Why Khrushchev destroyed the Stalinist artels

Why Khrushchev destroyed the Stalinist artels

The captain of the Land of Soviets leads us from victory to victory! 1933. B. Efimov


A lot of "black myths" were created about the Stalinist USSR, which created negative impressions of Soviet civilization in people. One of these myths is a lie about the "total nationalization" of the national economy under the USSR and Stalin. Under Stalin, private initiative flourished. Numerous artels and single handicraftsmen worked in the Union. Khrushchev already destroyed this very useful sphere of activity for the people and the people.

Artels under Stalin


It is believed that under socialism, the command-administrative and planning system, entrepreneurship is impossible. It is known that during the reign of NEP (the new economic policy), cooperatives and cooperatives flourished and produced the bulk of consumer goods. True, at this time there was a spike in the speculative capital of the new bourgeois (NEPMAN) and the Soviet bureaucracy. That is, corruption schemes flourished.

It seemed that under Stalin, when NEP had been covered up, they had been collectivized and industrialized, cooperative cooperatives would disappear. However, it was the other way around. In the Stalinist empire, entrepreneurship experienced a new heyday. Small production in the Stalinist USSR was a very strong and visible sector of the national economy. Artels during World War II even produced weapon and ammunition. That is, they possessed high technologies and their own production facilities. In the USSR, production and trade cooperatives supported in every way possible. Already in the course of the 1st five-year plan, the growth of the members of the artels by 2,6 times was outlined.

In 1941, the Soviet government protected the cooperatives from undue interference by the authorities, pointed to the mandatory election leadership of production cooperatives at all levels and for two years exempted enterprises from all taxes and state control over retail pricing. However, retail prices should not exceed state prices for similar products by more than 10–13%. It should be noted that state-owned enterprises were in worse conditions, since they did not have benefits. So that the economic management could not “crush” the cooperatives, the authorities determined the prices of raw materials, equipment, transportation costs, for storage in warehouses and retail facilities. Thus, the scope for corruption has been greatly narrowed.

Even during the most difficult conditions of the war, the cooperatives retained a significant part of the concessions. And after the war ended, during the recovery period they were expanded again. The development of cooperatives was considered an important state task - that cooperatives help in the restoration of the state. In particular, privileges were given to enterprises where people with disabilities worked, of which there were many after the war. Many former front-line soldiers were entrusted with organizing new artels in various settlements and places.

New life of the ancient Russian tradition


In fact, under Stalin, artels got a new life, went to a new level of development. This continued the ancient production tradition of Russian society. Artel production communities have been an important part of the economic life of Russia-Russia since ancient times. The artel principle of labor organization has been known in Russia since the time of the empire of the first Rurikovich. Obviously, it existed before, in pre-recorded times. Artels were known under different names: squad, gang, brother, brotherhood, etc. In ancient Russia, such communities could fulfill both military and production functions. It happened that entire villages and communities organized a common artel (they fished together, built ships, etc.). The essence is always the same - the work is performed by a group of people who are equal in rights with each other. Their principle is one for all, all for one. For organizational matters the prince-voivode, the chieftain-hetman, the master, chosen by the full-fledged community members, decides. All members of the cooperative do their job, actively support each other. There is no principle of human exploitation by man, enrichment of one or several members of the community at the expense of the bulk of workers.

Thus, from time immemorial, a communal, conciliar principle prevailed on Russian soil, which was part of the Russian worldview and outlook. He helped to beat enemies, and quickly recover from military or socio-economic disasters-troubles, and to build an empire-power in the most severe conditions. It is worth remembering that in our harsh northern conditions, only this principle helped to create the greatest empire-power.

Under Stalin, who de facto revived the Russian empire-power, this most important Russian production tradition was not only preserved, but also received a new impetus for development. Artel took an important place in Soviet society. After the red emperor, 114 thousand workshops and cooperatives of various directions remained in the country. About 2 million people worked in metalworking, jewelry, in the food, textile and chemical industries, woodworking, and so on. Artel cooperatives. They produced about 6% of the country's gross industrial output. In particular, cooperatives produced a significant part of furniture, metal utensils, knitwear, children's toys, etc. As a result, the private sector made a great contribution to the development of light industry, providing the people with consumer goods. Artels produced practically all the objects and goods necessary in ordinary life in the most problematic sector of the national economy of the USSR. What was connected with the priority of the development of heavy industry, mechanical engineering and the military-industrial complex (the question of the survival of civilization and the people). And during the war years, the private sector established the production of weapons from ready-made components, manufactured boxes for ammunition, ammunition for soldiers and horses, etc.

Interestingly, the private sector was not only engaged in production. In the private sphere, dozens of design bureaus, experimental laboratories, and even two research institutes worked. That is, there was a research department, Soviet artels were not a relic of feudal times. Soviet artels produced advanced products. For example, the Leningrad artel “Progress-Radio” produced the first tube receivers in the USSR (1930), the first radio sets (1935), and the first TVs with a cathode ray tube (1939). In this area, there was even a private (non-state!) Pension system. Artels also carried out financial activities: they provided loans to their members for the purchase of equipment, tools, for the construction of housing, the purchase of livestock, etc.

Also in the private sector, general progress was noted for the Soviet state. So, the Leningrad enterprise "Joiner-builder", which in the 1920s produced sleighs, wheels, clamps, etc., in the 50s became known as "Radio Operator" and became a major manufacturer of furniture and radio equipment. The Gatchina artel “Jupiter”, which produced various household trifles, tools in the 20s and 40s, manufactured dishes, drills, presses and washing machines in the early 50s. And there were many such examples. That is, private enterprises, their capabilities grew together with the Soviet Union.

As a result, in the USSR during the Stalin period, entrepreneurship was not only not infringed, but, on the contrary, was encouraged. It was an important sector of the national economy and was actively developed and improved. It is also important to note that productive entrepreneurship was growing, and not parasitic-speculative trading, which bred in the years of NEP, recovered during the Gorbachev “catastrophe” and liberal, destructive reforms of the 1990s. Under Stalin's “totalitarianism,” private initiative and creativity were encouraged in every way, since this was to the advantage of the power and the people. Private enterprises made the economy of the USSR more stable. At the same time, Soviet entrepreneurs were protected by the Soviet state, they forgot about such a problem as the merging of the bureaucracy with organized crime, about the danger of crime.

Stalin and his associates well understood the importance of private initiative in the economy of the country and the life of the people. They thwarted the attempts of the dogmatists of Marxism-Leninism to destroy and nationalize this sector. In particular, in the All-Union discussion in 1951, the economist Dmitry Shepilov (at the suggestion of Stalin, he was appointed head of the team for the creation of the first textbook on the political economy of socialism in the USSR) and the USSR Minister of Light Industry and chairman of the Trade Council under the USSR Council of Ministers Alexei Kosygin defended the freedom of artels and personal plots of collective farmers. The same idea can be noted in Stalin's work “Economic problems of socialism in the USSR” (1952).

Thus, contrary to the anti-Soviet, anti-Russian myth (under "bloody Stalin" people were only robbed), everything was the other way around. The people were robbed under feudalism and capitalism. Under Stalinist socialism, a system of honest, productive business was formed and worked perfectly (tested by the most terrible war). And not a mercantile speculative, usurious-parasitic, as in Russia since the capital’s victory. Entrepreneurs were protected from abuse and extortion of corrupt officials, pressure and parasitism of bankers-money-lenders and the criminal world. Under the Red Emperor, private enterprise organically supplemented the public sector.


Before the war, the Radstel cooperative produced about 2000 models of the 17TN-1 TV


Artel "Photo-Trud" (branch of EFTE, later - a separate artel "Arfo") produced the first Soviet serial cameras

Khrushchev


Khrushchev arranged “perestroika-1” in the country and inflicted several heavy, almost fatal blows on the Russian (Soviet) power and the people. He abandoned the Stalinist course of development, which turned the USSR into the advanced civilization of mankind. From building a society of service, knowledge and creation. The Soviet elite refused development, chose "stability", which ultimately led to the destruction of Soviet civilization.

The “Thaw” of Khrushchev destroyed the Stalinist system. On April 14, 1956, a decree of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Council of Ministers of the USSR “On the reorganization of trade cooperation” appeared, according to which the artel enterprises were transferred to the state. The property of enterprises was alienated free of charge. An exception was made only for small producers of household goods, art crafts and artels of the disabled. However, they were forbidden to independently carry out regular retail trade. Thus, Khrushchev staged a pogrom of private enterprises that were useful to the state and the people.

One of the negative manifestations of this pogrom was the famous Soviet deficit, which the post-Soviet rulers, officials and liberals constantly reproached the Soviet Union. Under Stalin, when tens of thousands of cooperative societies, hundreds of thousands of single handicraftsmen operated in the country, the people's food needs were met by collective-farm markets, individual peasants and collective farmers with household plots, there was no such problem. In the Stalinist USSR, the problem of a shortage of a product (usually it was food or household goods, that is, what artels specialized in) was solved at the local level.

The cooperatives in the USSR revived under Gorbachev, but basically it was no longer private production, but speculative, commercial and financial activity, which led not to the development of the country and the prosperity of the people, but to the enrichment of a narrow group of “new Russians”. The new bourgeois and capitalists who are living on the plunder of the USSR-Russia.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. DMB 75 25 March 2020 05: 39 New
    • 70
    • 6
    +64
    This bad man not only destroyed the artels, he destroyed a lot of things from the Stalinist legacy. He made reductions in the army, when there weren’t much time left for people, he sawed the needles of ships, he got sick in agriculture, to put it mildly - in 1962-1963. the crisis in the development of virgin lands worsened, liquidated the MTS, collective farmers were again cut back on land, the agricultural crisis led to the first mass purchases of grain abroad (12 million tons). In 1959, with the help of the troops, the one and a half thousand protests by construction workers of the Kazakhstan Magnitogorsk were suppressed (Temirtau city). In 1962, a 7-strong working demonstration was also held in Novocherkassk, also dispersed by troops using tanks (24 people were killed, 105 participants in the unrest were convicted). Working speeches were held in many industrial areas - in Moscow, Leningrad, Donbass, Kemerovo, Ivanovo. In foreign policy with China, relations of friendship were multiplied by zero, but a lot of this ragul did. By the beginning of the 60s the USSR was in a deep economic crisis , which could also be explained by the inconsistency of reforms. The indignation of the inconsistency of politics was heard from both ordinary people and party members. It’s not for nothing that Khrushchev was removed from his post, otherwise he would have broken a lot of firewood, and you say artels ...
    1. Nikolaevich I 25 March 2020 08: 04 New
      • 36
      • 0
      +36
      Quote: DMB 75
      in agriculture, I got sick of it, to put it mildly -

      That's it ! Very ... very softly you said about the harm done by the Khrushchev agriculture of the country ... and briefly! The negative consequences in agriculture after Khrushchev’s intervention turned out to be monstrous, after which the country did not recover, in my opinion, until the end until the “perestroika”! If it weren’t for Khrushchev, we (our generation) would have lived in a "different" country, in different conditions ... you look, both "perestroika" and the EBN th coup would have been impossible, because people are not needed!
      1. gsev 28 May 2020 09: 52 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        The negative consequences in agriculture after the intervention of Khrushchev turned out to be monstrous,

        In my opinion, the consequence of Khrushchev’s reign is the ability of the USSR national economy to exist without the need for executions and exile of collective farmers and workers in the absence of starvation deaths of these collective farmers and workers.
    2. Varyag_0711 25 March 2020 08: 15 New
      • 40
      • 5
      +35
      Yes, Paskudnik Khrushchev broke a lot of firewood. If you do not take what you have already mentioned, then you can also recall Khrushchev’s rehabilitation, when all sorts of Nazi little ones were released into the wild, from Bandera to forest brothers. But the worst is not even that. The worst thing is that these shortcomings, changing documents over time, crawled into the party and into power. It was with the advent of Khrushchev that the party nomenclature began to emerge. The abolition of purges in the upper and middle echelons of power led to total impunity and the flourishing of corruption and nepotism, which ultimately marked the beginning of the end of the great Soviet empire. This is the worst thing. If Zhukov possessed even a modicum of foresight and common sense in politics, he would never have supported khrushche. But, in my eyes, the Marshal of Victory forever tarnished himself by his connection with the traitor the Khrushchev. But Rokossovsky remained faithful to the end, and responded to the "request" of Khrushche to slander Stalin that Stalin was holy to him. And this is despite the fact that he himself was once subjected to repression. This is a human being, but Zhukov got what he deserved.
      1. Reptiloid 25 March 2020 11: 21 New
        • 12
        • 1
        +11
        Well yes! There was rehabilitation, there was a return from the northern settlements, there was also a re-emigration from Canada due to Khrushchev. Moreover, all these enemies of the USSR returned with money, began to pile up and tried to get into control, wherever they could.
      2. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 44 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Baltic collaborators to a large extent under Stalin amnestied. And many have never been held accountable.
  2. Starover_Z 25 March 2020 05: 49 New
    • 17
    • 5
    +12
    Interesting stuff. There were some echoes in times of stagnation, but the private sector was never said to work so broadly. So, again, Khrushchev has a direct relationship to the coup in relation to artels ?!
    Well, why even under the power of the Soviets, when the Politburo and the Council of Ministers were at the top, suddenly one “barmaley” came and frightened everyone and did it make them redo everything? Something is not believed ...
    1. Vladimir_2U 25 March 2020 06: 10 New
      • 29
      • 2
      +27
      Quote: Starover_Z
      Well, why even under the power of the Soviets, when the Politburo and the Council of Ministers were at the top, suddenly one “barmaley” came and frightened everyone and did it and made him redo everything

      Why would you intimidate me? On the contrary, Stalin’s rigidity and exactingness to the results didn’t allow many to “live” calmly, so Khrushchev very much relaxed and dismissed the top.
      1. Fitter65 25 March 2020 06: 25 New
        • 25
        • 2
        +23
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Why would you intimidate me? On the contrary, Stalin’s rigidity and exactingness to the results didn’t let many people “live” calmly

        And then the president gives the May instructions, and no one is going to fulfill them, but the money allocated for their implementation ran out. And most importantly, no one bears any responsibility for this.
        1. Boris55 25 March 2020 07: 39 New
          • 6
          • 21
          -15
          Quote: Fitter65
          And then the president gives the May instructions, and no one is going to fulfill them, but the money allocated for their implementation ran out. And most importantly, no one bears any responsibility for this.

          Tell me, where is Medvedev and his government?
          1. Vladimir_2U 25 March 2020 08: 21 New
            • 17
            • 1
            +16
            Quote: Boris55
            Tell me, where is Medvedev and his government?

            Really Kolyma from his knees raises? )))
            1. AK1972 25 March 2020 12: 22 New
              • 10
              • 0
              +10
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Really Kolyma from his knees raises? )))

              No, he works as a turner apprentice, masters mastery, in a month he will receive the 2nd category and salary 11tyr.
          2. Varyag_0711 25 March 2020 08: 26 New
            • 21
            • 6
            +15
            Boris55 (Boris)
            Tell me, where is Medvedev and his government?
            I do not want to disappoint you, but onvamednedimon was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation by presidential decree of January 16, 2020. The cash salary is set at 618 713 rubles. And his government for the most part retained their places, and those who did not, too, did not remain without a tidbit. So you froze stupidity.
            I don’t understand one thing, where did you get such a holy and blind faith in a guarantor? Do you still believe in good king Putin and bad boyars?
            1. Boris55 25 March 2020 08: 35 New
              • 7
              • 25
              -18
              Quote: Varyag_0711
              I do not want to disappoint you, but “onvamednedimon” ...

              The group was removed from power, the representative of which was "onvamednedimon".

              Quote: Varyag_0711
              And his government for the most part retained their places,

              Mostly, representatives of the "Putin" group retained their places.

              Quote: Varyag_0711
              Do you still believe in a good king

              A group of security forces, of which Putin is a representative, uphold the sovereignty of our country. I do not like capitalism. But capitalism + surrender of Russia's interests by the “onvamednedimon” group to the West, I do not like even more.
              1. Varyag_0711 25 March 2020 08: 44 New
                • 20
                • 11
                +9
                Boris55 (Boris)
                The group was removed from power, the representative of which was "onvamednedimon".

                Here is my word of honor, do not be offended, but you are very funny if you believe in what you write ... hi
                1. Boris55 25 March 2020 08: 48 New
                  • 9
                  • 21
                  -12
                  Quote: Varyag_0711
                  you are very funny if you believe in what you write ...

                  Do you understand what power is? Or do you believe that any citizen of Russia who has reached a certain age can easily enter the Kremlin and take the place of president? Don't you think this is funnier? Have you tried, or at least know, how to get into the elections at least to the lowest level of power? What is needed for that? laughing

                  "State policy and management in a crowd-elite society is an agreement reached on the possibilities of various clan-corporate groups in using the state structure and system to achieve their narrowly corporate goals."
                  1. AK1972 25 March 2020 12: 24 New
                    • 13
                    • 3
                    +10
                    Quote: Boris55
                    Have you tried, or at least know, how to get into the elections at least to the lowest level of power? What is needed for that?

                    Three things are needed:
                    1. Money;
                    2. Money;
                    3 Money
                    Mind and ability are usually not required.
                    1. gsev 28 May 2020 10: 02 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: AK1972
                      Mind and ability are usually not required.

                      Mind and ability are always in demand. If there is an idea, then, as Mao said, then power will appear. And on the example of Russia under Yeltsin, Chubais brought the money in boxes for photocopy to the election of Yeltsin himself, and General Lebed in a duffel bag to create extras. But Lukashenko in a similar situation did without money with some ideas. The US State Department does not give how much money, it doesn’t affect Lukashenko ..
          3. 210ox 25 March 2020 09: 06 New
            • 10
            • 0
            +10
            And where can he go? In the same place, under the authority .. These leeches sucked tightly.
          4. Fitter65 25 March 2020 12: 14 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Quote: Boris55
            Tell me, where is Medvedev and his government?

            Like from your window
            Red Square is visible!
            And from our window
            Kolyma see a little bit!
            And now it’s unseen, there are in Kolyma the non-executors of the presidential decree. By the way, what happened to Tolya Taburetkin? How many years is there, he waved a Kyle at the mines? How are we doing with Nano technology? Do you have nano technology in Russia? Of course, not only nano, but nuno! By the way, here only the “Electrician” “works” ...
      2. Basil50 25 March 2020 06: 36 New
        • 19
        • 1
        +18
        Khrushchev was not alone.
        Many who dreamed of * crunch bun *. We and the Civil War because of these * dreamers * occurred.
        In 1953, the military coup was a success and the division of power began. What this has led us to see.
        It is disgusting that our cultural figures for the sake of selfish interests have LATED a lot of things and continue to LY. And we are forced to listen to it.
        1. gsev 25 March 2020 08: 24 New
          • 4
          • 23
          -19
          Quote: Vasily50
          In 1953, the military coup was a success and the division of power began. What it led to, we see

          Of course you can see. Under Khrushchev there were no longer mass deaths from starvation in the USSR.
          1. Varyag_0711 25 March 2020 08: 38 New
            • 21
            • 8
            +13
            gsev (Gusev Vladimir)
            Of course you can see. Under Khrushchev there were no longer mass deaths from starvation in the USSR.
            Have you heard anything about the line for bread that you have been hearing since night? But my parents, while still schoolchildren in these lines, spent their childhood.
            Do not try to judge what you do not know. Take an interest in what caused the uprising in Novocherkassk, it is very useful to expand the general horizons.
            1. gsev 25 March 2020 14: 34 New
              • 4
              • 17
              -13
              Quote: Varyag_0711
              Take an interest in what caused the uprising in Novocherkassk, it is very useful to expand the general horizons.

              The queue for bread is still not a starvation. As far as I know, those killed during the Novocherkassk demonstration were much less than for example during the Kazakh uprising. In addition, I think that if the CPSU city committee removed the director of the plant for his words "There is no money for meat pies, buy with jam." unrest would subside. I have a feeling that Khrushchev cannot be forgiven, that with him, scientists, designers, and artists began to be valued more than the gendarmes. Therefore, all his accusations ..
              1. Varyag_0711 25 March 2020 15: 20 New
                • 18
                • 5
                +13
                gsev (Gusev Vladimir)
                I have a feeling that Khrushchev cannot be forgiven, that with him, scientists, designers, and artists began to be valued more than the gendarmes. Therefore, all his accusations ..
                And were there gendarmes in the USSR? Excuse me, do you even know who the gendarmes are and what the gendarmerie is? Take an interest in leisure.
                And then, why is the gendarme worse than a scientist, designer, and artist, and why should it be valued below them? What kind of lousy-intellectual habits do you have? Or do you think that a worker in a factory is less useful than Filya Kirkorov or Kolya Baskov? I think the opposite. All our rotten intelligentsia (in this case, it means cultural activity) is not worth the fingernail of any worker who, in contrast to them, brings real benefits to the state.
                The queue for bread is still not starvation.
                That is, the reasons for the discontent in Novocherkassk, you did not ask? Or do you really think that this was the cause of the discontent:
                In addition, I think that if the CPSU city committee removed the director of the plant for his words "There is no money for meat pies, buy with jam." unrest would subside.
                Then you are so stupid that you confuse the effect with the cause. The director’s words became only a catalyst, the cause of discontent was initially a shortage of products, an increase in production standards (and, in fact, a decrease in wages), while at the same time a rise in price of essential goods. This is not starvation in your opinion? People were doomed to starvation because their salaries would simply not be enough for more expensive products.
                Sometimes it’s still useful to include the head, and not only in it ...
                1. ser56 25 March 2020 17: 01 New
                  • 4
                  • 13
                  -9
                  Quote: Varyag_0711
                  it brings real benefits to the state.

                  debatable ... Filia pays significantly more taxes ... request
                  Quote: Varyag_0711
                  The cause of dissatisfaction was initially a shortage of products, an increase in production standards (and, in fact, a decrease in wages), while at the same time a rise in price of essential goods.

                  and what is so special about this in the USSR? Another weapon suppression of a popular uprising ... request
                2. gsev 26 March 2020 21: 01 New
                  • 2
                  • 5
                  -3
                  Quote: Varyag_0711
                  All of our rotten intelligentsia (in this case, we mean cultural activities),

                  It reminds me of one statement by Hitler. Let me give you a point, not verbatim. Aloizovich said that the janitor is more valuable than a scientist. A scientist can spend his whole life searching for one microbe, which he is extremely proud of. And any janitor with a broomstick sends thousands of germs into the gutter, which deserves great respect. As I understand it, Hitler had in mind the pride of the German civilization Koch, who identified the causative agent of cholera and laid the foundations of modern medicine and sanitation. What do you think, who left the largest trace in the history of the microbiologist Koch or the entire police detective apparatus of Prussia? On the example of the PRC, it is clear that it was the medical and scientific intelligentsia of the PRC that made a decisive contribution to the victory over the new virus. The merit of the Chinese state security is that it did not punish the doctor who reported on the Internet about the new virus. You write about the workers of Novocherkassk who were supposedly doomed to starvation. My grandmother colorfully described how in the village of Sibirovka near Michurinsky under Stalin, starving to death, my relatives, whose ancestors were sent to Kazakhstan as fists as a guest, measured me with scornful views for saying about Stalin without curses in the 1970s .. Tragedy dispossession with numerous deaths of children from diseases and malnutrition en route to Kazakhstan entered their genetic memory. But I have not heard of starvation under Khrushchev. Even the Ukrainian Institute of Memory could not blame the Russians for the Holodomor under Khrushchev. You did it. And if engineers and scientists did not introduce new technologies and did not increase productivity at the Novocherkassk plant, then the workers had to put up with low prices, and the KGB authorities organized executions of those who were dissatisfied with the prices. History does not like subjunctive moods, but the failures of designers and scientists could have caused the Libyan, Hungarian or Yeltsin versions in the USSR before. And no FSB can prevent this if the scientific intelligentsia did not ensure parity for their country with aggressive neighbors ..
            2. rigoletto2001 26 March 2020 08: 08 New
              • 0
              • 7
              -7
              c'mon, these are all enemies of the Soviet regime ..... like during the Tambov rebellion. It was just that under Stalin they were afraid and utter a whim, but then they finally decided.
            3. Reptiloid 27 March 2020 04: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Just in the early 60s in the Kaluga region there were such lines, from night to night they took bread, then early in the morning they attracted children, gave a certain amount per person
    2. codetalker 25 March 2020 06: 49 New
      • 16
      • 1
      +15
      Like this one. So all the bureaus and all the ministers were in favor. Since the revolution itself, the Bolsheviks have fought against the Trotskyists and joined one side or another. Even despite a temporary alliance between them. After the death of Stalin and the assassination of Beria, the Trotskyists took power ... And they began to rebuild everything for themselves. No lone “barmalei” exist in state administration.
    3. Marine engineer 25 March 2020 07: 05 New
      • 20
      • 2
      +18
      “Well, why even under the power of the Soviets, when the Politburo and the Council of Ministers were upstairs, suddenly one“ barmaley ”came and frightened everyone and did it make them redo everything? Something is not believed ... "

      The 20th Congress of the CPSU at which Khrushchev made a supposedly “closed” report on the personality cult was held in February 1956, and the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR “On the reorganization of trade cooperation” in April 1956. One without the other would not be possible. This is just one of the episodes in the dismantling of Stalinist socialism.
      1. gsev 28 March 2020 22: 25 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Quote: Marine engineer
        One without the other would not be possible. This is just one of the episodes in the dismantling of Stalinist socialism.

        At one time, Dulles conducted the operation "Cleavage Factor". Soviet state security has shown its complete incompetence and inability to distinguish a foreign spy from an honest citizen. As a result, in Eastern Europe, so many people were arrested by the communist security services that the communist governments brought to the abyss. Khrushchev's report is a reaction to the current state of affairs, which canceled the Hungarian events in other countries. After the death of Stalin, Khrushchev promised the Soviet state apparatus personal immunity with the words “This is our apparatus, dear, Soviet,” commenting on Malenkov’s speech about the shortcomings of this apparatus. A statement revealing the personality cult is a promise to the Communists to rid them of libel and unrighteous condemnation.
    4. The comment was deleted.
      1. Gene84 25 March 2020 15: 24 New
        • 19
        • 0
        +19
        boris, this article is called "Why Khrushchev destroyed the Stalinist artels", and this article is located in the "History" section. what do you climb with your constitutional amendments here? Do you have enough places on the site?
    5. Reptiloid 25 March 2020 11: 29 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Starover_Z
      Interesting stuff. There were some echoes in times of stagnation, but the private sector was never said to work so broadly. So, again, Khrushchev has a direct relationship to the coup in regards to artels?! ...

      There have always been few materials on the subject of artels. The topic is complicated. About 3 years ago there was an article about this time, also aroused interest. In the discussion there were forum users who still found those artels and the closure before their eyes was occurring, they wrote about it.
      1. depressant 25 March 2020 15: 36 New
        • 11
        • 2
        +9
        Dima, I’ll correct it: a year ago there was a topic, and I took part in its discussion. The crime of Khrushchev is a direct parallel with our time, with the way small and medium-sized business enterprises are actively choking. So, a year ago I was firmly convinced that the suppression of small and medium-sized businesses takes place only because the oligarchs are afraid that small and medium-sized businesses, which have been trained to large (if not suppress), and even trained in a real competitive environment, are very they quickly chop off their extractive industries.
        And a bolt from the blue became for me another explanation of the crime, found on the net. Well, how so? We entered the global capital system - right? So, in order for us to want to buy something, we need foreign consumer goods and other things to be allowed to sell inside our country. Is it logical? Is logical. And so that the foreign seller does not fade due to competition with local (Russian) manufacturers and does not leave offended and evil with bad consequences for our oligarchs, these local (Russian) manufacturers must be suppressed in every possible way. And then the savvy Russian peasant will take a closer look at foreign goods, and will make it cheaper and better. Therefore, in order for oil, gas, weapons and other things to be bought from us, I can’t crush the savvy Russian peasant by the most I can, by any means destroying his production. Which is successfully done by the political leadership of the country, which destroyed 70 to 100 thousand small and large Soviet enterprises. It is instead of modernization assistance with the subsequent entry into the world market.
        That is, before our eyes for 20 years there has been a time-lapse crime of power against their people by deliberately suppressing the creative power of the people in favor of a foreign producer. We, the smartest nation, are deliberately turned into a bunch of small traders and impoverished consumers of foreign products. China did not besiege its savvy Chinese peasant and therefore rose sharply. Well, there they understood politics correctly
        I.V. Stalin. He was a great statesman. And these ... wretched mongrels grunting foreigners.
        1. Reptiloid 25 March 2020 16: 08 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Good afternoon, Lyudmila love The topic of small and medium-sized businesses is difficult enough for me. Among the acquaintances, our family has people who just tried, started, were successful. However, now after more than 20 years it can be said that very few have been able to resist so far. Someone seized the moment and went to hired posts, "at the uncle", saved the acquired. Someone was able to multiply. Someone - quite the contrary.
          Speaking of small and medium-sized businesses, you should remember their employees. In difficult moments and they have hardships. I, therefore, missed the article you mentioned, which happens.
          I want to add that Vladimir, Mordvin3 is aware of the Khrushchev time, artels are aware of.
        2. Reptiloid 26 March 2020 03: 30 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Once again I read your comment, Lyudmila.
          ..... a savvy Russian man will take a closer look at imported goods and do better .......
          As a matter of fact, this happened at the beginning of cooperation, MPs and joint ventures were organized with enthusiasm, in which new programs were quickly implemented and salaries grew. And the market "" decided everything "" --- they said so. So, at the initial stage, they lured into the market, and the fact that the supply of such offices was at the expense of state enterprises and kept quiet. At the same time, state-owned enterprises suffered from hyperinflation and shock therapy, probably more than individual citizens.
          The market decided in its favor. But not Russian, not domestic, but the market of world capitalism and transnational corporations. Although this is not a market already. A distributor.
          1. Reptiloid 27 March 2020 04: 26 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Having strangled many state-owned enterprises with the help of cooperatives, MPs, and joint ventures, the foreign market resolved and removed these same MPs, joint ventures, and cooperatives, as Lyudmila wrote.
        3. gsev 27 March 2020 02: 12 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: depressant
          Therefore, in order for oil, gas, weapons and other things to be bought from us, I can’t crush the savvy Russian peasant by the most I can, by any means destroying his production.

          I think that the world behind the scenes has nothing to do with it. There are many people in Russia, both among bosses and among criminals, who cannot sleep peacefully if they find out that their talented neighbor earns more than their mind, work or talent and does not share them with them. It seems that neither Bush nor Trump were able to establish their own business in Russia, were not ready to be so cut off by the terrible Russian backstage.
    6. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 46 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Once again, the cooperative is not a private, but a cooperative sector of the housekeeper. The residual private sector was represented by a few individual peasants, shoemakers, shoe cleaners, single miners, etc. And then, it was an individual labor activity, without the use of wage labor.
  3. Lannan Shi 25 March 2020 05: 51 New
    • 27
    • 3
    +24
    Khrushchev is an outspoken Trotskyist. His policy is that the external, that the internal is the export of the revolution in a pure and unclouded form. The internal gradual rollback is actually to the surplus appraisal, the external one - we are blowing up a fire to all the bourgeois on a mountain. Therefore, the cooperatives were curtailed. They did not fit into the ultraradical ideology.
    1. Aerodrome 25 March 2020 06: 13 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      today in the role of coronary artery virus. also the "small business" began to glue fins.
    2. Yuri Marunchenko 25 March 2020 11: 34 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      And where did the other members of the Stalinist political bureau look, were they all like-minded and nominees of Stalin? It is very primitive to blame everything on one person, then on Khrushchev, then on Gorbach, despite the fact that the CPSU party was leading, all key posts and responsibility was on it.
      1. Basil50 25 March 2020 16: 59 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        When Khrushchev began to release criminals from prisons, as well as policemen and other traitors, many were rehabilitated. Rehabilitation was carried out by lists, without consideration of cases.
        The question is, and who went to prison INSTEAD of rehabilitated criminals and policemen with Bendera?
        Under IOSIFE VISSARIONOVICH STALIN, there were ALWAYS a little less than a million prisoners in Soviet prisons and colonies. Under Khrushchev, the number of prisoners was a little over TWO MILLIONS. Who was planted?
        1. Reptiloid 26 March 2020 12: 26 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          More than 2000000? brand new information for me.
          Khrushchev released far from all. There were stories in geology that quite a lot of employees worked there on the D-V, of those who were in the settlement after the camps. Someone after technical schools, on working specialties. .. So they were allowed to leave "" to the mainland "" in 1975 and many left the parties. Those people, as they say, were 45-50 years old. Maybe it’s not clear why they sent them Khrushchev? Now I do not know. There are stories that the whole group of technical school ...... after graduation .....
  4. avia12005 25 March 2020 06: 37 New
    • 31
    • 1
    +30
    My grandfather, born in 1893, had a 4th grade education. Under Stalin, from the end of the 20s he worked in an artel. He became the author of the first electric oven in the USSR, twice from Kharkov he went to VDNH to represent it.
    Grandmother born in 1899 did not work, she was a housewife. My mother and her older brother had a nanny who lived with her family.
    The second grandfather, born in 1887, during the Civil War was the chief of communications of the 5th Army of the Red Army. Under Stalin, he became a rationalizer and worked at many Kharkov factories. And the second grandmother with two sons did not work either.
    Such is the "impoverished" life and the "fear" of the Gulag.
  5. old_pferd 25 March 2020 06: 39 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Before the war, the Radstel cooperative produced about 2000 models of the 17TN-1 TV

    Not models, pieces, probably?
    1. BAI
      BAI 25 March 2020 10: 33 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Since 17, the 1TH-1940 television receivers have been producing the Kozitsky Leningrad Plant and the Radio Operator of the Leningrad, and the 17TH-3 television sets have been produced by VNIIT experimental workshops since the beginning of 1941. Work on the creation of a simple television receiver was carried out at the Leningrad plant Radist, the first company in the country focused on the mass production of electronic TVs. Experts from VNIIT and from the radio plant named after him came here. Kozitsky. Basically, experts were guided by the well-known television sets of foreign companies and their experience. The TV ``17 ТН-1 '' was developed in the laboratory of the engineer Ing. M.N.Tovbin and S.A. Orlov in the fall of 1939.

      I didn’t understand one thing - but what about the artel? Yes, and on the instruction manual it is clearly written - "factory". And it’s obvious that the state.
      And the Photocor camera was produced at the GOMZ Leningrad Plant - State optical-mechanical plant.
      1. old_pferd 25 March 2020 13: 44 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        http://www.spbizmerit.ru/artel-stanovitsja-zavodom.html
        "The further development of the plant as part of the industrial cooperative became difficult and in 1940, by decision of the government, the plant was transferred to the state industry"
        Instruction of 1941.
      2. old_pferd 25 March 2020 14: 20 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And the Photocor camera was produced at the GOMZ Leningrad Plant - the state optical-mechanical plant.

        The photo is not Photocor.
        http://bar90cameras.ru/artel-arfo-moskva
      3. Mordvin 3 26 March 2020 09: 22 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: BAI
        and where is the artel? Yes, and on the operating instructions it is clearly written - "factory"

        An artel is like a form of management, and not a structure of production. We are now plowing the American Proctal Gamble in full swing, and few people remember that once this enterprise was the Third Five-Year Plan artel.
  6. tihonmarine 25 March 2020 06: 40 New
    • 26
    • 2
    +24
    Under Stalin, my paternal grandfather worked in the “leather jacket” and “shapovalov” artels, when Nikita Khrushch arrived, the artel was closed. In 1957, the grandfather decided to give presents to his grandchildren and dumped three pairs of felt boots, invested, and grandfather was planted for three years, although he was 69 years old, thanks to 1 secretary of the Borzinsky district party committee who helped. Grandfather was released six months later. The scum person was Khrushchev.
  7. codetalker 25 March 2020 06: 42 New
    • 17
    • 1
    +16
    Yes, with the Khrushchev the deposition of the Soviet Union began. Gorbachev with all its charms was an inevitable result. It took more than 30 years of the undercover game to begin to openly disassemble the Stalinist empire. It is unfortunate that the people devoted to the Motherland did not succeed in taking control after Stalin.
  8. parusnik 25 March 2020 07: 24 New
    • 19
    • 1
    +18
    As a result, Khrushchev created the “shadow” economy, which flourished under Brezhnev, and it began to grow together with the party apparatus, which later led to the well-known events in 1991 ...
    1. Gene84 25 March 2020 15: 27 New
      • 19
      • 0
      +19
      Certainly, Khrushchev can be called the parent, the founding father of the shadow economy of the USSR. Do not he eliminate the artels created under the economic program of Stalin, everything could be different.
  9. nikvic46 25 March 2020 07: 52 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Being small with artels I did not come across. But with lone handicraftsmen it was straightforward. It’s hard to imagine the morning street of the 50s. These are milkmen, “I sharpen knives,” glaziers. And in the afternoon, junk-makers appeared. It is also difficult to imagine the Bread Bazaar where they sold food for birds and rabbits in bags. my father sent rabbit skins to be handed over to the furrier. Now, in order to insert glass, you need to contact the Housing Office. Then they themselves came to you. A carpenter lived opposite us. He for us rubbed a chest of drawers with carvings for 300 rubles (Stalin's). Living, of course, was easier. But the relationship between people was also simple. Now we remember those who died in the war. And no one remembers those who died after the war. And these were mostly war veterans. And when someone died, even those who were in a quarrel, they gave money for a modest funeral. We remember that, but we won’t refund it.
  10. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 07: 54 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    so still WHY did the bald man arrange the rogue of the artels ?!
    1. Gene84 25 March 2020 15: 35 New
      • 18
      • 0
      +18
      The fact is that
      a) Khrushchev was essentially a Trotskyist. Trotskyism is essentially military communism, military communism - it is characterized by centralized economic management, the nationalization of large, medium and small industry, the state monopoly on agricultural products, surplus-surplus, the prohibition of private trade, and so on;
      b) he imagines himself a person, although he was mediocrity;
      c) he simply did not understand the economy, he was special in undercover intrigues.
  11. Olgovich 25 March 2020 08: 11 New
    • 8
    • 20
    -12
    Stalin and his associates well understood the importance of PRIVATE initiative in the economy of the country and the life of the people

    So bring, author, WORDS of Stalin about it! What can not? And they .... just NO!

    Under Stalin's "totalitarianism," private initiative and creativity were encouraged in every way, since this was to the advantage of the power and the people. Private enterprises made the economy of the USSR more stable.

    Lies — there were no private enterprises in the USSR — read the Constitution of the USSR — there is not a single word about private property:
    Article 4. The economic basis of the RSFSR is the socialist system of economy and socialist ownership of the instruments and means of production, established as a result of the liquidation of the capitalist system of economy, abolition of private property on tools and means of production
    Article 5. Socialist property in the RSFSR has either a form of state ownership (public property) or a form of cooperative collective farm property.

    Funny attempts to present artels ... by private enterprises with the entrepreneurial initiative of its members: the famous collective farms and were agricultural cartels.

    That is, the USSR was all the time ....private business lol that is nonsense, collective farms, like other "private" artels, did not decide for themselves, practically ANYTHING: in the cooperatives the norms of production, prices, tariff rates and official salaries, pricing, assortment and other things were set by the STATE, which let them plan The artel was a form of communist economy.

    Artel it was impossible to buy, sell, inherity, etc. - all of its movable and immovable property was in equal collective ownership of the employees of the enterprise, the right to use of which was canceled upon withdrawal or dismissal.

    . The plan for commercial cooperation was part of the unified national economic plan of the USSR.

    If someone tried to create private production under the guise of an artel — they simply planted it — only from July 1948 to January 1949, 8,8 thousand artel workers were prosecuted for abuse and organization of false artisans in the USSR.

    But even these enterprises, in the end, had to be destroyed:
    Stalin:
    the merger of collective property with state (public) as it moves towards communism inevitably.


    What happened in practice: the share of fishing cooperatives steadily FALLED: the share of industrial products they produce in 1928 was 13%, in 1937 - 9,5%, in 1950 - 8,2%.

    “WE WILL COME TO VICTORY OF COMMUNIST LABOR!”. lol
    And they came .... by 1991 ....
    1. Andrey VOV 25 March 2020 08: 29 New
      • 13
      • 7
      +6
      Change the nickname, really, well, for example, "Ever-dissatisfied with everything," with one such word
    2. Vladimir_2U 25 March 2020 08: 31 New
      • 22
      • 7
      +15
      Olgych changed his tactics, now he can’t talk, he is trying to demand something.
      Quote: Olgovich
      well understood the importance of the PRIVATE initiative

      Quote: Olgovich
      abolition of private ownership of tools and means of production
      Does Olgych understand the difference between private initiative and private ownership of production tools? It is unlikely, but for development I will inform you that cooperatives and cooperatives imply collective ownership.
      Quote: Olgovich
      What happened in practice: the share of fishing cooperatives steadily FALLED: the share of industrial products they produce in 1928 was 13%, in 1937 - 9,5%, in 1950 - 8,2%.
      Discoverer of the economy Olgovich on the air! It’s a pity that the tyamki didn’t have enough to understand that it was not the share of the artels that fell, but the production of state-owned enterprises has grown many times over!
    3. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 09: 01 New
      • 13
      • 4
      +9
      Quote: Olgovich
      Lies — there were no private enterprises in the USSR — read the Constitution of the USSR — there is not a single word about private property:

      and under the crunch of French rolls you, as always, comfortably settled in a puddle, you catch the difference between private initiative and private property
      1. Olgovich 25 March 2020 10: 37 New
        • 5
        • 11
        -6
        Quote: Barmaleyka
        and under the crunch of French rolls you are comfortable as always settled in a puddle the difference between private initiative and private property

        1.A "smells" - from you, from the article:
        Private enterprises made the economy of the USSR more stable.

        Got it, no? no
        1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 10: 55 New
          • 14
          • 4
          +10
          it will never reach you, once again there was personal property the cooperatives were the collective property of the workers, and stop crunching you already tired
          1. Olgovich 25 March 2020 12: 11 New
            • 2
            • 11
            -9
            Quote: Barmaleyka
            to you never when will not reach, once again there was personal property

            to you never doesn’t reach that personal property is NOT PRIVATE: the main difference in
            inadmissibility of being in private ownership social labor input means of production.

            From the Constitution of the USSR:
            Section 10. Law personal property of citizensand their labor income and savings, for a residential building and auxiliary household, for household items and household items, for personal consumption items and amenities, as well as the right to inherit personal property of citizens - are protected by law.

            without private ownership, there are no private enterprises.
            1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 12: 22 New
              • 9
              • 3
              +6
              Since the cooperatives and NEVER are private enterprises, moreover, for what small business should do, to which the cooperatives are absolutely not important type of ownership mobility and the possibility of involving the active part in this production is important
    4. Gardamir 25 March 2020 09: 03 New
      • 13
      • 2
      +11
      Stalin's artels and collective farms are not private enterprises, but community ones. What's not clear. It was after Stalin that the collective farm chairmen began to be appointed from the center.
      100% of toys in the country were produced by artels. In Leningrad, artels during the blockade produced cartridges.
      1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 09: 10 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        artels gold washed
      2. Olgovich 25 March 2020 10: 41 New
        • 3
        • 12
        -9
        Quote: Gardamir
        Stalin's artels and collective farms, these are not private enterprises, and community. What's not clear

        1.From an article about artels:
        Private enterprises made the economy of the USSR more stable.

        You gave her a plus?

        2. Give the USSR documents on ... "community" enterprise.
        Quote: Gardamir
        It was after Stalin that the collective farm chairmen began to be appointed from the center.

        lol laughing
        Quote: Gardamir
        100% of toys in the country were produced by artels. In Leningrad, artels during the blockade produced cartridges.

        What they were ORDERED to produce according to the PLAN was what they produced — such is the “initiative” and “entrepreneurship”
        1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 10: 57 New
          • 6
          • 3
          +3
          Quote: Olgovich
          What they were ORDERED to produce according to the PLAN was what they produced — such is the “initiative” and “entrepreneurship”

          Well, study the topic do not write nonsense
      3. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 52 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        You probably watched films of the Stalin period on village themes? They show the collective farm meeting. And always there is an employee of the district party committee, and often he recommends the candidacy of the next chairman.
        1. Gardamir 29 March 2020 19: 49 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          he recommends the candidacy
          but then the collective farmers might not have heeded the recommendation, but later, they were no longer recommendations. but mandatory for execution.
    5. EvilLion 25 March 2020 09: 09 New
      • 16
      • 1
      +15
      Lies - there were no private enterprises in the USSR


      Because the artel is not private. A-priory. You have a share of her income while you work in it. The artel’s plan can be lowered if you order something from her. But here's a bad luck, there was such a thing as cooperative shops, that is, production cooperatives had their own sales channel. At the same time, it’s very difficult to plan, for example, sales of confectionery products, because it’s not bread that you can count on half a standard loaf per day, but no one knows what sales will be of one or another kind of cookie, or cake, or which shoe model will be chosen by the consumer.

      As for private traders, in the post-war USSR with a mass of disabled people who physically cannot go to the factory, this is a fairly common way of earning money.
      1. Olgovich 25 March 2020 10: 55 New
        • 2
        • 10
        -8
        Quote: EvilLion
        Because the artel is not private. A-priory.

        From the article;
        Private enterprises made the economy of the USSR more stable.
        .
        Quote: EvilLion
        . The artel’s plan can be lowered if you order something from her. But here's a bad luck, there was such a thing as cooperative shops, that is, production cooperatives had their own sales channel. Wherein very difficult to planfor example, the sale of confectionery products, because it’s not bread that you can count on half a standard roll in a day, but No one knows, what will be the sales of one or another sort of cookies, or cakes, or what shoe model the consumer will choose.
        lol What sales do you think ... VARIETIES of cookies, if any chronically there was no, like the same bread, or ... MODELS of shoes, if in 37 g the sale of shoes in the USSR was:
        Leather shoes - steam 1 steam
        Report of the Central Statistical Bureau of the USSR 1955
        ? belay lol
        1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 12: 36 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Because the author himself does not understand the difference between private and collective.
      2. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 20: 25 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        In most cases, cooperative stores belonged to the consumer cooperation system.
  12. steelmaker 25 March 2020 08: 44 New
    • 6
    • 4
    +2
    Thanks to the author! Such articles in school textbooks are not enough!
    1. Pavel Amarok 25 March 2020 10: 28 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Such articles will not be missed for anything. How, then, someone ruled the country better and more efficiently than "who is the season" uncle Pyn?
    2. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Thanks for that? What does he not understand the difference between cooperative and private property?
  13. rudolff 25 March 2020 08: 48 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    The private sector of the economy in the late Soviet period, of course, suggested itself. Quite calmly, one could give private services, catering, car service to private owners. Plus small production of sought-after goods. Furniture, clothes, shoes, household appliances. Well and most importantly, give those who wish land and allow farming. If all this had been done in the 80s, thoughtfully, in stages, without excesses, if they had eliminated this deficit that had bothered everyone, then ... maybe there would have been no 90s.
    1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 11: 42 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: rudolff
      The private sector of the economy in the late Soviet period, of course, suggested itself. Quite calmly, one could give private services, catering, car service to private owners.

      indisputable, but the problem is that, like the abolition of serfdom (which was also needed), they carried out mediocre, illiterate and absolutely did not study the possible consequences
      1. rudolff 25 March 2020 12: 26 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Fools and roads. This is a classic of the Russian genre. Alas!
    2. EvilLion 25 March 2020 12: 38 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      To give a car service, you need to give the production of spare parts, and these are car factories. To make farming in the 80s, which is the same collective farm only on a different form of ownership, you need to take away land from someone, and it from collective farms.
      1. rudolff 25 March 2020 13: 03 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        I do not see any relationship between the car service and the production of spare parts. It is just repair and maintenance. I don’t know how old you are, but those who found the Union remember what the Soviet car service is and who such a car mechanic is! This is Human! Always in line, always with a bow!
        As for farming, everything had to be done wisely, not agulously. Start with land not occupied in circulation. Farm households. Chronically unprofitable collapsed collective farms.
        1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 13: 11 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And where did your car service get the details from? He does not have his own machine tool base, and it is difficult to monitor the quality of workmanship in (semi) artisanal production.

          In the conditions of the late USSR, the unoccupied in circulation was unoccupied for some reason. In addition, the farm involves hired labor for a private trader, this is absolutely unacceptable in the conditions of the USSR, and no one will do it. Well and again, how is the farm different, if not from a collective farm, then from a state farm working on the principle of a factory? The collective farm - this is the farm which does not have an owner and somehow there is distributed wages. The first collective farms appeared just like local initiatives.
          1. Barmaleyka 25 March 2020 23: 27 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: EvilLion
            And where did your car service get the details from?

            but where now, does he produce it himself?
    3. Olgovich 25 March 2020 13: 56 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      Quote: rudolff
      The private sector of the economy in the late Soviet period, of course, suggested itself. Quite calmly, one could put it in the hands of private traders domestic services, catering, car service. Plus small production of sought-after goods. Furniture, clothes, shoes, household appliances.

      100% would benefit ALL from this! I’ll also add construction, building materials- Remember what a terrible shortage of all this was ...

      But the party bonzes were afraid of this, like a devil of incense.
      Quote: rudolff
      Well and most importantly, give those who wish land and allow farming.

      You will recall HOW violently, consistently and Harshly weaned peasants from the EARTH from the communes of 1917 to the 1960s ...

      Even in 1939, after the terrible times of the forced collapse of 1928-1933, after the most brutal purges of 1937, the peasants ... massively seized the land!

      This was forced to admit Stalin in 1939 in his speech:
      What did it lead to, this struggle between the beginning of a personal economy, the basis of which is a manor field, and the beginning of a social economy, the basis of which is a collective farm field? What did this lead to? You talk about this quite colorfully - personal farm field expanded contrary to the requirements of the charter and, most importantly, contrary to the requirements of our Bolshevik Leninist policy, and the expansion private individual field occurred due to the public collective farm field.

      Brutal ruling on trimming these areas, punished and planted peasants, taking away ...
      Did not help!

      In 1946, AGAIN a similar decree was issued (again they captured the kolkh of land, which were empty at that!), It did not help!
      In 1954 Mr. AGAIN — for the same reason!

      And .... they repulsed, however, the peasants' hunt for land: when in 1964, THOUGHT, they began to give and expand personal plots, benefits, etc. (complete pa was in the agricultural sector), but non-females ..... peasants already themselves sent ...
      So 30 years earlier it was necessary ...
    4. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It was all in Hungary, Yugoslavia, Poland, East Germany. But the system did not save.
  14. EvilLion 25 March 2020 08: 56 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    It is known that during the reign of NEP (new economic policy), cooperatives and cooperatives flourished and produced the bulk of consumer goods.


    NEP was covered in the 1927th. Artels and private traders actually existed until 1960. The NEP’s cover didn’t cause any problems with the supply of consumer goods, on the contrary, it already lifted everyone who often had nothing to eat in cities because of fists in the villages and NEPman in the cities themselves. NEP is simply the abolition of wartime measures; the business that has existed since tsarist times has nothing to do with NEP, just as the shoemaker did shoes, he did.
    1. bober1982 25 March 2020 09: 56 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: EvilLion
      NEP covered up in 1927

      A little later than 1927, by the beginning of the 30s, they had been “strangled” by taxes, and the NEP was not forbidden by anyone.
      By 1927, the Soviet leadership led by Stalin (who was actively opposed by Trotsky and Zinoviev) it became finally clear that the NEP should be abandoned, and its protection (from the attacks of the Trotskyists) switched to a gradual abandonment of it, it’s role in removing it from ruin fulfilled. And, the continued continuation of such an economic policy simply threatened statehood itself: there was a very high level of corruption, crime, speculation, and discontent among workers and rank-and-file party members.
      After the defeat of the Trotskyists, the Stalinist group began a struggle with Bukharin, who was the leader of those who advocated the continuation of the "mercantile" policy, and when such a policy was pursued, there could have been no industrialization.
      1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 10: 28 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        The main problem of the NEP is the free trade in bread, because in a country with 85% of the peasant population, it cannot be otherwise. The state fought unsuccessfully for several years, then there was collectivization, and the fists either had to plow honestly or move to Siberia, well, whom the angry peasants had not killed, or had not been shot in a gang. The problem was solved radically by organizing a form of production and a sales channel that did not leave room for speculators. And what is the NEP fulfilled, I do not really understand, unless I created new bourgeois. It’s just that there were no other forms of organization of production in the civil and NEP era besides the ones known from tsarist times.
        1. bober1982 25 March 2020 10: 45 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Quote: EvilLion
          And what is NEP fulfilled there, I don’t really understand, except that I created new bourgeois

          Yes, he created petty bourgeoisie, some ordinary communists committed suicide, many left the party in protest, for them it was a tragedy.
          But, back in 1921, the need to restore market relations was recognized, various forms of state capitalism were allowed. This was a temporary measure, it was necessary to "pull" the country out of ruin.
  15. Brigadier 25 March 2020 09: 38 New
    • 11
    • 2
    +9
    My grandfather is a simple infantry battalion, who went through almost the entire war (5 times wounded, 2 times - seriously), he was a very restrained person, but I remember how he once took a little chest in the company of men in the yard when it came to former politicians countries said that Stalin for him was and will forever remain the "Supreme Commander"and Khrushchev - ... (solid mat !!!).

    That's it...
  16. atos_kin 25 March 2020 09: 54 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Stalin always asked to call him simply "Comrade Stalin", and not "Red Emperor", etc.
  17. EvilLion 25 March 2020 10: 05 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    We, and specifically here on topvar, with a mass of hysterical people, have no fundamental understanding of this issue at all, and it is absolutely critical for the economic model of the state. The slogan “factories to the peasants” itself presupposes one simple thing, that the means of production will belong only to those who work on it. They cannot be owned and made profit simply by the fact of this ownership. That is, a private entrepreneur-director is one thing, but somehow a man whose great-grandfather created something, and now he sits in a resort in France and is led by a hired manager - that’s another. Just an extra link.

    The business entity resulting from the kick does not obey anyone, and he does not care about anyone else's interests. Before WWII, for example, aircraft factories actually organized spikes with specific design bureaus and produced only what they wanted. In this regard, they simply do not differ in any way from Nizhnekamskneftekhim with which our tire enterprises could not conclude contracts for the supply of raw materials for a long time, because the monopolist simply became impudent and twisted his arms, as a result, we had downtime, they had tactical victory, and the beloved Tatneft we go under, began to introduce the production of the necessary raw materials in Togliatti. Although here they are, on one of KAMAZ load the raw materials, on the other after 20 minutes you unload. They were specially built in such a way as part of a single plan to minimize transport costs. That is, some serious planning in an industry consisting of completely independent enterprises is impossible regardless of their form of ownership. Of course, this did not suit the Stalinist government, and they had to cover up the freemen in critical industries. It is impossible to build a truck in a different way, and even more so an airplane, only tightly connected chains of dozens, if not hundreds of suppliers working according to a single plan. All Western concerns within themselves are arranged in the same way, they only have parasites that take part of the profit for themselves on yachts and villas.

    The problem is that the gigantic structures designed to produce the minimum stock of very complex products disgustingly work where the maximum speed of change of stock and not so much technical as creative design is needed. A person will buy clothes based on individual preferences, and not a list of technical specifications. And the production of some tape recorders for the population. It’s not interesting for the state; it will do it on the principle of a computer strategy, where it looks that the population has a negative morality, has built something, a moral one. And it was this sector that closed individual and collective entrepreneurship in the USSR. Not everyone wants to wear the same model of shoes, optimized for mass production, who received special clothing at the factories will understand, for example, I never put on the shoes that were given to us, these are some bricks (the shoes are not special protective, otherwise I would wear them).
    1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 10: 05 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Continued ...

      Khrushchev covered everything, and I, for example, cannot imagine how I could in the 80s, for example, unite with the artist Petya and musician Dima and make a computer game. Neither a way to register a business, nor sales channels. Not to mention the fact that importing computers under it would also be impossible due to the ban on foreign exchange transactions for private individuals. And when someone whines about back to the USSR, it should be understood that many things that are common now could not be there in principle. If the country does not have enough tape recorders, and those that are bad, then Grundig can only be bought if its state buys for currency. Hello to the difference in the exchange rate of the Soviet ruble officially and on the black market.

      BUT. Back to me, Pete and Dima, let's say we have mechanisms to sell our product. And what is very important, our product in modern technical conditions can be propagated very quickly. Compared to Stalin's times, the value of just intellectual work has increased many times over, since the possibilities for replicating its results are not comparable. The three of us know how to make games, we buy our game in millions, we are millionaires and soon we already have a computer company that can compete with the state. by companies, and personally with us with any intelligible deductions from sales, and not like in the USSR, when the print runs could be ignored, although the state then rained revenue from them, huge amounts of money. Microsoft, for example, was formed in a still fresh market, and it could not have been formed, because someone would have been lucky, not Bill Gates, so conditional John Fox. I.e. ind. Entrepreneurship inevitably leads to the fact that such organizations can grow into corporations, and in the conditions of easy replication int. The ownership period in innovation areas can go on for years and first decades. That is, a dialectical contradiction was already inherent in the idea of ​​artels, and I don’t know how to resolve it.
    2. Alexey RA 25 March 2020 18: 43 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: EvilLion
      Before WWII, for example, aircraft factories actually organized spikes with specific design bureaus and produced only what they wanted.

      Pfff ... after the war, our aircraft factories managed to mass-produce and commission the Air Force equipment that was not adopted for service. smile
      And one tank factory, instead of fulfilling the decision on the production of the T-64 endorsed at the very top, took it and rolled out its tank instead. And he achieved his adoption and serial production. However, the tank was not bad.
  18. Stalnov I.P. 25 March 2020 10: 14 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    An example of a well-thought-out, strategic policy and planning of the country's economy, with strict discipline and personal responsibility, which unfortunately modern leaders do not have, is probably their nervous attitude to STALIN and the USSR as a whole, as well as the inability to repeat what our people did grandfathers and fathers. By the way, the growth of GDP during the period of industrialization was from 15 to 45 %% per year, and the average annual GDP from 1928 to 1940 was 22,5%, no country in the world has done and probably will not do this, that's why people able to work like that.
    1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 10: 30 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      The low-start effect is strong there, in 1999 we also had + 10% growth.
  19. BAI
    BAI 25 March 2020 10: 23 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Artel "Photo-Trud" (branch of EFTE, later - a separate artel "Arfo") produced the first Soviet serial cameras

    The camera "Photocor". Found in the village in the attic of the house (when I bought the house). But the casing - corrugation, crumbled immediately when trying to open the camera.
  20. Yuri Marunchenko 25 March 2020 11: 03 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    So why did Khrushchev dissolve the artels, although, like the other members of the Politburo, he was a Stalinist nominee and like-minded person?
    1. Marine engineer 25 March 2020 12: 09 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Because he was never a Stalinist “like-minded person”.
  21. WayKheThuo 25 March 2020 11: 12 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    The article is extremely tendentious and, as is usual in such "creations" that periodically appear on the VO, not a single reference to the source. None at all!
    I believe that this kind of opus is more harmful than helping people understand the processes taking place in the USSR and carefully answer very simple questions:
    1. How did it happen that literally after 3 years the course of Stalin was condemned, and after 8 years, at night (!) The body of Stalin was taken out of the mausoleum? Where, damn it, were his associates and assistants? Have everyone been killed? Well, I only heard about Beria.
    2. How did it happen that under Stalin, in his direct subordination were people like Khrushchev, for example? If he is so bad After all, it was clear what kind of fruit it was, even by cleaning it was visible - "... calm down, ..." this is about him. Why did you keep it? Was it useful?

    Bushkov, in his two-volume book devoted to Stalin, wrote that in his opinion the “Stalinist Guard” was defeated due to their own disorganization and busyness with real work, and not with hardware games, as opposed to Khrushchev and the companies that replayed them dry in their field. A typical example from the present: Yeltsin-Swan and the 1996 elections, if not mistaken.

    I have always believed and probably will not change my mind that the stability of any structure is manifested only under the pressure of external / internal processes aimed at the destruction of this structure. After the death of Dzhugashvili, his course was criticized after 3 years, the complete debunking after 8 years, and the USSR fell apart a little more than 40 years later.
    From the point of view of history, these are not even stages - for example, moments and their extreme brevity speaks of the stability of the USSR as a socio-political structure in general, and of Stalin’s mistakes in organizing it in particular, which, however, in no way detract from Stalin’s merits before the Fatherland.

    As air, we need competent, balanced, cleared of bias articles, which allow us to identify mistakes made in a simple and clear language, and most importantly, to determine where and how to move on, because the path that my country is taking today will lead it to a common capitalist cattle yard, but I would not like that very much.
    I think so.
    1. rigoletto2001 25 March 2020 11: 45 New
      • 2
      • 6
      -4
      Khrushchev is the same person from the "Stalinist Guard", they are all of the same field of berries. With such success, we can say that Trotsky was very busy with real work and therefore lost to the hardware struggle to Stalin. No sweetheart, they were all masters of intrigue and undercover struggle.
    2. Olgovich 25 March 2020 12: 26 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: WayKhe Thuo
      that in his opinion the "Stalinist Guard" was defeated due to their own disorganization and employment with real work, not hardware games, in contrast to Khrushchev and the companies that beat them dry in their field

      This Kaganovich, Malenkov, Molotov, past the crucible of purges of the 30s, not ... apparatchiks? request

      These are MASTERS of hardware games, which is why they died in their beds ...

      By the way, it was they who organized the conspiracy at the Presidium of the Central Committee and tried to throw Khrushchev away, and only then Zhukov saved him and the anti-party group branded ....
      1. Alexey RA 25 March 2020 18: 44 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Olgovich
        This Kaganovich, Malenkov, Molotov, past the crucible of purges of the 30s, not ... apparatchiks?

        Mikoyan forgot - "I’ll slip between the droplets". smile
        1. Olgovich 26 March 2020 08: 47 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          They forgot Mikoyan - "I’ll slip between the droplets."

          This yes, ALL "slipped", the only one of its kind yes
          1. Alexey RA 26 March 2020 12: 44 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Olgovich
            This yes, ALL "slipped", the only one of its kind

            From Ilyich to Ilyich without a heart attack and paralysis. © smile
    3. EvilLion 25 March 2020 12: 41 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      In about the same way as in our Vladimir Solntseliky various interesting people appear in submission.
  22. strannik1985 25 March 2020 11: 27 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    The author is confused in terminology, artels were not private, a production cooperative in the form of a collective farm, with mandatory collective responsibility and labor participation. For example, agricultural collective farms (340 thousand by 1940). An artel cannot be sold, bought, or inherited; all movable and immovable property was in the collective ownership of employees; the right to use was canceled in the event of dismissal or withdrawal from the artel. The cooperatives resolved all the basic issues with the state; the activities of the cooperatives were led by trade unions and councils to the Central Council of the USSR Industrial Cooperation.
    "Private" in them is that one person could organize and manage an artel.
  23. rigoletto2001 25 March 2020 11: 39 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Oh! Dear Alexander, he was born another opus! It's charming, just charming .... Yes, with some theses! Against the background of sad news about coronavirus, it's just a breath of laughter ... in the sense of a good mood. You can talk more about the volunteer Khrushchev and about the “father of all” peoples and friend of all athletes "? And about the abundance of the times of Koba, drop a couple of statues the same.
    1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 12: 43 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      You can search, for example, the Soviet commercial advertising of the early 50s and photos of the shelves of the then shops. And the last pre-war years, when investments in industry began to produce results, the standard of living was already quite high.
  24. Operator 25 March 2020 12: 57 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    With artels, everything is clear.

    Khrushchev did a much more catastrophic thing - he destroyed the production model of the Stalinist economy:
    - centralized planning for each state-owned enterprise of production volumes and prices in kind;
    - annual centralized price reduction;
    - abandonment of centralized planning of production costs, including payroll;
    - distribution at the enterprise level of the wage fund between performers according to the coefficient of labor participation.

    The management of enterprises, knowing their planned volume of production and current prices for it, had the right to independently rebuild production and reduce the cost of production, the entire economic effect was spent on introducing innovations and material incentives for the best employees.

    Khrushchev’s economic model has moved to centralized planning of production costs, including payroll. As a result, the incentive for enterprise management to reduce costs through innovation has disappeared.

    Under Brezhnev, there was a further departure from the Stalinist model of the economy - in the form of a Kosygin reform, a model which was developed in the United States and thrown into the USSR through the adviser of Kosygin, Kharkov citizen Yevsei Liberman, who maintained contacts with his Jewish relatives in America. T.N. "economic accounting" was based on the rejection of centralized price planning for natural products. Pricing was tied to cost - the more the company spends, the higher the price (plan for the shaft). The national economy has gone to smash.

    In this connection, the party leadership of the USSR, headed by Andropov, received the basis to begin the process of transition to the capitalist model of the economy, which ended successfully in December 1991.
    1. EvilLion 25 March 2020 13: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      - annual centralized price reduction;


      It only led to attempts to get rid of him when, for example, directors immediately lay down the "fat" that could be on the trail. year to take off. And in general, overfulfillment of plans leads only to the fact that plans increase. => You can overfulfill by 15%, overfulfill by 2%, so as not to change.
      1. Operator 25 March 2020 13: 36 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        At the start (the moment of which there was new construction or modernization at the state expense), prices were determined by calculation: depreciation + production costs divided by the volume of output in accordance with the capacities of the state enterprise.

        Then, prices for each product range decreased annually in a centralized manner - the management of state-owned enterprises was strictly oriented towards streamlining technology, increasing productivity for workers, reducing administrative staff, introducing innovations, reducing the consumption of raw materials and semi-finished products, switching to higher-quality products with higher prices (for permission of the central planning authority).

        Naturally, the leadership of the state-owned enterprise had the opportunity to raise the starting price, but the main thing in the Stalinist model of the economy was the constant increase in labor productivity as the only criterion for the superiority of the socialist system over the capitalist system.
        1. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 15: 10 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: Operator
          management of state enterprises was strictly focused on rationalization of technology


          Well - not all.
          Most managers didn’t need this “rationalization” - they were paid at a rate, and a ration proposal could reduce costs by 2–3 times and the state could cut costs.
          It all depended on the particular leader - on which the Soviet system burned out.

          And in Japan, for some reason, it worked -
          “Kaizen” in business is continuous improvement, starting from production and ending with top management, from a director to an ordinary worker. By improving standardized actions and processes, the goal of kaizen is lossless production (see Lean Manufacturing
          1. Operator 25 March 2020 15: 22 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
            Most managers didn’t need this “rationalization” - they were paid at a rate, and a rational proposal could cut costs by 2–3 times and the state could cut costs

            I already said that the cost of production was not taken into account at all with centralized price planning, with the exception of a single point in time - the launch of a new or modernized production (for state funds).

            Then prices were set depending on demand or tasks to increase labor productivity.

            In the PRC, for the state-owned enterprises, the Stalinist model of centralized planning still operates.
            1. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 15: 34 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Quote: Operator
              I already said that the cost of production was not taken into account at all with centralized price planning, with the exception of a single point in time - the launch of a new or modernized production (for state funds).


              Do you even understand this?
              There is no truth in this statement! - Do not tell anyone this nonsense.
              In the USSR, everything was considered as a standardizer - from the hour the machine was worked out to the tool wear coefficient — all this was included in the cost price! I myself considered according to the norms of the USSR for the machine park and tools :))
              Entire departments of rationing companies considered the cost of production choosing standards and coefficients from thick reference books.
              Another thing is that this cost was far from real due to many nuances, but overall close to the truth.
              Not only that - the factory standardizer was checked by a higher, ministerial - and had to argue the rules and exceptions.
          2. EvilLion 25 March 2020 17: 00 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            As we joked here, when this eccentric letter M, who invented all these kaizens on Toyota, died, then they whipped joy for a week there, so they got this insanity. It just doesn't work.

            Rat the proposal reducing the prime cost by 2-3 times is an exceptional phenomenon, where more often a serious reduction is impossible, or is possible only through huge capital investments, for example, supplying new equipment.
            1. Dmitry V. 26 March 2020 09: 03 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Quote: EvilLion
              2-3 times exceptional phenomenon


              In complex designs, yes.
              In simple - a very common occurrence.
              For example, some kind of bracket, change the technology from foundry to stamping.
              Or introduce a device that allows you to process a package of parts instead of a single part.
              Unfortunately, in the USSR they went along the path of technology simplification - eliminating "non-essential" technical processes, which ultimately affected the quality of the final product.

              Now much has been lost - for example, I order the manufacture of shafts at one tractor factory - and the only specialist who regularly goes into binge can do the termination ... He does it well, there are no questions, but the timing ...
              Production time is constantly exceeding a month, for the same amount of time comes from China.
    2. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 15: 21 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Operator
      With artels, everything is clear.

      Khrushchev did a much more catastrophic thing - he destroyed the production model of the Stalinist economy:
      - centralized planning for each state-owned enterprise of production volumes and prices in kind;
      - annual centralized price reduction;
      - abandonment of centralized planning of production costs, including payroll;
      - distribution at the enterprise level of the wage fund between performers according to the coefficient of labor participation.


      This is generally stupid, stupid, plan for the year ahead what you need :))
      Therefore, giants designed for wagon deliveries were built in our country.

      And if you need 2 tons of that rental, and a box of hardware - no, only illegally exchange or wait for months through a monstrously clumsy distribution system. And at this time, production will start - the State Planning Commission did not provide a box of hardware in the plan ... - rubbish and rubbish again!
      Absolutely inflexible inert and low-quality industry, uninterested in quality products in most industries - the exception is military acceptance, and there used to be products that went beyond the parameters, and now everything is much worse in the military than in the USSR.

      By the way, these same problems are plaguing the Russian economy, and now - dozens of kilograms of non-typical hardware are needed - you can’t order in the Russian Federation, only tons. And in China, yes - please, give me the drawing and parameters - they will do it for several days.

      Friends from the military-industrial complex are turning in - bring hardware from China ... the consequences of the gigantomania of the USSR and the rigidity of production.
      1. Operator 25 March 2020 15: 30 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The state order under Stalin was controlled centrally along the entire chain of cooperative production.

        Over-planned production at the capacities and production areas not covered by the state order was completely left at the mercy of the management of state enterprises without planning volumes and prices for products (and especially cost and wages).

        Therefore, when there was a shortage of any component, they began to produce it at home (if the product is simple) or to order on the side of a specialized enterprise (if the product is complex).

        That is why under Stalin, narrow-profile cooperatives flourished, specialized in the operational execution of orders of state enterprises. Artels died not because of Khrushchev’s instructions, but because of the breakdown of the Stalinist model of the economy.
      2. strannik1985 25 March 2020 17: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Totally inflexible inert

        It has one, but decisive, advantage - it allows you to have an economy many times more than in a market economy.
        And in China

        The volume of FDI in the economy of the PRC in 2019 was 137,2 billion dollars.
      3. Alexey RA 25 March 2020 19: 07 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        And if you need 2 tons of that rental, and a box of hardware - no, only illegally exchange or wait for months through a monstrously clumsy distribution system. And at this time, production will rise - the State Planning Commission did not provide a box of hardware in the plan

        I immediately recall the beginning of "Office Romance" and reprimand Novoseltsev:
        Did you notice that we have interruptions with certain goods? This is due to the fact that certain products are not planned by such rotozei as you. Please remake.
  25. irontom 25 March 2020 13: 17 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    By the way, I ask you to pay attention to negative characters in the famous comedy Operation Y, if you remove the hypertrophy of the images, in fact, small private traders.
    1. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 15: 12 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: irontom
      negative characters, if you remove the hypertrophy of the images, in fact, small private traders.


      Helped a local official to "enclose" the warehouse of the regional consumer union :))
  26. A. Privalov 25 March 2020 13: 37 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    When the artels were closed, I was still small and was just going to school, but I had several relatives working in the artels. Both are disabled. One returned from the war without a leg, and the second was almost blind after a concussion. From their stories I know that the cooperatives produced many useful and useful things in the household — tin cans, corkscrews, penknives, padlocks, overhead and mortise locks, plasticine, hangers, wooden toys, small electrical fittings, stationery buttons and paper clips, folders, shoe polish, etc. goods to which the "large" enterprises did not reach. The Trudovik artel at DOK-3 produced stocks for AK, and their neighbors, the Metallist artel, which made tin boxes for candy candies and tea, launched production of a number of components for military productions, including horns for AK, fuse cases and checks for hand grenades, belt buckles for various light weapons, etc.

    Artels, in fact, possessed to a certain extent, financial independence. They had the right to barter exchanges with various enterprises. Suppose you have a barrel of paint, and you need sheet cardboard or small screws - by agreement, this could be exchanged. Procurers traveled around the country, buying, for example, cattle hooves - from which they made combs and buttons, from shells - pearl buttons, and the procurers of fluff and feathers supplied artels producing pillows and feather-beds.

    Each employee was a shareholder in the artel. He received a salary during the year, but once a year, on June 30, the general meeting of the artel shared the profit. In successful artels, the most recent laborer received 5 monthly salaries, the average worker - 10, etc. The chairman of the artel could receive up to 50 salaries.

    There were abuses. Artels produced unaccounted products. There were stores selling these goods. Profit was divided among the participants in the transaction. Such figures were called guild guilds. In the late 50s, a number of high-profile criminal trials related to artels were held. Some participants in the cases received capital punishment, dozens of 15 years with confiscation ... (The guilds existed later, in the 60s and 70s, but this was already without any connection with the artels.)

    For all these small artels, the State, which loves to keep everything from shoe laces, to hairpins under control, was practically impossible to keep track of. One fine day, the cooperatives covered up, taking away all the profits, equipment, materials, premises and roughly uniting the Ministry of Local Industry, specially created for this purpose, in small enterprises. Thus began the era of shortages of small, but such necessary things.
    1. BAI
      BAI 25 March 2020 17: 42 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      A state that loves to keep everything from shoe laces to hairpins under control,

      Either Marx, or Engels has the phrase: “If the state decides how many pants to issue for citizens of the state, and how many buttons are needed for these pants, citizens will be left without pants, without buttons.”
    2. Alexey RA 25 March 2020 19: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      From their stories I know that the cooperatives produced many useful and useful things in the household — tin cans, corkscrews, penknives, padlocks, overhead and mortise locks, plasticine, hangers, wooden toys, small electrical fittings, stationery buttons and paper clips, folders, shoe polish, etc. goods to which the "large" enterprises did not reach.

      At the same time, there were artels that produced rather high-tech, even at present times, products, and worked for the defense industry.
      Artel Primus did all sorts of valves for hydraulics. Including valves for submarines and diesel fuel valves.
      Production and machine tools - Bosch.
      Yes - this is an artel.
      © fvl_01
      In besieged Leningrad, it was the “Primusovites” who helped establish non-conventional plants such as the Sestroretsky Tool (former weapons) factory and the No. 209 plant of the People's Commissariat of the USSR (A. A. Kulakov Electromechanical Plant — ship SUAO and calculating machines):
      One more Leningrad enterprise, the Primus artel, had to be involved in setting up production. Usually they remember her when they want to demonstrate that the teaching staff could be done literally in any shed on her knee. In fact, it was an enterprise with serious equipment and experienced personnel (renamed the factory in 1944). It was the specialists of Primus who mastered the production of PPP in two months and helped stamping both Sestoretsky and head plant No. 209, which was considered in Leningrad.

      At that time, stamping and welding were high-tech - our weapons industry mastered them only in the very end of the 30s.
  27. bandabas 25 March 2020 14: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "Uncle Joe" as the leader of the Country was close to ideal! good
  28. Pavel Fedorov 25 March 2020 14: 35 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    The bastard Zionist Khrushchev who hated the Russian people did everything for the collapse of the USSR, his sidekick was settled in the Kremlin .... they finish ...
  29. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 14: 58 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Thus, contrary to the anti-Soviet, anti-Russian myth (under the "bloody Stalin" people were only robbed), everything was the other way around.


    Just the people worked for workdays:
    To work on the collective farm, a wage system was introduced — workdays. It did not imply a cash payment, but settlement with peasants' products: grain, bread, potatoes.

    Full payment occurred only if the collective farm was fully paid to the state for all points of the plan launched by the district committee. If the collective farm did not fulfill the plan, full settlement with collective farmers was prohibited by law.


    the norms were large, not always the peasant could fulfill it. For this, a quarter of workdays was removed from him in the form of a fine.


    In 1940, for example, 12% of all Soviet collective farms did not give out cash at all for workdays. In the Tambov region this figure was 26%, in Ryazan - 41%.


    As a rule, the greatest number of workdays was accrued to the collective farm administration: the chairman’s working day cost significantly more than the working day of a simple collective farmer (1,75-2,00 versus 1,3 workdays). In 1937, the average collective farmer (both male and female) received pay for 19 days of work in January and 20 days in July


    according to these data, Karelian collective farmers received 83,3 rubles a month, while Central Asian farmers received 841,66 rubles. The average salary in industry in 1951 was 740 rubles per month. One can only envy Asian collective farmers

    https://historical-fact.livejournal.com/102662.html

    very good in grain harvests and pay for workdays 1937. This year, in-kind delivery increased and 50,6% of collective farms issued less than 3 kg per workday; 26,4% gave from 3 to 5 kg. According to statistics, the average collective farmer earned 1937 workdays in 197 and received 376 rubles on them. Divided by months, it turns out 31,33 rub. per month. Grain turned out to be 60-70 kg per month. Plus a number of other natural products. For comparison: the salary in industry in 1937 was 231 rubles per month.


    This suggests that the collective farmers, who were the majority in collective farms, received income of 13-15% of the average worker’s salaries, despite the fact that they worked only 40-45 less workdays than the worker shifts per year.
    At the same time, the worker had a limited 8 hour working day, and the collective farmers in work had to work for 10-12 hours.
    Only in the Central Asian republics - comparable to the level of remuneration of workers.

    Can such a distribution system be called fair?
    1. evgen1221 25 March 2020 15: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, it wasn’t worth confusing and equalizing some of the amplitudes — well, what worked less and got more while producing more, with a low percentage of rejects (a defective calf was presented at a meat processing plant — and it’s already ridiculous to write massively for all plants in the region). So that would not get more times produced a shaft of more product (nlrmal situation). Just someone toad crushed and raced over the bumps. The trouble is that Khrushchev had no desire and mind to understand how the artel works and what good it brings, and then Suslov and the ode to the error give rise to a lot of other already insurmountable problems, which led to the sad outcome of a progressive country.
  30. evgen1221 25 March 2020 15: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well, what to expect from people who came to power in the late 80-90s under the slogans-Let the Party steer and Over the hill-such pumpkins (from the movie phrase). Not a baggage of knowledge or a desire to understand how the entrusted area works, one desire to blindly steer ...
  31. Operator 25 March 2020 15: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
    In the USSR, everything was considered as a standardizer - from the hour the machine was worked out to the tool wear coefficient — all this was included in the cost price! I myself calculated according to the USSR standards for the machine tool park and tools :)) Entire departments of rationing companies considered the cost of production choosing standards and coefficients from thick reference books

    Damn, and I repeat what once again - centralized planning of the cost of production of state enterprises began only with Khrushchev.

    And internal factory rationing of the cost existed from Tsar Gorokh to this day - companies of any form of ownership in all countries of the world (including Russia) do just that.
  32. Dmitry V. 25 March 2020 15: 55 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    In modern Russia and now megacorporations work in the style of the economy of the USSR.

    For example, one of the units of which several dozen in the distance from the capital is conducting industrial construction. The chief mechanic must draw up a plan ahead of time for the purchase of spare parts that may fail during the year (!). Even GlavMekh with its head and many years of statistics, of course, takes spare parts and consumables with a margin - otherwise, they will remove his head for simple equipment. Similarly, the chief welder, the head of transport and the other department heads take.
    As a result, over several years, tens of branches accumulated unused balances of hundreds of millions of rubles. True, they even tried to sell them.

    Similarly, in the USSR system - in addition to justified deliveries, they were taken with a supply, + mobilization backlogs and reserves were stored in warehouses - in total, a mass of resources, raw materials and materials were not used, it was stored up to an hour.
    True, it was possible to use the mobile reserve in case of disruption of supplies (which was commonplace in the USSR), but they could also put them in and drive them out of the party ... therefore the directors were chemically treated as they could.
    1. Alexey RA 25 March 2020 19: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
      In modern Russia and now megacorporations work in the style of the economy of the USSR.

      Not only in the USSR. In the Russian branch of one large, but now defunct transnational telecommunications company (with "import" managers), they arranged a window replacement in December. The reason is "we need to spend funds for repairs before the end of the year, otherwise they will be cut off at our head office".
  33. Fishery 25 March 2020 16: 50 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    before the war, they covered up just a private initiative, there was a story about a tanker, so in his memoirs the Akurat covered the leaders before the war, he describes how his dad nearly opened his forge with two workers, and almost sat down.
  34. ser56 25 March 2020 16: 57 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    another nonsense of the author ... request
    "Under Stalin, when tens of thousands of cooperative societies, hundreds of thousands of single handicraftsmen operated in the country, collective-farm markets satisfied the food needs of the people, individual peasants and collective farmers with personal plots, there was no such problem. "
    if not a secret - why then were the collective farms and state farms? bully
  35. Free wind 25 March 2020 18: 08 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    Khrushchev reduced the army not out of harm, but because it became very huge, why in peacetime there were 6 million soldiers, and army appetites grew. Khrushchev began to gradually establish relations with the same America. They did not quarrel with China because of Stalin, just Khrushchev did not give them the atomic bomb. Artels were not private shops, they were collective property. And the villagers had the opportunity to keep all living creatures. and sell surplus in the markets. it seems that there were problems with horses.
  36. NF68 25 March 2020 18: 27 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Because the man was not of great mind.
  37. wooja 26 March 2020 00: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    the author is right ... that was ... 15% of the economy of the Stalinist USSR was - the non-state sector of the economy-- that was officially called. The CNS has nationalized this sector, making the country's economy mono-structured .... how we all know how it ended.
  38. Shuttle 26 March 2020 06: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    A good article, but to call the faithful disciple of Lenin, the Bolshevik-Marxist-Leninist emperor - is too much. Even if this “title” is painted red.
    Joseph Vissarionovich is without a doubt a strong-willed man. But he worked great with teams of specialists.
  39. Dmitry V. 26 March 2020 09: 35 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Here is one comment from a military pilot:
    Grandfather Ignat Ivanovich Verbitsky occupied a completely special place in our family. ... He was famous for many talents, but above all, for his extraordinary ability to craft from valuable species of trees. The walls of our house, which my grandfather built on the banks of the Psou river bordering Georgia, were always hung with guitars, mandolins, domras, balalaikas made by grandfather. In the corner there were magnificent stacked canes of mahogany and boxwood, and on the shelves crowded along the main objects that brought grandfather fame - medical stethoscopes from the same boxwood, which, as they said, had excellent acoustic properties. These elegant, lacquered tubes have for some time become the reason for a real pilgrimage to our home by doctors practicing in cities and towns from Sochi to Sukhumi.

    The first wave of collectivization and dispossession that swept through the southern Black Sea almost did not touch Vesely. But the second, in 1931, flashed like a tornado, having done a lot of trouble. The village was worried, an agent came from Adler - a gloomy man in a leather cap. To the words of the chairman of the collective farm Palchikov that there were no fists in Veseloy, the commissioner answered with an ironic irony: “Everyone has it, but you don’t? You, Comrade Palchikov, although a former red commander, but you are not thinking correctly, your revolutionary instinct has obviously dulled. Who is the most reference owner in the village? ” Fingers, they say, shrugged. “And Verbitsky? - the authorized representative pressed. “He is rowing money with a shovel, he lives like a master.” “But this is another matter, he does not exploit other people's labor,” Palchikov did not give up. But the fate of grandfather was decided. At the collective farm meeting, with the tacit consent of the frightened villagers, they decided to dispossess Verbitsky, because, as the commissioner said, he lives richly and, moreover, there is a plan to dispossess at least two owners in each village.

    I remember how Nikolai Alekseevich Ostrovsky judged our family tragedy:

    “If I say that a mistake has occurred with your father and grandfather, I will curse my soul.” Although, of course, in such a huge matter as collectivization, one cannot do without mistakes. I believe you. I think your father and grandfather are not guilty before the Soviet regime ...
    .
    - Someone strongly perverts the party line in the village. No wonder. Strongly here gives Trotskyism. Well, yes, you are unlikely to understand, still small. But here is what I have to understand and remember for a lifetime: in any policy, with the sharpest turns of history, justice for people is all!

    Over the years, I probably violate the accuracy of the words spoken by Nikolai Alekseevich, but his thought was just that.

    http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/pustovalov_bm2/05.html
  40. Pavel57 26 March 2020 14: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    How did Stalin overlook Khrushchev?
  41. CTEPX 26 March 2020 14: 22 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    For some reason, the author repeatedly calls cooperative cooperatives the private sector. This is the public sector. And, unlike the private, which is capitalist, and the state, which is imperialistic (state-capitalist), this sector is the only socialist winked
  42. erased 27 March 2020 13: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The moment has come when we will remember the USSR for a very specific purpose. For what is happening now has long gone beyond all reasonable.
  43. To state 27 March 2020 17: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yeah .... how much we did not know
  44. serezhasoldatow 27 March 2020 20: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Ukrainian, then take it from him, in addition to analysis and that box.
  45. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 17: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    These were not private owners, it was a cooperative production! A kind of socialist property. There was a criminal liability for engaging in private enterprise!
  46. Sergej1972 29 March 2020 18: 05 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Now I can’t recall the link from memory. But I read somewhere that these promartels were on Khrushchev’s drum. He was neither for nor against. They were eliminated at the initiative of Anastas Mikoyan. At the same time, artisanal artels were preserved. Consumer cooperation has survived, and housing and garage and building cooperatives soon spread.
  47. mmaxx 30 March 2020 16: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Khrushchev was an unfinished Trotskyist. With extremist and stubborn looks. This obstinacy and limitation of the brain is visible in all his deeds. Both bad and good. Just do not have such a place in power in a big country. But the USSR was not lucky.
  48. Griol April 1 2020 09: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    When you read the next myth about the “best friend of children”, you begin to understand that it is impossible to comment on individual opuses, a diagnosis of a psychiatrist is required here. It’s like in those years of the Soviet regime - photographs of store shelves littered with meat products and sellers smiling benevolently and a completely diametrical picture in life. Khrushchev brought a lot of evil, trying to bring us to "communism" faster - this is a barbaric reduction in the army, and a ban on keeping livestock for the already robbed collective farmers, and there is much more to talk about. But to advertise what was not there is a mockery of the history of our people. And finally ... Very often in different articles "true" statistics are given .. Fear God, good people. When did Soviet statistics tell the truth? I can answer this difficult question for you .. The first and last time the state administration of the country gave in 1937, after which it was shot in full force. After that, those tsifiri were published, which was confirmed by the next partyigenoss.
  49. Bogatyrev April 2 2020 00: 33 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Don't you think that the wide distribution of production cooperatives existed under Stalin rather by inertia as a transitional form to industrial production, which Khrushchev simply transferred to the next logical stage?
    Was there a shortage in the USSR? If so, then what exactly? Italian boots? They and the cooperatives did not.
  50. Alexander Saveliev 1 June 2020 21: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Still, the author did not say why Khrushchev destroyed the artels. Of course, one can assume, because Khrushchev was an illiterate dogmatist. But this is still an assumption. To be sure, it would be nice to present the corresponding Khrushchev statements, etc. software installations. I hope Comrade Samsonov will do this in the future.