.
The most democratic branch of musical creativity, the song branch, reached its peak. In this field, talented composers worked - I.O. Dunaevsky, B.A. Mokrousov, M.I. Blanter, the Pokrass brothers and others. Their works had a great influence on contemporaries. Simple, easily remembered melodies of the songs of these authors were well-known to everyone: they sounded at home and on the street, poured from movie screens and from reproducers. And along with peppy major music, uncomplicated verses sounded glorifying the homeland, labor, and Stalin. The pathos of these songs did not correspond to the realities of life, but their romantic and revolutionary elation had a strong impact on a person.
Fidelity to socialist realism should have been demonstrated by masters of fine art. The main criteria for evaluating the artist were not his professional skills and creative personality, but the ideological orientation of the plot. Hence the neglect of the genre of still life, landscape and other "petty-bourgeois" excesses, although such talented masters as P. P. Konchalovsky, A. V. Lentulov, and M. S. Saryan worked in this area.
Leading now are other artists. Among them, the main place was taken by B.V. Johanson. His paintings "Rabfak goes (Vuzovtsy)", "Interrogation of the Communists" and others became classics of socialist realism. A. A. Deineka worked a lot, creating his famous poetic canvas “Future Pilots”, Yu. I. Pimenov (“New Moscow”), M. V. Nesterov (a series of portraits of the Soviet intelligentsia) and others.
At the same time, portraits, sculptures and busts of Stalin became an indispensable attribute of every city, every institution.
Literature. Theater. Strict party dictatorship and comprehensive censorship could not but influence the general level of mass literary production. One-day works appeared that looked more like editorials in newspapers. But, nevertheless, even in these years, which were unfavorable for free creativity, Russian Soviet literature was represented by talented writers who created significant works. In 1931, A. M. Gorky finally returned to his homeland. Here he finished his novel "The Life of Klim Samghin", wrote the plays "Egor Bulychov and others", "Dostigaev and others." A.N. Tolstoy also put the last point in the trilogy "Walking through agony" at home, created the novel "Peter I" and other works.
M. A. Sholokhov, the future Nobel Prize laureate, wrote the novel "Quiet Don" and the first part of "Virgin Soil Upturned". M. A. Bulgakov worked on the novel "The Master and Margarita" (although, then, it did not reach the general reader). Generous talent was noted by the works of V. A. Kaverin, L. M. Leonov, A. P. Platonov, K. G. Paustovsky and many other writers. There was excellent children's literature - books by K.I. Chukovsky, S. Ya. Marshak, A.P. Gaidar, A.L. Barto, S.V. Mikhalkov, L.A. Kassil, etc.
Since the late 20s. plays on the stage of the theater were confirmed by Soviet playwrights: N.F. Pogodin ("The Man with the Gun"), A.E. Korneychuk ("The Death of the Squadron", "Plato Krechet"), V.V. Vishnevsky ("Optimistic Tragedy"), A. N. Arbuzova ("Tanya") and others. The repertoire of all theaters of the country included Gorky's plays written in different years - "Enemies", "Petty Bourgeois", "Summer Residents", "Barbaras" and others.
The most important feature of the cultural revolution was the active introduction of Soviet people to art. This was achieved not only by increasing the number of theaters, cinemas, philharmonic halls, concert halls, but also thanks to the development of amateur performances. Clubs, palaces of culture, houses of children's creativity were created throughout the country; grandiose reviews of folk talents and amateur art exhibitions were held.
FOREIGN POLICY OF THE SOVIET UNION In the 1930s
Change in the foreign policy of the USSR. In 1933, the Nazis came to power in Germany, not hiding their intentions to begin the struggle for the redivision of the world. The USSR was forced to change its foreign policy. First of all, the provision was revised, according to which all "imperialist" states were perceived as real enemies, ready at any moment to start a war against the Soviet Union. At the end of 1933, the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, developed a comprehensive plan for creating a collective security system in Europe. From that moment until 1939, Soviet foreign policy acquired an anti-German orientation. Its main goal was the desire for an alliance with democratic countries in order to isolate fascist Germany and Japan. This course was largely connected with the activities of the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs M. M. Litvinov.
The successful results of the new course were the establishment in November 1933 of diplomatic relations with the United States and the admission of the USSR in 1934 to the League of Nations, where he immediately became a permanent member of its Council. This meant the formal return of the country to the world community as a great power. It is fundamentally important that the entry of the Soviet Union into the League of Nations took place on its terms: all disputes, primarily over royal debts, were resolved in favor of the USSR.
In May 1935, an agreement was signed between the USSR and France on assistance in the event of a possible attack by any aggressor. But mutual obligations were in fact ineffective, since the agreement was not accompanied by any military agreements. Then a mutual assistance agreement was signed with Czechoslovakia.
In 1935, the USSR condemned the introduction of universal military service in Germany and the Italian attack on Ethiopia. And after the introduction of German troops into the demilitarized Rhine region, the Soviet Union proposed the League of Nations to take measures to suppress violations of international obligations. But the voice of the USSR was not heard.
The course of the Comintern to create a united anti-fascist front. For the implementation of its foreign policy plans, the USSR actively used the Comintern. Until 1933, Stalin considered the main task of the Comintern to organize support for his domestic political course in the international arena. The most harsh criticism of the Stalinist methods sounded from the side of world social democracy. Therefore, Stalin declared the Social Democrats the main enemy of the Communists of all countries, regarding them as accomplices of fascism. These Comintern installations in practice led to a split in anti-fascist forces, which greatly facilitated the Nazis' coming to power in Germany.
In 1933, along with a revision of the Soviet foreign policy, the Comintern’s attitudes also changed. The development of a new strategic line was led by G. Dimitrov, the hero and winner of the Leipzig process launched by the Nazis against the Communists. The VII Congress of the Comintern, which took place in the summer of 1935, approved the new tactics. The Communists proclaimed the creation of a united anti-fascist front to prevent a world war as their main task. To this end, the Communists had to organize cooperation with all forces - from the Social Democrats to the liberals. At the same time, the creation of an anti-fascist front and widespread anti-war actions were closely linked to the struggle for the security of the Soviet Union. Congress warned that in the event of an attack on the USSR, the Communists would call the workers "by all means to promote the victory of the Red Army over the imperialist armies."
The first attempt to implement the new tactics of the Comintern in practice was made in 1936 in Spain, when General Franco raised a fascist rebellion against the republican government. The USSR openly declared its support for the republic. Soviet military equipment, two thousand advisers, as well as a significant number of volunteers from among military specialists, were sent to Spain. Events in Spain clearly showed the need for joint efforts in the fight against fascism, which was gaining strength. But democracies were still weighing which regime was more dangerous for democracy - fascist or communist.
Far Eastern policy of the USSR. Despite the complexity of the European foreign policy, the situation on the western borders of the USSR was relatively calm. At the same time, on its Far Eastern borders, diplomatic and political conflicts spilled over into direct military clashes.
The first military conflict occurred in the summer and fall of 1929 in northern Manchuria. The CER was the stumbling block. According to the 1924 agreement between the USSR and the Beijing government of China, the railway passed under the joint Soviet-Chinese management. But by the end of the 20s. the Chinese administration was almost completely supplanted by Soviet specialists, while the road itself actually became the property of the Soviet Union. This situation became possible due to the unstable political situation in China. But in 1928, the government of Chiang Kai-shek came to power, which began to pursue a policy of unification of all Chinese territories. It tried by force to regain its lost ground on the CER. Armed conflict arose. Soviet troops defeated the Chinese border troops in the Chinese territory, which began the fighting.
At this time, in the Far East, represented by Japan, the world community received a powerful hotbed of fomentation of war. Having seized Manchuria in 1931, Japan posed a threat to the Far Eastern borders of the Soviet Union; moreover, the USSR-owned CER was in the territory controlled by Japan. The Japanese threat forced the USSR and China to restore their diplomatic relations.
In November 1936, Germany and Japan signed the Anti-Comintern Pact, which was then joined by Italy and Spain. In July 1937, Japan launched a large-scale aggression against China. In this situation, the USSR and China went to a mutual rapprochement. In August 1937, a non-aggression pact was concluded between them. After signing the treaty, the Soviet Union began to provide technical and material assistance to China. In battles on the side of the Chinese army, Soviet instructors and pilots fought.
In the summer of 1938, armed clashes broke out between Japanese and Soviet troops on the Soviet-Manchu border. A fierce battle took place in the area of \u200b\u200bLake Hassan, not far from Vladivostok. From Japan, this was the first reconnaissance in battle. She showed that she was unlikely to be able to take off the Soviet borders. Nevertheless, in May 1939, Japanese troops invaded the territory of Mongolia in the area of \u200b\u200bthe Khalkhin Gol River. Since 1936, the Soviet Union was linked to Mongolia by an alliance treaty. True to its obligations, the USSR introduced its troops into the territory of Mongolia.
Munich agreement. Meanwhile, the fascist powers carried out new territorial seizures in Europe. In mid-May 1938, German troops concentrated on the border with Czechoslovakia. The Soviet leadership was ready to help her without France, but on condition that she herself asked the USSR about it. However, Czechoslovakia still hoped for the support of the Western allies.
In September, when the situation escalated to the limit, the leaders of England and France arrived in Munich to negotiate with Germany and Italy. Neither Czechoslovakia nor the USSR were admitted to the conference. The Munich agreement finally fixed the course of the Western powers towards the "pacification" of the fascist aggressors, satisfying Germany's claims to tear off the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. Nevertheless, the Soviet Union was ready to assist Czechoslovakia, guided by the charter of the League of Nations. For this, it was necessary that Czechoslovakia apply to the Council of the League of Nations with a corresponding request. But the ruling circles of Czechoslovakia did not do this.
The hopes of the USSR for the possibility of creating a collective security system were finally dispelled after the signing of the Anglo-German and in September of the same year the Franco-German declarations, which were essentially non-aggression pacts. In these documents, the contracting parties declared their desire to "never again wage war against each other." The Soviet Union, seeking to protect itself from a possible military conflict, began to search for a new foreign policy line.
Soviet-Anglo-French negotiations. After the conclusion of the Munich Agreement, the heads of government of England and France proclaimed the offensive of an "era of peace" in Europe. Using the connivance of the Western powers, Hitler sent troops to Prague on March 15, 1939, and completely liquidated Czechoslovakia as an independent state, and on March 23 captured the Memel region, which was part of Lithuania. At the same time, Germany made demands on Poland to join Danzig, which had the status of a free city, and part of Polish territory. In April 1939, Italy occupied Albania. This somewhat sobered up the ruling circles of England and France and forced them to agree to the proposal of the Soviet Union to begin negotiations and conclude an agreement on measures to curb German aggression.
On August 12, after lengthy delays, representatives of England and France arrived in Moscow. It suddenly turned out that the British did not have the authority to negotiate and sign an agreement. Both missions were led by minor military figures, while the Soviet delegation was led by Commissar of Defense Marshal K.E. Voroshilov.
The Soviet side presented a detailed plan of joint action by the armed forces of the USSR, England and France against the aggressor. The Red Army, in accordance with this plan, was to set up 136 divisions, 5 thousand heavy guns, 9-10 thousand tanks and 5-5.5 thousand combat aircraft in Europe. The British delegation said that in the event of a war, England would initially send to the continent only 6 divisions.
The Soviet Union did not have a common border with Germany. Consequently, he could take part in repelling aggression only if the allies of England and France — Poland and Romania — let Soviet troops pass through their territory. Meanwhile, neither the British nor the French did anything to induce the Polish and Romanian governments to agree to the passage of Soviet troops. On the contrary, members of the military delegations of the Western powers were warned by their governments that this crucial issue for the whole matter should not be discussed in Moscow. The negotiations deliberately dragged on. The French and English delegations followed the instructions of their governments to negotiate slowly, "to strive to reduce the military agreement to the most general terms."
Rapprochement of the USSR and Germany. Hitler, not abandoning the forceful solution of the "Polish question", also proposed that the USSR begin negotiations on a non-aggression treaty and delimitation of spheres of influence in Eastern Europe. Stalin faced a difficult choice: either to reject Hitler’s proposals and thereby agree to the withdrawal of German troops to the borders of the Soviet Union in the event of Poland’s defeat in the war with Germany, or to conclude agreements with Germany that would enable the USSR’s borders to be moved far west and to some extent time to avoid war. The attempts of the Western powers to push Germany to war with the Soviet Union, as well as Hitler’s desire to expand his "living space" at the expense of the eastern lands were not a secret for the Soviet leadership. Moscow was aware of the completion of the preparation of the German troops for an attack on Poland and the possible defeat of the Polish troops due to the clear superiority of the German army over the Polish.
The more difficult negotiations were with the Anglo-French delegation in Moscow, the more Stalin was inclined to conclude that it was necessary to sign an agreement with Germany. It was necessary to take into account the fact that from May 1939 on the territory of Mongolia, military operations of the Soviet-Mongolian troops against the Japanese were conducted. The extremely unfavorable prospect of waging war on both the eastern and western borders loomed before the Soviet Union.
On August 23, 1939, the whole world was shocked by shocking news: USSR People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs V. M. Molotov (appointed to this post in May 1939) and German Foreign Minister I. Ribbentrop signed a non-aggression agreement. This fact was a complete surprise for the Soviet people. But no one knew the most important thing - secret protocols were attached to the agreement, in which the division of Eastern Europe into spheres of influence between Moscow and Berlin was fixed. According to the protocols, a demarcation line was established between German and Soviet troops in Poland; the Baltic states, Finland and Bessarabia belonged to the sphere of influence of the USSR.
Undoubtedly, at that time the treaty was beneficial to both countries. He allowed Hitler to begin the capture of the first bastion in the east without unnecessary complications and at the same time convince his generals that Germany would not have to fight on several fronts at once. Stalin gained time in order to strengthen the country's defense, as well as the opportunity to push aside the initial position of a potential enemy and restore the state within the borders of the former Russian Empire.
The conclusion of the Soviet-German agreements thwarted the attempts of the Western powers to draw the USSR into the war with Germany and, conversely, made it possible to switch the direction of German aggression primarily to the West. The Soviet-German rapprochement introduced a certain discord in relations between Germany and Japan, eliminated the threat of war on two fronts for the USSR.
Having settled affairs in the west, the Soviet Union intensified military operations in the east. In late August, Soviet troops under the command of G.K. Zhukov surrounded and defeated the 6th Japanese army on the river. Khalkhin Gol. The Japanese government was forced to sign a peace agreement in Moscow, according to which the fighting ceased on September 16, 1939. The threat of escalating war in the Far East has been eliminated.
What you need to know about this topic:
Socio-economic and political development of Russia at the beginning of the XX century. Nicholas II.
The domestic policy of tsarism. Nicholas II. The intensification of repression. "Police Socialism."
Russian-Japanese war. Reasons, move, results.
Revolution of 1905 - 1907 Character, driving forces and features of the Russian revolution of 1905-1907 stages of the revolution. The causes of defeat and the significance of the revolution.
Elections to the State Duma. I State Duma. The agrarian question in the Duma. Acceleration of the Duma. II State Duma. The coup d'etat June 3, 1907
Third June political system. Electoral Law June 3, 1907 III State Duma. The alignment of political forces in the Duma. The activities of the Duma. Government terror. The decline of the labor movement in 1907-1910
Stolypin agrarian reform.
IV State Duma. Party composition and Duma factions. The activities of the Duma.
The political crisis in Russia on the eve of the war. Labor movement in the summer of 1914. The crisis of the upper.
The international situation of Russia at the beginning of the XX century.
The beginning of the First World War. The origin and nature of the war. The entry of Russia into the war. The attitude to the war of parties and classes.
The course of hostilities. Strategic forces and plans of the parties. The results of the war. The role of the Eastern Front in the First World War.
The Russian economy during the First World War.
The workers 'and peasants' movement in 1915-1916 The revolutionary movement in the army and navy. The growth of anti-war sentiment. The formation of the bourgeois opposition.
Russian culture of the 19th - early 20th centuries
The aggravation of socio-political contradictions in the country in January-February 1917. The beginning, background and nature of the revolution. The uprising in Petrograd. The formation of the Petrograd Soviet. Provisional Committee of the State Duma. Order N I. Formation of the Provisional Government. The abdication of Nicholas II. The causes of dual power and its essence. The February coup in Moscow, at the front, in the province.
From February to October. The policy of the Provisional Government regarding war and peace, on agricultural, national, and labor issues. Relations between the Provisional Government and the Soviets. The arrival of V.I. Lenin in Petrograd.
Political parties (Cadets, Socialist-Revolutionaries, Mensheviks, Bolsheviks): political programs, influence among the masses.
Crises of the Provisional Government. An attempted military coup in the country. The growth of revolutionary sentiment among the masses. Bolshevization of the Moscow Soviets.
Preparation and conduct of an armed uprising in Petrograd.
II All-Russian Congress of Soviets. Decisions about power, peace, land. The formation of public authorities and management. Composition of the first Soviet government.
The victory of the armed uprising in Moscow. Government agreement with the Left Social Revolutionaries. Elections to the Constituent Assembly, its convocation and dispersal.
The first socio-economic transformations in the fields of industry, agriculture, finance, labor and women's issues. Church and state.
Brest peace treaty, its conditions and significance.
Economic tasks of the Soviet government in the spring of 1918. Aggravation of the food issue. The introduction of food dictatorship. Working food detachments. Combo
The revolt of the Left Socialist Revolutionaries and the collapse of the bipartisan system in Russia.
The first Soviet Constitution.
Reasons for intervention and civil war. The course of hostilities. Human and material losses during the civil war and military intervention.
The domestic policy of the Soviet leadership during the war. "War Communism". GOELRO plan.
The policy of the new government in relation to culture.
Foreign policy. Agreements with border countries. The participation of Russia in the Genoese, Hague, Moscow and Lausanne conferences. Diplomatic recognition of the USSR by the main capitalist countries.
Domestic policy. Socio-economic and political crisis of the early 20s. Famine 1921-1922 Transition to a new economic policy. The essence of the NEP. NEP in the field of agriculture, trade, industry. Financial reform. Economic recovery. Crises during the NEP and its coagulation.
Projects for the creation of the USSR. I Congress of Soviets of the USSR. The first government and the Constitution of the USSR.
Disease and death of V.I. Lenin. Intraparty struggle. The beginning of the formation of the regime of power of Stalin.
Industrialization and collectivization. Development and implementation of the first five-year plans. Socialist competition - the goal, forms, leaders.
Formation and strengthening of the state system of economic management.
The course towards continuous collectivization. Dispossession.
The results of industrialization and collectivization.
Political, national-state development in the 30s. Intraparty struggle. Political repression. The formation of nomenclature as a layer of managers. The Stalinist regime and the constitution of the USSR 1936
Soviet culture in the 20-30s.
Foreign policy of the second half of the 20s - mid 30s.
Domestic policy. The growth of military production. Emergency measures in the field of labor legislation. Measures to solve the grain problem. Military establishment. The growth of the Red Army. Military reform. Repression against the command personnel of the Red Army and the Red Army.
Foreign policy. Non-aggression pact and treaty of friendship and borders between the USSR and Germany. The entry of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus into the USSR. Soviet-Finnish War. The inclusion of the republics of the Baltic states and other territories in the USSR.
Periodization of the Great Patriotic War. The initial stage of the war. Turning the country into a military camp. Military defeats 1941-1942 and their reasons. Major military events. The surrender of fascist Germany. The participation of the USSR in the war with Japan.
Soviet rear during the war.
The deportation of peoples.
Guerrilla warfare.
Human and material losses during the war.
The creation of the anti-Hitler coalition. United Nations Declaration. The problem of the second front. Conference of the Big Three. Problems of post-war peace settlement and comprehensive cooperation. USSR and UN.
The beginning of the cold war. The contribution of the USSR to the creation of the "socialist camp". Education CMEA.
The internal politics of the USSR in the mid 40s - early 50s. The restoration of the national economy.
Social and political life. Politics in the field of science and culture. Continued repression. "Leningrad affair." Campaign against cosmopolitanism. "The case of doctors."
Socio-economic development of Soviet society in the mid-50s - the first half of the 60s.
Socio-political development: XX Congress of the CPSU and the condemnation of the personality cult of Stalin. Rehabilitation of victims of repression and deportation. Intraparty struggle in the second half of the 50s.
Foreign policy: the creation of ATS. The entry of Soviet troops into Hungary. Aggravation of Sino-Soviet relations. The split of the "socialist camp." Soviet-American relations and the Caribbean crisis. USSR and third world countries. Reducing the number of armed forces of the USSR. Moscow Treaty on the Limitation of Nuclear Tests.
USSR in the mid 60s - the first half of the 80s.
Social and Economic Development: Economic Reform of 1965
The growing difficulties of economic development. The decline in social and economic growth.
USSR Constitution 1977
Socio-political life of the USSR in the 1970s - early 1980s.
Foreign policy: nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The consolidation of post-war borders in Europe. Moscow agreement with Germany. Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE). Soviet-American treaties of the 70s. Soviet-Chinese relations. The entry of Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan. Aggravation of international tension and the USSR. Strengthening of the Soviet-American confrontation in the early 80s.
USSR in 1985-1991
Domestic policy: an attempt to accelerate the country's socio-economic development. An attempt to reform the political system of Soviet society. Congresses of People's Deputies. Election of the President of the USSR. Multiparty system. Aggravation of the political crisis.
Aggravation of the national question. Attempts to reform the national-state system of the USSR. Declaration of State Sovereignty of the RSFSR. "Novogarevsky process." The collapse of the USSR.
Foreign policy: Soviet-American relations and the disarmament problem. Agreements with leading capitalist countries. The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. Changing relations with countries of the socialist community. The collapse of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the Warsaw Pact Organization.
Russian Federation in 1992-2000
Domestic policy: "Shock therapy" in the economy: price liberalization, stages of privatization of commercial enterprises. Drop in production. Strengthening social tension. The growth and deceleration of financial inflation. Aggravation of the struggle between the executive and legislative branches. Dissolution of the Supreme Council and the Congress of People's Deputies. October events of 1993. Abolition of local organs of Soviet power. Elections to the Federal Assembly. 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation. Formation of a presidential republic. Aggravation and overcoming of national conflicts in the North Caucasus.
Legislative Election 1995. Presidential Election 1996. Power and Opposition. An attempt to return to the course of liberal reforms (spring 1997) and its failure. The financial crisis of August 1998: causes, economic and political consequences. "The Second Chechen War." Legislative Election of 1999 and Early Presidential Election of 2000. Foreign Policy: Russia in the CIS. The participation of Russian troops in the "hot spots" of the near abroad: Moldova, Georgia, Tajikistan. Relations of Russia with non-CIS countries. The withdrawal of Russian troops from Europe and neighboring countries. Russian-American agreements. Russia and NATO. Russia and the Council of Europe. Yugoslav crises (1999-2000) and Russia's position.
- Danilov A.A., Kosulina L.G. History of the state and peoples of Russia. XX century.
Question 01. What are the reasons for the transition to a policy of mass collectivization?
Answer. Causes:
1) the party needed funds for industrialization;
2) the communists initially viewed the peasants as alien to the socialist revolution of small owners, collectivization deprived the peasants of private property, making them almost proletarians of the village;
3) the unification of the peasants into collective farms, their material dependence on the leadership of the collective farm made them more controlled by the command and administrative system of government of the Soviet country;
4) collectivization guaranteed Soviet power against crises with food supplies to cities similar to the grain procurement crisis of 1927.
Question 02. Why was collectivization accompanied by dispossession?
Answer. It was easier to take the funds necessary for collectivization from a relatively small number of fists than from a much larger number of medium and small masters. In addition, the hatred of fellow villagers was easier to call for rich fists (no one canceled the elementary human envy).
Question 03. What are the reasons for the appearance of Stalin's article “Vertigo from Success”?
Answer. Mass collectivization at an accelerated pace caused resistance from the population. Dissatisfaction with the authorities began to penetrate the army, which still consisted largely of peasants. Then an article was published by I.V. Stalin's “Vertigo from success”, in which he condemned the “planting of collective farms by force”. Thus, the head of the country whitewashed himself in the eyes of the majority of the population. In fact, the party leadership very quickly demanded further collectivization again by violent means.
Question 04. What were the results of the policy of continuous collectivization?
Answer. Summary:
1) the number of cattle and horses for 1929-1932 decreased by a third, pigs - 2 times, sheep - 2.5 times;
2) gross grain production decreased by 10%;
3) the population of the USSR decreased from 1926 to 1937 by 10.3 million people (or 9%);
4) In 1932-1933, an unprecedented famine began, affecting about 25-30 million people;
5) after the introduction of the passport system, which collective farmers did not fall under, the peasants were actually attached to the place of their birth, deprived of their freedom to choose their life path, as in the days of serfdom;
9) the collective farmers developed indifference to the socialized property and the results of their own labor.
Question 05. What assessments of collectivization do you know? Which one do you share?
Answer. Estimates of collectivization vary from completely positive to completely negative. Her supporters argue that without collectivization there would have been no industrialization, without industrialization the defense industry would not have been developed and the USSR could not have survived during the Great Patriotic War. Opponents point to the huge number of victims of collectivization. The version popular in Ukraine today stands apart: in this union republic, the Soviet government artificially caused hunger during collectivization used as a form of genocide against the Ukrainian people, a means to populate the territory with a large number of loyal Russians. In my opinion, the Ukrainian version is not solvent: I.V. Stalin used repression against entire peoples and the population of entire regions (Crimean Tatars, the population of Königsberg), but completely different, faster and more effective methods were used. As for collectivization, its negative assessment is closer to me. Human sacrifices, especially such a number in peacetime, have no excuses. Also, there is no justification for the hatred that Soviet propaganda sowed between the peasants themselves during collectivization. In addition, it was collectivization that laid the foundations for the indifference of collective farmers to the efficiency of their own labor, which led to problems with the country's supply of food and fodder (which often had to be purchased) until the collapse of the USSR,
Question 06. In your opinion, was the collectivization of the Soviet village objectively necessary?
Answer. I believe that collectivization was not necessary. In the conditions of total control over the country of the bureaucratic apparatus of the Communist Party, there really was no other way to such rapid industrialization (there was no other source of funds for its implementation), but under the conditions of a different state system or the communists revised some of their principles, industrialization could be carried out differently. This is evidenced, for example, by the Meiji revolution in Japan, during which it was possible to overcome a much more significant lag behind the industrialized countries. Meiji revolution was carried out in a country with the absolute power of the ruler, also at the cost of grief for many people, but not so mass destruction of unarmed peasants and not at the cost of farm inefficiency for many decades to come.
Synopsis on the history of Russia
Chronological framework: 1929-1937 Definition: collectivization - the replacement of the system of small-property peasant farming by large socialized agricultural producers.
Two problems: the extent to which the national characteristics of Russia (the peasant land community) and collectivization are correlated, and to what extent the construction of socialism involves collectivization.
Economic background. Agriculture in 1925: the size of crops was almost equal to the level of 1913, and the gross grain harvest even exceeded the pre-war. Sale and purchase of land is prohibited, but rent is allowed. The total number is 24 million peasant farms (the bulk of the middle peasants is 61%). 1926-1927 - sown area 10% higher than pre-war. Gross yield exceeds pre-war by 18-20%. The total number of farms is 25 million (the bulk are still middle peasants 63%). Mostly manual labor prevails. Gross grain harvest is growing, and marketable bread is almost not increasing. There are difficulties with grain procurement, which in 1927-28. turn into a crisis: disruption of the grain procurement plan, the introduction of cards in cities.
Causes of the crisis: low productivity, low marketability, bread strikes generated by the nonequivalent exchange between the city and the village. Low purchase prices for bread push the peasants to sabotage grain procurements, and the government responds with emergency measures: tax increases, strict discipline in terms of payments, confiscation, repression, dispossession.
Political background. Associated with a strong-willed decision of the Soviet leadership. It concludes the insolvency of the small peasantry in the current situation and sets the task of ensuring state control over the agricultural sector, and thereby tries to solve the problem of the uninterrupted flow of funds for industrialization. The course on collectivization was based on the conclusions of the economist and statistics Nemchinov.
The course towards collectivization (adopted the 15th party congress in 1927). The beginning of collectivization was preceded by preparations for it, which consisted of: technical assistance to the village, the creation of the MTS, the development of cooperation, financial assistance to collective farms and state farms, the policy of limiting the kulaks, and the help of the working class. The main forms of cooperation: TOZs (partnerships for land cultivation), artels (collective farms), and communes (socialization reaches an extreme degree).
The year of the great turning point. In November 1929, Stalin's article “The Year of the Great Breakthrough” was published, which became the ideological justification of forced collectivization: “The middle peasants have gone to the collective farm, so you can start forcing collectivization.” In the years 1929-1930. a number of decisions of the Central Committee, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars were adopted, which specified the course towards continuous collectivization and the elimination of the kulaks as a class. During collectivization, the Bolshevik Party relied on part of the poorest peasantry and the working class. 35 thousand workers were sent to the village to organize collective farms.
Measures against the fists. Punitive measures were applied against active opponents of the Soviet regime (eviction to remote areas, obtaining land outside the collective farm). The criteria for separating the kulaks and the podkulakniks were very vague (sometimes wealthy peasants fell). In total, about 1 million peasant farms were dispossessed.
The excesses in collectivization: coercion to join collective farms, unjustified dispossession of the kulaks, forced socialization of residential buildings, small livestock, poultry, vegetable gardens. As a result: mass slaughter of cattle (1/2 livestock destroyed), mass exodus of peasants from the collective farm, a wave of uprisings (kulak rebellions). March 2, 1930 - an article by Stalin, “Vertigo from Success,” is published. The blame for the excesses in the conduct of collectivization and dispossession he laid on the local leadership. March 14, 1930 — the Central Committee’s decree on combating the distortion of the party line in the collective farm movement — began to overcome excesses and, as a result, forcibly created collective farms dissolved. By August 1930, just over 20% of households remained in them.
A new rise in the collective farm movement occurred in the fall of 1930 and 1931. The public sector in the countryside is expanding - state farms are being created. Machine-tractor stations (MTS), which previously operated as joint-stock companies, were nationalized. At the beginning of 1931, a new wave of dispossession began, which provided free labor for numerous five-year construction projects. The result of repression was the growth of collective farms. By the end of 1932, more than 60% of households were on collective and state farms. This year was declared the "year of continuous collectivization."
Famine 1932-1933 If 1930 yielded a high yield, then in 1932 an unexpected famine broke out. Reasons: adverse weather conditions (drought), yield decline due to collectivization, backward technical base, growth in harvesting (to cities and for export). The geography of famine is Ukraine, the South Urals, the North Caucasus, Kazakhstan and the Volga region. The victims of hunger: 3-4 million people. On August 7, 1932, the USSR adopted the Law on the Protection of Socialist Property, popularly called the “Three Spikelets Law”, which envisaged a ten-year prison term or execution for embezzlement of collective farm property. It was during this period that 18 million centners of grain were exported abroad to receive currency and pay foreign bills. Collectivization has stopped. But already in the summer of 1934, the beginning of its final stage was announced.
The completion of collectivization. In 1932, equalization on collective farms was overcome - workdays, pieceworking, and brigade labor organization were introduced. In 1933, political departments and MTS were created (1934 - 280 thousand tractors). V1935 - the card system was canceled. 1937 - state acts on eternal land ownership were presented to collective farms. The collective farm system won completely. 90% of the farms were on collective farms and state farms. By 1937, at the cost of colossal sacrifices (human and material), collectivization was completed.
socialist industrialization politics collectivization
The task of industrialization of Russia (in the broad sense of the word) also involved large-scale transformations in the agricultural sector. It was necessary to create effective large agricultural enterprises capable of increasing the production of grain, meat, raw materials and meeting the needs of the population and industry. At least two options were possible here. The first was to rely on the main suppliers of marketable grain - kulaks, which, despite the policy of “restricting and crowding out”, still provided the bulk of agricultural products for the domestic market. Reliance on them would make it possible, through the transfer of additional land and equipment to them, to ensure a steady increase in production. This point of view was adhered to by N. I. Bukharin. The second way was to bet on the poorest layers of the peasantry, uniting them into collective farms. The idea of \u200b\u200bcollective farms was not new. Lenin spoke about this in the first months after the revolution. However, Lenin saw the transition to collective farms as a gradual and voluntary process (just such an approach was the basis for all party decisions, starting with the Fifteenth Congress of the CPSU (B.), Which had embarked on a course of collectivization). Stalin set the task to solve this problem in the near future.
In 1929, the party leadership proclaimed a course towards the complete collectivization of peasant farms, which, according to the leaders of the Bolsheviks, made it possible to solve several important tasks for the authorities at once: to provide a mechanism for pumping funds for the needs of industrialization; eliminate the kulaks as a class and thereby expand the social base of the regime in the countryside; to spread the influence of the state on the private sector of agriculture (and thereby ensure complete nationalization of the economy); eliminate the so-called "agricultural overpopulation".
Complete collectivization has unfolded since January 1930. The resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of the Bolsheviks (6) and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR “On the pace of collectivization and measures to help the state on collective farm construction”, published on January 5, 1930, noted that the implementation of the policy of continuous collectivization would take several years A. Danilov. History of Russia. - 2nd ed. - M .: Publishing house "New textbook", 2004. - S. 266 .. In some areas of the country (the most developed cereals: Kuban, Ukraine, Volga region) it was supposed to be completed in the near future.
The main form of peasant cooperation, the agricultural artel, was also determined. In contrast to communes and partnerships for joint land cultivation - TOZ, the artel provided for, along with collective labor and public use of land, livestock, equipment, distribution of the results of joint economic activities, also the preservation of personal plots of land, small livestock, small inventory and etc.
However, instead of a planned, gradual and voluntary unification, a widespread campaign of forcible and immediate involvement of the entire peasant population in collective farms began. Kulakov and their families, depriving property, were evicted to the eastern and northern regions of the country. Together with the kulaks, a significant number were deprived of their property and exiled to the middle peasant family. According to some sources, up to 15 million people were affected by the dispossession policy.
The first result of this policy was a massive famine that erupted in 1932-1933. in the richest grain regions of the country before. About 8 million people became victims of hunger.
For 1929 - 1932 the number of cattle decreased by 33%, horses - 32%, pigs - almost half, sheep - 2.5 times. A mass exodus of the rural population to the cities began. However, this was also part of the management plans - industrialization required labor.
Of course, the main historical result of collectivization was the industrial leap that was carried out at the cost of great efforts and costs.
The policy of continuous collectivization in the USSR: results and consequences
Among the Bolshevik revolutionaries there were few educated intellectuals and experienced business executives, but they were all armed with the “Most Advanced Revolutionary Theory,” which they were very proud of. According to Theory, poorly managed owners are contraindicated in the new government. It is necessary to turn peasants into a rural proletariat. It was precisely this outcome that the policy of continuous collectivization in the USSR should have led.
And this was to be done against the background of the inevitable post-war and post-revolutionary crisis. The authorities understood that it was necessary to recognize the obvious: unemployment, devastation, hunger. But they demanded that the events be interpreted correctly: the party knows, the party is fighting and will win, and collectivization is only part of the party’s big politics. For this, the best journalists and writers are involved.
Investments are not needed to create collective farms. The village just has to give bread. And she will give it (dissatisfied and wealthy cutaway). Money is needed for industry and the army. And to the west, also covered by the crisis, are grain trains ...
A trial wave of collectivization in the USSR begins in 1927. Exorbitant taxes on individual persons. The lowest purchase prices are for them. Power is in a hurry. The leader calls for "overcoming the age-old backwardness of 10 years," and the economic half measures did not produce immediate results. Coercive measures were required. The bread had to be knocked out. No matter what. Otherwise, the defeat of the party and the death of power. And in 1929 a tsunami of collectivization surged ...
The results of continuous collectivization in the USSR
First result: over the years of collectivization of grain, 677 million more convertible “gold” rubles were exported.Here they are, money for modernization. 9 thousand plants were built, industrial production doubled by 1934. Yes, quantity to the detriment of quality. But the main task - to ensure state control over production and consumption - has been resolved.
Among other tactical results:
- the crisis has been overcome;
- eliminated unemployment;
- “proven” the advantage of large manufacturers over small;
- created new industries and the military-industrial complex;
- destroyed the best, most efficient and active part of the peasantry;
- Monstrous mass hunger has come.
Consequences of a policy of continuous collectivization
Long-term results are as follows:- the country has become one of the few capable of producing any product;
- the production of consumer goods is minimized;
- forced labor incentives triumphed over economic ones;
- the command-administrative management system is absolutized;
- A powerful propaganda apparatus has been created;
- the ruble loses convertibility;
- All sectors of the economy are provided with cheap workers;
- the Great Empire of state socialism has developed;
- Fear seizes the hearts of Soviet people even more.
The main conclusion was made by history: the great theory turned out to be erroneous. And not just about the policy of solid collectivization. Universal economic laws cannot be neglected. You can’t sacrifice a theory for the people: a people that has always shown its tremendous potential - in ten years it will win the war.