THEME 2: THE FIVE YEAR PLANS AND INDUSTRIAL/AGRICULTURAL CHANGE Flashcards
What were the Five-Year Plans designed to do?
To break away from the NEP, with its capitalist elements, and bring about rapid industrialisation to modernise the economy and move towards socialism. Large-scale nationalisation and state-control would abolish detested Nepmen, those private business owners and traders who had flourished under the NEP. They were seen as capitalists, class-enemies who represented a reminder of the old world and its values. Fear of foreign invasion would lead Stalin to declare, ‘We are 50 to 100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in 10 years. Either we do it or we shall be crushed’. Thus, to industrialise was patriotic, and this was to form an important part of Stalin’s cry for ‘Socialism in one country’.
How would the FYPs be carried out?
The Plans aimed to use the most advance technology, applied with an emphasis on heavy industry, to make the USSR self-sufficient. They would rely on the mass mobilisation of its people and resources. The language of the Plans reflected a massive military campaign as the people were encourage to ‘storm and conquer’ on many ‘fronts’. Industrialisation was placed under the direction of Gosplan, the State Planning Authority. Targets were set for those industries the government saw as the priority for modernisation, and resources were allocated accordingly. The Five-Year Plans saw the rapid extension of the state over the economy. People’s Commissariats were set up to co-ordinate the differing branches of industry and Party Officials were used at factory level to ensure orders from the centre were carried out.
What happened to the Nepmen and ‘bourgeois experts’ under the FYPs?
The FYPs saw a drive against the Nepmen, as small businesses and shopkeepers were often forced to oin state co-operatives. As the state took over nearly all of the urban economy, it was clear that the mixed economy of the NEP was at an end. Within the factories there was a concerted campaign against the so-called ‘bourgeois experts’, those technical staff who had retained their positions because the state needed their expertise to run industry smoothly. This policy, directed by the government, built on the prejudices of the industrial workers and rank and file communists and was probably encouraged by the experts’ scepticism that the targets of the FYPs could ever be achieved. In 1928, there had been a series of show trials against these bourgeois experts, accused of ‘wrecking’ and deliberate sabotage, often in collaboration with foreign agents.
What were the aims of the First, Second and Third FYPs?
First (1928-32) - concentrated on rapid growth of heavy industry, such as coal, steel and iron, an approach reccomended by ‘superindustrialisers’. Consumer industries, such as textiles and producers of household goods, were neglected. The original justification for this focus was the need to build up an industrial infrastructure of factories, communication networks and plant before other sectors could flourish.
Second (1933-37) - Initially set higher targets for consumer goods production, but as the 1930s progresse, the rise of Hitler in Germany redirected the focus onto the needs of defence, which meant that heavy industry continued to recieve priority.
Third - launched in 1938, was geared even more directly towards arms production to meet the threat of Germany.
What evidence can be found of success of the First Plan?
Large industrial centres, such as Magnitogorsk and Gorki, were built from scratch and became large cities. In 1929, there were only 25 people living at Magnitogorsk; three years later, this number had increased to 250,000. Pig iron increased from 3.3 million tons (1927) to 14.5 million tons (1937).
What evidence of failure can be found of the First Plan?
Facilities at the industrial centres were primitive, with workers housed in tents and temporary huts. The material rewards were limited and work was hard. Even by 1933, only 17% of the the wrokforce in Moscow was skilled and, in other cities the figure was considerably smaller. New plants were built but they didn’t make a significant impact on production until after 1934. Labour camp prisoners were diverted to mines, railway constuction and other projects. The most notorious was the White Sea Canal project, which employed 180,000 prisoners by 1932. During the winter of 1931-32, 10,000 prisoners died on this project. The completion of the canal was hailed as a propoganda triumph but, in order to reduce costs and speed up construction, the depth was reduced from 22 ft to 12 ft, rendering the canal useless for all but small barges. Quality was often sacrificed in the rush to fulfil targets. The Stalingrad tractor factory was supposed to be producing 500 tractors a month in 1930, but in June it only managed eight. Most of these broke down within three days.
What evidence of success can be seen in the Second and Third Plans?
Coal production increased from 35.4 million tons (1927) to 128.0 million tons (1937). The chemical industry also made progress as well as the engineering and transport industries.Overall, the period 1928-41 saw a 17% growth rate, but progress was unbalanced. There was a four-fold increase in the production of steel, from 4.0 million tons (1927) to 17.7 million tons (1937), and a six-fold increase in coal production. The Plans saw the successful completion of the of projects to provide power for the growth in industry. The Dneiper dam project was one of the most important examples. There was some advance in consumer goods under the Second Five-Year Plan. Footwear production and food processing made significant increases. New bakeries, ice-cream and meat-packing factories were established in many towns.
What evidence of failure can be seen in the Second and Third Plans?
The oil industry remained disappointing, increasing from 22.0 million tons (1932) to 28.5 million tons (1937), remaining nearly 20 million tons below the estimated target for 1937. The consumer industries also suffered. The production of textiles actually declined during the First Five-Year Plan and the housing industry was virtually ignored.
Overall, how successful were the Five Year Plans between 1928 and 1941?
Due to the success of the Soviet Union during the Second World War, this seemed to prove that Stalin’s aim of transforming the USSR into a modern industrial society, able to withstand attack by foreign capitalist powers, had been achieved. The Soviet Union had undoubtedly made enormous economic progress, but beneath the surface this progress was unbalanced, with a marked decline in certain sectors whilst others showed impressive growth. Economic progress was often achieved amidst, and in spite of, chaos in the planning and application of policy. The extensive use of slave labour from the Gulag also meant that it was achieved at an enormous human cost. The process of industrialisation had dislocated large sectors of the population and led to severe deprivations. The health of the workers and the natural environment were also severly damaged.
Why was collectivisation needed with reference to development of industry?
A modern economic base was seen as essential if the Soviet Union was to defend itself against an attack by the capitalist powers. However, industrial development would only be possible if it was supported by an increase in agricultural productivity. Industrialisation leads to population increase in towns and cities, which leads to an increase in the demand for food surpluses. New industries also require technology from abroad and the Soviet Union needed food surpluses to export in order to obtain foreign exchange to pay for this. Therefore, agriculture would have to provide more than just food to support industry. Labour would be needed in the new industrial centres and this could only be achieved in the short-term by the mechanisation of agriculture, which means successful industrialisation needed more efficient agriculture.
Why was collectivisation carried out in reference to ‘the economic case’?
Agriculture, centred on small peasant plots, was very inefficient compared with the rest of Europe. Most farms were owned by peasant households, with their land distributed in a piecemeal fashion. The formation of collective farms where peasants would be grouped together on larger farm units would create economies of scale. Larger units would replace hedgerows and boundaries to make the use of machinery more viable and cost-effective. This would increase food production and reduce the labour requirements of agricultural production, subsequently releasing many much-needed workers for the growing industrial plants.
Why was collectivisation carried out in reference to politics?
Extends socialism to the countryside which ensures the survival of the Revolution. The control of the Party in the countryside was weak and its support had declined since the Tambov Rising. Collectivisation provided the opportunity for getting rid of the kulaks, those richer peasants who seemed to benefit from the NEP, and in the eyes of the Communists, hoarded food for their own consumption rather than provide it for industrial workers in the towns.
How was collectivisation carried out?
December 1927, the Fiteenth Party Congress decided on a programme of voluntary collectivisation, but food shortages in 1928 led the government to carry out forced requisitioning of grain as a temporary emergency measure. This form of action was termed the ‘Ural-Siberian’ method and it was used increasingly as the pace of collectivisation accelerated. Stalin then proposed to ‘liquidate’ the kulaks as a class rather than just try to curb their exploitative tendancies. Local Party officials went into villages to announce the organisation of a collective farm (kolkhoz) and to lecture the peasants on the advantages of forming a collective, until enough had signed up as members. Promises of increased mechanisation through the establishment of Machine and Tractor Stations (MTS) were given. The MTS were government-run centres that supplied farm machinery to the collectives. They also provided advice on farming techniques and political lectures to persuade peasants to sign up. Once enough had signed up, the collectives could sieze animals, grain supplies and buildings in the village as property of the collective. Any refusals were termed ‘kulaks’ and deported to Siberia and the Urals.
What evidence is there of success in collectivisation?
Where collectivisation did succeed was in imposing Party control over a reluctant rural population. In 1930 the mir was abolished and replaced by the kolkhoz administration, headed by a chairman who was a Party member and usually from the town. Party control was extended by the use ofteenagers, members of the Communist youth organisation, who used wooden watchtowers to spy on the peasants in the fields to ensure they didn’t steal food for their families. Control had been secured, but it deepened the divide between town and countryside.
What evidence is there of failure in collectivisation?
Economically, the results were devestating. Supply of machinery to collectives was slow and many were without tractors until mid-1930s. Kulaks often most productive farmers so their removal was damaging and when the kulaks slaughtered their animals in retaliation this had a damaging effect on numbers of livestock.Between 1928-33, number of cattle halved and this loss was not fully recovered until 1953. The consequence of this collapse was a shortage in meat and milk. Grain production also fell, declining from 73.3 million tonnes (1928) to 67.6 million tonnes (1934). The government responded by increasing grain procurements to feed the towns and Red Army. As the rural population starved, the government siezed food for export to gain foreign exchange. Widespread famine occurred in 1932-33, particularly affecting the Ukraine, Kazakhstan and the Caucasus region. A passport system was introduced to tie peasants to a collective, a system that begun to partly resemble serfdom, from which they were supposedly liberated in 1861. Newly available Soviet data puts the number of famine-related deaths at four million in 1933 alone and around 10 million overall.
