Collectivisation: Why didn't it work?

P

President Clark

Warlord
Joined
Apr 4, 2002
Messages
110
Why did Stalin implement such a strategy that was to become detremental for the Soviet government and people in years to come. There were other, more productive ways, to have a farming system to cow the peasantry other than collectivisation.

Has there ever been a sucessful way of implementing collectivisation? And is it this Stalinist or essential for all communist systems;

*Strict command economy
*Collectivised agriculture
*Emphasis on heavy industry and cutbacks on consumerism

What as there obssesion on heavy inustry and collectivisation?
 
I don't know how collectivization could work, but I do know why it didn't work for Stalin. He proposed that the government simply take all the food grown in the country and distribute it equally amongst the people. Sounds like a good idea, right?

Unfortunately, the Soviet buerocracy and infrastructure was in no shape to handle such a monumental task. Food would be collected and then left to rot in storage somewhere, and no food would be availiable for anybody. Also, many government officials were more concerned about enriching themselves than making sure the ordinary peasants had sufficient food. Often they would sell food that was supposed to be distributed freely or hoard it for their own use and to drive prices up.

Therefore, considering the fact that 20 million Russians starved to death, collectivization can be fairly described as a bad idea.
 
collectivisation failed in THE USSR because of the lack of sense of responsability in those traditionally non-democratic areas(serfdom was abolished only in 1861) and the resistance of farmers(many hid food).

There was no minimum to produce(unlike in industries) and production was communal on state-owned lands whereas the way to go is/would certainly have been one state-owned parcel for each farmer.

Command economy was state-command and not people-command
heavy industry was because of war,etc and Stalin didn't care about people.
 
I heard that Heavy industry was emphasised because a desperate need for hard currency
 
You are wrong, I'm afraid.
Collectivisation was great success of Stalin regime. It answered next most important problem of Soviet Union:
1. Russian culture was really detriment in political sphere in comparison with Western culture. It had some reason as well: Russia placed in very unfavorable climatic zone & have really fickling outcrops in any year. If you check Russian annales ("letopisi") you will find that any year she got some zone with poor outcrop & some other zone with good outcropping. When Russia was Monarchy this problem had next solution - Monarch had Absolute Power over all Russians & his henchmen took out all outcroping in regions & divide it between all Russians in most equalizing manner. This method helped to go around infavorable weather results in any region, but really dampened any farming successes in all regions around.
Couple of times in Russian History Russian Govenrment tried to leave this weird practice with very bad results. Reforms of Boris Godunov, agricultural Reform of Patriarch Nikon & earlier part of Reforms of Peter the Great, agricultural Reform of Peter III - always ended in great Hungers & regicides or exiling of reformist ruler. Then this practice became Russian custom.
For better management of this practice Russian Government used very archaic structure of Russian country - "Obschina"< that compared Western standard of "early rural military Democracy" of some sort & made Russian Life pretty feudal by its standarts till 60 of XIX century.
Russian Ruler Alexander "freed Russian peasants from their slavery" but couldn't overcame this "Obschina" influence - russian peasants kept their customs of social life - i.e. living in human ant-hills of some sort.
This practice got some sudden support from Russian Government due to fact that 60-70 of XIX century were "hunger years" & Russia began taking credits (from France in first) for improving her food situation, but when in 80 of XIX century "free movement of former peasants" between country & cities was supressed Russia became food-exported herself! This lesson of History didn't go in vain & Russian Government tried to strenghten "Obschina" as hard as possible. But...
Great numbers of Russian peasantry was greatest retarding factor for Russian industry. Then Government needed some source of "free hands" for industry.As result in 80-90 of XIX century Rissia got new Judiciary, Tax & Common codexes that nudged "Obschina" to "push out" their unwanted members to cities. This practice gave so needed source for "human-mills" of Early Industrial Era, but you must take in account that all these people were already "stigmated" as "unwanted" by their rural societies - & gave great army of criminals. Very high criminal level gave some political outcrop in "socialist terror" phenomena in great extent not known in western society. Reason of mass-killing of Nobles by terrorists in these times were high stratifying condition in urban social life. Somebody have got - ALL, but most people had NONE & you must remember that these "most people" was already considered as "criminals" by their rural relatives.
Trying to stop terrorism by dropping "obschina" customs Prime-Minister Stolypin absolve "Obschina" by special Law. This move stopped "Terror" in cities, but raise hunger in country - Russia was between her Revolutions.
Hunger due to "Obschina" absolving & problems with transporting food excess between different region became reasons of collapsing "Holy Russia" & emerging of Soviet Union. But problem remains - when some regions had food excesses & some of them had hunger it's good idea "to take all from peasants & divide food equally". In other case you will get population decrease in one region in one year, but in next year hungered region will get good outcropping with bad outcropping in "full stomach" region of previous year & you'll get total population decrease as result. Then Stalin "collectivization" was returning to usual Russian customs that were usual from XIII century... If you check Soviet History, you will find that after beginning of "collectivization process" Soviet Union never got big hungers due to "bad outcropping" reasons, but before that Great Hungers were usual thing - for example Hungers in Don, Volga Valley & East Ukraina of 20-begin 30 of XX century.
"Collectivization" death sentence was given in end of 30 of XX century. Stalin inderstood that he must prepare his country against possible... "Polish-French-British" aggression with "Germany" as most probable enemy & he must make great nudge to Soviet Industry.
He knew about results of analogical Reforms in 80-90 of XIX century & didn't like idea of high criminal level in cities & returning "Terror" phenomena. (In days of his youth he was "terrorist" himself & knew root of this phenomena & feeding ground of it. Did he need any mad guy throwing bomb in his general direction? I think - not :). )
Then he made step in total different direction: He asked to bring into cities BEST peasants instead of WORST in Czarists times.
It was made by simple differentiation in urban & rural life for soviet citizens in favor to Urban Life with harsh suppresion of "free movement" between country & cities. Every peasant youth could enter Institute or "Technical College" & became urban citizen if he could making his grade. (Difference between Urban & Rural Life in Soviet Union was around 3-5 times!)
It gave present situation with great learning level in modern Russia & really poor situation in agricultural sector. Try to realize that Russian rural populace was consisted from "unwanted people" more then 50 years around - all s,mart or clever guys went out from villages for high level Life in 50-60 of XX century as last...
You couldn't make any sound Economy in agricultural sector if all your rural workers are hereditary drunkards or people with really low IQ. (Any "idealistic peasants" waere really scarce & seldom, then - they were striking minotity :(. )

This situation haven't any bind with Collectivization process & if anybody told so - they don't understand Russian/Soviet social Life.

Sincerely yours, Alex.
 
Didn't Work!!!!????????

Where did you get this Blsht from?
It worked, worked, worked, thousand times "worked" !!!
The aim of collectivization was reached succesfully !!! Because its purpose was to:
1) Establish high administrative control over agriculture;
2) Not to let agricultural capitalism to develop;
3) To supply agriculture with technics;
4) To get as much money out of peasantry, as it was possible for industrial development ;

Collectivization's primary!!! purpose was to gather money and resources for industrialization, and maybe the secondary (or less important) purpose was to develop agriculture.

Edit: Just noticed you were talking about some "farming" :lol: :lol: :lol: - I love that joke!!!
 
Originally posted by Bifrost
Didn't Work!!!!????????

Where did you get this Blsht from?
It worked, worked, worked, thousand times "worked" !!!
The aim of collectivization was reached succesfully !!! Because its purpose was to:
1) Establish high administrative control over agriculture;
2) Not to let agricultural capitalism to develop;
3) To supply agriculture with technics;
4) To get as much money out of peasantry, as it was possible for industrial development ;

Collectivization's primary!!! purpose was to gather money and resources for industrialization, and maybe the secondary (or less important) purpose was to develop agriculture.

Edit: Just noticed you were talking about some "farming" :lol: :lol: :lol: - I love that joke!!!
Click to expand...
Hm, well, maybe it did work, but it only cost about 30 million dead people! Feeding the population is easier when there's a lot less people to actually feed!
 
It wasn't actually Mao that endorsed the killings. It was his creepy sidekicks. Mao was about forty billion times better than Chek (sp?), just like Castro is forty billion times better than Batista, and Allende was forty billion times better than Pinochet.
 
Originally posted by newfangle
It wasn't actually Mao that endorsed the killings. It was his creepy sidekicks. Mao was about forty billion times better than Chek (sp?), just like Castro is forty billion times better than Batista, and Allende was forty billion times better than Pinochet.
Click to expand...
Look pal, I'm a good liberal and all, but this statement must elicit a :rolleyes: .

Just because a thug claims to be a communist or reactionary, that doesn't make him any less a thug when compared to his peers.
 
Hm, well, maybe it did work, but it only cost about 30 million dead people! Feeding the population is easier when there's a lot less people to actually feed!
Click to expand...

Yeah, you understood me quite well. And it didn't matter how many lives it cost. There was the great aim - building communism. :wallbash:
 
Why did stalin emphasise heavy industry and a command economy, I think in my opinion that the true nature of a communist economy is that of the scandinavian states.

But I think that it can be only done a small scale such as those states populations.
 
The guys right though. The russian people sacrificed themselves for a day that never came and stalin used this hope to achieve his own aims.
 
No, I think Stalin was a zealot of communistic ideas and he believed in great future as any Russian did. he was completely sure that all his actions will lead USSR straight to the better days,so he thought, he used people for the people's good.
 
He built a state that had sczirophenia. On lies and death, Thats communism?
 
Alex, Bfrost. I think you miss a point. The perception throughout the west is that collectivism was a massive failure, causing SSR to need to import large amounts of food. It is seen by some as a paradigm of how capitalism works, but communism does not.

We have history failed collect farms in USA. The Pilgrims of Thanksgiving Holiday fame tried to set up a communist society. This patterned after the early Christian model, not Marx who had not written yet. In two years the crop failures had reduced the situation to near starvation with winter coming on. Thanksgiving was a Holiday to thank God in the face of severe want and need.

Please note this is not what we teach our children.

J
 
Your western main society principle is individualism " country for people", ours is " people for country". The reforms always cost many lives in eastern countries, well I can write a lot on this topic, but I think I've already done enough. And BTW there is a specifical trait of all great reforms that were maid in Russia - millions of Lives wasted. Just remember Peter I.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Without Rule of Law Plague Edition
Replies
7
Views
6K
Erebras
Erebras
V
Trotsky vs. Stalin
Replies
11
Views
21K
greenpeace
greenpeace
Back
Top Bottom