Evaluation of Collectivisation Flashcards
How many kulak families were affected by dekulakisation? Why was this a success?
1 million
This meant that the USSR was able to remove widespread anti-socialist elements from the countryside. It sent a clear message about their ideology.
How was the culture in villages affected by collectivisation? Why was this a success?
Culture became more socialist and less christian. For example, the League of the Militant Godless destroyed churchs, icons and deported priests. Festivals were renamed e.g. Easter became the “Day of the Furrow”. In this way, collectivisation went some way to promoting a socialist way of thinking and life
How many farms were collectivised by 1937? March 1930?
1937 - 93%
March 1930 - 60%
What did the incentive to denounce Kulaks create?
A degree of class warfare
What happened to state grain procurement? What did this mean for the cities?
Apart from 1932, state grain procurement increased year on year. This meant that the cities were receiving a more reliable supply of grain which alleviated social suffering there.
How many 7 year olds were enrolled in school in 1928 compared to 1938?
1928 - 6 million
1938 - 7.6 million
What was the response to the widespread destruction of culture?
Widespread opposition
How many peasants withdrew from collective farms after Stalin’s “Dizzy with Success” article?
40%
How did collectivisation harm Smychka?
Peasants no longer worked to produce a surplus to buy goods from workers and workers were part of the collectivisation squads which the peasants disliked. They no longer worked to the mutual benefit of one another. Peasants were even stopped from reaching cities during the famine and workers couldn’t even talk about the famine without a 5 year sentence in jail.
How many peasants died during the famine, aggravated by the state’s high procurement and minimal pay to farmers?
4-5 million
What did dekulakisation do to the social element of the countryside?
Removed a key element of the community who peasants looked up to and often didn’t even consider to be ‘kulaks’
What was the grain harvest in 1928? 1930? What does this show?
1928 - 73.3m tonnes
1930 - 83.5m tonnes
May potentially show how the economies of scale were already having a positive impact on the grain harvest
What were grain exports in 1930 and 1931? How did that compare to 1928? What was the situation during the famine years?
1928 exports = 0.3m tonnes
1930 and 1931 = approx 5m tonnes
Even during the famine years, the exports remained higher than the 1928 levels even if they were lower than the couple of previous years
What happened to state procurement between 1928 and 1935? How was this an economic success?
Continually increased (apart from in 1932) This improved the food supply to the workers and growing urban populations. This was needed to satisfy them and to aid industrialisation. Similarly, it allowed more grain exports which also helped industrialisation.
How much of land was made up of private plots? How much of the agricultural output did these account for?
4%, yet 25-25% of output came from the private plots.
What was the issue of removing Kulaks for the efficiency of the land? What experience did the activists running the farms have?
Kulaks were often the most successful and knowledgeable peasants when it came to farming. The activists brought in from the cities on the other hand had very little experience.
What proportion of the necessary tractors did the USSR have?
only 4%
Between 1929 and 1933, how many animals were slaughtered to prevent them from being requisitioned?
40 million
How much were grain exports between 1932-34 during the famine? What was the problem with this?
1932 = 1.8m 1933 = 1.7m 1934 = 0.8m This was a problem because it meant the USSR could not raise as much capital from abroad to aid industrialisation and modernisation in the Soviet Union.
What did the famine do to the agricultural labour force?
It decimated the labour force, rendering certain farms more inefficient and others were even forced to close.
How did livestock on state owned farms compare to private holdings? What happened to horse numbers between 1929 and 1933?
Livestock on state owned farms was much less than that on private holdings. The number of horses halved between 1929 and 1933.
How did the fact that 93% of farms were collectivised by 1937 symbolise a political success?
Showed how the democratically centralist leaders were effectively able to coordinate a nationwide transformation to farming
Which western visitor fell into the Soviet façade that “all talk of famine is ridiculous”?
Walter Durranty
What did the Law of Seventh-Eights do to the Soviet Union’s political control in the countryside?
It increased it by making punishments for theft of Kolkhoz and cooperative property or violence, threats and intimidation in them 10 years of imprisonment. This coerced peasants into line
Which other body in the countryside increased the Soviet Union’s control there?
Motor Tractor Stations
How many people were convicted under the Law of Spikelets within the first half year?
150,000
Which loyal, powerful bodies exerted political control over the peasantry during collectivisation?
OGPU, the League for the Militant Godless and collectivisation squads
What did the impact of “Dizzy with Success” suggest about the political influence Stalin had in the country?
His political influence was farily high since his voice was adhered to and believed
How can the deaths of many Ukrainians during the famine be seen perhaps as a political success for Stalin?
Since Ukraine was the scene of a lot of unrest towards the Soviet regime and hence the deaths of many of them damaged the rebel movement and intimidated them into line.
What did the writing of “Dizzy with success” do to the political image of the USSR perhaps?
The article can be seen as an admission of political failure since the state was unable to control the actions of those which it sent into the countryside. It brought about mass de-collectivisation which was embarrassing for the program.
What did the granting of private holdings to peasants at the 1935 congress mean for the political status of the Bolsheviks?
It weakened the ideological strength of the Bolsheviks since they were forced to make ‘capitalist’ concessions. Private land holdings were essential to agricultural production
What would news of the struggling farms and the famine do to the reputation of Stalin?
News of struggling farms and famine, although attempted to be silenced by the state, would not have helped the reputation of Stalin. He would appear incapable of providing for his people and dealing with the issues at hand.
What proportion of the peasantry were believers in the Russian Orthodox Church by 1937?
57% of the population
What proportion of the work force in 1928 were farmers or craftspeople? How had this changed by 1938?
1928 = 75% of workforce were either farmers or craftspeople 1938 = 47% were farmers in the Kolkhoz
