Disputes surrounding Soviet collectivization: progress or drama

Disputes surrounding Soviet collectivization: progress or drama

History The initial stage of the Soviet period is full of details around which disputes constantly arise. And not only big historians argue, but also ordinary citizens, for whom the history of the country is not an empty phrase.


One of the areas discussed is collectivization and the so-called dispossession. According to some, this is the forerunner of the future economic breakthrough and an example of a party understanding of the proper development of the agricultural sector, for others - the drama of their families, the robbery of the simple peasantry in the state of “workers and peasants”.

On the channel "Herald of the Storms" a point of view is presented in which collectivization is presented as "one of the main anti-Soviet horror stories", against which a large number of myths and, as it were said now, fakes have managed to form since the late 20s of the last century.

The author is inclined to believe that collectivization, the creation of collective farms raised the country's agriculture to a qualitatively different level.

From the material:

Let us take a look at a typical peasant family of the early 20th century. Naturally, she could not afford to buy a tractor, combine harvester or other equipment.

According to the author, the unification of peasants into collective farms gave a new impetus.

The author’s arguments are presented in the video:

Photos used:
soviet archives
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. strannik1985 16 March 2020 05: 41 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Why only "or"?
    Progress and drama in one phenomenon.
    1. Uncle lee 16 March 2020 05: 50 New
      • 21
      • 2
      +19
      My father-in-law, born in 1918 he remembered collectivization very well when everyone was driven into a collective farm, even taking a sewing machine, and there were 11 children in his family ... Nevertheless, he entered the institute (this is about collective farmers without rights and passports), he fought the whole war in the infantry, an order bearer and over the years, having analyzed collectivization, I came to the conclusion that the collective farms fed the country and without them the country would not have won the Great Patriotic War!
      1. carstorm 11 16 March 2020 06: 57 New
        • 10
        • 1
        +9
        this is how one should relate to everything even the worst in history. just ask yourself, what would happen if the story went wrong? I am not a fan of Stalin and his decisions, but I perfectly understand that they all, to one degree or another, led to victory in the Second World War. and go differently, even a little could be different results. in the life of any person, nevertheless, exactly) every step we take, even the most stupid in the past, leads us to where we are now. if I don’t get drunk in firewood and don’t stick in the club that day I wouldn’t get married for the first time and I wouldn’t have a nine-year-old blonde who is twisting rope from me), etc.)))
        1. Yury Siritsky April 13 2020 13: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I think that Stalin will do without your love.
      2. Alexander Suvorov 16 March 2020 08: 50 New
        • 15
        • 6
        +9
        Without collectivization, industrialization would have been impossible, and without industrialization there would have been no tanks, no planes, no artillery, no ammunition for them. And without collectivization, neither the army nor the country would be fed.
        Moreover, collective farms were a relatively voluntary affair; not everyone was driven there at gunpoint.
      3. Blacksmith 55 16 March 2020 09: 29 New
        • 5
        • 11
        -6
        My father-in-law is also from the age of 18, and remembered collectivization.
        Somehow I talked with him, and he said: Everyone who did not like to work, ran around the village with flags. And the workers were in the field.
        Now to talk about what would happen if ..., in my opinion it’s kind of a little stupid, although you can and should learn from the mistakes of history.
        We are now reasoning from the height of our knowledge.
        After all, on earth there were many countries that fed their population even without collective farms.
        1. Victorio 18 March 2020 19: 08 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: smith 55
          My father-in-law is also from the age of 18, and remembered collectivization.
          Somehow I talked with him, and he said: Everyone who did not like to work, ran around the village with flags. And the workers were in the field.
          Now to talk about what would happen if ..., in my opinion it’s kind of a little stupid, although you can and should learn from the mistakes of history.
          We are now reasoning from the height of our knowledge.
          After all, on earth there were many countries that fed their population even without collective farms .

          ===
          true, however, I doubt very much that "All those who did not like to work ran around the village with flags. And those who worked were in the field." why run with flags around the village, if everything is in the field. times were harsh, unemployed or poorly working, they would quickly go to certain places for correction. my grandfather, then still a shepherd boy, who had fallen asleep in the sun, was caught by his father with a whip and injured his son's tendon. but there was nothing, for prison threatened the cows for damaging the field.
    2. knn54 16 March 2020 09: 19 New
      • 16
      • 1
      +15
      FORCED MEASURE. And the result is from plow to the atomic bomb in 20 (!) Years.
    3. Mavrikiy 17 March 2020 07: 24 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: strannik1985
      Progress and drama in one phenomenon.

      That is true, but progress is to the country, and drama is to the people. And this does not need to be opposed, for the people as a result survived and won. The state ensures the safety of the people.
  2. Sergey Olegovich 16 March 2020 05: 45 New
    • 25
    • 0
    +25
    Better than the poem by Demian Poor "Communards" and not say:

    Neither affluence nor order;
    Not his own Kasyan walks:
    Kasyan has a horse,
    There is no plow and seeds.
    Emely blows in the gap.
    With grief, poor, as if drunk:
    The plow is old at Emelya,
    No horses and seeds.
    Nefed takes evil sadness,
    Grandfather curses the whole world: Seeds were found at grandfather,
    No horse, no plow. I met Kasyan Nefed, Emelyan approached them.
    Word for word - a conversation ensued among the peasants.
    - Oh, brother, not life, but grief. “I've become quite powerful.”
    - Everyone agreed on that soon:
    To grieve together.
    What everyone had in vain
    That now merged into one:
    There is a commune, and in the commune there is a Plow, a horse I am a Grain.
    Grandfather with Kasyan, the field plows,
    Soldered by labor with them, Emelya waves the hammer, Renovating the common house.
    Labor is not labor, only joy
    God's light has become nicer. - Brothers, happiness and success. My greetings to the Commune!
    1. Mr. X 17 March 2020 06: 40 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      ,, Kasyan has a horse,
      There is no plow and seeds.
      Emely blows in the gap.
      With grief, poor, as if drunk:
      The plow is old at Emelya,
      No horses and seeds.
      Nefed takes evil sadness,
      Grandfather curses the whole world: Seeds were found at grandfather,
      No horse, no plow. I met Kasyan Nefed, Emelyan approached them.
      Word for word - a conversation ensued among the peasants.
      - Oh, brother, not life, but grief. “I've become quite powerful.”
      - Everyone agreed on that soon:
      To grieve together. ,,

      But nothing that the peasant way of life was primarily a communal way of life? And just collectivization destroyed both the communities and the peasantry.
  3. rocket757 16 March 2020 07: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    According to some, this is the forerunner of the future economic breakthrough and an example of a party understanding of the proper development of the agricultural industry, for others - the drama of their families, the robbery of the simple peasantry in the state of “workers and peasants”.

    This argument will be ... and still will be.
  4. rudolff 16 March 2020 08: 01 New
    • 5
    • 16
    -11
    What kind of progress are we talking about, if until the collapse of the Union the collective farms could not really feed the country. Forever semi-empty counters of food stores. Total collectivization ultimately killed the peasantry and can’t reanimate it now by any distribution of hectares.
    Collective farms had to be created where people really wanted it and where there were opportunities. And who did not want, please - peasant-farm and farm management. Plus, over time, agricultural enterprises.
    1. Egoza 16 March 2020 08: 26 New
      • 16
      • 3
      +13
      Quote: rudolff
      Collective farms had to be created where people really wanted it and where there were opportunities. And who did not want, please - peasant-farm and farm management. Plus, over time, agricultural enterprises.

      Yeah! That's just now all the "owners" of the farmers groan that the collective farms were better. And now the village is completely destroyed and is dying out. Although the land in the property .... so many fists never dreamed of!
  5. Burdock 16 March 2020 09: 56 New
    • 2
    • 13
    -11
    Collectivization, it was state slavery, and there is nothing good in it, as well as an excuse for that. If you approve of collective farms, then go to the village, and from dawn to dusk, dig on the ground for pennies, and even for food, and then, through your arms and back, it will reach your hearts at the commissar's jackets that there are collective farms.
    1. strannik1985 16 March 2020 13: 27 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Collectivization, it was state

      Slavery = work in agricultural cooperatives.
      Too shy to ask, are you a private landowner?
  6. bober1982 16 March 2020 11: 58 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Where these bloggers are only being dug up, some kind of invasion, if you only familiarize yourself with the labor activity of the mentioned comrade (A. Ruda), tell him about collectivization somewhere in a psychiatric hospital.
    Judge for yourself.
    Blogs on Echo of Moscoweither a communist, or a Trotskyist, Crimea is NOT ours, he ran along Bolotnaya, was born in 1990, that is, a very young man, constantly protests against everyone and everything, either betrayed left interests, or betrayed right interests.
    All this is comical, gentlemen, comrades.
    1. Foul skeptic 16 March 2020 13: 51 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      You have a very correct remark
      1. bober1982 16 March 2020 13: 58 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Soon, in all likelihood, we will read the studies of Lenka-perverts, about industrialization, and what is worse than all these fellow bloggers, but nothing ..
  7. place 16 March 2020 13: 07 New
    • 10
    • 2
    +8
    The whole history of capitalism is the history of the collectivization of production, the enlargement of manufacturing firms and the complexity of their interaction. BUT if in which country - mentally defective, the main trouble is and THIS EVERYTHING will go ON YOUR BOTH WAY. Sinuous!

    1. Stolypin - the slogan “destroy the community”! This led not only to the stratification of the peasants, but to a massive influx of devastated cities. Where no one created jobs for them. Well, bln ... it just never crossed anyone's mind !!

    2. The end of the 20s - the stratification of the peasantry, similar to the times of Stolypin, but more widespread. Migration of millions to the cities where work was found for them. For politics relied on industrialization.

    3. They wrote tons of paper about the horrors of collective farm life, but about the fact that it was preceded by this and about how they consciously ravaged the collective farms, starved the cows, spoiled and burned the collective farm property - writing “not comme il faut” today. Because the reader will not “understand”, whose brains have been washed out by more than half a century of propaganda since the “Khrushchev thaw”.

    4. In the 90s, the hated collective farms were finally destroyed. Hurray - savages dance and sing. Now we have everything as “the white people in America” of the 19th century. Farmers !!! And again the process of stratification and crowding out of farmers by agroholdings - “collective farms of capitalism” - begins, for the objective laws of production cannot be fooled. They are for the mentally disabled, the same as for the normal.
  8. place 16 March 2020 14: 05 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5
    So ! Society has done everything to surely close its path to the future.
    "The fat years of zero" profucans are of no use. Well, now gentlemen, comrades, there comes an hour of reckoning for their massive foolishness and vileness not seen in other states, for betraying everything that could be betrayed. For the fact that efforts entire generations were only a prelude to the idiotic and bestial ruin .... If only the descendants were damned, another half of the trouble. The trouble is that these descendants may not exist at all ......
  9. boris epstein 16 March 2020 17: 02 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    The USSR carried out industrialization. Suspiciously needed working hands. And not in the distant future, but today, now. Where to get them? Only from the village. There worked 85% of the working population. How to do this without harming food production? Only to introduce collective labor. There was no other way out. An example of modern Spain. There are three types of property in agriculture - latifundia (landowners), agricultural state corporations following the example of the United States and collective farms - the Spanish version of Soviet collective farms. The most cost-effective collective farms.
  10. Mr. X 16 March 2020 17: 03 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    ,, Party leaders believed that if the capitalist countries created industry at the expense of the funds received from the exploitation of the colonies, then socialist industrialization can be carried out by exploiting the "inner colony" - the peasantry. The village was considered not only as a source of food, but also as the most important channel for replenishing financial resources for the needs of industrialization. But it’s much easier to pump out funds from several hundred large farms than to deal with millions of small ones. That is why, with the beginning of industrialization, a course was taken towards the collectivization of agriculture - "the implementation of socialist transformations in the countryside."
    1. place 16 March 2020 17: 44 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: Mr. X
      But it’s much easier to pump out funds from several hundred large farms than to deal with millions of small

      ----------------------------

      Moreover, the "millions of small ones" - according to the LAWS OF CAPITALISM DEVELOPMENT, which are unified both in the city and in the countryside - will inevitably turn into millions of ruined proletarians and a small number of large oligarchs. And the interests of these oligarchs may be far from the interests of the state.

      If statesmen really care about the interests of the state, they will do what Stalin did. And what could have been done in general under the semi-savage customs of the society of the descendants of serfs. If otherwise, they will do what Yeltsin did. There are no other ways.
      Do you like the second way? Or maybe you are such a great politician that you also know other ways?
    2. place 16 March 2020 17: 48 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      “Mr. X” still cherishes the thousand-year-old dream of a Russian peasant about a “peasant paradise”, where all men are rich, gold is shoveling and no state oppresses them.
      AND MOST IMPORTANT- THEY DO NOT EAT EACH OTHER. What in general in real Russian life is fantastic !!!
      1. Mr. X 16 March 2020 18: 35 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Paradise is impossible.
        And although reality doesn’t suit me very much, there are two things because of which I am ready to endure a lot.
        1) this is what they do not plant and do not kill for dissent
        2) in fact, in fact, no one is starving
        1. place 18 March 2020 14: 04 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Mr. X
          I am ready to endure a lot.
          1) this is what they do not plant and do not kill for dissent
          2) in fact, in fact, no one is starving

          --------------------------------------

          1. For "dissent" in the USSR, no one was killed or imprisoned. There were no laws to plant for thoughts. There were laws to plant for crimes, as in any country in the world. And if in our society "the law that draws ....", or "there is no justice" - then this has been with us for centuries. This is a property of folk traditions, not a specific state system.

          2. You have the same perception problem as most compatriots: you consider crimes against Soviet law and power to be crimes of the law and power itself. Such is the psychology of all descendants of serfs. for them there is no law, but there is a good or evil master, "white master" or "red" - but all the same - master. HE IS AND IS AND LAW AND AUTHORITY.

          3. I remember that the problem of the "Soviet deficit" was solved in the Russian Federation in a couple of weeks in early 1992 - after Boris Yeltsin signed a decree on market prices. The deficit has disappeared. The market is full. Gaidar and Chubais - saved the country from hunger! WHERE EVERYTHING HAS TAKEN OUT - RIGHT GREAT SECRET. Who and where has this been discussed over the past almost 30 years?

          4. I believe that the nature of hunger in the early USSR was approximately the same. Moreover, the level of agricultural development in the USSR in the 20s was approximately the same as in the Republic of Ingushetia. And in the Republic of Ingushetia, hunger was a periodic normal occurrence, even with grain exports to Europe.
          1. Grizzly bear 18 March 2020 21: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            ,, you consider crimes against Soviet law and power to be crimes of the law and power itself. ,,

            Laws can also be criminal, and so can power. Accordingly, crimes against such laws and authorities are no longer de facto crimes.
  11. nikvic46 17 March 2020 06: 58 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    There is human destiny. And there is the fate of the state. And they crossed paths during the years of war. Many believe that in tsarist Russia everyone lived well-fed. But even Turgenev has references to hunger. Contemporaries confuse hunger with the Soviet lack of food. But 50 years ago Soviet newspapers reproached schoolchildren for playing football with bread. Some reproach us for not being able to save the USSR. Others seem to say that we were drunkards and freeloaders. Then the question. But what did we achieve that we were presented with from across the ocean? Although they say that we have not achieved anything at all and everything has grown out of the blue. Now there are challenges to our country. And God grant that we are so honored like the USSR, came out victorious.
  12. Doctor 18 March 2020 10: 45 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    They bought grain in the USSR.
    In the Russian Empire and capitalist Russia they sell.
    That says it all.
    1. place 18 March 2020 13: 32 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Arzt
      They bought grain in the USSR.
      In the Russian Empire and capitalist Russia they sell.
      That says it all.

      ----------------------------
      What about understanding the meaning of what was said?
      Everywhere in the world, a product is produced where its cost is lower, and sold where it is higher. In RI and in the current Russian Federation, the climatic conditions for grain production were not as favorable as in the West. And traditionally, the technique was worse developed. ESPECIALLY in the Russian Empire, where the peasant did not even work as a plow, but as a plow.

      Therefore, any normal person will understand that the purchase of grain in the USSR is a normal thing. But the sale of grain FROM RUSSIA - TO THE WEST is abnormal. This means one thing - a Russian landowner, merchant, merchant - at all times robbed a Russian peasant just to the ends ...... BUT, as the poet of the 19th century said:
      People of the servile rank -
      Real dogs sometimes
      The heavier the punishment-
      So gentlemen gentlemen.
      THERE HAS STANDED FOR AGES AND THE RUSSIAN EARTH IS COST !!! That says it all.
      1. Doctor 18 March 2020 17: 39 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        But the sale of grain FROM RUSSIA - TO THE WEST is abnormal. This means one thing - a Russian landowner, merchant, merchant - at all times robbed a Russian peasant just to the ends ......

        So in the USSR in the 30s they also started from this, although it seems they were not landowners.
        They tore everything from the people, started to drive them for export, and then they wonder where the famine came from.

        From a letter of I.V. Stalin V.M. Molotov. About the timing of the export of bread
        ... 2) We still have 1-1,5 months. for bread export: from the end of October (and maybe even earlier) American bread will begin to enter the market on a mass scale, against which it will be difficult for us to resist. If during these 1–1,5 months. we will not take out 130-150 million pounds. bread, our currency situation may then become directly desperate. Once again: we must force the export of bread with all our might!
        Stalin
        RGASPI. F. 588. Op. 1. D. 5388. L. 121ob. Manuscript. Autograph.

        From the protocol No. 7 of the meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On the Export of Bread”
        06.09.1930
        3. Accept the offer of NCTorg with the additions (see annex).
        application
        1. To oblige NKTorg of the USSR to ship to ports during September months. not less than 1600 thousand tons, of which: wheat - 1235 thousand tons; barley - 250 thousand tons; rye - 35 thousand tons; oats - 50 thousand tons; legumes - 30 thousand tons. Total: 1600 thousand tons.
        RGASPI. F. 17. Op. 162. D. 9. L. 24, 26-27. Certified copy.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. place 19 March 2020 12: 25 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Arzt
          So in the USSR in the 30s they also started from this, although it seems they were not landowners.
          They tore everything from the people, started to drive them for export, and then they wonder where the famine came from.

          Quote: Arzt
          In the USSR they bought grain

          -------------------------------

          Does nothing seem contradictory to you? Or maybe - first, who needs to oversleep and wash?
          1. Doctor 19 March 2020 12: 44 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Does nothing seem contradictory to you? Or maybe - first, who needs to oversleep and wash?

            What is the contradiction? in that they robbed the people? So it is true.

            Special communication of the Information Department of the GPU of the Ukrainian SSR on "abnormal phenomena" in conducting grain procurements in the Zinovievsky District
            26.10.1929
            Top secret
            ... The methods of "pumping out" bread from non-kulak farms are characteristic. In the Zlynsky r. the procurement officer Smadich (sent from the district) called over 120 people with the participation of the police. villagers, of whom more than half were middle-class low-power, and talked to each of those called as follows: "How much bread did you take out?" - and, having received the answer, he continued: “And who will take out the rest for you, the viper?” “Reptile, take the bags and a mound of bread, as they require.” If the villagers refused to accept the bags, he locked them at night in the theater so that they would "think".
            .... In with. Pancevo N-Mirgorod r. the commission to promote grain procurement called at 12 o’clock. nights of low-power middle peasant Motyan A.N. (pays tax of 15 rubles.) And offered to immediately hand over 100 pounds. wheat. After Motyan’s refusal, he was searched, and 50 pounds were found. rye (by no means concealed) and took her as if allegedly hidden. Motyan has 10 souls in the family. When he went to the village council on this basis in order to seize the seized bread, they answered him: "Do not bark, say thank you that you have not yet been beaten and arrested for such things."
            ... After Bondartsu’s announcement of the commission’s resolution on confiscation of property, those who arrived began literally robbing the household. Most of the arrivals rushed into the garden, where she began to pick apples with branches. A group of villagers rushed into the cellar and stole wine, honey and more, and drank too much until they lost consciousness. Wearable items, dishes, and other items listed in the act were stolen. The peasants who observed this picture were indignant, saying: "This is not a law, but a simple robbery, similar to a pogrom."
    2. Foul skeptic 18 March 2020 18: 09 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      That says it all.

      If you knew how right you are.
      In 1911, rye and wheat harvested per person 240 kg
      In 1987 - 362 kg
      In the extremely unsuccessful 1975 - 297 kg
      And in the first case, they sell grain, in 2 and 3 they buy it.
      In 2018 - 504 kg, but after export - 204 kg. (in 1975 after export - 286 kg, in 1987 - 356 kg)
  13. Valerikk 18 March 2020 18: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Arzt
    But the sale of grain FROM RUSSIA - TO THE WEST is abnormal. This means one thing - a Russian landowner, merchant, merchant - at all times robbed a Russian peasant just to the ends ......

    So in the USSR in the 30s they also started from this, although it seems they were not landowners.
    They tore everything from the people, started to drive them for export, and then they wonder where the famine came from.


    Too shy to ask, where did the proceeds from the sale go to RI, the USSR, and now?
    1. Doctor 18 March 2020 18: 05 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Too shy to ask, where did the proceeds from the sale go to RI, the USSR, and now?

      In the development of the country. In all three cases. Just a form of ownership is different.
      1. place 19 March 2020 12: 29 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Arzt
        In the development of the country

        ---------

        Yeah, yep ....... type- buy "Lamborghini" or transfer money to offshore .... if someone lies, so admit .... what people laugh.
        1. Doctor 19 March 2020 12: 37 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Yeah, yeah ....... type- buy "Lamborghini" or transfer money to offshore

          Not without that. But this is a drop in the ocean. The main thing is business development. So in the development of the country.
          Do you think only a socialist USSR could build an ocean fleet and a spaceship?
          No, imagine the USA too. But there was no socialism there.
          Also in monarchist capitalist Russia, not only yachts were built, but armadillos too.
          And all to protect the country in the long run.
          1. Foul skeptic 19 March 2020 18: 17 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The main thing is business development. So in the development of the country.

            1) Up to 80% of the proceeds from the export of bread went to cover the debt. And nothing that would change the situation in the economy was not even on the horizon. The debts of the first world, given the preservation of the Republic of Ingushetia and payment obligations, would already exceed the proceeds from the export of bread.
            2) For the period 1898-1913 non-residents withdrew to the amount of 8 587 million rubles from the country, capital entered into the country by non-residents - 2 225 million rubles.
            What development is possible under such conditions?
            1. Doctor 19 March 2020 18: 59 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Up to 80% of the grain export revenue went to cover the debt.

              Everyone has debts. The largest in the United States is known.
              The socialist USSR did not pay for the lease-lease; 674 million were delayed until 2030.
              The question is not this, but that the capitalist countries also ultimately work for the entire population, and vice versa in a socialist country, ordinary people can starve worse than among feudal lords. We know examples. wink
              1. Foul skeptic 20 March 2020 08: 22 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                The issue is not debt per se, because debt per se is not a sentence, but resources to cover it and the impact of extracting these resources on the economy as a whole. And the possibility of "development" in such conditions.
                In fact, I do not plan to start a conversation of different systems (cap., Social.), It is tiring.