How successful were Stalins 5 year plans?

Question 1

State the 2 main reasons to argue that the 5 year plans were successful

Answer 1

1 - If the 5 year plan’s success are measured in terms of their industrial growth they can be regarded as a large success

3 - Successfully industrialised Russia so much so that they were prepared for an industrialised war against its European neighbours by 1941.

Question 2

State the 3 main reason to argue that the 5 year plans were not successful

Answer 2

1 - If the Five-Year Plans are judged by its targets, then it cannot be regarded as a total success ie the failures of each plan

2 - The logistics /organisation of the 5 year plans was not successful + paved the way for problems.

3 - The First Five-Year Plan transformed the Soviet Union however this transformation came the great expense of the Russian people.

Question 3

Explain the 1st key point to argue the 5 year plans were successful

Answer 3

1 - If the 5 year plan’s success are measured in terms of their industrial growth they can be regarded as a large success;

• The 1st 5 Year plan dramatically kickstarted the soviet economy with both impressive growth + substantial achievements in the heavy industry sector. Coal + Iron output doubled + Iron increased from 6- 19 million tonnes.
  Electricity production production trebled + 1500 enterprises were opened.
• The 2nd 5 year plan was revised + targets were scaled back + emphasis placed on consolidation. The plan had some success particularly in ‘the good years’ between 1934-1936 and managed to produce electric power + chemical/electrical production grew rapidly + By 1937 the USSR was virtually self-sufficient in machine making and metal working.
• The 3rd 5 year plan saw the continuation of growth in the Heavy industry sector + Defence and armaments grew rapidly.

Question 4

Explain the 2nd key point to argue the 5 year plans were successful

Answer 4

2 - Successfully industrialised Russia so much so that they were prepared for an industrialised war against its European neighbours by 1941;

The Soviet Unions victory over Germany in the Second World War/ Great Patriotic War is proof that the First Five-Year plan was indeed a massive success.

• The Soviet Union, previous to WW2, suffered heavy defeats in the Russo-Japanese War and in the First World War due to their poor mobilisation of forces and the lack of technological weaponry. However, this was not the case in the Second World War.

The Red Army victory on the Eastern Front were largely because the Germans underestimated the Soviet Unions ability to mobilise so quickly. Stalin ended Hitler s idea of a quick German victory in the USSR by successfully defending Moscow from German attack

• Therefore without the rapid industrialisation, due to the First-Five Year Plan, the Soviet union would have likely been unsuccessful at preventing the German invasion. Mass Industrialisation in the Five-Year Plan allowed the Soviet union to have enough vehicles, munition and the necessary equipment to win the war. Preparing the Soviet union for a possible German invasion was one of the biggest reasons behind rapid industrialisation, so if the First Five-Year plan is analysed in that sense, it was a huge success because there is no doubt that the Soviet un ion would not have stood a chance against the German invasion had they not rapidly industrialised.

Question 5

Explain the 1st key point to argue the 5 year plans were not successful

Answer 5

1 - If the Five-Year Plans are judged by its targets, then it cannot be regarded as a total success ie the failures of each plan;

The aims + objectives of the 1st 5 year plan were largely unsuccessful;

• The Chemical (light) industry + house building targets were not met + more neglected.
• Very little growth + even a decline in consumer industries ie house building + food processing
• Lack of skilled workers created major issues + workers constantly changed jobs creating instability. Railways being unable to cope with demand caused underproduction due to factories being held up + managers refused to admit anything was ever wrong out of fear of being labelled disloyal so covered up these problems meaning they remained unsolved.

The aims of the 2nd + 3rd 5 year plans were similarly a failure if analysed in terms of their fulfilment of objectives;

• Consumer goods industries were still lagging + once again took a back seat + many factories ran out of raw materials.. Whilst they sometimes showed signs of recovery ie in footwear + food processing it was not anywhere near enough. Steel output grew insignificantly + Oil production failed to meet targets leading to a fuel crisis.

Question 6

Explain the 2nd key point to argue the 5 year plans were not successful

Answer 6

2 - The logistics /organisation of the 5 year plans was not successful + paved the way for problems.

• The 5 year plans for industry were ambitious + far reaching so much so that’s suggested they were more of a socialist fantasy than a rational calculation. Party leaders believed in 2/3 years country would be a socialist economy + money would be abandoned.
  In this sense - 5YP seen as propaganda device rather than to drive soviet citizens forward + increase sense of urgency. However the plans rapidly hit problems when the central planning system found it couldn’t cope w demands it’d imposed on itself.
• The plans put central-planning at the forefront of the Soviet economy. The State decided what was produced, where and how rather than it being determined by workers or consumers - like it would be in capitalist economy which proved disastrous for everyday consumers goods which was exacerbated by Stalin + Supreme economic council agreed decision that the line share of investment would go to coal, iron + seal industries. This was intended to make the soviet union being less reliable on the West for goods + become more self-sufficient however contributed to the acute consumer goods shortages.

Question 7

Explain the 3rd key point to argue the 5 year plans were not successful

Answer 7

3 - The Five-Year plans may have transformed the Soviet union however this at a great expense of the Russian people, workers + managers;

• From the outset citizens were asked to sacrifice their standard of living in the short term for long-term objectives as they were driven by need to develop heavy industries to protect themselves form west via propaganda.
• Targets were backed by law so failure to meet targets were criminal offences which placed emended resume on workers + managers;

Fulfilling quotas whilst having limited control over there resources, wages and prices was a challenging task + whilst they could receive a bonus if they did better than expected they could also be put on trial, imprisoned or even executed for failing to fulfil targets whilst also needing to ensure he couldn’t be charged with ‘wrecking’ (economic/industrial sabotage ie lowering morale) so the pressure they faced was immense

Managers also expected to apply state regulations in the workplace - National ‘work norms’ which governed how much each labourer expected to do + the rules making it difficult for mangers to earn respect or good will of his labour force and often workers would form against managers to get them imprisoned or punished.

• The intensity of year plans alongside his policy of collectivisation 1929-41 sparked the great famine of 1932-1943 which killed around 7 million citizens. There was huge agricultural disasters taking place which the gov refused to acknowledge was sparked by their policies as the 5 year plans + collectivisation was such powerful weapon to stamp down resistance. This showed the complete disregard for human life from the Soviet State. The few successes of the First Five-Year Plan came at a horrific cost for the Russian people.