STALIN
Collectivisation What was meant by the term ‘collectivisation’? The bringing together of individual peasant farm plots to form a large collective farm or kolkhose. This large farm would have one central village and be run by a committee. All equipment shared, and about 20% of produce sold to the state at fixed low price. State in return provided machinery from Machine Tractor Stations (MTS) Some collectives were totally state owned and run called sukhoses. Peasants received a set low wage but were allowed to farm small plots next to their houses for their own consumption. What were the key features of collectivisation? Formation of kolkhose farms i.e. controlled and farmed by a peasant collective. Land would be centrally farmed, with shared equipment or hired off the state from MTSs. 20% of produce was sold to the state at a fixed low price. Some collectives were centrally owned by the state- sukhoses. Policy of collectivisation was announced in 1928. Initially peasants were encouraged to join and after 1929 forced through the actions of the army and NKVD. Land taken from the kulaks formed the basis of the collective to which other peasants were ‘encouraged’ to join. By 1934 70% of land had been collectivised. By 1941 virtually all land had been collectivised. Opponents of collectivisation were identified as ‘kulaks’ and either executed or transported. This elimination of a so-called capitalist class was called ‘de-kulakisation’.
What was meant by the term ‘kulak’? Wealthy peasants who owned more land than the average peasant and hired extra labour. As such they were identified by the communists as capitalists and hostile to collectivisation. 5 million were either killed or deported to camps during 1930s. In reality the number of kulaks was small- any peasant opposing collectivisation was labelled as such.
Why did Stalin introduce collectivisation? Stalin wanted to end the New Economic Policy (NEP) for two reasons. Overall economic reasons were to fulfil wider political aims: Economic: By the late 1920s increases in agricultural production had slowed and by 1928 there was once again a grain crisis. Peasants were unwilling to sell their grain because industry was producing few goods for them to buy. Collectives had several advantages: they were easier to manage and take grain from than individual peasant plots; they were more efficient in theory due to economies of scale; mechanisation could be introduced easily. Increased efficiency would men fewer peasants were needed- the surplus would move to the cities and become workers. Increased production would allow Stalin to sell the surplus to foreign countries, earn foreign currency and then import technical industrial equipment. Political: Collectivisation was a more pure form of communism. Stalin could eliminate wealthy peasants (kulaks) and remove rivals to his power such as Bukharin who had supported NEP. This would mean more workers and fewer peasants. (This reflected communist hostility to backward and traditional peasants) Stalin saw agriculture as essential for the survival of communism (food shortages had been partly responsible for the Tsar’s troubles in 1917). Increased production would feed a growing working class. A growing working class meant a stronger USSR. A stronger USSR meant a stronger Stalin…
Why was there so much opposition to collectivisation? Peasants disliked handing over land and livestock to the state. Since 1917 their experience of the state had been largely negative. The 1917 ‘Decree on Land’ had ‘given’ land to the peasants- land they had already taken and regarded as their own anyway. War Communism during the Civil war had led to forced grain requisitioning and executions by the Cheka. The NEP had allowed some private profit and agriculture had recovered but by 1928 many peasants were unwilling to produce surplus food since they had few goods to buy. Wealthier peasants resisted the actions of the NKVD (formerly the Cheka). 5 million kulaks arrested and killed/deported to camps etc. Collectivisation also resulted in further grain requisitioning (for export). This combined with harvest failure produced famine in 1931-3 and peasant unrest. Probably 13 million peasants died as a consequence of collectivisation/famine and 17 million forced into the cities.
1
Industrialisation Why did Stalin introduce the Five-Year Plans? What was the impact of collectivisation between 1928-41? Impact on agriculture: Initial slump in agriculture from 1928 to 1933 due to peasant resistance (refusing to sow crops and slaughtering of animals), loss of kulak expertise, harvest failure. Some recovery in the mid-1930s of production levels- but only in 1940 were levels as high as pre-1914. Mechanisation of agriculture increased but still shortages of basic equipment. By 1934 70% of land collectivised. Majority collectivised by 1941. Impact on industry: Export of grain allowed Stalin to buy technical machines for the Five-Year Plans. 17 million peasants displaced to work in industry and new industrial complexes such as Magnitogorsk. 20% of grain bought by the state to feed workers. Social impact: Removal of kulak class- probably as many as 5 million deported or killed. Removal of all peasant opposition. Probably a further 5 million peasants, including whole villages killed or deported to labour camps (gulags). Famine in 1931-33 killed about 7 million peasants. Peasant life largely destroyed- churches demolished, villages uprooted. But collectives did provided new schools and hospitals. Political impact: Peasants as a political class neutralised. Communist hold on power strengthened therefore but at a cost. Stalin’s hold on power was initially strengthened due to the collectivisation process but the disruption and deaths caused led to some opposition by 1934. This in part led to Kirov’s murder and the later purges (see later notes). There were many reasons why Stalin wished to modernise industry but like agriculture, political and personal aims were uppermost: Political: Industrialisation would create a large working-class which therefore fulfilled the ideas of Marx that communism would develop in a modern industrialised society. A peasant agrarian society was seen as backward and conservative. A modern industrialised state would show the world the power of communism. Stalin had said in a speech in 1931 that the USSR was 50-100 years behind the West and needed to catch up in ten. This would fulfil his policy of ‘Socialism in One Country’. State nationalisation would also end the NEP and stop private trading by Nepmen. Personal: Such a development would consolidate Stalin’s control on power and show him to be the worthy successor of Lenin. He could also attack the NEP and its supporter Bukharin (as he did in 1928). Economic: Industry would be centrally planned by the state. (A command economy). This was seen as more efficient and productive. (as with collectivisation) Concentration on heavy industry would allow the development of a good infrastructure and would produce larger economic units. (Factories in the USA were on average ten times as big as Soviet ones). Industrial development would provide machinery for agriculture. Strategic: Heavy industry would provide the USSR with the necessary armaments needed to defend communism from a hostile capitalist world. (Stalin naturally mistrusted Nazism and saw Britain and France conspiring to induce a war between Germany and the USSR). Many new industrial cities (e.g. Magnitogorsk) were developed in the Urals away from the Soviet borders in the west.
2
What were the key features of the Five Year Plans? Three Five Year Plans: 1928-32- aimed at expanding heavy industry- coal, oil, steel etc. All production nationalised bringing the NEP to an end. 1933-37- aimed at making machines especially tractors. Emphasis was also placed on consumer goods but this was sidelined because of rearmament. New transport links were developed including the Metro. Mining for minerals expanded. 1938-41- aimed to produce more consumer goods such as radios, but called off in 1941 due to war. Production once again focused on rearmament.
Describe the key features of the Stakhanovite movement. Stakhanovites were workers awarded better wages and housing on account of their high work rate. This title was named after the famous exploits of Alexei Stakhanov (see above). Stakhanovites were often unpopular with other workers as they pushed up quotas expected. Stalin used the movement to introduce internal competition amongst workers and encourage them to increase output and thus meet the targets of the Five-Year Plans.
Why were new industrial centres built in the Soviet Union in the 1930s? Key features included: A centrally planned economy with production targets set in all key areas by Gosplan (State Planning Commission). All private property was now nationalised. Statistics were published to show targets and Stalin made regular announcements. Single managers were put in place in factories to replace workers committees. The number of industrial workers doubled with new cities being built, often in the East for protection e.g. Magnitogorsk. Whole communities were uprooted to live in these cities sighted in areas formerly wilderness. Canal, road, rail links built. Other major achievements were the construction of new ship canals, railways, oil fields, hydroelectric dams and the Moscow underground (Metro). Shortages and problems were met by drafting in peasant labour, and foreign engineering expertise e.g. Ford motors helped build the Soviet car industry, US help in the Dneiper Dam project and in setting up the Soviet asbestos industry. Greater emphasis placed on schooling and technical university education. Most targets set were optimistic and not reached. Managers lied about progress and deficiencies were blamed on capitalist wreckers and spies (or Trotskyites). Few consumer goods actually produced and what was produced was of poor quality. Main focus therefore on major engineering projects- Gigantomania. Why did Stalin introduce the Stakhanovite Movement? Alexei Stakhanov was a miner in the Donbass region who allegedly mined 102 tons of coal in one shift (14 times the amount expected- though he was helped!). He was made a national hero and sent on tours to encourage others as an example of socialist values. Stakhanov’s achievement was used by Stalin to encourage other workers to work hard, and to introduce an element of competition into the workplace between individuals and ‘shock brigades’. Workers who exceeded their production targets were accorded the title ‘Stakhanovite’ and rewarded with better housing, holidays and extra wages. New industrial complexes such as Magnitogorsk were seen as new social experiments- the creation of a socialist society from nothing. They were therefore part of Stalin’s wider project of pushing through industrialisation in 10 years to catch up with the West. New cities were constructed near raw material resources such as oil (Fergana Valley) or iron ore (Magnitogorsk, Sverdlovsk) etc. or near new hydro-electric schemes such as the Dneiper Dam project. The location of new complexes such as Manitogorsk in the Urals or Leninsk in the Kusbass region helped national security- they were far from Soviet borders with Poland and the West where likely invasion might come.
How successful were the Five Year Plans in improving Soviet industry? Successful: By 1940 the USSR was the world’s second largest industrial power after the USA. Spectacular increases in production were achieved from 1928: Coal and iron output doubled after the first plan and quadrupled after the second, electricity generation trebled by 1933 and increased sixfold by 1937, oil production exceeded its target in 1933 and was trebled by 1937, steel production had increased fourfold and exceeded its 1937 target. 1,500 new industrial plants were built and over 100 new towns and cities built. New industries such as chemicals, plastics and metallurgy developed. New specialist expertise was imported from abroad and introduced in new technical qualifications at university Major constructions such as the Dneiper Dam and Belomor canal were completed. Transport links were improved. Unsuccessful: Much of the work was completed by using slave labour (Belomor Canal) or employing workers for low pay, long hours and harsh conditions. Some workers, being favoured more than others, caused much resentment. Production targets were over-optimistic- only oil and steel exceeded targets. Because of the pressure to produce huge quantities, quality was often poor and bottlenecks and shortages developed. Emphasis on heavy industry meant that industry produced few consumer goods. Technical expertise still remained low until new graduates came on stream.
3
The Cult of Personality
In what ways was the Soviet Union and the lives of its people changed by the Five-Year Plans in the years 1928-1941? Impact on industry: (See earlier notes!) Impact on agriculture: Emphasis on machinery in the second plan meant that collectivisation was supplied with farm equipment and tractors (though there were still shortages) Impact on Soviet lives: Positive Unemployment was virtually non-existent. Women enjoyed a greater sense of equality. They were encouraged to study new technical and vocational courses. Their participation in industry rose steadily to 40% of the workforce by 1937. Crèches and day care centres (and prohibitions on divorce) were meant to encourage childbirth but also make workplaces friendlier for working mothers. Education became free and compulsory for all. New colleges and schools built. Some skilled workers, engineers, scientists, managers, and professionals such as teachers and doctors were rewarded with higher wages and better housing. But there were many drawbacks: Conditions in factories were harsh. Long hours for low pay were the norm (wages fell by 50% in this period). Much was hard physical graft. Punishment for lateness or idleness was severe. Managers were removed if targets were not met. All could be sent to the camps if work was not satisfactory (see notes on purges). This was particularly harsh for peasants who had little experience of using machinery. Mistakes were blamed as sabotage. Resentment at the better treatment of some skilled workers or Stakhanovites disrupted work. Slave workers suffered particularly- 100,000 died digging the Belomor Canal. Due to the large influx of workers into towns (the urban population grew by 29 million in the 1930s) overcrowding a serious problem. New city industrial plants were built first and workers had to live in tents! Only 1 family in 20 in Moscow had more than one room. The concentration on heavy industry meant that there were few consumer goods. Muslim groups in the Asian republics were attacked since it was felt that Islam held back industrialisation
Why did Stalin develop a cult of personality? To elevate his leadership to an almost god-like status. This would encourage ordinary Soviets to worship Stalin as a great leader- man of the people, visionary, moderniser and protector (particularly during the war years) and keep the country united (despite the fact that most other things divided them!) This cult would consolidate Stalin’s hold on power and allow him to attack opponents- e.g. Trotsky etc.
What were the key features of the cult of personality? Glorification of the leader to almost god-like status. Huge propaganda machine pushed out images of Stalin as hero, man of the people etc. by using posters, film, statues, radio etc. Images of Stalin were everywhere- (Big Brother). Photographs etc. were altered. Places were named after him- Stalingrad, people had to clap at his name, etc. (the Party clapped after his speeches until a bell was rung!) Education was influenced- children were taught that Stalin was a great leader and worthy successor of Lenin (who was also worshipped though dead!). Pupils learnt about Stalin’s version of history.
On the whole therefore the FYPs had beneficial effects for the Soviet State in terms of production and security (see below), but at great cost to the individual worker.
In what ways did the Five-Year Plans prepare the Soviet Union for war? Emphasis on heavy industry-coal/iron etc- enabled Soviet industry to concentrate on armament production. Road, rail and canal construction improved readiness for war. Location of new industrial complexes in the Urals etc. far from the Soviet borders with the West would allow war production to continue even if the western portion of the USSR was invaded ( as was the case in 1941) Workers and peasants were used to the harsh realities of life.
4
The Purges
What were the key features of the Purges? 1928-34 Early Purges Removal of opponents of collectivisation and the FYPs. e.g. Nepmen, kulaks, managers of industry etc. to provide scapegoats for some of the problems with the modernisation process. 1934-5 ‘Great Purge’ Removal of many of the Bolshevik Party (500,000?) either expelled (by taking away their party cards) or executed. This removed about 20% of the Party. Begun with the assassination of Kirov in 1934 to th remove critics of the pace of change. Following this 1108 out of 1966 members of the 17 party Congress were purged. Stalin had felt this congress was critical of his policies. Many were charged with laziness, corruption or careerism. This allowed Stalin to promote his followers. 1936-38 Purge: known as the Ezhovschina (evil epoch of Ezhov- head of the NKVD) Show trials- public trials of leading Bolsheviks such as Kamenv and Zinoviev in 1936, and Bukharin in 1938. Public confessions were followed by execution. Further mass purges of the party but also extended to the army- 25,000 officers including 5 out of 8 marshals, and a purge of the navy. Purges widened to include non-party doctors and scientists as well as writers etc. 1939 final purge of the NKVD itself including Ezhov. Stalin covers his tracks!
Why did Stalin introduce show trials? Means of removing rivals. The old left opposition- Kamenev, Zinoviev removed in 1936 and the right opposition- Bukharin, Tomsky, Rykov were removed in 1938. They knew too much about Stalin’s methods. Indirectly Stalin discredited Trotsky who from exile in Mexico (until his assassination in 1941) devoted his life to attacking Stalin. Public trials were broadcast on radio. By forcing the accused to publicly confess to imaginary crimes Stalin was able to convince ordinary Russians about the dangers of spies etc. and also consolidate support for his own leadership. This increased public vigilance against opponents portraying Stalin as protector of his people- cult of personality.
Why did Stalin set up labour camps? Camps (gulags) were set up as a place to dump what were seen as enemies of the state and communism- political opposition, wreckers, spies and saboteurs, priests etc. or any seen as a threat to Stalin. Harsh brutal regimes were set up in camps to break down the resistance of inmates. Few survived the conditions. Camp labour was a cheap slave labour force used to construct some of the major engineering projects of the FYPs- e.g. Belomar Canal.
Why did Stalin carry out a series of purges in the years to 1941? Top down theory. Main explanation has been to blame Stalin either because he was paranoid of opposition or because he was realistic and ruthless- removing opposition was the only way of holding on to power (i.e. he was a function of the system!) Stalin wanted to consolidate his hold over the USSR. To do this he needed to remove old Bolsheviks who knew about his ways- Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin, Trotsky or were popular, a threat to his power, and critical- e.g. Kirov. The purge of old Bolsheviks within the Party (e.g. 17th Party Congress) would make space for those recruited in the 1920s who were loyal to Stalin e.g. Khrushchev. Stalin could blame the problems of the FYPs and collectivisation on the work of wreckers, spies and capitalists- managers, kulaks, thus deflecting criticism of himself. The creation of a large poll of slave labour (as a consequence of the purges) could be used on large engineering projects. Stalin was worried that if war came, invasion by Germany could inspire a revolt at home against Stalin. Stalin also needed to cover his earlier tracks- hence the purge of Ezhov and the NKVD in 1938. Divide and rule! Bottom up theory. It can also be argued that the extent of the purge owed something to the general climate within the USSR after the revolution. There were lots of rivalries within the bureaucracy. Many people within society were only too willing to denounce enemies or people before they denounced them! The NKVD got carried away. There was a general climate of suspicion about wreckers and spies created by Stalin. Stalin later accused the NKVD of being ‘dizzy with success’.
What were the effects of the Purges? Estimated that between 11-20 million were sent to the camps of which half died before release. Many others were the victims of summary execution by the NKVD either in cells or on the land. Number of kulaks purged were probably 5 million killed and 5 million deported. Stalin’s hold on power was tightened. No debate about party line was tolerated. Stalin was now undisputed leader since effectively the old Bolshevik Party had been removed and replaced by loyal bureaucrats who had little political interest other than in furthering their careers via the party. In some senses the USSR was weakened. The removal of 25,000 officers and the purge of 5 out of 8 marshals (including c-in-c Tukhachevsky) meant that the army was not as well led in 1941 when Germany attacked. (Though recent work has suggested that many of the officers had been allowed to return to duty.) All the admirals of the navy were also removed. Society was more divided. A climate of fear developed as informers denounced enemies. Nobody was safe from accusations of being ‘Trotskyite’ ‘bourgeois’ or ‘capitalist spy’ etc. Children were encouraged
5
to inform on parents! Churches were closed, Muslims persecuted and national identities attacked. Cultural life was more controlled as poets, writers and musicians had to follow accepted forms established by the Party.
The purges had hit national groups particularly. From 1937 onwards many party officials were purged in the Republics. During the war from 1939 onwards ethnic groups whose loyalty was doubted were deported to labour camps- Poles, ethnic Germans, Cossacks etc, members of the Baltic states.
The Second World War
[N.B Not required for new syllabus]
Describe the ways in which Stalin encouraged Soviet citizens to resist Germany in the years after 1941. Scorched earth policy- civilians were encouraged to slaughter livestock and burn crops before the advancing Germans in 1941-2 In 1941 civilians were encouraged to take up arms and use guerrilla tactics to harass the Germans behind their lines. Close co-operation of Soviet military and partisan groups by 1943-4 helped to defeat Germans at Kursk etc. Stalin encouraged a massive patriotic response by a state managed propaganda campaign which made references to the defeat of Napoleon in 1812. The Second World War became the second ‘Great Patriotic War’. State patriotism was mirrored by a genuine mass patriotism which proved as, or more, important and helped to heal some of the divisions created in the 1930s. The heroic resistance of civilians at Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad helped this patriotic feeling. Civilians dug trenches, anti-tank ditches etc. Civilians were ordered to remain in the cities to encourage soldiers to fight for a living rather than a dead city. Civilians in industry were encouraged to help in the massive relocation of Soviet industry behind the Leningrad-Stalingrad line. Further increases in armament production came by drafting in women to replace men called up the serve in the army. Stalin also announced his recognition of the Russian Orthodox church which pleased millions Terror was also used to- collaborators were shot and nationalities deemed unreliable were re-settled or shot.
What were the effects of the Second World War on the peoples of the Soviet Union in the years 194153? For many Russians the war brought further misery: Estimates vary but some suggest that as many as 20 million citizens died in the war. Some were the victims of the NKVD- nationalities whose loyalty was doubtful, civilians who collaborated etc. The majority were killed by the Germans either as reprisals for acts of sabotage, or murdered because of their racial status- either as ‘sub-human’ slavs or Jews. This systematic use of ethnic cleansing by Einsatzkommandos probably resulted in the deaths of 2 million Russian Jews. Many others- civilians and soldiers that were captured were used as slave labour in the many camps set up and literally worked to death. In addition a further 7 million soldiers died as a result of the fighting or after capture as the USSR bore the brunt of the fighting in the war. Much material damage resulted: Broad swathes of the Russian countryside were destroyed and buildings burnt. Cities such as Stalingrad lay in ruins. One quarter of all Soviet industry was destroyed and nearly 100, 000 collectives in ruins. Much of the country’s railway lines were wrecked and rolling stock destroyed. However the war brought some sense of unity: Stalin’s role as leader was undisputed- the cult of personality was at its height. Patriotism during the war had drawn Russians together and thus allowed recovery to come quicker than might be expected.
What impact did the Second World War have on women in the Soviet Union? Why did some Soviet citizens fight on the same side as the Germans in the years 1941-43? The Russian empire and then the USSR had traditionally been seen as imperial conquerors by some nationalities- e.g. those members of the Baltic states who had been annexed in 1939 etc. In the late 1920s and particularly the 1930s Stalin had tried to stamp out regional national identities. In 1934 a policy of Russification was begun- enforcing the teaching of Russian in schools, replacing regional languages with Russian as the state language etc. Russians were encouraged to move to non-Russian areas, while non-Russian graduates were forced to move to Russia. Such actions were resented. For some nationalities, particularly Ukranians who remembered the 1931-3 famine, the Germans were seen as liberators. Many resented Stalin for his enforced programme of collectivisation and industrialisation etc. Women had been an important part during the years of the FYPs. They had plugged the gap during labour shortages During the Second World War women became even more vital in industry as men left to fight. They learnt new technical and industrial skills. Women had also played an important part in the civilian defence of Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad. The war therefore continued the trend begun in the 1930s to give women some form of equal status with men in the workplace, in education etc.
6
There were still many problems with agriculture that were never really solved- acute labour shortages (most peasants had joined up in 1941), destroyed collectives etc. Collectives re-established in the West and houses rebuilt. This was done by force since the Germans had restored private plots again. Increases in production were only achieved by repression through imposed grain procurements, strict controls, land confiscation and sacking of managers if targets were not met.
KHRUSHCHEV Society Rise to power
In what ways did Stalin control education and religion in the years 1928-45? Education: Strictly controlled education with harsh discipline and examinations. State controlled curriculum with History given prominence to indoctrinate children about the glories of the Revolution and the work of Stalin- part of the cult of personality. Other leaders such as Trotsky were attacked and then disappeared from textbooks. Youth groups were also used to continue this political indoctrination. At eight children joined the Octobrists, and then from 10-16 joined the Pioneers. At 19 young people joined Komsomol. Organised activities like sports and camping were introduced. Religion: During the 1903s official attacks of the Orthodox Church were stepped up. The ‘League of the Godless’ smashed churches and images. Many leading priests and churchgoers were arrested and sent to the camps. Trying to spread religious ideas was a crime. Many churches were closed down. During the war to encourage patriotism control was relaxed, but soon steeped up again after 1945.
Why did Khrushchev emerge as the dominant figure in the USSR by 1956? After Stalin's death there emerged a power struggle between the three leading figures of the Presidium [Inner Council of the Party or Politburo]: Malenkov- Chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Stalin's expected successor Beria- Minister of Internal Affairs [MVD] Khrushchev- Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. Beria arrested and shot in 1953. He was hated by the other two and as head of the MVD [replaced NKVD in 1946] was feared too. His part in the Doctors' Plot [a purge of Jewish- doctors in 1953 accused of trying to murder the leadership] was exposed as a sham and the doctors released. The army was willing to back Khrushchev since Beria had played a key part in the army purges of 1937. Khrushchev was able to force Malenkov to resign as Prime Minister in 1956 [replaced by Khrushchev's ally Bulganin]. Several factors made him popular by 1956: He was a lively and outgoing figure with impeccable Party credentials: son of a peasant, Bolshevik and army commissar in the Civil War, party boss in Moscow 1935-8, and responsible for the Metro, party boss in the Ukraine from 1938 and political commissar during the war in the defence for Stalingrad. As General Secretary of the Party after 1953, like Stalin, he used the post to build up a powerful body of support. Between 1953-6 supporters of Khrushchev had replaced one third of the Central Committee. Being head of the Party once again proved to be more powerful than head of state. Between 1953-6 Khrushchev's policies appeared more popular and successful. He advocated the planting of 'virgin lands' in Western Siberia and Kazakhstan. Good harvests in 1954 and 1955 helped his cause.
Post 1945 How did Stalin encourage workers and peasants to rebuild the Soviet Union after the end of the Second World War? Cult of Personality Stalin gained most from the war. As Generalissimo a propaganda myth was created which emphasised Stalin’s role in the defeat of Germany. The role of generals such as Zhukov, and the Russian people as a whole was played down. This meant that Stalin’s calls for reconstruction were followed. Industrial Reconstruction Stalin announced the Fourth Four Year Plan which was devoted to reconstruction. Workers showed amazing resilience in rebuilding industry. By 1947 the Dneiper Dam was restored and most industry had reached post-war levels. Recovery was helped by seizing captured machinery, rolling stock from Germany. Captured soldiers and the slave labour population were used to help reconstruction. (Many returning Soviet soldiers who had been captured by the Germans were deemed ‘corrupted’ by the West and sent to the camps). Agricultural Reconstruction
7
Initially tension between the USSR and Eastern Europe was relaxed. Moscow control was loosened (though it was later to be tightened in Poland and Hungary after those countries tried to establish too much independence- see Cold War notes). Khrushchev closed down Cominform- the organisation set up by Stalin to co-ordinate East European policy in line with Moscow. Friendship with the west was initially encouraged through a policy of ‘peaceful co-existence (though again this was not to last long! - see later Cold War notes).
De-Stalinisation
Economy In what ways did Khrushchev try to improve industrial output and modernise agriculture in the Soviet Union in the 1950s and early 1960s? Industry: 1959- Seventh Year Plan- made more realistic targets. Heavy emphasis on power stations and exploitation of oil, gas and coal. Development of plastics and man made fibres. Greater emphasis on consumer goods. Set up 105 regional economic councils to take place of national ministries to try to make industry more responsive to local needs and conditions. Agriculture: Made a high priority by Khrushchev. Key problems being low productivity- high taxes and low state prices meant that there was little incentive to produce more. (Private plots far more productive) Increase in state procurement prices by 25% to boost incentives. Costs to kolkhoses reduced i.e. hire of tractors etc. and peasant taxation lowered. More investment in fertilisers and machinery Development of ‘virgin lands’ of W. Siberia and Kazakhstan. 35.9 million hectares cultivated by 1956. Changes to kolkhose- 50% amalgamated to form state run sukhoses- giving peasants fixed state wages and pensions. MTS abandoned- machinery sold to the kolkhose. Kolkhoses given greater freedom to decide on production.
Why did Khrushchev carry out a policy of de-Stalinisation after he became leader of the Soviet Union? To draw a line under Stalinism: Following the World War II Stalin had become more paranoid and morose than before, as the USSR became locked into a Cold War with the West. Convinced that enemies were everywhere he unleashed further terror: 12 million sent to the camps and used as slave labour to rebuild the USSR. Close control of culture and the arts was maintained. The Party was purged once again to make way for new party recruits who had joined after 1945. The cult of personality was raised to greater heights. Once Khrushchev became undisputed leader of the USSR by 1956 he wanted to establish his own power base by attacking Stalin. This would allow him to purge old-style supporters of Stalin. He could also remove from the records his own involvement in the purges and his failure to reform agriculture following the war. Likely that Khrushchev himself was honest in his attack on the excesses of Stalinism. To make the USSR ready for further reform: In order to make the economy work better Khrushchev wanted further reforms of the communist system. By attacking the record of Stalin, Khrushchev could blame the failings of the 1930s on Stalin and not on the communist system itself. Relaxing tension between the USSR and its satellite states in Eastern Europe would help economic cooperation, while Khrushchev also wanted to deflate tension with the West (peaceful co-existence)
Describe the key features of de-Stalinisation. Domestic: Stalin’s record was criticised by Khrushchev in his ‘secret speech’ at the closed session of the 20th Party Conference in 1956. Khrushchev denounced Stalin as a tyrant and mass murderer- responsible for the staged show trials, as responsible for the deportation of millions to the camps and as a paranoid personality and inept war leader. This speech helped release the built up tension and climate of fear that had been generated during Stalin’s lifetime. Evidence about mass deportations and executions was released and many convictions quashed. Those who were still alive [!] were released. The cult of personality was dismantled. Stalin’s image was removed, statues toppled, Stalingrad renamed Volgograd and Stalin’s body removed from Lenin’s mausoleum. A new cultural freedom was allowed: Stalinist history was rewritten to criticise the excesses of the 1930s. Writers and artists were freer to develop ideas though there were still accepted party lines to follow. (Indeed Khrushchev was more ruthless than Stalin in destroying churches and rooting out the influence of the priesthood.) Foreign:
8
Overall agricultural and industrial policies failed because although Khrushchev realised that central control of prices, wages and planning stifled initiative, he was unprepared to allow real independence to industry and agriculture. This would be to weaken Party control and thus threaten the entire communist system. Profit motives were not allowed to influence the thinking of regional council planning. Furthermore as Khrushchev increasingly devoted more time and money to the arms and space races, investment in consumer goods suffered.
How successful were Khrushchev’s policies on Soviet agriculture and industry in the 1950s and early 1960s? Industry: Targets set were still insensitive to local conditions. Regional councils simply created more bureaucratic overlap. New Supreme Economic Council continued to perpetuate problems of the command economy i.e. inefficiency and low incentives. Agriculture: Virgin lands a mixed result: Huge gamble to develop arable land on the edge of a zone of uncertain rainfall with huge populations transplanted into difficult conditions. Lands cultivated did produce about 50% of Soviet grain. But unpredictable harvest- drought in 1955 and 63 produced dustbowl conditions. Some errors too- Khrushchev’s ‘craze for maize’- maize not well adapted to virgin lands. Only 20% of crop harvested. By 1963 USSR forced to import grain from the West. Little research had gone into transporting grain form the virgin lands to urban areas. Even when there was a successful crop much of it rotted at the roadside since the railway network was inefficient. Pricing system: Failed to work effectively. Prices varied at random and in the case of meat, eggs and milk were still less than the costs of production. The sale of produce from private plots continued to provide half the peasants' income [3% of land was responsible for 30% total production] which revealed the lack of incentive to increase efficiency on the kolkhose land. Urban resistance to increases in food prices reduced state ability to increase procurement prices. Kolkhose: Closure of MTSs backfired. Kolkhose lacked buildings to store machinery and rotted in fields. A lack of mechanics and parts made matters worse. Kolkhose system continued to be unable to gain enough independence from state planning. Khrushchev continually interfered at all levels. Subsidies combined with socialised farming meant a lack of incentive and inefficiency. Standard of living improved but some problems: General improvement in diet away from potatoes and bread. Many basic commodities cheap- especially books and public transport. 50% of households had TV and washing machine by 1968. Pensions increased. Housing increasingly available for young couples with heating free. Communal flats with shared washing and cooking of Stalin's day were replaced But some shortages. Goods such as footwear and clothes expensive and very few had cars. Only 10% had a telephone. Emphasis always on quantity rather than quality. Many new apartment blocks lacked running water and lifts. Prefabricated structures were damp and a blot on the urban landscape.
Why did Khrushchev fall from power in 1964? Khrushchev was removed from power in 1964 and replaced by Brezhnev as First Party Secretary and Kosygin as Chairman of the Council of Ministers. Most of his policies had failed: His agricultural policies had had only mixed results with key failures over his virgin land and maize policies. His cut backs on military expenditure cost him the support of the army. His attack on the certainties of Stalin made him enemies within the Party particularly among hard-liners who did not want to see any relaxation in control. In foreign affairs his policy over Cuba was seen as a failure- he had brought the USSR close to nuclear war and had been forced to withdraw missiles form Cuba in a very public climb down. [Even though he had negotiated the removal of US missiles form Turkey and ensured the survival of communist Cuba] On a personal level many disliked Khrushchev’s political style- banging his shoe on the table of the UN, his rudeness and rather uncouth manner.
9
Within government considerable corruption was evident. A collective inertia to change was fostered by party bosses and bureaucrats who did not want to ‘rock the boat’. Those in power benefited from having better flats, cars, holidays etc. Brezhnev,s ‘stability of cadres’ was supposed to mean continuity of experience, but in reality meant creeping ‘cosy’ corruption.
The Era of Brezhnev
This was reflected in the leadership- conservative, lacking in ideas and old e.g. the gerontocracy of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chenenko Gorbachev
Why, by the early 1980s were Soviet citizens increasingly unhappy with government domestic policies? The Soviet government persisted with an economic system that was not working: The problems were not new. The communist system’s ‘command’ or centrally planned nature was inefficient. Decision-making was slow, poorly informed, and out of touch with regional realities. Decisions often reflected the needs of those in power rather than the needs of ordinary people. The goods planned for were not necessarily the goods that people wanted. E.g. Aral Sea fiasco where irrigation schemes for cotton shrunk the Sea and ruined the local fishing industry. Because of central planning, at production level there was no incentive to develop new goods, or manufacturing techniques. Consequently production was inefficient, productivity low and quality of consumer goods and housing poor. Russians increasingly relied on the black market for goods since the shops were often empty or long queues developed. Without the profit incentive, or the incentive of higher wages, a culture of laziness, inefficiency and low morale permeated the workplace. Skiving and petty pilfering became the norm. This had a knock on effect on living standards which rose slowly but were outstripped by the West. Many people chose to save since there were few goods to buy. The cost of living remained high because although prices were low wages were low also. Faced by a system that was failing government did little to attempt reform, but instead merely sought to perpetuate a system which gave those in power considerable advantages: Government consistently refused to delegate planning decisions or permit managers or workers to produce for profit. This was seen as the key feature of capitalism. Consequently attempts to improve agriculture and industry continued to face problems in the 1980s. In agriculture productivity on kolkhose land remained low, tractors rusted and most skilled engineers left for the cities. In industry wages and prices continued to be set centrally, thus removing incentives to work harder. Inefficiency continued and quality remained low. Industrial output began to slow despite heavy investment. Most money keeping the economy afloat came from exploitation of Russian oil for export. Huge amounts of money was channelled into developing a rival space programme to the Americans or spent on conventional and nuclear armaments. This money could have been more productively used to improve living standards. ‘We can send a rocket to Venus, but our fridges don’t work’ said Gorbachev. Government kept procurement prices high for farmers, but food prices low in the shops to please consumers. But, in order to balance the books the state had to rely on its earnings from oil or high taxation and low wages. As a result the problems of the system continued.
Glasnost and Perestroika
Why did President Gorbachev introduce perestroika after 1985? Gorbachev wanted to reverse the economic decline of the Brezhnev years and make the Communist system work by reforming it from within by ‘restructuring’- i.e. relaxing central control. He wanted to reverse negative economic growth by renewed investment in mechanisation in imitation of the West. Gorbachev also wanted a political form of perestroika to halt corruption within the Party and end the ‘stability of cadres’- the stability of doing nothing other than rewarding oneself! By economically and politically making Communism work Gorbachev hoped the USSR would rival the West and prove that Communism was superior. In addition this would stop internal criticism of the system.
Why did Gorbachev introduce the policy of ‘glasnost’? As part of perestroika, Gorbachev also wanted to encourage openness and debate about how to make the Communist system work better both politically and economically. Gorbachev did not envisage that this would lead to the challenge of Communism itself. In part glasnost was a reaction to the Chernobyl disaster. In covering up the extent of the nuclear disaster the government had delayed taking action and refused Western help with disastrous consequences. The disaster was in part a result of a Soviet cover-up about the state of its nuclear reactors [old and unsafe!]
10
Describe the key features of perestroika. Economic Perestroika: ‘Restructuring’ of the economy to reverse the negative growth of the economy in the 1970s and early 1980s. This envisaged greater investment in machine tools and raising productivity by automation in line with the West. The economy was to be made more responsive to consumer demand. This was achieved by freeing industry from central planning. Managers were given the power to set prices, negotiate their own supplies, control their own budgets and set wages. State monopolies were to be broken down into smaller state industries to foster internal competition. Initially Gorbachev did not envisage private enterprise though this was allowed on a small scale in 1988. More power was to be given to workers. They were now able to elect their managers. Political Perestroika: ‘Restructuring’ of the Party would mean making it more accountable and open to scrutiny. Gorbachev removed many perks including their Volga cars. To do this in 1989 elections to the Congress of Peoples Deputies were free and held by secret ballot. Finally in March 1990 the article; which banned all other parties was repealed. The CPSU [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] would have to fight for the right to govern the USSR. Gorbachev hoped and believed that this would make the Party work. Gorbachev also allowed greater self-government for the nationalities and republics. This did not mean full independence- even though this happened in the Baltic states in 1991.
What were the successes and failures within the Soviet Union of ‘glasnost’ and ‘perestroika’ under President Gorbachev? Successes Hard to pinpoint! Gorbachev did foster debate and openness CPSU reformed- free elections within the Party established in 1989. Multi-party democracy permitted in 1990 Plans for a more-devolved USSR planned in the Union treaty of 1991. Failure Economic- failed to halt the decline of the economy- negative growth continued after 1985. In 1987 production fell by 6%. There was no overall clear plan to the perestroika reforms- unable to reverse 40 years of stagnation and inefficiency. Government debt continued to rise. 40% still spent on space and defence. Loss of revenue due to fall in world oil prices after 1987. Attempts to disrupt trade in vodka merely reduced tax receipts fro m the drink! Increased payout in state benefits continued to drain resources. Despite discussion, no attempt to end price subsidies [in an attempt to hide real inflation]. Glasnost encouraged debate but not in a constructive sense. Internal questioning soon turned into criticism of communism itself. Political reformers such as Yeltsin now argued that pace of change not quick enough.
Describe the key features of Glasnost ‘Openness’ or allowing criticism of government where it was guilty of corruption and negligence. This was partly a result of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. Gorbachev hoped openness would lead to constructive rather than destructive debate. New freedoms were allowed- novels originally banned such as Dr. Zhivago were permitted. Press censorship was relaxed and dissidents such as Sakharov were allowed to return form internal exile. Restrictions on religious groups were lifted while western culture was given its place- Macdonald’s opened in Moscow! The record of Stalin was finally put right, after Khrushchev’s partial criticism. Files were opened about the extent and nature of the purges. The powers of the KGB were restricted and their prison cells closed. Gorbachev used the ‘common touch’ by meeting ordinary people making public appearances in an informal setting.
Why did perestroika fail to solve the problems of the Communist system? Gorbachev’s reforms too limited and badly planned. Unable to reform the long-term structural problems of the Soviet economy in the time available. Pace of change therefore too quick for the system to adapt. Fundamental problems of inefficiency and lack of incentive inherent in the communist system not tackled. Most reformers therefore urged a quickening of the pace of change to abandon communism itself. This was not what Gorbachev intended! Gorbachev did not receive the financial help from the West that he was hoping for. Most western states sat back and watched the USSR implode! Glasnost backfired. By encouraging openness, Gorbachev encouraged questioning of the communist system and encouraged Eastern European states to break away from Russian control. Collapse of communism in Europe in 1989 encouraged the republics of the USSR to break away from Russian control too- first started by the Baltic States in 1990. Gorbachev refused to use military intervention to halt this process [as Khrushchev had in Hungary and Brezhnev in Czechoslovakia] partly because many Russian troops had been withdrawn to save money!
11
Collapse of the Soviet Union
Explain why the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991? Economic collapse by 1990: Perestroika failed to halt long term structural problems. Government seriously in debt due to failing tax revenues and escalating costs of defence, benefits etc. Government internally divided between reformers who urged abandonment of communism and communist hard-liners who insisted on a return to the old ways of Brezhnev. By 1991 Gorbachev appeared to hesitate and called for a halt to reform. Political collapse: Glasnost did not produce constructive debate, but open criticism. Free elections to the CPSU allowed reformers like Boris Yeltsin [originally sacked as Moscow boss] to be elected to the Supreme Soviet. Nationalities demanded independence. Collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, followed by independence of Baltic republics in 1990. Gorbachev unwilling/unable to use force to stop this. Other republics- Azerbaijan, Georgia, Chechnya also demanded independence. Even the Russian federation led by Yeltsin now declared itself superior to the USSR. Crisis came in 1991 when hard-liners in the Politburo and army tried to turn the clock back. They arrested and then replaced Gorbachev cancelling his reforms. The Vice-President assumed control and ruled using emergency laws. Collapse of the USSR: The political coup of 1991 failed. In Moscow the army refused to fire on its own citizens, demonstrating in support of Boris Yeltsin who occupied the parliament building of the Russian Federation in Moscow in defiance of the coup. Gorbachev was released but Yeltsin made it clear that his freedom was down to Yeltsin’s actions. In November and December the 14 Republics of the USSR, including Russia, all voted for independence from each other. They agreed to set up a Commonwealth of Independent States- a loose confederation and economic bloc. With the USSR voted out of existence there was now no job for Gorbachev as its President. Following independence the member states of the CIS set up multi-party democracy and abolished communism.
Why did Gorbachev resign as leader of the USSR in 1991? Events in 1991 Gorbachev was forced to resign because he had no post to fill- the USSR had voted itself out of existence! In November and December 1991 the leaders of the 14 republics, including the Russian Federation under Yelstin, decided to bring an end to the USSR and communism. Long term problems: This was a result of the sweeping change that had affected the USSR since Gorbachev came to power in 1985. His twin policies of perestroika and glasnost had not been able to reform the communist system but had merely allowed open debate and criticism of the system. The economy had declined further by 1987 while the government slid into deeper and deeper debt. As a result the majority of the population were deeply critical of the communist system and its political rulers. Furthermore by 1991 the government was unable to afford an army capable of maintaining Soviet control of Eastern Europe - the traditional means through which the leadership had held on to power. Consequently the collapse of Soviet power in Eastern Europe in 1989 followed by the independence of the Baltic Republics in 1990 gave the rest of the Soviet republics the stimulus needed to assert their own independence. This reflected long-term resentment ever since 1917 of Russian domination of the Union. Communism had held on to power by force via the army, and terror via the secret police. By 1991 neither forces were strong enough to prevent disintegration.
12