Why complete collectivization. Collectivization in the USSR: causes, goals, consequences

COLLECTIVIZATION OF AGRICULTURE

reasons for collectivization. The implementation of grandiose industrialization required a radical restructuring of the agricultural sector. In Western countries, the agrarian revolution, i.e. system of 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 funds received from the exploitation of the colonies, then socialist industrialization could be carried out through the exploitation of 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 is much easier to siphon funds from a few hundred large farms than to deal with millions of small ones. That is why, with the beginning of industrialization, a course was taken for the collectivization of agriculture - "the implementation of socialist transformations in the countryside."

In November 1929, Pravda published Stalin's article "The Year of the Great Turn", which spoke of "a radical change in the development of our agriculture from small and backward individual farming to large-scale and advanced collective farming." In December, Stalin announced the end of the NEP and the transition to a policy of "liquidating the kulaks as a class." On January 5, 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks issued a resolution "On the rate of collectivization and measures of state assistance to collective farm construction." It set strict deadlines for the completion of collectivization: for the North Caucasus, the 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 were to "solve the problem of collectivization within five years." This formulation oriented to complete collectivization by the end of the first five-year plan.

However, this document did not answer the main questions: what methods to carry out collectivization, how to carry out dispossession, what to do with the dispossessed? And since the countryside had not yet cooled down from the violence of grain procurement campaigns, the same method was adopted - violence.

Dispossession. Two interconnected violent processes took place in the countryside: the creation of collective farms and dispossession. The "liquidation of the kulaks" was aimed primarily at providing the collective farms with a material base. From the end of 1929 to the middle of 1930, more than 320,000 peasant farms were dispossessed. Their property worth more than 175 million rubles. transferred to collective farms.

At the same time, the authorities did not give a precise definition of who should be considered kulaks. In the generally accepted sense, a kulak is someone who used hired labor, but this category could also include an average peasant who had two cows, or two horses, or a good house. Each district received a dispossession rate, which averaged 5-7% of the number of peasant households, but the local authorities, following the example of the first five-year plan, tried to overfulfill it. Often, not only the middle peasants, but also, for some reason, objectionable poor peasants were recorded in kulaks. To justify these actions, the ominous word "podkulaknik" was coined. In some areas, the number of dispossessed reached 15-20%.

The liquidation of the kulaks as a class, by depriving the countryside of the most enterprising, most independent peasants, undermined the spirit of resistance. In addition, the fate of the dispossessed was supposed to serve as an example to others, those who did not want to voluntarily go to the collective farm. Kulaks were evicted with their families, infants, and the elderly. In cold, unheated wagons, with a minimum amount of household belongings, thousands of people traveled to remote areas of the Urals, Siberia, and Kazakhstan. The most active "anti-Soviet" were sent to concentration camps.

For help local authorities 25,000 urban communists ("25,000 men") were sent to the countryside.

"Dizzy with Success" In many areas, especially in the Ukraine, the Caucasus and Central Asia, the peasantry resisted mass dispossession. To suppress peasant unrest, regular units of the Red Army were involved. But most often the peasants used passive forms of protest: they refused to join collective farms, they destroyed livestock and implements as a sign of protest. Terrorist acts were also committed against "twenty-five thousand" 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 launched at his call was threatening disaster. Discontent began to seep into the army. Stalin made a well-calculated tactical move. On March 2, Pravda published his article "Dizziness from Success". He laid all the blame for the situation on the executors, local workers, declaring that "collective farms cannot be planted by force." After this article, the majority of peasants began to perceive Stalin as a people's defender. A mass exit of peasants from collective farms began.

But a step back was taken 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 demanding "to achieve a powerful upsurge of the collective-farm movement." In September 1931, collective farms already united 60% of peasant households, in 1934 - 75%.

collectivization results. The policy of continuous collectivization led to disastrous results: for 1929-1934. gross grain production decreased by 10%, the number of cattle and horses for 1929-1932. decreased by one third, pigs - 2 times, sheep - 2.5 times.

The extermination of livestock, the ruin of the village by the incessant dekulakization, the complete disorganization of the work of collective farms in 1932-1933. led to an unprecedented famine that engulfed approximately 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, forbade mentioning the famine in funds mass media. Despite its scale, 18 million centners of grain were exported abroad to receive hard currency for the needs of industrialization.

However, Stalin celebrated his victory: despite the reduction in grain production, its deliveries to the state increased by 2 times. But most importantly, collectivization created the necessary conditions for the implementation of plans for an industrial leap. It put at the disposal of the city a huge number of workers, simultaneously eliminating agrarian overpopulation, made it possible, with a significant decrease in the number of employed, to maintain agricultural production at a level that did not allow for a long famine, and provided industry with the necessary raw materials. Collectivization not only created the conditions for transferring 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 market economy- privately owned peasant economy.

Kolkhoz peasantry. Village life in the early 1930s proceeded against the backdrop of the horrors of dispossession and the creation of collective farms. These processes led to the elimination of the social gradation of the peasantry. The kulaks, the middle peasants, and the poor have disappeared from the countryside, as has the generalized concept of the individual peasant. New concepts were introduced into everyday life - the collective farm peasantry, the collective farmer, the collective farm woman.

The situation of the population in the countryside was much more difficult than in the city. The village was perceived primarily as a supplier of cheap grain and a source of labor. The state constantly increased the rate of grain procurements, taking almost half of the harvest from the collective farms. The calculation for the grain supplied to the state was made at fixed prices, which during the 30s. remained almost unchanged, while the prices of manufactured goods increased by almost 10 times. The wages of collective farmers were regulated by a system of workdays. Its size was determined based on the income of the collective farm, i.e. that part of the crop that remained after settlement with the state and the machine and tractor stations (MTS), which provided agricultural machinery to the collective farms. As a rule, the incomes of collective farms were low and did not provide a living wage. For workdays, peasants were paid in grain or other manufactured products. The work of the collective farmer was almost not paid for with money.

At the same time, as industrialization progressed, more tractors, combines, motor vehicles and other equipment began to arrive in the countryside, which were concentrated in the MTS. This helped to partly mitigate the negative consequences of the loss of working livestock in the previous period. Young specialists appeared in the village - agronomists, machine operators, who were trained by educational institutions of the country.

In the mid 30s. the situation in agriculture has somewhat stabilized. In February 1935, the government allowed the peasants to have 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 was abolished. Life in the countryside began to improve little by little, which Stalin did not fail to take advantage of, declaring to the whole country: "Life has become better, life has become more fun."

The Soviet countryside reconciled itself to the collective farm system, although the peasantry remained the most disenfranchised category of the population. The introduction of passports in the country, which the peasants were not supposed to, meant not only the erection of an administrative wall between the city and the countryside, but also the actual attachment of the peasants to their place of birth, depriving them of their freedom of movement and choice of occupation. From a legal point of view, the collective farmer, who did not have a passport, was tied to the collective farm in the same way as a serf had once been to the land of his master.

The immediate result of forced collectivization was the indifference of the collective farmers to the socialized property and the results of their own labor.

FORMING THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF THE USSR IN THE 1930s

Formation of a totalitarian regime. The grandiose tasks set before the country, which required centralization and exertion of all forces, led to the formation of a political regime, later called totalitarian (from the Latin word "whole", "complete"). Under such a 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 an 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. such regimes were established not only in the USSR, but also in some other countries that also solved the problem of a modernization breakthrough.

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, nominated candidates for deputies of the Soviets various levels. Only party members occupied all responsible government posts, headed the army, law enforcement and judicial agencies, and led the national economy. No law could be adopted without prior approval from the Politburo. Many state and economic functions were transferred to party authorities. The Politburo determined the entire foreign and domestic policy of the state, solved the issues of planning and organizing production. Even party symbols have acquired an official status - the red banner and the party anthem "Internationale" have become state.

By the end of the 30s. The face of the party has also changed. She finally lost the remnants of democracy. Complete “unanimity” reigned in the party ranks. Ordinary members of the party and even the majority of members of the Central Committee were excluded from the development of party policy, which became the prerogative of the Politburo and the party apparatus.

Ideologization of public life. Party control over the mass media played a special role, through which official views were disseminated and explained. With the help of the "Iron Curtain" the problem of the penetration of other ideological views from the outside was solved.

The education system has also changed. The structure has been completely rebuilt curricula and course content. They were now based on the Marxist-Leninist interpretation of not only social science courses, but sometimes natural sciences.

Under the undivided party influence was the creative intelligentsia, whose activities, along with the bodies 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 strive to participate in socialist construction into a single union of Soviet writers. To carry out similar changes in the line of other types of art." In 1934, the First All-Union Congress of the Union of Soviet Writers took place. He accepted 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 those who worked professionally in these areas in order to establish party control over them. For "spiritual" support, the government provided certain material benefits and privileges (the use of art houses, workshops, receiving advance payments during long-term creative work, providing housing, etc.).

In addition to the creative intelligentsia, other categories of the population of the USSR were covered by official mass organizations. All employees of enterprises and institutions were members of trade unions, which were completely under the control of the party. Young people from the age of 14 were united in the ranks of the All-Union Leninist Communist Youth Union (Komsomol, Komsomol), declared a reserve and assistant to the party. The younger schoolchildren were members of the October, and the older ones - pioneer organization. Mass associations were created for innovators, inventors, women, athletes and other categories of the population.

Formation of Stalin's personality cult. One of the elements of the political regime of the USSR was the personality cult of Stalin. December 21, 1929 he turned 50 years old. Until that date, it was not customary to publicly celebrate the anniversaries of the leaders of the party and state. The Lenin Jubilee was the only exception. But on that day, the Soviet country learned that it had a great leader - Stalin was publicly declared "the first disciple of Lenin" and the only "leader of the party." The Pravda newspaper was filled with articles, greetings, letters, telegrams, from which flowed a stream of flattery. The initiative of Pravda was picked up by other newspapers, from metropolitan to regional ones, magazines, radio, cinema: the organizer of October, the founder of the Red Army and an outstanding commander, the winner of the armies of the White Guards and interventionists, the guardian of Lenin's "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" appeared in the country and " best friend Soviet children". Academicians, artists, workers and party workers challenged each other for the palm in praising Stalin. But everyone was surpassed by the Kazakh folk poet Dzhambul, who in the same "Pravda" intelligibly explained to everyone that "Stalin - deeper than the ocean, higher than the Himalayas, brighter than the sun. He is the teacher of the universe."

Mass repression. Along with ideological institutions, the totalitarian regime also had another reliable support - a system of punitive organs for the persecution of dissidents. In the early 30s. the last political trials 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. "Shakhty case" served as a signal for the deployment of the fight against "pests" from among the scientific and technical intelligentsia in all sectors of the national economy. From the beginning of the 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 written by Stalin "On the protection of property of state enterprises, collective farms and cooperation and the strengthening of public (socialist) property", which went down in history as the law "on five spikelets", according to which even for minor theft from the collective farm fields were supposed to be shot.

In November 1934, a Special Council was formed under the People's Commissar of Internal Affairs, which was given the right to administratively send "enemies of the people" into exile or forced labor camps for up to five years. At the same time, the principles of legal proceedings that protected the rights of the individual 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, the prosecutor and the lawyer.

The reason for the deployment of mass repressions in the country was the murder on December 1, 1934 in Leningrad of a member of the Politburo, the first secretary of the Leningrad Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, S. M. Kirov. A few hours after this tragic event, a law was adopted on the "simplified procedure" for dealing with cases of terrorist acts and organizations. According to this law, the investigation was to be carried out in an accelerated manner and complete its work within ten days; the indictment was handed over to the accused a day before the case was heard in court; cases were heard without the participation of the parties - the prosecutor and the defense; requests for pardon were prohibited, and execution sentences were carried out immediately after their announcement.

This act was followed by other laws that toughened punishments and expanded the circle of persons subjected to repression. Monstrous was the government decree of April 7, 1935, which prescribed "minors, starting from the age of 12, convicted of theft, violence, bodily injury, murder or attempted murder, to be brought to criminal court with the use of all measures 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 testimony in order to protect their children from reprisal.)

Show trials. Having found a weighty reason and created a "legal foundation", Stalin proceeded to physically eliminate all those who were dissatisfied with the regime. In 1936, the first of the largest Moscow trials of the leaders of the internal party opposition took place. Lenin's closest associates - Zinoviev, Kamenev and others - were on trial. They were accused of murdering Kirov, of trying to kill Stalin and other members of the Politburo, and also to overthrow the Soviet government. Prosecutor A. Ya. Vyshinsky declared: "I demand that the enraged dogs be shot - every one of them!" The court granted this requirement.

In 1937, a second trial took place, during which another group of representatives of the "Leninist guard" was convicted. In the same year she was repressed large group senior officers led by Marshal Tukhachevsky. In March 1938, the third Moscow trial took place. The former head of the government, Rykov, and the "favorite of the party," Bukharin, were shot. Each of these processes led to the unwinding of the flywheel of repression for tens of thousands of people, primarily for relatives and friends, colleagues and even just housemates. Only in the top leadership of the army were 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 corps commanders - 50, out of 186 commanders - 154. Following 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 authorities who found themselves abroad. In August 1940, on Stalin's orders, Trotsky was assassinated in Mexico. The victims of the Stalinist regime were many leaders of the white movement, the monarchist emigration.

According to official, clearly underestimated data, in 1930-1953. 3.8 million people were repressed on charges of counter-revolutionary, anti-state activities, of which 786 thousand were shot.

The constitution of "victorious socialism". The "Great Terror" served as a monstrous mechanism by which Stalin tried to eliminate social tension in the country caused by the negative consequences of his own economic and political decisions. It was impossible to admit to the mistakes made, and in order to hide the failure, and, therefore, to maintain one's 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 really 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 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 necessity of adopting a new constitution, stated that Soviet society "realized what the Marxists call the first phase of communism - socialism." The "Stalinist constitution" proclaimed the elimination of private property (and, consequently, the exploitation of man by man) and the creation of two forms of ownership - state and collective-farm-cooperative as the economic criterion for building socialism. The Soviets of Working People's Deputies were recognized as the political basis of the USSR. The Communist Party was given the role of the leading core of society; Marxism-Leninism was declared the 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 the 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. In the intervals between its sessions, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR was to exercise executive and legislative power. The USSR included 11 union republics: Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Azerbaijani, Georgian, Armenian, Turkmen, Uzbek, Tajik, Kazakh, Kyrgyz.

But in real life, most of the norms of the constitution turned out to be an empty declaration. And socialism "in Stalin's way" had a very formal resemblance to the Marxist understanding of socialism. Its goal was not to create economic, political and cultural prerequisites for the free development of each member of society, but to increase the power of the state by infringing on the interests of the majority of its citizens.

NATIONAL POLICY AT THE LATE 1920-1930s

Attack on Islam. In the second half of the 20s. changed the attitude of the Bolsheviks to the Muslim religion. 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 provided religious education (madrasas) were replaced by secular ones, and hospitals were included in the state health care system. Most mosques were closed. Sharia courts were also abolished. Removed from their duties, the clergy were forced to publicly repent that they "deceived the people."

In the cities, at the direction of the Center, a campaign to eradicate Muslim traditions that do not meet the standards of "communist morality". In 1927, on International Women's Day on March 8, women gathered for a rally defiantly tore off their burqa and threw it directly 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 carried out against ritual prayers and the celebration of Ramadan. The official ruling on the matter stated that these humiliating and reactionary practices prevent workers from "taking Active participation in the construction of socialism, "because they contradict the principles of labor discipline and the planned principles of the economy. Polygamy and the payment of kalym (bride price) were also prohibited as incompatible with Soviet family law. Making a pilgrimage to Mecca, which every Muslim is obliged to make at least once in his life became impossible.

All these measures caused violent discontent, which, however, did not take the scale of mass resistance. However, several Chechen imams declared a holy war against the enemies of Allah. In 1928-1929. uprisings broke out among the highlanders of the North Caucasus. In Central Asia, the Basmachi movement again raised its head. These speeches were suppressed with the help of army units.

The repressions that fell upon Muslims led to the fact that people stopped openly demonstrating their adherence to Islam. However, the 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 20s - 30s. the course towards the development of national languages ​​and culture was curtailed. In 1926, Stalin reproached the Ukrainian people's commissar for education for the fact that his policy led to the separation of Ukrainian culture from the general Soviet one, which was based on Russian culture with "its highest achievement - Leninism."

First of all, the use of local languages ​​in public institutions was abolished in national education systems. In primary and high school obligatory study of the second - Russian language was introduced. At the same time, the number of schools where teaching was conducted only in Russian increased. Teaching was translated into Russian in high school. The only exceptions were Georgia and Armenia, whose peoples jealously guarded the primacy of their languages.

At the same time, the state languages ​​of the Caucasus and Central Asia went through a double reform of the alphabet. In 1929, all local writing systems, mainly Arabic, were transferred to the Latin alphabet. Ten years later, Cyrillic was introduced - the Russian alphabet. These reforms virtually nullified previous efforts to spread literacy and written culture among the population.

Another source of introduction to the Russian language was the army. In the 1920s, with the introduction of universal military service, attempts were made to create an ethnic homogeneous parts. Even then, however, 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 national composition stationed far from their homeland. Russian became the language of military training and command.

The recognition of the Russian language as the state language of the USSR pursued not only ideological goals. Firstly, it facilitated the possibility of interethnic communication, which was important in the conditions of ongoing economic modernization. Secondly, it made life easier for the Russian population in national republics ah, the number of which in connection with the implementation of the five-year plans has increased significantly.

And, thirdly, it made it possible for parents who had far-reaching plans for the future of their children to send them to schools where they could join state language and thus gain advantages over their compatriots. Therefore, the national elites did not protest against linguistic innovations.

However, the increase in the status of the Russian language did not at all mean a return to the tsarist policy of Russification. The anti-religious campaign and the 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 their Orthodox churches, priests, believing hardworking peasants, the traditional system of land tenure, and 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 an expression of the multinational party Soviet culture, and not Russian in its traditional sense.

"Economic Leveling of the National Outskirts". Destruction of national personnel. One of the main tasks of industrialization and collectivization was proclaimed by the Party to be raising the level of economic development of the national outlying districts. To accomplish this task, the same universal methods were used, which often did not take into account at all the national traditions and peculiarities of the economic activities of different peoples.

The example of Kazakhstan was indicative, where collectivization was primarily associated with intensified attempts to force the nomadic people to switch to arable farming. In 1929-1932. cattle, and especially sheep, were literally destroyed in Kazakhstan. The number of Kazakhs engaged in cattle breeding decreased from 80% of the total population to almost 25%. The actions of the authorities did not correspond to national traditions so much that fierce armed resistance became the answer to them. Basmachi, 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.

While proclaiming a policy of "equalizing the economic level of the national outskirts," the central government at the same time demonstrated colonial habits. The first five-year plan, for example, envisaged a reduction in crops cereal crops in Uzbekistan, and in return, cotton production expanded to incredible proportions. Most of it was to become raw material for the factories of the European part of Russia. Such a policy threatened to turn Uzbekistan into a raw materials appendage and aroused strong resistance. The leaders of the Uzbek Republic worked out an alternative plan for economic development, which assumed 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 "indigenization" was also subject to adjustment. Since directive changes in the economy and the centralization of management were by no means always welcomed by local leaders, leaders were increasingly sent from the Center. Leaders of national formations and cultural figures who tried to continue the policy of the twenties were subjected to repression. In 1937-1938. in fact, the party and economic leaders of the national republics were completely replaced. Many leading figures of education, literature and art were repressed. Usually, local leaders were replaced by Russians sent directly from Moscow, sometimes by more "understanding" representatives of the indigenous peoples. The most egregious situation was in Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, where the republican politburos disappeared in full force.

Industrial construction in national areas. Nevertheless, the economic modernization that began in the country changed the face of the 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 during 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.

During the years of the first five-year plan, 400 enterprises were put into operation in the Ukrainian SSR, among them such as the Dneproges, the Kharkov Tractor Plant, the Kramatorsk Heavy Engineering Plant, etc. The share of industrial products in the economy of the republic increased to 72.4%. This testified to the transformation of Ukraine into a highly developed industrial republic.

In Central Asia, new cotton-cleaning plants, silk-reeling factories, food processing plants, canning factories, etc. were built. Power plants were built in Fergana, Bukhara and Chirchik. The Tashkent plant of agricultural machines began to work. A sulfur plant was built in Turkmenistan and mirabilite mining began in the Kara-Bogaz-Gol Bay.

An important role in the industrialization was played by the Turkestan-Siberian Railway. Its construction was completed in 1930. Turksib connected Siberia, rich in grain, timber and coal, with the 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, Yakut, Buryat-Mongolian. If capital investments in the industry of the RSFSR as a whole grew 4.9 times during the first five years, then in Bashkiria - 7.5 times, in Tataria - 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 ASSR, the industrial exploitation of the region's oil and coal resources began, and oil wells were built in Ukhta. The development of oil reserves began in Bashkiria and Tatarstan. The extraction of non-ferrous metals in Yakutia, the development of the natural resources of Dagestan, North Ossetia.

Often industrial enterprises the whole country built on the national outskirts. 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 up, studied, worked, created families nearby. In the 30s. in the USSR, a multinational community of people with its own social and cultural specifics, behavioral stereotype, and mentality has developed. An artistic expression of the spirit of internationalism that reigned in Soviet society was the most popular film "The Pig and the Shepherd", which tells about the love of a Russian girl and a guy from Dagestan.

SOVIET CULTURE OF THE 1930s

Development of education. The 1930s went down in the history of our country as the period of the "cultural revolution". This concept meant not only a significant increase, compared with the pre-revolutionary period, in the educational level of the people and the degree of their familiarization with the achievements of culture. Another component of the "cultural revolution" was the undivided dominance of the Marxist-Leninist doctrine in science, education and all areas of creative activity.

Under the conditions of the economic modernization carried out in the USSR, special attention was paid to raising the professional level of the population. At the same time, the totalitarian regime demanded to change the content school education and education, for the pedagogical "liberties" of the 20s. were of little use 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 academic year, the country began the transition to universal compulsory primary education in the amount of 4 classes. By 1937 seven years of education became compulsory. The old teaching and upbringing methods, condemned after the revolution, were returned to the school: lessons, subjects, a fixed schedule, grades, strict discipline and a whole range of punishments, up to and including expulsion. School curricula 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 the events and phenomena that took place.

School building was widely developed. Only during 1933-1937. more than 20,000 new schools opened in the USSR, about the same number as in tsarist Russia in 200 years. By the end of the 30s. over 35 million students studied at school desks. According to the 1939 census, literacy in the USSR was 87.4%.

The system of secondary specialized and higher education. By the end of the 30s. The Soviet Union came out on top in the world in terms of the number of pupils and students. Dozens of secondary and higher educational institutions have emerged in Belarus, the republics of Transcaucasia and Central Asia, the centers of autonomous republics and regions. The circulation of books in 1937 reached 677.8 million copies; books were published in 110 languages ​​of the peoples of the Union. Mass libraries were widely developed: by the end of the 30s. their number exceeded 90 thousand.

Science under ideological pressure. However, both education and science, as well as literature and art, were subjected to ideological attack in the USSR. Stalin declared that all sciences, including natural and mathematical ones, are political in nature. Scientists who disagreed with this statement were persecuted in the press and arrested.

An acute struggle unfolded in biological science. Under the guise of defending Darwinism and Michurin's theory, a group of biologists and philosophers headed by T. D. Lysenko came out against genetics, declaring it a "bourgeois science." The brilliant developments of Soviet geneticists were curtailed, and subsequently many of them (N. I. Vavilov, N. K. Koltsov, A. S. Serebrovsky, and others) were repressed.

But Stalin paid the closest attention to historical science. He took personal control of textbooks on the history of Russia, which became known as 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 against the exploiters. At the same time, a new branch of science appeared, which became one of the leading ones in the Stalinist ideological construction - the "history of the party." In 1938, the "Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks" was published, which Stalin not only carefully edited, but also wrote one of the paragraphs for it. The publication of this work marked the beginning of the formation of a single concept for the development of our country, which all Soviet scientists had to follow. And although some of the facts in the textbook were rigged and distorted in order to exalt the role of Stalin, the Central Committee of the party in its resolution assessed the "Short Course" as "a guide that represents the official, verified by the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks) interpretation of the main issues of the history of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and Marxism- Leninism, which does not allow any arbitrary interpretations. Every word, every provision of the "Short Course" had to be taken 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.

Successes of Soviet science. Ideological dogmas and strict party control had the most detrimental effect on the state of the humanities. But representatives of the natural sciences, although they experienced the negative consequences of the intervention of party and punitive bodies, nevertheless managed to achieve noticeable success, continuing the glorious traditions of Russian science.

The Soviet physical school, represented 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); .

A significant contribution to applied science was made by the works of chemists N. D. Zelinsky, N. S. Kurnakov, A. E. Favorsky, A. N. Bach, S. V. Lebedev. A method for the production of synthetic rubber was discovered, the production of artificial fibers, plastics, valuable organic products, etc. began.

World achievements were the work of Soviet biologists - N. I. Vavilov, D. N. Pryanishnikov, V. R. Williams, V. S. Pustovoit.

Significant progress was made in Soviet mathematics, astronomy, mechanics, and physiology.

Geological and geographical research has acquired a wide scope. Mineral deposits were discovered - oil between the Volga and the Urals, new coal reserves in the Moscow and Kuznetsk basins, iron ore in the Urals and in other areas. The North was actively explored and developed. This made it possible to sharply reduce the import of certain types of raw materials.

socialist realism. In the 30s. the process of liquidating dissent 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 the Soviet reality not as it really was, but as it was idealized by those in power.

Art propagated myths, and most Soviet people readily accepted them. Indeed, since the time of the revolution, the people have lived in an atmosphere of belief that the grandiose social upheaval that has taken place should bring a beautiful "tomorrow", although "today" was difficult, painfully difficult. And art, together with the encouraging promises of Stalin, created the illusion that the happy time had already come.

In the minds of people, the boundaries between the desired "bright future" and reality were blurring. This state was used by the authorities in order to create a socio-psychological solidity of society, which, in turn, made it possible to manipulate it, constructing either labor enthusiasm, or mass indignation against "enemies of the people", or popular love for their leader.

Soviet cinema. Cinematography, which has become the most popular form of art, has made a particularly great contribution to the transformation of people's consciousness. Events of the 20s and then 30s. reflected in the minds of people not only through their own experience, but also through their interpretation in films. The whole country watched the documentary chronicle. It was seen by the audience, sometimes unable to read, unable to deeply analyze the events, they perceived surrounding life not only as a cruel visible reality, but also as a joyful euphoria pouring from the screen. The stunning impact of Soviet documentary filmmaking on mass consciousness is also explained by the fact that brilliant masters worked in this field (D. Vertov, E. K. Tisse, E. I. Shub).

Do not lag behind the documentary and artistic cinema. A significant number of feature films were devoted to historical and revolutionary themes: "Chapaev" (directed by the Vasilyev brothers), a trilogy about Maxim (directed by G. M. Kozintsev and L. Z. Trauberg), "We are from Kronstadt" (directed by E. L. Dzigan).

In 1931, the first Soviet sound film "Start in Life" (directed by N. V. Ekk), which tells about the upbringing of a new Soviet generation, was released. The films of S. A. Gerasimov "Seven Courageous", "Komsomolsk", "Teacher" were devoted to the same problem. In 1936, the first color film "Grunya Kornakov" appeared (directed by N.V. Ekk).

In the same period, the traditions of Soviet children's and youth cinema were laid. There are film versions of famous works by V. P. Kataev (“The lonely sail turns white”), A. P. Gaidar (“Timur and his team”), A. N. Tolstoy (“The Golden Key”). Wonderful animated films were produced for children.

Especially popular among people of all ages were musical comedies by G. V. Aleksandrov - "Circus", "Merry Fellows", "Volga-Volga", I. A. Pyryev - "The Rich Bride", "Tractor Drivers", "Pig and Shepherd" .

The favorite genre of Soviet filmmakers was 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.

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 and others.

Musical and visual arts. The musical life of the country was associated with the names of S. S. Prokofiev, D. D. Shostakovich, A. I. Khachaturian, T. N. Khrennikov, D. B. Kabalevsky, I. O. Dunaevsky. Collectives were created that later glorified the Soviet musical culture: Quartet them. Beethoven, the Grand State Symphony Orchestra, the State Philharmonic Orchestra, etc. At the same time, any innovative searches in opera, symphony, and chamber music were decisively suppressed. When evaluating certain musical works, the personal aesthetic tastes of the party leaders, which were extremely low, affected. This is evidenced by the rejection by the "tops" of D. D. Shostakovich's music. His opera "Katerina Izmailova" and the ballet "Golden Age" were subjected to rough criticism in the press for "formalism".

The most democratic branch of musical creativity, songwriting, reached its peak. Talented composers worked in this field - I. O. Dunaevsky, B. A. Mokrousov, M. I. Blanter, the Pokrass brothers and others. Their works had a huge impact on contemporaries. The simple, easy-to-remember melodies of the songs of these authors were on everyone's lips: they sounded at home and on the street, poured from movie screens and from loudspeakers. And along with the major cheerful music, simple verses glorifying the Motherland, work, and Stalin sounded. The pathos of these songs did not correspond to the realities of life, but their romantic-revolutionary elation had a strong impact on a person.

Masters of fine arts also had to demonstrate fidelity to socialist realism. The main criteria for evaluating the artist were not his professional skills and creative individuality, but the ideological orientation of the plot. Hence the dismissive attitude towards the genre of still life, landscape and other "petty-bourgeois" excesses, although such talented masters as P. P. Konchalovsky, A. V. Lentulov, M. S. Saryan worked in this area.

Leading now have become other artists. Among them, the main place was occupied by B.V. Ioganson. His paintings "Rabfak goes (University students)", "Interrogation of Communists" and others became classics of socialist realism. A. A. Deineka, who created his famous poetic canvas "Future Pilots", Yu. I. Pimenov ("New Moscow"), M. V. Nesterov (a series of portraits of the Soviet intelligentsia), and others worked a lot.

At the same time, portraits, sculptures and busts of Stalin became an indispensable attribute of every city, every institution.

Literature. Theatre. Strict party diktat and comprehensive censorship could not but have an impact on general level mass literary production. One-day works appeared, resembling editorials in newspapers. But, nevertheless, even in these years, 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 Samgin", wrote the plays "Egor Bulychov and Others", "Dostigaev and Others". A. N. Tolstoy, also at home, put the last point in the trilogy "Walking through the torments", created the novel "Peter I" and other works.

M. A. Sholokhov, future laureate Nobel Prize, wrote the novel "Quiet Flows the Don" and the first part of "Virgin Soil Upturned". M. A. Bulgakov worked on the novel "The Master and Margarita" (although it did not reach the mass reader then). The works of V. A. Kaverin, L. M. Leonov, A. P. Platonov, K. G. Paustovsky and many other writers were noted for their generous talent. 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 and others.

Since the end of the 20s. plays by Soviet playwrights were established on the stage: N. F. Pogodin ("The Man with a Gun"), A. E. Korneichuk ("Death of the Squadron", "Plato Krechet"), V. V. Vishnevsky ("Optimistic Tragedy"), A. N. Arbuzov ("Tanya") and others. The repertoire of all theaters in the country included Gorky's plays written in different years - "Enemies", "Petty Bourgeois", "Summer Residents", "Barbarians", etc.

The most important feature of the cultural revolution was the active familiarization of Soviet people with art. This was achieved not only by increasing the number of theaters, cinemas, philharmonic societies, concert halls, but also by developing amateur art activities. Clubs, palaces of culture, houses of children's creativity; grandiose reviews of folk talents, exhibitions of amateur works were arranged.

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, making no secret of their intentions to start a struggle for the redivision of the world. The USSR was forced to change its foreign policy. First of all, the position 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 for Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, developed a detailed plan for creating a system of collective security in Europe. From that moment until 1939, Soviet foreign policy took on an anti-German orientation. Her main goal was the desire for an alliance with democratic countries in order to isolate Nazi Germany and Japan. This course was largely associated 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 tsarist debts, were resolved in favor of the USSR.

In May 1935, an agreement was concluded 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 treaty was not accompanied by any military agreements. Then an agreement on mutual assistance was signed with Czechoslovakia.

In 1935, the USSR condemned the introduction of compulsory military service in Germany and Italy's attack on Ethiopia. And after the introduction of German troops into the demilitarized Rhineland, the Soviet Union proposed to the League of Nations to take measures to stop violations of international obligations. But the voice of the USSR was not heard.

The course of the Comintern towards the creation of a united anti-fascist front. The USSR actively used the Comintern to implement its foreign policy plans. Until 1933, Stalin considered the main task of the Comintern to be the organization of support for his internal political course in the international arena. The sharpest criticism of Stalin's methods came from 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 guidelines in practice led to a split in the anti-fascist forces, which greatly facilitated the coming of the Nazis to power in Germany.

In 1933, along with the revision of the Soviet foreign policy, the attitudes of the Comintern also changed. The development of a new strategic line was headed by G. Dimitrov, the hero and winner of the Leipzig process started by the Nazis against the Communists. The new tactics were approved by the 7th Congress of the Comintern, which took place in the summer of 1935. The communists proclaimed the creation of a united anti-fascist front to prevent a world war as the 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 broad anti-war actions were closely linked with the struggle "for the security of the Soviet Union." The Congress warned that in the event of an attack on the USSR, the Communists would call on the working people "by all means to contribute to the victory of the Red Army over the armies of the imperialists."

The first attempt to put the new tactics of the Comintern into practice was made in 1936 in Spain, when General Franco raised a fascist revolt 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. The events in Spain clearly showed the need for united efforts in the struggle against the growing strength of fascism. But the democracies were still weighing which regime is more dangerous for democracy - fascist or communist.

Far East 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 resulted in direct military clashes.

The first military conflict took place in the summer-autumn of 1929 in Northern Manchuria. The stumbling block was the CER. According to the agreement of 1924 between the USSR and the Beijing government of China, the railway passed under joint Soviet-Chinese management. But by the end of the 20s. the Chinese administration was almost completely replaced 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 to regain by force the positions lost on the CER. An armed conflict broke out. Soviet troops defeated the Chinese border detachments on Chinese territory, which began hostilities.

At that time, in the Far East, in the face of Japan, the world community received a powerful hotbed of incitement to war. Having captured Manchuria in 1931, Japan created a threat to the Far Eastern borders of the Soviet Union, moreover, the CER, which belonged to the USSR, ended up on 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 later joined by Italy and Spain. In July 1937, Japan launched a large-scale aggression against China. In such a situation, the USSR and China went to mutual rapprochement. In August 1937, a non-aggression pact was concluded between them. After the signing of the treaty, the Soviet Union began to provide technical and material assistance to China. In the battles, Soviet instructors and pilots fought on the side of the Chinese army.

In the summer of 1938, armed clashes began between Japanese and Soviet troops on the Soviet-Manchurian border. A fierce battle took place in the area of ​​​​Lake Khasan, not far from Vladivostok. On the part of Japan, this was the first reconnaissance in force. It showed that it would hardly be possible to swoop down on Soviet borders. Nevertheless, in May 1939, Japanese troops invaded the territory of Mongolia in the area of ​​the Khalkhin Gol River. Since 1936, the Soviet Union has been connected with Mongolia by a union treaty. True to its obligations, the USSR brought its troops into the territory of Mongolia.

Munich Agreement. Meanwhile, the fascist powers were making new territorial conquests in Europe. In the middle of May 1938 German troops concentrated on the border with Czechoslovakia. The Soviet leadership was ready to help her even without France, but on the condition that she herself would ask 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 for negotiations 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 to "appease" the fascist aggressors, satisfying Germany's claims to seize the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. Nevertheless, the Soviet Union was ready to provide assistance to Czechoslovakia, guided by the charter of the League of Nations. For this, it was necessary that Czechoslovakia applied 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 in September 1938 of the Anglo-German, and in December of the same year, the Franco-German declarations, which were essentially non-aggression pacts. In these documents, the contracting parties declared their desire "never again to wage war against each other." The Soviet Union, seeking to protect itself from a possible military conflict, began searching for a new foreign policy line.

Soviet-English-French negotiations. After the conclusion of the Munich Agreement, the heads of government of Britain and France proclaimed the onset of an "era of peace" in Europe. Taking advantage of the connivance of the Western powers, on March 15, 1939, Hitler sent troops into Prague and finally liquidated Czechoslovakia as 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 annex Danzig, which had the status of a free city, and part of Polish territory. In April 1939 Italy occupied Albania. This somewhat sobered the ruling circles of Britain 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. Here it suddenly became clear that the British did not have the authority to negotiate and sign an agreement. Secondary military figures were placed at the head of both missions, while the Soviet delegation was headed by Marshal K. E. Voroshilov, People's Commissar for Defense.

The Soviet side presented a detailed plan of joint action by the armed forces of the USSR, Britain and France against the aggressor. The Red Army, in accordance with this plan, was to deploy in Europe 136 divisions, 5 thousand heavy guns, 9-10 thousand tanks and 5-5.5 thousand combat aircraft. The British delegation stated that in the event of a war, England would initially send only 6 divisions to the continent.

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 the Soviet troops 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, the members of the military delegations of the Western powers were warned by their governments that this decisive question for the whole matter should not be discussed in Moscow. Negotiations deliberately dragged on. The French and British delegations followed the instructions of their governments to negotiate slowly, "to strive to reduce the military agreement to the general conditions".

Rapprochement of the USSR and Germany. Hitler, without abandoning the forceful solution of the "Polish question", also suggested that the USSR begin negotiations on the conclusion of a non-aggression pact and the delimitation of spheres of influence in Eastern Europe. Stalin faced a difficult choice: either reject Hitler's proposals and thereby agree with 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 conclude agreements with Germany that make it possible to push the borders of the USSR far to the west and to some time to avoid war. For the Soviet leadership, the attempts of the Western powers to push Germany into war with the Soviet Union were no secret, as well as Hitler's desire to expand his "living space" at the expense of the eastern lands. Moscow knew about 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 the negotiations with the Anglo-French delegation in Moscow were, the more Stalin was inclined to the conclusion that it was necessary to sign an agreement with Germany. It was also necessary to take into account the fact that since May 1939, military operations of the Soviet-Mongolian troops against the Japanese were carried out on the territory of Mongolia. The Soviet Union faced an extremely unfavorable prospect of waging war simultaneously on both the eastern and western borders.

On August 23, 1939, the whole world was shocked by the shocking news: the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR V. M. Molotov (appointed to this position in May 1939) and the German Foreign Minister I. Ribbentrop signed a non-aggression pact. This fact came as a complete surprise to the Soviet people. But no one knew the most important thing - secret protocols were attached to the agreement, in which the section of Eastern Europe on spheres of influence between Moscow and Berlin. 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, without unnecessary complications, to begin the capture of the first bastion in the east and at the same time convince his generals that Germany would not have to fight on several fronts at once. Stalin received a gain in time to strengthen the defense of the country, as well as the opportunity to push back the initial positions of a potential enemy and restore the state within the borders of the former Russian Empire.

The conclusion of the Soviet-German agreements frustrated the attempts of the Western powers to draw the USSR into a war with Germany and, conversely, made it possible to switch the direction of German aggression primarily to the West. The Soviet-German rapprochement brought about a certain discord in relations between Germany and Japan and eliminated the threat of war on two fronts for the USSR.

Having settled things in the west, the Soviet Union stepped up military operations in the east. At the end of 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, from September 16, 1939, hostilities ceased. The threat of an escalation of the war in the Far East was eliminated.

What you need to know about this topic:

Socio-economic and political development of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. Nicholas II.

Domestic policy of tsarism. Nicholas II. Strengthening repression. "Police socialism".

Russo-Japanese War. Reasons, course, results.

Revolution of 1905 - 1907 Character, driving forces and features of the Russian revolution of 1905-1907. stages of the revolution. The reasons for the defeat and the significance of the revolution.

Elections to the State Duma. I State Duma. The agrarian question in the Duma. Dispersal of the Duma. II State Duma. Coup d'état June 3, 1907

Third June political system. Electoral law June 3, 1907 III State Duma. The alignment of political forces in the Duma. Duma activities. government terror. The decline of the labor movement in 1907-1910

Stolypin agrarian reform.

IV State Duma. Party composition and Duma factions. Duma activities.

The political crisis in Russia on the eve of the war. The labor movement in the summer of 1914 Crisis of the top.

International position Russia at the beginning of the 20th century.

Beginning of the First World War. Origin and nature of war. Russia's entry into the war. Attitude towards the war of parties and classes.

The course of hostilities. Strategic forces and plans of the parties. Results of the war. The role of the Eastern Front in the First World War.

The Russian economy during the First World War.

Workers' and peasants' movement in 1915-1916. Revolutionary movement in the army and navy. Growing anti-war sentiment. Formation of the bourgeois opposition.

Russian culture of the 19th - early 20th centuries.

Aggravation of socio-political contradictions in the country in January-February 1917. The beginning, prerequisites and nature of the revolution. Uprising in Petrograd. Formation of the Petrograd Soviet. Provisional Committee of the State Duma. Order N I. Formation of the Provisional Government. Abdication of Nicholas II. Causes of dual power and its essence. February coup in Moscow, at the front, in the provinces.

From February to October. The policy of the Provisional Government in relation to war and peace, on agrarian, national, 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. Growth of revolutionary sentiment among the masses. Bolshevization of the capital Soviets.

Preparation and conduct of an armed uprising in Petrograd.

II All-Russian Congress of Soviets. Decisions about power, peace, land. Organ formation state power and management. Composition of the first Soviet government.

The victory of the armed uprising in Moscow. Government agreement with the Left SRs. Elections to the Constituent Assembly, its convocation and dissolution.

The first socio-economic transformations in the field of industry, agriculture, finance, labor and women's issues. Church and State.

Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, its terms and significance.

Economic tasks of the Soviet government in the spring of 1918. Aggravation of the food issue. The introduction of food dictatorship. Working squads. Comedy.

The revolt of the left SRs and the collapse of the two-party system in Russia.

First Soviet Constitution.

Reasons for intervention and civil war. The course of hostilities. Human and material losses of the period of the civil war and military intervention.

The internal policy of the Soviet leadership during the war. "War Communism". GOELRO plan.

The policy of the new government in relation to culture.

Foreign policy. Treaties with border countries. Participation of Russia in the Genoa, 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 of 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 curtailment.

Projects for the creation of the USSR. I Congress of Soviets of the USSR. The first government and the Constitution of the USSR.

Illness and death of V.I. Lenin. Intraparty struggle. The beginning of the formation of Stalin's regime of power.

Industrialization and collectivization. Development and implementation of the first five-year plans. Socialist competition - purpose, forms, leaders.

Formation and strengthening state system economic management.

The course towards complete collectivization. Dispossession.

Results of industrialization and collectivization.

Political, national-state development in the 30s. Intraparty struggle. political repression. Formation of the nomenklatura as a layer of managers. Stalinist regime and the constitution of the USSR in 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 labor law. Measures to solve the grain problem. Armed forces. Growth of the Red Army. military reform. Repressions 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 Baltic republics 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 Capitulation of Nazi Germany. Participation of the USSR in the war with Japan.

Soviet rear during the war.

Deportation of peoples.

Partisan struggle.

Human and material losses during the war.

Creation of the anti-Hitler coalition. Declaration of the United Nations. The problem of the second front. Conferences of the "Big Three". Problems of post-war peace settlement and all-round cooperation. USSR and UN.

Beginning of the Cold War. The contribution of the USSR to the creation of the "socialist camp". CMEA formation.

Domestic policy of the USSR in the mid-1940s - early 1950s. Restoration of the national economy.

Socio-political life. Politics in the field of science and culture. Continued repression. "Leningrad business". Campaign against cosmopolitanism. "Doctors' Case".

Socio-economic development Soviet society in the mid 50's - early 60's.

Socio-political development: XX Congress of the CPSU and the condemnation of Stalin's personality cult. Rehabilitation of victims of repressions and deportations. Intra-party struggle in the second half of the 1950s.

Foreign policy: the creation of the ATS. The entry of Soviet troops into Hungary. Exacerbation of Soviet-Chinese relations. The split of the "socialist camp". Soviet-American Relations and the Caribbean Crisis. USSR and third world countries. Reducing the strength of the armed forces of the USSR. Moscow Treaty of Limitation nuclear testing.

USSR in the mid-60s - the first half of the 80s.

Socio-economic development: economic reform 1965

Growing difficulties of economic development. Decline in the rate of socio-economic growth.

USSR Constitution 1977

Socio-political life of the USSR in the 1970s - early 1980s.

Foreign Policy: Nonproliferation Treaty nuclear weapons. Consolidation of post-war borders in Europe. Moscow treaty with Germany. Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Soviet-American treaties of the 70s. Soviet-Chinese relations. The entry of Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan. Exacerbation 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 socio-economic development of the country. An attempt to reform the political system of Soviet society. Congresses of People's Deputies. Election of the President of the USSR. Multi-party system. Exacerbation of the political crisis.

Aggravation national question. Attempts to reform the national-state structure of the USSR. Declaration on State Sovereignty of the RSFSR. "Novogarevsky process". The collapse of the USSR.

Foreign policy: Soviet-American relations and the problem of disarmament. Treaties with leading capitalist countries. The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. Changing relations with the countries of the socialist community. Disintegration of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the Warsaw Pact.

Russian Federation in 1992-2000

Domestic policy: "Shock therapy" in the economy: price liberalization, stages of privatization of commercial and industrial enterprises. Fall in production. Increased social tension. Growth and slowdown in financial inflation. The aggravation of the struggle between the executive and legislative branches. The dissolution of the Supreme Soviet and the Congress of People's Deputies. October events of 1993. Abolition of local bodies of Soviet power. Elections to the Federal Assembly. The Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 Formation of the presidential republic. Aggravation and overcoming of national conflicts in the North Caucasus.

Parliamentary elections 1995 Presidential elections 1996 Power and opposition. An attempt to return to the course of liberal reforms (spring 1997) and its failure. Financial crisis August 1998: causes, economic and political consequences. "Second Chechen War". Parliamentary elections in 1999 and early presidential elections in 2000. Foreign policy: Russia in the CIS. Participation of Russian troops in the "hot spots" of the near abroad: Moldova, Georgia, Tajikistan. Russia's relations with far-abroad countries. Withdrawal of Russian troops from Europe and CIS 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.

agriculture in the USSR, the policy of the Soviet state and party leadership in the late 1920s - early 1930s, aimed at the mass creation of collective farms (collective farms). The peasantry was accompanied by the liquidation of individual farms and carried out at an accelerated pace, using violent methods and repression against the peasantry.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Collectivization

process of converting sole cross. x-in collective, social. x-va - collective farms, state farms. After Oct. roar. work began on the unification of the cross. in collective social x-va. The first collective farms in the U.—communes and artels—were created at the end of 1917 and the beginning. 1918 (communes). Intensive growth of social forms of x-in occurred in U. after the end of civil. war. In June 1920 there were 85 state farms in Ukraine with a total of 2,167 employees. (state farms), 191 communes, 234 artels, 18 tozes with 26,669 employees. The number of agricultural artels exceeded the number of communes; the layer of prosperous cross-middle peasants in Ukraine was more powerful than in Russia as a whole. However, the cross-middle peasants did not show interest in collective forms of farming, preferring trade-supply and marketing cooperation. On Wednesday. there were 16.4 horses per commune, 73 heads of cattle, incl. 23 heads of cattle, per artel, respectively 9.1, 35.5 and 11.8. Communes, as a rule, were created by the poor-proletarian strata on nationalized large private estates. Having received a solid mat. base and lacking skills in organizing and managing large agricultural production, most of them soon went bankrupt, and hunger overtook the communards. During the NEP there was a decline in the development of social. forms of management in s.kh. Collective farms, state farms were economically weak and could not exist without the state. help in the conditions of market relations. The number of collective farms in Ukraine decreased from 714 in 1921 to 472 in 1926. In 1925/26, collective farms and state farms produced 0.6 percent of gross agricultural output. and occupied 0.93% of the sown area. The 15th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (December 1927) proclaimed a course towards the K. agricultural sector. and attacks on the kulaks. At U. c. collective farm movement were Trans-Urals and Orenburg. According to social The composition of the created collective farms and state farms represented the movement of the poor peasants and a small number of low-powered middle peasants. In accordance with the decisions of the XV Congress of the CPSU (b), kulak farms were subject to progressive income taxation in the amount of 5 to 25% of income. The kulaks paid 8 times per hectare of agricultural land, 21 times per worker, and 30 times more per farm than the poor and middle peasant groups. From the spring of 1929, the beginning. apply the Ur.-Siberian method of self-taxation. Member kulak x-in were deprived of voting rights. Fast. The Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of July 18, 1929, was forbidden to kulaks to join collective farms, and those who accepted them were qualified as pseudo-kolkhozes. Kulaks and their dependents were deprived of the right to serve in the Armed Forces. Due to the growth in the number of cross. performances in 1929 began to apply Art. 58 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. After Nov. (1929) plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks; plenum of the Uralobkom (Dec. 1929) decided to collectivize in 1930 at least 80% of the cross. x-in. Feb. 1930 the Great Dane was signed. between Bashk. and Tataria, according to Bashk. pledged to complete K. by Feb. 1931. Nov. 1929 - March 1930 - the first stage of kulaks. Carrying out continuous kulaks was aimed primarily at eliminating the kulaks as a class. Decree of the Central Executive Committee and Council of People's Commissars of the USSR of February 1. 1930 "On measures to strengthen the social. Reorganization of agriculture in areas of complete collectivization" determined the categories of kulaks, the procedure for the confiscation of their property and eviction. Kulak farms were divided into 3 categories: 1) counter-rev. a kulak asset, which was subject to immediate arrest; 2) wealthy kulaks who passively resisted K.; 3) the rest of the fists. Kulaks enrolled in the 1st and 2nd categories were supposed to be evicted to the sowing. and east. districts of the country, the third category to settle in hard-to-reach districts. In Ur. region 5 thousand were assigned to the first category, 15 thousand crosses to the second. x-in (1.6%). By June 1930, 30 thousand farms (2.3%) were dispossessed, in Bashk. - 61 thousand rich crosses who resisted were shot without trial, some were imprisoned, the rest were sent to remote districts in special settlements (concentration camps). They were officially listed as special settlers. As a rule, they worked in logging, in the mining industries, in the p. prom. enterprises. From Ur. region and Bashk. all in. In 1930-1931, 41,214 families were deported to U. from Ukraine, Belarus, the North Caucasus, the Volga region, and the Central Chernozem region, 134,233 families. Hard work, hunger caused mass mortality and escapes (link). Dispossessed in the third category moved to the village. 20-30 yards for outdoor areas. During the continuous period of K., decossackization and self-dispossession took on a massive scale. Under the influence of repressive measures, the percentage of k. increased. in Ur. region from 1 Jan. to March 1, 1930 from 30 to 68.8%, in Bashk. up to 81.2%. Naib. the highest level of K. was in Irbitsky (88.7), Ishimsky (88.2), Perm. (76.8), Chelyab., Sarapulsky (76.7%) env. The creation of communes, in to-ryh communities, has become widespread. not only the main funds x-va, slave. livestock, but also small livestock, poultry, housing, personal items. In the beginning. March 1930 in Ur. region there were 1174 communes, which accounted for 30% of all collective farms. Naib. mass distribution received communes in the Tyumen region. (76.3% of all collective x-in). Attempts have been made to create a (district) communes: "Giant" of the Irbit district, as well as Shatrovsky, Talitsky, Mekhon district. In many districts, the creation of giant collective farms with coverage of several. village councils and even okrug. In the beginning. March 1930 in Ur. region there were more than 40 district collective farms. Solid K. covered x-va slave. U. According to the budget studies. 1926/27 74.2% of the families of mining artisans had a land allotment (one farm accounted for 1.11 dess.), 83.2% of slaves. families had a cow, 55.4% horses. Feb. 1930 most crops, livestock slave. were socialized. In the spring of 1930, a socialist arose in the village. tension. On March 2, 1930, Stalin published Art. "Dizziness from success", in which he condemned excessive administration, coercion in conducting K. Began mass decay collective farms. By July 1930, the share of collectivized x-in Ur. region decreased to 24.6%, in Bashk. up to 21.2%. Autumn 1930-1934 - the second stage of K. It was characterized by a total attack on the individual sector. Society was completed. crops. The collective farmer was left with a personal plot of 6 acres. The most important economy cross elimination lever. x-in was a violent community. livestock. As a result, the dynamics of the decrease in the number of livestock in Ukraine was: 1928 - 100%, 1930 - 74%, 1933 - 42% (livestock). Mass society. livestock, grain, grain and meat procurement, the closure of churches exacerbated the social. and criminogenic tension in ur. village (peasant movements). Agricultural Revolution. led the country to general famine. Dynamics K. cross. x-in in Ur. region was: on 10/1/1930 - 26.4%, 10/1/1931 - 66.1, 01/01/1932 - 66.4, 01/01/1933 - 66.2, 01/01/1934 - 69.8%. 1935-1940 - the third (final) stage of K. The final stage of K. was the campaign of 1939-1940, as a result of which farms were liquidated. That. in the late 1930s, the communities were completed. individual cross. x-in and x-in slave. K. led to profound changes in the social - economics. position not only in the village, but throughout the country. Lit.: Efremenkov N.V. Collective-farm construction in the Urals in 1917-1930 // From the history of the collectivization of agriculture in the Urals. Sat. 1. Sverdlovsk, 1966; He is. Collective-farm construction in the Urals in 1931-1932 // From the history of the collectivization of agriculture in the Urals. Sat. 2. Sverdlovsk, 1968; Plotnikov I.E. The role of the Soviets in the preparation of the collectivization of agriculture (on the materials of the Urals). Chelyabinsk, 1980; History of the national economy of the Urals (1917-1945). Part 1. Sverdlovsk, 1988; Bazarov A.A. Fist and agrogulag. Chelyabinsk, 1991; Denisevich M.N. Individual farms in the Urals. (1930-1985). Yekaterinburg, 1991; Davletshin R.A. " Great fracture"and the tragedy of the peasants of Bashkiria. Ufa, 1993; Dispossessed and special settlers. Yekaterinburg, 1993; History of the Cossacks of Asian Russia. V.3. Yekaterinburg, 1995. Plotnikov I.E., Denisevich M.N.

Collectivization This is the process of uniting small individual peasant farms into large socialist farms based on the socialization of property.

Goals of collectivization:

1) The creation of collective farms in a short time in order to overcome the dependence of the state on individual peasant farms in the matter of grain procurement.

2) Transfer of funds from the agricultural sector of the economy to the industrial sector for the needs of industrialization.

3) The liquidation of the kulaks as a class.

4) Providing industrialization with cheap labor due to the departure of peasants from the countryside.

5) Strengthening the influence of the state on the private sector in agriculture.

reasons for collectivization.

By the end of the recovery period, the country's agriculture had basically reached the pre-war level. However, the level of its marketability remained lower than before the revolution, because. large landowner economy was destroyed. The small peasant farm provided for the most part its own needs. Only large-scale farming could lead to an increase in commodity production, or an increase in marketability could be achieved through cooperation. Credit, marketing and supply, consumer cooperatives began to spread in the countryside even before the revolution, but by 1928 they were not enough. The involvement of the broad masses of the peasantry in collective farms allowed the state, firstly , to implement the Marxist idea of ​​transforming small peasant farms into large socialist farms, Secondly to ensure the growth of commodity production and, third, take control of stocks of grain and other agricultural products.

The 15th Congress of the CPSU (b) in December 1927 proclaimed a course towards the collectivization of the countryside. However, no deadlines and specific forms of its implementation have been established. The party leaders who spoke at the congress unanimously noted that small individual peasant farming would continue to exist for quite a long time.

It was supposed to create various forms of industrial cooperation:

§ Commune - a large degree of socialization of production and life.

§ Artel (collective farm) - socialization of the main means of production: land, inventory, livestock, including small livestock and poultry.

§ TOZ (association for cultivation of the land) - General work on the cultivation of the land.

But the grain procurement crisis of 1927/1928 changed the attitude of the party leadership towards the individual peasant economy.. Violent discussions broke out in the party (see the topic "Industrialization").

1) One way out was offered I. Stalin. He spoke in favor of the maximum concentration of resources due to the tension of the entire economic system, the transfer of funds from secondary industries (agriculture, light industry).

2) N. Bukharin insisted on a balanced development of the industrial and agricultural sectors of the economy on the basis of a market form of communication between the city and the countryside, while maintaining individual peasant farms. N.I. Bukharin spoke out against the imbalance and disruption of proportions between industry and agriculture, against directive-bureaucratic planning with its tendency to organize big leaps. Bukharin believed that under the conditions of the New Economic Policy, cooperation through the market would include ever larger sections of peasants in the system of economic ties and thereby ensure their growth into socialism. This was to be facilitated by the technical re-equipment of peasant labor, including the electrification of agriculture.

N.I. Bukharin and A.I. Rykov suggested the following way out of the procurement crisis of 1927/28:

§ increase in purchase prices,

§ refusal to apply emergency measures,

§ a reasonable system of taxes on the village upper classes,

§ deployment of large collective farms in grain regions, mechanization of agriculture.

The Stalinist leadership rejected this path , regarding it as a concession to the kulak.
Seizure of surplus grain began in the image and likeness of the period of “war communism. Peasants who refused to hand over grain at state prices were prosecuted as speculators.

Simultaneously, the forcing of collectivization began ( 1928). In some places, peasants were forced to join the collective farms, declaring those who resisted were enemies of Soviet power.

In 1928, the first machine and tractor stations (MTS) began to appear, which provided peasants with paid services for cultivating the land with the help of tractors. The tractor demanded the elimination of the boundary between the peasant stripes, therefore, the introduction of a common plowing.

Forced collectivization.

In November 1929, at the Plenum of the Central Committee, Stalin spoke with the article “The Year of the Great Turning Point”, where he stated that a "radical change" had occurred in the collective farm movement: middle peasants had already gone to the collective farms, they were being created in large numbers. In fact, this was not the case, since only 6.9% of the peasants joined the collective farms.

After the statement about the accomplished "radical change" the pressure on the peasants to force them to join the collective farm increased sharply, "complete collectivization" began to be carried out ( 1929). Party organizations of the main grain regions declared areas of complete collectivization (Lower and Middle Volga, Don, North Caucasus), began to accept obligations to complete collectivization by the spring of 1930, that is, in two to three months. The slogan "frantic pace of collectivization" appeared. In December 1929, a directive followed to socialize cattle in areas of complete collectivization. In response, the peasants began to slaughter cattle en masse, which caused catastrophic damage to livestock.

In January 1930, the decision of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks was adopted "On the pace of collectivization and measures of state assistance to collective farm construction." In the main grain-growing regions of the country, it was proposed to complete collectivization by the autumn of 1930, in other regions - a year later. The resolution declared that the main form of collective farming was not the agricultural artel, but the commune (most high degree socialization) . Unlike the artel, the commune socialized not only the means of production, but all property. Local organizations were asked to launch a collectivization competition. Naturally, in this situation the pace of collective-farm construction increased sharply. By March 1, 1930, almost 59% of households were in collective farms.

The main means of forcing the peasants to join the collective farms was the threat of dispossession. Since 1928 a policy of restricting the kulaks was pursued. It was subject to increased taxes, state lending to kulak farms was prohibited. Many wealthy peasants began to sell their property and leave for the cities.

Since 1930 dispossession policy begins. dispossession - these are mass repressions in relation to the kulaks: deprivation of property, arrests, deportations, physical destruction.

On January 30, 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On measures to eliminate kulak farms in areas of complete collectivization." The fists were divided into three groups :

Ø counter-revolutionary kulak asset - were subject to dispossession, arrest and imprisonment in camps, and often - the death penalty;

Ø the largest fists - Moved to remote areas

Ø all other fists - were evicted from collective farm lands.

The property of the dispossessed was placed at the disposal of the collective farms.

The dispossession was carried out not by the judiciary, but by the executive branch and the police, with the involvement of the communists, the local poor and workers-agitators specially sent to the village of the communists ("twenty-five thousandths"). There were no clear criteria for who should be considered a kulak. In some cases, rural rich people were dispossessed, on whose farms several laborers worked, in others, the presence of two horses in the yard became the basis for dispossession. Often the campaign to "eliminate the kulaks as a class" turned into a settling of personal scores, into plundering the property of wealthy peasants. On the whole, 12-15% of households were dispossessed across the country (up to 20% in some areas). The real share of kulak farms did not exceed 3-6%. This testifies that main blow fell on the middle peasantry. Those dispossessed and evicted to the North were considered special settlers. Special artels were created from them, the working and living conditions in which were not much different from the camp ones.

The following methods and forms of dispossession were used:

ü administrative coercion to participate in collective farm construction;

ü exclusion from cooperation and confiscation of deposits and shares in favor of the fund for the poor and farm laborers;

ü confiscation of property, buildings, means of production in favor of collective farms;

ü inciting by the party and Soviet authorities of the poor strata of the population on the prosperous peasantry;

ü the use of the press to organize an anti-kulak campaign.

But even such repressive measures did not always help. Forced collectivization and mass repressions during dispossession provoked resistance from the peasants. In the first three months of 1930 alone, more than 2,000 demonstrations related to violence took place in the country: arson and breaking into collective farm barns, attacks on activists, etc. This forced the Soviet leadership to temporarily suspend collectivization. Stalin March 2, 1930 spoke in "Pravda" with the article "Dizziness from success", where coercion to join the collective farm and the dispossession of the middle peasants were condemned as "excesses". The blame for this rested entirely with local workers. The Exemplary Charter of the collective farm was also published, according to which the collective farmers received the right to keep a cow, small livestock, and poultry on their personal farmstead.

March 14, 1930 issued a resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) "On the fight against distortions of the party line in the collective-farm movement". Those who joined the collective farm under pressure received the right to return to individual farming. A mass exit from the collective farms followed. By July 1930, 21% of households remained in them, compared to 59% by March 1. However, a year later, the level of collectivization again reached the March level of 1930. This is due to higher taxes on individual farmers, the difficulties they encountered in trying to get back the plots, livestock and equipment transferred to the collective farms.

In 1932-1933, in the grain regions, which had just survived collectivization and dispossession, there was a severe famine. The year 1930 was fruitful, which made it possible not only to supply the cities and send grain for export, but also to leave a sufficient amount of grain for the collective farmers. But in 1931, the harvest turned out to be somewhat below average, and the volume of grain procurement not only did not decrease, but even increased. This was due mainly to the desire to take as much grain as possible abroad in order to obtain currency for the purchase of industrial equipment. Bread was confiscated, leaving the peasants not even the necessary minimum. The same pattern was repeated in 1932. The peasants, realizing that the bread would be confiscated, began to hide it. Grain procurements, especially in the main grain regions, were disrupted.

In reply the state resorted to cruel punitive measures. In areas that did not fulfill the tasks for grain procurement, the peasants were taken away all the available food supplies, dooming them to starvation. The famine covered the most fertile grain regions, for example, the Lower and Middle Volga regions, the Don, and Ukraine. Moreover, if the villages were dying of exhaustion, then in the cities there was only a slight deterioration in supply. According to various estimates, from 4 to 8 million people became victims of the famine.

In the midst of hunger On August 7, 1932, the law "On the protection and strengthening of public (socialist) property" was adopted, known in everyday life as the "law of three (five) spikelets." Any, even the smallest theft of state or collective farm property was henceforth punishable by execution with a replacement of ten years in prison. The victims of the decree were women and teenagers who, fleeing from starvation, sheared ears of corn with scissors at night or picked up grain spilled during the harvest. In 1932 alone, over 50,000 people were repressed under this law, including more than 2,000 who were sentenced to death.

During the famine, the process of collectivization was suspended. Only in 1934, when the famine ended and agricultural production began to grow again, did peasants resume joining the collective farms. The ever-increasing taxes on individual farmers and the limitation of their field plots left the peasants no choice. It was necessary either to join the collective farms, or to leave the village. As a result, by 1937, 93% of the peasants became collective farmers.

Collective farms were placed under the strict control of the Soviet and party organs. Purchase prices for agricultural products were set at extremely low levels. In addition, the collective farms had to pay for the services of the MTS with their products and pay the state tax in kind. As a result, collective farmers worked virtually for free. Each of them, under pain of criminal punishment, was obliged to work out a certain minimum of workdays on the collective farm field. It was impossible to leave the village without the consent of the collective farm board. peasants did not receive passports introduced in 1932. The main source was personal household plots.

Results and consequences of collectivization.

1) Solving the country's socio-economic problems for a long period at the expense of agriculture, the village (the collective farm system is a convenient form of withdrawing the maximum volume of agricultural products, transferring funds from the countryside to industry, to other sectors of the economy).

2) Elimination of a layer of independent, prosperous peasants who wanted to work without dictate from the state.

3) The destruction of the private sector in agriculture (93% of peasant farms are united in collective farms), the complete nationalization of agricultural production, the subordination of all aspects of rural life to the party-state leadership.

4) Cancellation in 1935 card system product distribution.

5) Alienation of peasants from property, land and the results of their labor, loss of economic incentives to work.

6) Lack of qualified labor force, youth in the countryside.

Thus, collectivization inflicted heavy damage on agriculture, brought down famine and repression on the peasants. In general, there was a slowdown in the growth of agricultural production, and there was a constant food problem in the country.

The collectivization of the peasantry (80% of the country's population) was intended not only to intensify labor and raise the standard of living in the countryside. It facilitated the redistribution of funds and labor from the countryside to the city. It was assumed that it would be much easier to obtain grain from a relatively small number of collective farms (collective farms) and state farms (state agricultural enterprises) working according to the plan than from 25 million dispersed private producers. It was this organization of production that made it possible to concentrate the labor force to the maximum at the decisive moments of the agricultural work cycle. For Russia, this was always relevant and made the peasant community "immortal". Mass collectivization also promised to release from the village labor force necessary for construction and industry.

Collectivization was carried out in two stages.

First: 1928–1929 - confiscation and socialization of livestock, the creation of collective farms on local initiative.

In the spring of 1928, the accelerated creation of collective farms began.

Table 1 Chronicle of collectivization

years	Developments
1928	The beginning of the forced creation of collective farms
1929	Solid collectivization - "The year of the great turning point"
1930	The liquidation of the kulaks as a class - "Dizziness from success"
1932-1933	A terrible famine (according to various sources, from 3 to 8 million people died). The actual suspension of collectivization
1934	The resumption of collectivization. The beginning of the final stage of the creation of collective farms
1935	Adoption of a new charter of collective farms
1937	Completion of collectivization: 93% of peasant farms united in collective farms

In the spring of 1928, a campaign began to confiscate food from the peasants. The role of the performers was played by the local poor and workers and communists who came from the city, who, according to the number of the first set, began to be called "twenty-five thousand people." In total, 250 thousand volunteers went from cities to carry out collectivization from 1928 to 1930.

By the autumn of 1929, the measures taken from the 15th Party Congress (December 1925) to prepare for the transition of the countryside to complete collectivization began to bear fruit. If in the summer of 1928 there were 33.3 thousand collective farms in the country, uniting 1.7% of all peasant farms, then by the summer of 1929 there were 57 thousand of them. Over a million, or 3.9%, of farms were united in them. In some areas of the North Caucasus, the Lower and Middle Volga, the Central Chernozem region, up to 30-50% of farms have become collective farms. In three months (July-September), about a million peasant households entered the collective farms, almost the same number as in the 12 post-October years. This meant that the main sections of the countryside - the middle peasants - began to switch to the path of collective farms. Based on this trend, Stalin and his supporters, contrary to previously adopted plans, demanded that collectivization be completed in the main grain regions of the country within a year. The theoretical justification for forcing the restructuring of the countryside was Stalin's article "The Year of the Great Break" (November 7, 1929). It said that the peasants went to the collective farms "whole villages, volosts, districts" and already in the current year "decisive successes in the field of grain procurement" were achieved, the assertions of the "right" about the impossibility of mass collectivization "collapsed, scattered into dust". In fact, at that time only 7% of peasant farms united in collective farms.

The plenum of the Central Committee (November 1929), which discussed the results and further tasks of collective farm construction, emphasized in the resolution that the turning point in the attitude of the peasantry towards collectivization "in the upcoming sowing campaign should become the starting point for a new movement forward in the rise of the poor and middle peasant economy and in the socialist village restructuring. It was a call for immediate total collectivization.

In November 1929, the Central Committee instructed the local party and Soviet bodies to launch a complete collectivization not only of villages and districts, but also of the regions. In order to induce peasants to join collective farms, on December 10, 1929, a directive was adopted, according to which local leaders in collectivization areas were to achieve almost complete socialization of livestock. The response of the peasantry was the mass slaughter of animals. From 1928 to 1933, only 25 million cattle were slaughtered by peasants (during the Great Patriotic War, the USSR lost 2.4 million).

In a speech at a conference of Marxist agrarians in December 1929, Stalin formulated the task of liquidating the kulaks as a necessary condition for the development of collective farms and state farms. A "great leap" in development, a new "revolution from above" was supposed to put an end to all socio-economic problems at once, to radically break and rebuild the existing economic structure and national economic proportions.

Revolutionary impatience, the enthusiasm of the masses, the mood of the storm movement, to a certain extent inherent in the Russian national character, were skillfully exploited by the country's leadership. In the management of the economy, administrative levers prevailed, material incentives began to be replaced by work on the enthusiasm of people. The end of 1929 was essentially the end of the NEP period.

Second stage: 1930-1932 - after the decision of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of January 5, 1930 "On the pace of collectivization and measures of state assistance to collective farm construction", the campaign of "solid collectivization" planned in Moscow began. The whole country was divided into three regions, each was given specific dates for the completion of collectivization.

This decree set strict deadlines for its implementation. In the main grain regions of the country (the Middle and Lower Volga regions, the North Caucasus), it was to be completed by the spring of 1931; throughout the country.

In spite of decision, and the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, and grassroots party organizations were determined to carry out collectivization in more compressed juices. The "competition" of local authorities for the record-breaking rapid creation of "areas of complete collectivization" began.

The five-year plan for collectivization was carried out in January 1930, when more than 20% of all peasant farms were in the collective farms. But already in February, Pravda orientated its readers: "The blueprint for collectivization - 75% of the poor and middle peasant farms during 1930-31 is not the maximum." The threat of being accused of right deviation due to insufficiently decisive actions pushed local workers to various forms of pressure against peasants who did not want to join collective farms (deprivation of voting rights, expulsion from the Soviets, boards and other elected organizations). The resistance was mostly provided by wealthy peasants. In response to the brutal actions of the authorities, mass peasant discontent grew in the country. In the first months of 1930, more than 2,000 peasant uprisings were registered by the OGPU, in the suppression of which not only the troops of the OGPU-NKVD, but also the regular army took part. In the Red Army units, which consisted mainly of peasants, dissatisfaction with the policy of the Soviet leadership was ripening. Fearing this, on March 2, 1930, in the Pravda newspaper, I. V. Stalin published an article "Dizziness from Success", in which he condemned the "excesses" in collective farm construction and blamed the local leadership for them. But in essence, the policy towards the countryside and the peasantry remained the same.

After a short break for agricultural work and harvesting, the campaign for the socialization of peasant farms was continued with renewed vigor and completed on time in 1932-1933.

In parallel with the socialization of peasant farms, in accordance with the resolution of the Central Committee of January 30, 1930 "On measures to eliminate kulak farms in areas of complete collectivization", a policy of "liquidating the kulaks as a class" was pursued. Peasants who refused to join the collective farm were deported with their families to remote areas of the country. The number of "kulak" families was determined in Moscow and brought to the attention of local leaders. During dispossession, about 6 million people died. Total liquidated "kulak farms" only in 1929-1931. amounted to 381 thousand (1.8 million people), and in total during the years of collectivization reached 1.1 million households.

Dekulakization became a powerful catalyst for collectivization and made it possible by March 1930 to raise its level in the country to 56%, and in the RSFSR to 57.6%. By the end of the five-year plan, more than 200,000 fairly large (on average, 75 households) collective farms had been created in the country, uniting about 15 million peasant farms, 62% of their total number. Along with collective farms, 4,500 state farms were formed. According to the plan, they were supposed to become a school for managing a large socialist economy. Their property was state property; the peasants who worked in them were state workers. Unlike collective farmers, they received a fixed salary for their work. wages. At the beginning of 1933, the implementation of the first five-year plan (1928–1932) was announced in 4 years and 3 months. All the reports cited figures that did not reflect the actual situation in the Soviet economy.

According to statistics, from 1928 to 1932, the production of consumer goods fell by 5%, the total agricultural production by 15%, and the personal incomes of the urban and rural population by 50%. In 1934 collectivization resumed. At this stage, launched a broad "attack" on the individual peasants. An unbearable administrative tax was established for them. Thus, their farms were brought under ruin. The peasant had two ways: either to go to the collective farm, or to go to the city for the construction of the first five-year plans. In February 1935, at the II All-Russian Congress of Collective Farmers, a new exemplary charter for an agricultural artel (collective farm) was adopted, which became a milestone in collectivization and established collective farms as the main form of agricultural production in the country. Collective farms, as well as industrial enterprises throughout the country, had production plans that had to be strictly implemented. However, unlike urban enterprises, collective farmers had practically no rights, such as social security, etc., since collective farms did not have the status of state enterprises, but were considered a form of cooperative farming. Gradually, the village came to terms with the collective farm system. By 1937, individual farming had virtually disappeared (93% of all households were united into collective farms).


Content:

Why did they collectivize?

The grain procurement crisis threatened to disrupt the plans of the CPSU (b) party. As a result, the party decided to begin consolidation in agriculture - collectivization - the union of small peasant farms into large collective farms.

It was an objective process taking place in all developed countries, possibly with different incentives and within the framework of the 2000s, but everywhere it was relatively painful for the peasantry.

With low productivity and low productivity, small farms could not provide for the growing population of the country, moreover, too many people were employed in agriculture, a significant part of whom could work in cities. In fact, the Bolsheviks had a choice: leave the country as it is and lose in the first war, or start modernizing. Another issue is methods.

Tasks of collectivization

The following main tasks were set:

1. to increase the volume of agricultural production,
2. to eliminate inequality in the standard of living among the peasants (in other views - to destroy the small owner - the kulak, as a subject fundamentally antagonistic to the communist idea),
3. introduce new technologies to the village.

There was a kind of optimization of agriculture. However, economists often point out that the main goal was ensure industrialization with means and people. The country could not remain further agrarian.

How was collectivization

Collective farms began to be created en masse.

Active propaganda was carried out among the peasants for joining the collective farms and against the kulaks.

The layer of the kulaks was destroyed in a short time. The process of dispossession deprived the countryside of the most enterprising, most independent peasants.

But the measures taken were not enough, and the peasants for the most part ignored the agitation to join the collective farms, and therefore in 1929 the party decided to drive them there by force.

In November 1929, Stalin's article "The Year of the Great Break" was published. It spoke of "a radical change in the development of our agriculture from small and backward individual farming to large-scale and advanced collective farming."

In addition, private households raised taxation.

Delivered ahead of time reforms have been drastically reduced, now it has become necessary to complete it in two years. Local performers showed increased diligence. Mass unrest and clashes began, as a result of which Stalin's article "Dizziness from Success" was published and collectivization moved into a calmer direction (for a short time).

In the collective farms, cases of theft of bread spread. The state responded to the low rates of grain procurements with repressions. The Law on the Protection of Socialist Property introduced execution for such theft.

In 1932, 33, a mass famine broke out, which claimed the lives of several million.

In 1934, the final stage of collectivization began. Almost all peasants were divided into collective farms, which were assigned land and the obligation to hand over to the state from a third to a quarter of their production.

The results of collectivization

With the help of collectivization, several problems were solved:

• Industry received the necessary funds and people,
• An uninterrupted supply of food to cities and the army was established.
• The bread confiscated from the peasants during collectivization was shipped abroad in exchange for technology.
• Peasant labor has become somewhat easier.