Military Review

NEP - the path to a new catastrophe or to salvation?

116

V. I. Lenin and K. E. Voroshilov among the delegates of the X Congress of the RCP (b). 1921 g.


Depletion of the country


World War, Troubles, intervention and mass migration led to the depletion of Russia, its resources, human and material. The policy of war communism, a policy of mobilization with the aim of confronting the enemies of the Bolsheviks, has ceased to be tolerant for most of the peasantry (the overwhelming part of the population of Russia), devastated by the war and exhausted by crop failure. The peasants began to oppose the Soviet regime. The country faced the threat of a new outbreak of war between city and country, and this could be followed by a new external invasion of the West, the nationalist regimes of Poland and Finland, and the White Guards.

The natural response to the lack of a market, the withdrawal of food through surplus appropriation, was the reduction of the cultivated area by the peasants. The peasants have reduced the production of agricultural products to the minimum necessary to feed one family. And large farms that existed before the revolution were destroyed everywhere. Land plots were crushed everywhere and lost their marketability. In 1920, agriculture provided only about half of the pre-war production. And the reserves that existed earlier were used during the war. The threat of large-scale famine loomed before the country. In 1921-1922. famine covered the territory of 35 provinces, tens of millions of people suffered from it, about 5 million died. The Volga region, the Southern Urals and Southern Ukraine were particularly affected.

The industrial situation was even worse. In 1920, the production of heavy industry accounted for about 15% of the pre-war. Labor productivity was only 39% of the 1913 level. The working class suffered greatly. Many died on the fronts of the Civil. Plants and factories stood, many were closed. The workers went to the villages, saved themselves by subsistence farming, became handicraftsmen, small traders (bagmen). There was a process of declassing workers. Hunger, unemployment, war weariness and other hardships were the reasons for the discontent of the workers.

Agriculture was the backbone of the Russian economy and the main source of resources. And it was in complete decline. Large farms have practically disappeared, yards with a sown area of ​​more than 8 dessiatines accounted for about 1,5%. Courtyards with small plots prevailed completely - with sowings up to 4 acres, and one horse. The share of farms with more than 2 horses fell from 4,8% to 0,9%. There were more than a third of the horseless households. The war led to the death of a large number of able-bodied men, some became disabled and crippled. Most of the draft animals were lost.

If the current situation persisted, Russia could lose the remnants of industry, developed infrastructure (including railways), and large cities. Industry would become purely handicraft, serving the interests of the peasants. The country was losing the ability to maintain the state apparatus and the army. And without this, Russia would simply be devoured by large and small external predators.

Therefore, after an extraordinary period of war, the Soviet state tried to establish its economy. Two of the most authoritative agricultural economists in Russia, L. Litoshenko and A. Chayanov, were instructed to prepare two alternative projects. Litoshenko proposed to continue in the new conditions the "Stolypin reform" - a stake on farming with large land plots and hired workers. Chayanov proceeded from the development of peasant farms without wage labor with their gradual cooperation. These projects were discussed in the summer of 1920 at the GOELRO commission (the prototype of the planning body) and at the People's Commissariat of Agriculture. It was decided to put the Chayanov plan at the heart of state policy.

NEP - the path to a new catastrophe or to salvation?
The corpses of those who died of hunger, collected over several December days in 1921 at the cemetery in Buzuluk

The main milestones of the NEP


On March 8, 1921, the X Congress of the RCP (b) opened in Moscow. It took place against the backdrop of the Kronstadt mutiny and a series of peasant uprisings throughout Russia. At the same time, Kronstadt was not the primary reason for the introduction of the NEP. The text of the resolution on the NEP was presented to the Central Committee on February 24, 1921. The Congress adopted a decision on the transition from the policy of War Communism to the New Economic Policy and on replacing the surplus appropriation system with a tax in kind. The congress also adopted a special resolution "On Party Unity" proposed by V. Lenin. The document pointed out the harm and inadmissibility of any factionalism and ordered to immediately dissolve all factional groups and platforms. Any factional speeches were prohibited. For violation of these requirements, they were expelled from the party. In the summer, a purge took place in the Communist Party, about a quarter of its members were expelled from the RCP (b).

The NEP included several important decrees. The decree of March 21, 1921 replaced the food distribution with a tax in kind. During the surplus appropriation, up to 70% of agricultural products were seized, the tax was about 30%. The rest was left to the family and could be used for sale. At the same time, the tax became progressive - the poorer the family, the less it is. In a number of cases, the peasant economy could generally be exempted from tax. The decree of March 28, 1921 introduced free trade in agricultural products. On April 7, 1921, cooperatives were allowed. The decrees of 17 and 24 May created conditions for the development of the private sector (small, handicraft industry and cooperatives) and the material base of agriculture. A June 7 decree allowed the creation of small businesses with up to 20 employees. On October 4, 1921, the State Bank of the RSFSR was established.


Lenin speaks at the X Congress of the RCP (b) with a report on the transition to NEP. 1921 g.

"Peasant Brest"


The NEP gave rise to heated discussions in the party. It was called "retreat", "peasant Brest". Among some of the professional revolutionaries, hatred of the "peasant" principle of Russia was very stable and pronounced. Many Bolsheviks did not want to encourage the peasantry. However, Lenin emphasized that

"Only an agreement with the peasantry can save the socialist revolution in Russia."

And the peasants can only be satisfied with the freedom to exchange their surplus. Therefore, the "link with the peasant economy" (the basis of the NEP) is the main condition for building socialism. Thus, the NEP was caused not by a political moment, but by the type of Russia as an agrarian, peasant country.

It is worth noting that the discussion about the NEP imperceptibly pushed aside the concept of Marxism about the world proletarian revolution as a condition of socialism. All attention was focused on the internal affairs of Russia, from which the concept of building socialism in one country later grew.


Summary results


The first year of the new policy was accompanied by a catastrophic drought (of the 38 million dessiatines sown in the European part of Russia, 14 million died). The population of the most affected areas had to be evacuated to Siberia, the mass of people (about 1,3 million people) went independently to Ukraine and Siberia. The shock of the situation led to the fact that in 1922 rural work was declared a national and general party matter.

But gradually the NEP led to the restoration of agriculture. Already in 1922, the harvest amounted to 75% of the 1913 level, in 1925 the sown area reached the pre-war level. The main branch of the country's economy, agriculture, has stabilized. However, the problem of agrarian overpopulation, from which Russia suffered at the beginning of the 1928th century, was not resolved. So, by 1913, the absolute growth of the rural population was 11 million people (9,3%) compared to 5, and the total sown area increased by only 9%. Moreover, the sowing of grain has not increased at all. That is, the sowing of grain per capita decreased by 1928% and amounted to only 0,75 hectares in 570. Due to a slight increase in productivity, grain production per capita of the rural population increased to 48 kg. The number of livestock and poultry also increased, almost a third of all grain was spent on their feed. The nutrition of the peasants improved. However, commercial grain production fell by more than half, to 1913% of the XNUMX level.

The "naturalization" of agriculture also developed. The share of those employed in agriculture increased from 75 to 80% (from 1913 to 1928), and in industry fell from 9 to 8%, in trade from 6 to 3%. The industry was gradually recovering. In 1925, the gross output of large-scale industry was ¾ of the pre-war level. Electricity production exceeded the 1913 level by one and a half times.

Further development of the industry was restrained by a number of problems. Heavy industry and transport were in a severe crisis. They were practically unnecessary for the "peasant economy". In large cities, a difficult situation was observed with the revival of the negative phenomena of capitalism. The Menshevik Dan, leaving prison at the beginning of 1922, was surprised that there was an abundance of food in Moscow, but only the new rich ("Nepmen") could afford prices. Everywhere speculators were striking, waiters and cabbies began to say "master" again, prostitutes appeared on Tverskaya Street.

The drunkenness of the population has become one of the striking features of liberalization. The production and sale of alcohol was freed. By 1923, the production of state edible alcohol had dropped to almost zero. Private production and sale of liqueurs and liqueurs was allowed. The fight against moonshine has stopped. Up to 10% of peasant farms produced moonshine. Moonshine has become a surrogate for money in the village. Only in 1925 was the state monopoly on vodka production restored. The state monopoly on vodka again became important for the country's budget. In the 1927-1928 financial year, the "drunken part" accounted for 12% of budget revenues (in 1905 it was 31%). But since that time, a noticeable increase in the consumption of distillery alcohol by the population begins.

In the late 20s, the NEP was curtailed, and forced industrialization began. During the years of perestroika and the victory of democracy, many authors presented this as a consequence of the erroneous and vicious views of the Soviet elite, Stalin personally. However, otherwise it was impossible to make a quick leap into the future, to overcome the gap with the leading powers of the world by 50-100 years. The NEP was needed to give the country and people a respite, overcome the devastation, and restore what was destroyed. But then a different policy was needed.

In 1989, an economic modeling was carried out for the option of continuing the NEP in the 1930s. It showed that in this case there would be no way to raise the defense capability of the USSR. Moreover, gradually the annual growth of the gross product would fall below the growth of the population, which led to the steady impoverishment of the people, and the country would steadily go to a new social explosion, the war between town and country, and turmoil. It is obvious that peasant, agrarian Russia had no future. In the turbulent 1930-1940. it would simply be crushed by the advanced industrial powers. Or it would have happened after the start of a new Civil War in Russia.
Author:
116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 16 March 2021 04: 50
    +2
    War communism policy, mobilization policy with the aim of confronting the enemies of the Bolsheviks
    Maybe the invaders are still enemies of Russia and the Russian people, no?


    The natural response to the lack of a market, the withdrawal of food through the surplus appropriation, was the reduction of the cultivated area by the peasants.
    Well, nonsense! Below the author contradicts himself!
    Many died on the fronts of the Civil
    The war led to the death of a large number of able-bodied men, some became disabled, crippled



    In 1921-1922. famine covered the territory of 35 provinces, tens of millions of people suffered from it, about 5 million died.
    Does the author represent this as a consequence of surplus appropriation? There was a poor harvest due to drought.


    However, Lenin emphasized that
    "Only an agreement with the peasantry can save the socialist revolution in Russia."
    To everyone who represents V.I. Lenin as an enemy of the Russian people and the peasantry - Lenin's greetings!


    Only in 1925 the state monopoly on the production of vodka was restored
    But the Russian people until 25 were still drunk by the Bolsheviks! (Irony)

    The author does not seem to understand that the NEP was aimed primarily at small-scale commodity production in cities, for at least some kind of fair exchange for agricultural products.
    1. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 16 March 2021 05: 44
      +15
      The most important thing that the NEP decided was .... the creation of commodity-money relations. From the expropriation economy of war communism, natural exchange, the country made a turn towards the creation of a normal, commodity - money economy. It is curious that for this, in addition to the introduction of the circulation of the famous "gold chervonets", the circulation and exchange of absolutely all banknotes: tsarist, provisional government, Soviet, "White Guard" (such as "bells "and so on.), etc. In addition, Western capital and emigrants who created trading posts and even .... latifundia-analogues of the current Russian TORs (territories of advanced development) were widely invited to the country. This is what made it possible in the shortest possible time to raise the economy, in fact, to create it, practically from scratch.
    2. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 16 March 2021 05: 57
      +3
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      The author does not seem to understand that the NEP was aimed primarily at small-scale commodity production in cities, for at least some kind of fair exchange for agricultural products.

      yes Not everyone understood NEP even at that time.
      A little clarification is carried out here:

      ==========
      In 1989, an economic modeling was carried out for the option of continuing the NEP in the 1930s.

      Continuation? Why did they continue there? Counterfeit goods appeared: cigarettes, vodka and other scarce goods. Beer from state breweries was supplied to cooperative breweries, where it was sold at a price 4-5 times more expensive. Have you started to charge a fee for entering public toilets? In short it sounds like this:

      The whole point of the NEP was that the economy was created on the Russian ruble, and not on the dollar or pound:

      As a result, production began to appear INSIDE the country. The gold ruble was traded on the stock exchange ...
      Don't discount typhus, cholera, homeless people, illiteracy, hunger, post-war devastation, bondage of the Brest-Litovsk Peace, Europe's "open arms" ... This did not contribute to the success of the reforms. You just transfer it all to our time and compare ...
      As a result of the NEP, oligarchs did not appear in the USSR and the flows of resources and capital did not flow to the West as a wide river.
      hi
      1. Stas157
        Stas157 16 March 2021 06: 26
        +3
        I agree with you and Platoshkin. And once again, respected author, Alexander Samsonov, reveals white spots in our history, which in Soviet times were ignored by official education.
        The same way that history is being taught now - below any criticism - they belittle the Soviet and elevate the Tsarist White Guard.
        1. WHAT IS
          WHAT IS 16 March 2021 07: 34
          +18
          Quote: Stas157
          belittle the Soviet and elevate the Tsarist-White

          Oh, this is all too often. Even here, articles by authors are often published, with tears of emotion telling about how well the people lived under the tsar and the bars. Maybe a couple of percent of the population lived like that, but about the working people, the children and grandchildren of the workers and it is not necessary to pour this into the ears of the peasants, we judge by the recollections of our relatives, and not by the White Guard opuses.
      2. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 16 March 2021 06: 44
        0
        Quote: ROSS 42
        The whole point of the NEP was that the economy was created on the Russian ruble, and not on the dollar or pound.
        The point is not the point, but there is a very big difference from the 1990s, not in favor of the 90s by itself.
      3. kalibr
        kalibr 16 March 2021 11: 18
        0
        Quote: ROSS 42
        bondage of the Brest Peace

        What does he have to do with NEP?
        1. kalibr
          kalibr 16 March 2021 15: 41
          +1
          It must be the same 4 ignoramuses do not know that the Brest Peace was canceled long before the introduction of the NEP!
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 16 March 2021 17: 49
            0
            Another ... semi ... checked in. Wow...
      4. Daniil Konovalenko
        Daniil Konovalenko 16 March 2021 12: 33
        +4
        bondage of the Brest Peace
        The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was canceled on November 13, 1918.
    3. Doctor
      Doctor 16 March 2021 07: 28
      -6
      Maybe the invaders are still enemies of Russia and the Russian people, no?

      Is not a fact. The Bolsheviks were also supported because of the cordon.
      And the ideology itself came from the small German city of Trier.wink
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 16 March 2021 08: 07
        +9
        Quote: Arzt
        The Bolsheviks were also supported because of the cordon

        Yes? What forces?

        Quote: Arzt
        And the ideology itself came from the small German city of Trier.

        The ideology of justice and the withdrawal of huge masses of people from the state of bestiality appeared much earlier than Marxism, it just gave it some kind of science, that's all.
        1. Doctor
          Doctor 16 March 2021 08: 48
          -5
          Yes? What forces?

          The Bolsheviks themselves are a Western project.
          The first International met in London.
          Lenin and Co. came to Russia from Switzerland.
          Maybe soon we will meet someone else from there at the Finnish railway station. laughing

          The Balts kept their finger on the pulse to the end.
          Although for you, probably, Pelshe and Pugo are also the Russian People. wink
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 16 March 2021 08: 57
            +7
            Quote: Arzt
            The Bolsheviks themselves are a Western project.

            Russophobic stupidity, this is the least Western project of all the parties of that time, do not count some "Black Hundred" as the spokesmen for the will of the Russian people.

            Quote: Arzt
            Although for you, probably, Pelshe and Pugo are also the Russian People.
            And for you, they are the founders of the Bolshevik Party?
            1. Doctor
              Doctor 16 March 2021 09: 27
              -12%
              And for you, they are the founders of the Bolshevik Party?

              For me they are the overseers of the Russian People. Pelshe - Chairman of the Party Control Committee, with Pugo - it's clear.
              1. Ross xnumx
                Ross xnumx 16 March 2021 12: 17
                -3
                Quote: Arzt
                with Pugo - understandable.

                What is clear there? I still don't get it:
                I'm a bear, friends,
                I'm a bear, friends,
                Come out without fear
                If I am with Pugo,
                If I am with Pugo,
                And the bear is without Pugo!

                wassat
                1. Doctor
                  Doctor 16 March 2021 14: 11
                  -5
                  What is clear there? I still don't get it:

                  Chief of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
            2. Doctor
              Doctor 16 March 2021 09: 57
              -8
              Russophobic stupidity, this is the least Western project of all the parties of that time, do not count some "Black Hundred" as the spokesmen for the will of the Russian people.

              The Black Hundred did not form out of the blue, even then it was clear that the guys were newcomers.

              Do you remember the name of their anthem?
              The International, however.
              How would they be called now? winked
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 16 March 2021 10: 10
                +8
                Quote: Arzt
                Do you remember the name of their anthem?
                The International, however.

                Do you remember the words?
                You are despicable in your wealth
                Coal and became kings!
                You are your thrones, parasites,
                On our backs erected!
                Quote: Arzt
                How would they be called now?

                And who they called them - communists.
          2. Daniil Konovalenko
            Daniil Konovalenko 16 March 2021 12: 38
            +3
            The Bolsheviks themselves are a Western project.
            ..And the nationalist governments: the Baltics, Ukraine, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, whose project is the East? laughing Did the Japanese have a hand in Petliura? laughing
            1. mat-vey
              mat-vey 16 March 2021 12: 46
              0
              Quote: Daniil Konovalenko
              Did the Japanese have a hand in Petliura?

              They found something closer to what to "attach" ...
            2. Doctor
              Doctor 16 March 2021 13: 36
              -6
              ..And the nationalist governments: the Baltics, Ukraine, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, whose project is the East? laughing Did the Japanese have a hand in Petliura?

              West, East, South ... Anyone's. A weak country will be torn apart.
            3. Doctor
              Doctor 16 March 2021 14: 08
              -5
              And the nationalist governments: the Baltics, Ukraine, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, whose project is the East? laughing Did the Japanese have a hand in Petliura? laughing

              Also west. Tore the country apart.
          3. Freeman
            Freeman 16 March 2021 19: 02
            +1
            Arzt Today, 08:48
            Although for you, probably Pelshe and Pugo are also Russian people. wink

            On this score, there is a very authoritative opinion of Tsar Nicholas I, in whose reign the famous formula arose
            - "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality»


            Once at a court ball, Emperor Nicholas I asked the French Marquis Astolphe de Custine, who was visiting Russia at that time:

            - Marquis, do you think there are many Russians in this hall?

            “Everyone except me and the foreign ambassadors, your majesty!

            - You are wrong. This one close to me is a Pole, here is a German. There are two generals - they are Georgians. This courtier is a Tatar, here is a Finn, and there is a baptized Jew.

            - Then where are the Russians? Custine asked.

            - But all together they are Russians ...
            1. Doctor
              Doctor 16 March 2021 20: 48
              -2
              On this score, there is a very authoritative opinion of Tsar Nicholas I, in whose reign the famous formula arose

              A funny bike. Well, go to Vilnius, tell them that they are Russians. laughing
    4. Bar1
      Bar1 16 March 2021 09: 10
      -7
      what was the government at the time, what should you call it? Was it democracy / democracy or the power of the Soviets, as they declared at that time? Who made the decision about the Brest-Litovsk Peace, the bad Soviet-Polish war, the popular suppression of the Chembarniks, the Antonov suppression, the Kronstadt suppression?
      By all accounts, this was a very narrow circle of people, but on very unpopular issues BM, NEP, it was a PERSONAL initiative / will of Lenin. Therefore, this rule of the Bolsheviks can be deservedly called Tyranny and even worse, the tyranny of foreigners over the Russian population.
      The essence and meaning of the Bolshevik experiment is the destruction of the RUSSIAN peasant community through the policy of war communism / surplus appropriation and the complete prohibition of markets and their replacement by bureaucratic distribution of goods, which were first confiscated from the peasants, and then distributed throughout the country, it is not clear from what considerations.
      The author says that crop failures were the cause of the famine? But this is not so, in the WHOLE huge country there could not be crop failure everywhere, but only in some areas, and then the task of any state was to level these consequences, i.e. the transfer of foodstuffs to the starving provinces. But the Bolshevik government was adapted only to DESTROY and could never create anything, or even worse did not want to help the starving, therefore the famine of the peasantry was the main feature of this Bolshevik state.
      Lenin created the NEP, although the name itself already contains cunning. There was nothing "new" in this policy. Markets were allowed and the sale and purchase started. the NATURAL order of relations between town and country was restored. But Lenin died in 24. and the rest of the Bolshevik government decided to break the NEP. If Lenin was alive, would this order, this NEP have been preserved for a long time? Of course not. Sooner or later, the Bolsheviks would break everything natural.
      1. Fan-fan
        Fan-fan 16 March 2021 13: 09
        -3
        I agree that Lenin was the first to see that the continuation of that Bolshevik policy would lead to the death of the country and the Bolsheviks themselves, so he introduced the NEP, in fact, introduced a little capitalism. And this "a little" saved the country and the Bolsheviks themselves. Therefore, I do not believe in this author's statement:
        In 1989, an economic modeling was carried out for the option of continuing the NEP in the 1930s. It showed that in this case ... ... the annual growth of the gross product would fall below the growth of the population, which led to the steady impoverishment of the people.
        Does the author think the 1989 censorship would have missed another text? Doesn't anyone see that as a result of several years of NEP, the country has defeated hunger? I'm sure keeping and maybe adjusting the NEP a little would be the best option. And how did the NEP interfere with industrialization?
        1. Foul skeptic
          Foul skeptic 16 March 2021 14: 15
          +3
          maybe a small adjustment of the NEP would be the best option

          If you know that the economic policy required adjustment, then you probably know what needs to be adjusted. So, you see and can name its shortcomings. It is so?
        2. clerk
          clerk 17 March 2021 19: 38
          0
          ... Doesn't anyone see that as a result of several years of NEP, the country has defeated hunger? I
          She did not defeat him - she delayed him a little. Without enlargement
          In agricultural production (it does not matter whether it is a collective farm, a latifundia, a landlord farm, or a large kulak farm), famine was inevitable. The merit of the Bolsheviks was that they used the freed hands for industrialization, and not for riots or mass begging.
      2. Freeman
        Freeman 16 March 2021 18: 26
        +2
        Bar1 Today, 09:10
        The essence and meaning the Bolshevik experiment is the destruction of the RUSSIAN peasant community

        Destruction RUMOPKOY peasant community - essence and meaning agrarian reform Stolypin, not the Bolsheviks.
        The Bolsheviks just tried to recreate it in a new form. First, in the form of cooperatives, and later, collective farms.
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 16 March 2021 19: 15
          +1
          Quote: Freeman
          The destruction of the RUSSIAN peasant community is the essence and meaning of Stolypin's agrarian reform, not the Bolsheviks.
          The Bolsheviks just tried to recreate it in a new form. First, in the form of cooperatives, and later, collective farms.


          that tsarism in the person of Stolypin, that communism were busy, just with this - the complete destruction of Russian traditions and their replacement with non-Russian ones.
          The Holodomors of the early 20s and 30s were associated precisely with the fact that the Bolsheviks banned markets, i.e. trade between town and country, replacing the complete weaning and appropriation of the produced product.
          As for collectivization, this Bolshevik "collectivization" was accompanied by the weaning of peasant lands, the weaning of peasant property and the weaning of peasant livestock. The peasants were not given passports and therefore the peasants could not voluntarily move around the country, the peasants worked for workdays, i.e. it was a NEW Bolshevik serfdom.
          Under the Bolsheviks, for example, ALL the Cossack army was completely destroyed, despite the fact that the Cossacks helped the Bolsheviks to overthrow the Provisional Government.
          So you don't fucking know history.
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 17 March 2021 08: 24
            +1
            that the Bolsheviks banned markets i.e. trade between town and country, replacing the complete weaning and appropriation of the produced product.

            Where did you get it? The market was in the 30s, and even more so in the 20s. For example, the turnover of the collective farm markets of Leningrad in 1932 was 76,1 million rubles, in 1935 - 158,1 million rubles.
            Resolution of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR.

            On the procedure for the production of trade of collective farms, collective farmers and working people of individual peasants and the reduction of the tax on trade in agricultural products.
            (Approved by the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks on May 20, 1932).

            In order to assist collective farms, collective farmers and individual working peasants in the development of trade in the products of their agricultural production, on the basis of the decisions of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of May 6 and 10, 1932, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR decide:

            1. To abolish all existing, both republican and local taxes and levies from the trade of collective farms, collective farmers and individual working peasants with the products of their agricultural production in bazaars, squares, railway stations, marinas (bread, meat, poultry, eggs, dairy products, vegetables , fruits, etc.).

            2. To keep the bazaars clean and cover the costs of cleaning bazaars, allow the establishment of a local one-time fee, and this fee should not exceed per day of trade: from a cart - 1 ruble, when trading from hands, on trays, etc. - 20 kopecks ., from the head of large livestock - 1 ruble and from the head of small livestock - 50 kopecks.

            3. To prohibit the collection of a local one-time tax on trade from the hands of poultry, eggs, milk, butter, cheese, produced by collective farmers and individual working peasants.

            4. To oblige local councils to reduce as much as possible the rates of rent for premises charged from collective farm stalls, shops, shops.

            5. Establish that the income of collective farms and collective farmers from the sale on the market of the products of their agricultural. production is not taxed by agricultural enterprises. tax.

            6. Establish that the income of individual labor farms from sales on the market of the products of their agricultural households. productions are involved in taxation of agricultural households. tax in the amount of not more than 30% of income from trade, accordingly changing article 50 of the Regulation on agricultural - households. tax for 1932.

            7. Establish that the stalls, tents and shops opened directly by the collective farm for the sale of the products of its agricultural farm. production are subject to a reduced turnover tax rate of 3% of gross proceeds.

            8. The shops, shops and stalls opened by collective farm associations, unions (district, regional, territorial, republican and union) enjoy the same tax benefits as cooperatives.

            9. Trade in collective farms, collective farmers and individual labor peasants shall be carried out at prices prevailing in the market, and trade in collective farm associations at prices not higher than average commercial prices in state trade.

            10. Prevent the opening of shops and shops by private traders and in every possible way to eradicate dealers and speculators trying to cash in on the workers and peasants.

            11. Propose to the Central Executive Committees of the Union republics to immediately cancel all decisions and orders that contradict this resolution.

            Someone, but not you, to accuse people of ignorance of history.
            the peasants worked for their workdays

            still say - for the sticks. Sometimes it is better to be silent than to speak (in this case, to write).
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 17 March 2021 18: 41
              +1
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              Where did you get it? The market was in the 30s, and even more so in the 20s. TO


              damn, what stupidity. I’m not talking about the market, where Aunt Frosya sells a dozen eggs from her backyard. I’m talking about COMMODITY AND MONETARY relations, when the owner / landlord of the land can FREELY sell agricultural products not from his HOUSEHOLD farm of twenty acres, but farms of the size ...
              However, we are not talking about the individual farmer, but the Russian community MIR, when a collective of relatives jointly cultivate the land and jointly sell the products and then honestly and justly share the fruits of their labor with the whole world. I am talking about the Nizhny Novgorod fair, which was destroyed by the Bolsheviks and so with all large markets around the country.
              Can you understand this?

              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              still say - for the sticks. Sometimes it is better to be silent than to speak (in this case - to write)


              deny that the peasants on the collective farms toiled for workdays? But it's true.
              1. Foul skeptic
                Foul skeptic 18 March 2021 08: 39
                0
                I'm not talking about the market, where Aunt Frosya sells a dozen eggs from her backyard. I'm talking about COMMODITY AND CASH from

                Really? You understand that messages are saved on the forum and I don't even need to memorize your messages, but just copy what you said. Namely:
                banned the markets i.e. trade between town and country, replacing the complete weaning and appropriation of the produced product.

                1) Trade between town and country is prohibited. Lying
                2) The manufactured product was completely sampled. Lying
                deny that the peasants on the collective farms toiled for workdays? But it's true.

                This is illiterate. It is tantamount to such nonsense to say that a worker at a factory does not work for a salary, but for a production rate, and entrepreneurs work not for profit, but for contracts.
                1. Bar1
                  Bar1 18 March 2021 17: 26
                  -1
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  1) Trade between town and country is prohibited. Lying
                  2) The manufactured product was completely sampled. Lying


                  Arctic fox is not interesting to argue with you, you have to ask for every word.

                  And what is illiterate?
                  1. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic 18 March 2021 18: 33
                    -1
                    What other explanations might be required for what I wrote above? There is nowhere clearer.
            2. beeper
              beeper 18 March 2021 01: 55
              +1
              Foul skeptic

              "... also say - for sticks. Sometimes it is better to be silent than to speak (in this case - to write)"
              .

              hi You will probably be surprised, Vile skeptic, but in our collective farm, in the South-East of the Ukrainian SSR, even a "stick" was not always given to collective farmers for a workday - they could even count "half a stick", or even a "quarter stick" is like the chairman would get into a rage, he could tell the clerk not to give people anything for that day, and this happened, after all, the collective farm chairman was in the village "God and the Tsar" - a kind of Soviet tyrant, to whom it is better not to fall into disfavor, he wants to, will deprive him of his job and livelihood, all the issuance of "certificates" in the village council depends on him, or he will write a "paper" - he will simply "issue" it as an "enemy of the Soviet power" ... and this "changed shoes" into a "party member", a former White Guard he did "draw up" fellow villagers, writing denunciations "to the competent authorities (this" authorship "was probably confirmed when the archives of the OGPU-NKVD-KGB were opened for a short time)"!

              It was so "under Stalin", when, as in the song "it was, and prices were reduced (in fact, only for urban residents, due to imposed food taxes from each household and the lack of rights of free rural workers who saw little real money, this is with paid high school, with our post-war rural poverty) "!
              Therefore, with the death of the "leader of the peoples", ordinary villagers (and not a parasitic collective farm "asset", which, they said, may have really burned, not knowing whether it would be possible to save a place at the "trough" under the new "leader"!) on good changes and only "under Malenkov" ("Malenkov came and ate blinks") the peasants sighed a little easier, but he was not for long, but Khrushch, the duremar and the freak, was also not remembered well, and the brief news of his death, which was lost somewhere on the last page of the Izvestia newspaper (which many of our fellow villagers subscribed to) reacted with a smile and still fresh memories of the outstanding foolishness of the deceased with a cut and reduced army, virgin lands and corn, artels and economic councils, and household plots, which then every family felt on myself, as anxious expectation of a new war "over Cuba" ...
              In Brezhnev's times, my Granny used to say, "Otse, onuki, teper of the life of th God, praise God at once, just as much as a beaten chlib, cola take bulo ?!"

              But the chairman's wife, who had not worked on the collective farm field for a single day, was put on "sticks" regularly and fully, and she had a real passport, not a temporary "certificate" of some kind!
              This "nevyroblena" (as in our area, for a long time, they call those who parasitize on someone else's work and "in their life nothing heavier than a spoon, did not lift" negative ) "the woman has drawn up the maximum collective farm pension, and then the state farm pension! request

              Sorry, Vile skeptic, if "inadvertently (I could not restrain myself at the sight of your pompous militant ignorance in this" topic "- I usually try not to get involved in such" discussions ", but you seem to be making fun of my, already, alas, unrequited, ancestors , but I am still alive and have the opportunity to argue!) disturbed "your" pattern of consciousness "about" sticks ", but to you with your own words:
              Vile skeptic, sometimes it is better to be silent than to speak (in this case - to write).
              fool
              1. Bar1
                Bar1 18 March 2021 06: 26
                -1
                Quote: pishchak
                You will probably be surprised, Vile skeptic,


                do you think he doesn't know that? He knows everything, but one has to say something according to the principle of a crooked mirror. Instead of real free markets and market relations, everyone cites as an example the city bazaars where private traders and a few collective farms trade with the remainder of the plan, which, as usual in the USSR, always grew up.
                Already in ten messages I cite the example of the Nizhny Novgorod Fair and the role it played, but they ignore it and how mosquitoes itch about city markets.
                The fact that Soviet serfdom was in fact is of course a shame for the most "advanced" state in the world, but if such facts are not noticed, then they seem to be, and therefore "oh, the Soviet Union was a real people's democracy" true for everyone.
                And if it was a state of tyranny, then who was in power all these years, the tsars, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Putin - then all these are links of one chain and POWER with a capital letter never retreated and never turned off the main road - DESTRUCTION of the Russian community.
                1. beeper
                  beeper 18 March 2021 06: 39
                  +1
                  hi People need an educational program, comrade Pavel!
                  After all, many simply do not know the truth even about the latest (to say nothing of the "legends of antiquity deep") history and recent events of our time.
                  Power is in the truth! wink
                  1. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic 18 March 2021 08: 57
                    -1
                    People need an educational program

                    A person who does not understand that a workday is not a measure of time worked has decided that he can teach others?
                    The "stick" was not always given to collective farmers for a workday - they could have counted "half a stick" or even "a quarter stick"
                  2. Bar1
                    Bar1 18 March 2021 17: 37
                    -1
                    Quote: pishchak
                    People need an educational program, comrade Pavel!


                    Yes, just like that. The Bolsheviks seem to have "liquidated illiteracy", but this is again misleading. If people who could not read and write before suddenly began to read, then is this called "the elimination of illiteracy"? Of course not.
                    -And for God's sake do not read the Bolshevik newspapers.
                    -So there are no others.
                    - Don't read any.
                    Reading Bolshevik Russia was simply poisoned by mass propaganda and lies. People did not understand where the truth was. Prosperous peasants were called kulaks, an honest person expressing his thought was an enemy of the people, any initiative on the ground or in production running counter to the stupidity of the party elite - This is sabotage. Today you are a friend of the Party, tomorrow you are an enemy, and so many times.
              2. Foul skeptic
                Foul skeptic 18 March 2021 08: 49
                0
                Why did you write this sheet for, my respectable? She in no way, from the word at all, does not refute the fact that it is ignorant to declare that the collective farmers worked for their workdays.
                1. beeper
                  beeper 18 March 2021 10: 57
                  0
                  hi Vile expert, for "credited (by summing" sticks, their shares and zeros ")" workdays (in quotes, because the amount of time actually worked was always more than "credited" - this is such a crafty "collective farm accounting" was "under Stalin"!) "then, after the categorical surrender," take out the allotted "to the state, according to the leftover principle, already in the fall, the collective farmers were credited with what was owed (a priori meager, since the losses from the ineffective" directive party management of nature, land use and agronomists "were great and were fully compensated state at the expense of collective farmers) "collective farm rations".
                  And so yes, people worked, consider, "for the idea" - "for the sticks"!
                  Immediately after the liberation and partial clearance of the nearby fields, disfigured by explosions and trenched in trenches, our emaciated mothers and grandmothers, women collective farmers, who survived, harnessed themselves, by draft force, to a plow or harrow, and entered into a "battle for the harvest" ... and then we had a severe post-war famine and starving areas cordoned off by troops.
                  But the French, who were benefiting from the Soviet free echelons with grain, at the same time wrote indignant letters to Stalin, if instead of grain varieties of wheat they came across a couple of carriages with fodder wheat or rye ...
                  No offense, Vile skeptic, you are, apparently, a purely city dweller (you have only a weak theoretical idea about collective farms and those events) and, probably, the war and the long-term Nazi occupation did not reach your places ?! Vaughn Kolya from Novy Urengoy grew up far away (and was brought up by the descendants of exiled Bandera?) In general, with an unnatural love and compassion for the Nazi invaders, there was no one to tell and show what this "peaceful" European rabble was "doing" on Soviet soil!
                  So it is with the collective farms, which is why it died out, went to the cities, the Russian village, which at first the idiots, the Stolypinites, and then the Bolsheviks-Leninists / Stalinists broke and broke, blew, and blew the Communal Basis-Ridge to the Russian Peasantry, beaten off the love of the peasants and care for the Earth!

                  An educational program is necessary (honest, with open eyes, without unnecessary pathos of "dizziness from success", learning from the mistakes and successes of our past) if we want to live and develop as a United Russian State (multinational a priori), and not be rapidly dying out and degrading a resource appendage-colony (as already happened with our former Ukrainian SSR!) of the slave-owning Western World!
                  1. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic 18 March 2021 12: 07
                    0
                    What is this stream of consciousness? Do you like writing sheets of text? So write them at least to the point.
                    to "credited (by summing" sticks, their shares and zeros ")" workdays (in quotes, because the number is actually hours worked there was always more than "credited" - this is such a crafty "collective farm accounting" was "under Stalin"!) "Then, after the categorical surrender of" take out and put "to the state, according to the residual principle, already in the fall, the collective farmers were credited with the

                    I am writing again what a connoisseur of rural life should have known anyway - the hours worked were NOT measured in workdays. This is the first thing.
                    Secondly, the scheme you have written of deceiving collective farmers by the state by reducing the number of workdays worked out is meaningless. For the simple reason that the state did not pay for workdays with each collective farmer, it paid off under contracts of contract immediately with the collective farm (collective of collective farmers). Therefore, at least 10000 workdays on the collective farm are counted, at least 100000, at least 1000 - the state does not care about this - the amount of products delivered to the state does not depend on this. In the same way, if collective farmers instead of 10 workdays are given 1 workday for the same work, then the collective farmers will not receive 10 times less output, but exactly the same amount. A discovery for you, a connoisseur of rural life?

                    PS Your highly artistic outpourings on thousands of printed characters can only impress impressionable youths. For the rest, it will be a set of stamps and bloopers, like this
                    to the brief news of his death, lost somewhere on the last page of the Izvestia newspaper

                    I’m not a young man, and I remember that the obituary in Izvestia and Pravda was on the first page.
                    PPS And this:
                    Educational program is necessary (honest, with open eyes, without unnecessary pathos "dizziness from success", learning from the mistakes and successes of our past), if we want to live and develop as a United Russian State (a priori multinational), and not to be rapidly dying out and degrading resource appendage-colony (as already happened with our former Ukrainian SSR !) of the slave-owning Western World!

                    in general, it is ridiculous to mention pathos to a person, all the contents of whose messages are the very pathos, pathos.
                    1. beeper
                      beeper 18 March 2021 19: 33
                      0
                      So you, Vile skeptic, in other words, confirmed what I wrote above to you, in fact, "robe for sticks"!
                      Give it back to the state and do not grumble, and all the losses of the collective farm from ineffective "party-ideological" management are at the expense of ordinary collective farmers (it was "regulated" by the chairman and his "asset" with the help of the "accounting of stick workdays", which served as a measure individual "collective farm rations ( the whole "trick of the collective farm accounting" was that if there are fewer "sticks", it means that you will receive less rations for the same work!) ", the size of which did not bother the state (if the delivery plan to the state was fulfilled and exceeded by the agreed percentage) - even though die of hunger, survive as you can, but hand over the individual tax, partly in food, and partly in money that still needs to be obtained with the collective farm "payment in kind" - a conversation about how it was "under Stalin", in the "flourishing of collective farm management"! ).

                      According to Nikita Khrushchev-I do not remember the "obituary on the first page" -there was a very small note, in the middle or at the end of the newspaper (at the bottom of the sheet, I was just on the edge of the garden and digging a shallow trench, fluently
                      Looked over, this September day in 1971 we had a warm and sunny, I remember this in connection with that "bald photo" in the newspaper) the portrait is small!
                      If our grandfather, who subscribed and "from cover to cover" read "Izvestia", had not brought the newspaper to the garden and had not told our uncle about this "case", who served in the army in the dashing times of Khrushchev, then they would not have known that Khrushchev died - he was in the "information enclosure" among the Kremlin Brezhnevites and we did not have mourning for him, because I did not remember "anything good" - the "maize" died, well, a joke with him! request
                      1. Foul skeptic
                        Foul skeptic 19 March 2021 11: 59
                        +1
                        "regulated" by the chairman and his "asset" with the help of "stick workday accounting"
                        the whole "trick of the collective farm accounting" was that if there are fewer "sticks", it means that you will receive less rations for the same work!

                        And now I’m telling you how it was.
                        First, the chairperson did not decide at the end of the day to whom to credit the workday and to whom not. The workdays were assigned by the foremen with the participation of team leaders. Therefore, let all the tales about the cheating chairmen remain on the conscience of the collective farmers, who have crumpled in their ignorance, who believed that they would give you a workday for failing a day, but why work, the team will make the norm for you, and they will give me a workday anyway, that's the same workday.
                        Secondly, what is grown by the collective farm and remains after payments on the collective farm does NOT depend on the number of workdays, and therefore there are no "if there are fewer sticks, then there is less ration" in the collective farm's volume. Because the collective farm does NOT present to the state the number of workdays to be paid. And only in this case, it would make sense to reduce the number of workdays in order to reduce the payment for these workdays. I explain to those who missed the "Shares" lesson in grade 3.
                        The collective farm has grown 1000 tons of products. After payments to the state, settlement with MTS and the creation of a seed fund, etc. the collective farm has 400 tons of products left. And these 400 tons will be distributed over workdays. You understand that the figure of 400 tons (or any other) does not depend on the number of accrued workdays. And therefore, all the same, these 400 tons of products will be distributed among the collective farmers, even if they break it by 1000 workdays, at least by 10000. The state cannot get anything out of this. And how many workdays are already coming out for a particular Vasya, Petit, Fedya, these are questions to Vasya, Pete, Fedya, and not to the state - the distribution of workdays is not in its competence. And while doing this, Vasya, Petya or Fedya are workaholic lambs, illuminated by age-old folk wisdom, too, is not worth it. All the problems of the collective farms were not in the collective farm system, but in the collective farmers themselves. Whether you like it or not. And only then the situation was aggravated by the decisions of the districts.
                        PS
                        I remember this in connection with that "bald photo" in the newspaper) the portrait is small!

                        What a bald photo, what a portrait ?! That you come up with something that was not. The death of any retired party functionary was noted in the newspapers in plain text in a black frame. Therefore, Khrushchev's obituary was no different from, say, Mikoyan's.
                      2. beeper
                        beeper 19 March 2021 23: 26
                        0
                        hi Sadness, "Vile skeptic", now, in the style of post-Soviet "effective managers", weaving something about "stupid lazy workers" ?! And "fairy tales" about an allegedly independent (this is something with giblets and households dependent on the all-powerful "master" -the chairman, "master" not only in "Stalinist times" ?!) collective farm "asset (" thieves "creatures of the chairman-bookkeeper, foremen, team leaders, accountants, weighers, ... as a rule, included in the "bureau" of the local "party cell", with all that it implies ...) "?!
                        And according to the rest of your "convincing", fragmentarily drawn, "arguments" it is clearly seen that you are without the skills of systems thinking and not a "skeptic", but a naive "numb theoretician". yes
                        You admonish "literary" completely without understanding the "collective farm" realities, and, in general, our Soviet reality (write that you are "not a youth" now, but obviously not under the Union!). smile
                        Honestly, I understood this even from that of yours, "Vile skeptic", "sacramental phrase":
                        "... also say - for the sticks ...".

                        Alas! request
                    2. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 19 March 2021 13: 07
                      +1
                      in other words, they confirmed what I wrote above to you, in fact, "robyly for sticks"

                      belay
                      This is where in my text it can be seen?
    5. ivan2022
      ivan2022 17 March 2021 09: 24
      0
      Quote: Bar1
      Was it democracy / democracy or the rule of the Soviets, as they declared at that time? Who made the decision about the Brest-Litovsk Peace

      Uh-huh ... uh-huh .. "the master had to give freedom as promised and invite all the slaves to the discussion, God forbid getting such a" smart guy "in the authorities!" Democracy is a full-fledged elected government. And in those days, the distant powers of the Soviets were much broader than now! The Congress of Soviets appointed the Government. For example, the government of Lenin.
      "Either democracy or the Soviets" is nonsense, since there can be no "democracy" without a specific representative elected body. THAT WITHOUT THE PEACE OF BREST AND WITHOUT A REGULAR ARMY THE GERMANS WOULD BE PLUGGING THE ENTIRE COUNTRY - - a child should also understand. And when did the Red Army begin to form? BTW; THE SAME BOLSHEVIKS ABSTRACTED THE BREST WORLD ONLY IN NOVEMBER 1918.

      But the "patriots - Denikinites" in the summer of 1918 managed to form their Volunteer Army in the territories temporarily occupied by the Germans and with their help. The fact that Denikin even had his own embassy office in Berlin is nothing, eh? THIS IS WHO USED THE BREST WORLD INSTEAD TO CONTINUE THE WAR WITH THE GERMANS. OR COULD DENIKIN ALSO FULFILL THE CONDITIONS OF THE WORLD?
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 17 March 2021 19: 09
        0
        Quote: ivan2022
        The Congress of Soviets appointed the Government. For example, the government of Lenin.


        Well, why would the Bolshevik Soviets, headed by Trotsky, not appoint the chief of the Bolsheviks, Lenin, as chairman of the people's commissars?



        Quote: ivan2022
        Or democracy or the Soviets "- nonsense, because there can be no" democracy "without a specific representative elected body


        but you do not understand, no one is against the Soviets, on the contrary, the Soviets — without the Bolsheviks — this is real democracy.

        Quote: ivan2022
        THAT WITHOUT THE BREST PEACE AND WITHOUT A REGULAR ARMY, THE ENTIRE COUNTRY WOULD BE PLUGGED BY THE GERMANS



        do you intend to win with your big man just in time?

        The army was disintegrated, all sorts of "equal rights", "election of officers" and this was greatly facilitated by the Bolsheviks, i.e. Until the Bolsheviks had power, the Bolsheviks were shaking power and the army with all their might, and as they gained power, the vector turned upside down and a strong army was needed to fight both the external enemy - the Germans and the internal peasants / soldiers.
        The Germans, having seized the Ukraine and the Baltic States, robbed them: they even took out black soil, they cut down the Carpathian forests, or will you argue about this? The power that passed to the Bolsheviks cost the Russian people dearly.

        Speaking about the unpopular Brest Peace, I first of all speak about the hierarchy of power among the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks never had any democracy and all decisions were made harshly and authoritarianly either by the Small Council of People's Commissars consisting of Lenin, Trotsky and Sverdlov, or in general by Lenin alone.
  2. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 16 March 2021 10: 14
    +8
    The author's literary writing on historical topics and his denseness is simply off scale. Maybe he does this on purpose, with a provocative purpose - to develop discussion and enrich himself?
  3. Bar1
    Bar1 16 March 2021 17: 15
    -2
    interesting to look at the first photo from a fashion point of view.
    ALL the others except Lenin are in different headdresses: hats, caps, budenovka, and only Lenin is in an earflap hat. Then the question is: is the hat with earflaps a Russian hat, if Russians did not wear it in those days? The hat was introduced, somewhere since the twenties, not everywhere.
    By the way, in our time, the Russians have abandoned the cap with earflaps and wear whatever is horrible besides her.
  • Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 16 March 2021 05: 02
    +11
    It is obvious that peasant, agrarian Russia had no future
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 16 March 2021 06: 02
      +5
      Quote: Uncle Lee

      Obviously, Stalin's fears are coming true, because some have forgotten why the state is being created.
    2. Kisa
      Kisa 16 March 2021 06: 43
      -2
      somehow it is not logical - they created Marxist-Leninist theories on the construction of communism, but how to "establish the economy" in a difficult time, when the fried pecked the theory does not work and we must again return to private property and free trade ... why then was the state created? a person for a state or a state for a person ...
      and some kind of abstract modeling after half a century in 89m - well, not seriously, this is not an argument. the Chinese nepmen have now rushed for 20 years and cannot be seen
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 16 March 2021 07: 30
        0
        Quote: kitty
        and some kind of abstract modeling after half a century in 89m - well, not seriously, this is not an argument

        Yes, that's right, this kind of modeling looks pretty stupid.
        In 1989 there was perestroika euphoria, so they began to try to copy something similar to NEP
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 16 March 2021 07: 54
        +1
        Quote: kitty
        somehow it is not logical - they created Marxist-Leninist theories on the construction of communism, but how to "improve the economy" in difficult times, when a fried pecked the theory does not work

        the process of moving from theory to practice
        try to learn from textbooks any practical specialist, even a car mechanic, even a surgeon
        without practice and accompanying mistakes it will not work
        1. Fan-fan
          Fan-fan 16 March 2021 13: 13
          -2
          Do not defend that theory, because faced with practice, the theory had to be changed.
          1. Flooding
            Flooding 16 March 2021 13: 45
            0
            Quote: Fan-Fan
            Do not defend that theory, because faced with practice, the theory had to be changed.

            I wrote that any theory, when faced with practical application, reveals a lot of problematic issues.
            if you think that this is a defense of Marxism - so be it
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 March 2021 22: 59
        +1
        The Chinese have jumped at the expense of their number of cheap energy resources of Western production technologies and investments since the 70s - they are on the market rails.
    3. WHAT IS
      WHAT IS 16 March 2021 07: 29
      +14
      “To slow down is to lag behind. And they beat backward. But we don't want to be beaten. No, we don’t want to! The history of old Russia consisted, among other things, in the fact that it was continuously beaten for its backwardness. They were beaten by the Mongol khans. They were beaten by Turkish beks. The Swedish feudal lords beat them. They were beaten by the Polish-Lithuanian lords. The Anglo-French capitalists beat them. They were beaten by the Japanese barons. They all beat me for backwardness. For military backwardness, for cultural backwardness, for state backwardness, for industrial backwardness, for agricultural backwardness. They beat them because it was profitable and went with impunity ... Such is the law of the exploiters - to beat the backward and the weak. The wolf's law of capitalism. You are behind, you are weak - it means that you are wrong, therefore, you can be beaten and enslaved. You are powerful - it means that you are right, therefore, you must beware ... Do you want our socialist fatherland to be beaten and that it lost its independence? But if you don’t want that, you must eliminate his backwardness in the shortest possible time and develop real Bolshevik rates in building his socialist economy. There are no other ways. That is why Lenin said on the eve of October: "Either death, or catch up and overtake the advanced capitalist countries." We are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they will crush us. "

      And they were able to do it then.
      1. apro
        apro 16 March 2021 07: 48
        +1
        Quote: WHAT IS
        And they were able to do it then.

        So then the tasks were set for this, and resources were directed for this, and it was monitored, and corrected, if it went wrong ...
      2. Woodman
        Woodman 16 March 2021 08: 27
        -1
        Quote: WHAT IS
        The history of old Russia consisted, incidentally, in the fact that it was continuously beaten for backwardness.

        In fairness, in the process of these endless "beat, beat" Russia stretched from Warsaw to the Pacific Ocean and Alaska, from Murmansk (including Finland) to Iran ...
        Quote: WHAT IS
        We are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years.

        And the main part of this lag appeared as a result of the Civil War, which the author for some reason modestly called the Troubles.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 16 March 2021 09: 49
          -3
          Quote: Lesovik
          In fairness, in the process of these endless "beat, beat" Russia stretched from Warsaw to the Pacific Ocean and Alaska, from Murmansk (including Finland) to Iran ...

          Russia was "beaten" only in Russophobic heads: by the 20th century, it was allegedly built by the "broken" the largest country in the world .

          But those who, "were not beaten" (aha, a military catastrophe of 1941-42 unprecedented in the world, this is it), in just 70 years lost a third of that, that painstaking work collected the "broken".

          Author:
          And large farms that existed before the revolution were destroyed everywhere. Land plots were crushed everywhere and lost marketability. In 1920, agriculture provided only about half of the pre-war production. And the reserves that existed earlier were used during the war. The threat of large-scale famine loomed before the country. In 1921-1922. famine covered the territory of 35 provinces, tens of millions of people suffered from it, about 5 million died. The Volga region, the Southern Urals and Southern Ukraine were especially hard hit.

          The industrial situation was even worse. In 1920, the production of heavy industry accounted for about 15% of the pre-war level. Labor productivity was only 39% of the 1913 level. The working class suffered greatly.

          These are all terrible results of the VOR - the loss of only people was SIX times higher than the losses in the World War, for the termination of which there was, in particular, the VOR. But the thieves promised milk rivers and jelly banks, but only complete illiterate ignoramuses and cynics could think and promise that an armed coup and a violent seizure of power by a losing minority, peace with the invaders will not lead to GW and intervention... And robbery of everyone and everything, refusal of debts and forced labor will bring wealth. Normal people immediately warned about this.

          As a result, attempts to introduce communism led to the death of more than 10 million people, the destruction of the economy and, as a result. to the NEP, i.e. back to where you left.

          And the NEP restored the country, which almost returned to the blessed 1913 in the consumption of food and clothing.

          Then again everything collapsed with wild hunger strikes in the peaceful 1930s and it was barely possible to get to the level of 1913 only by the 1950s ...
          But otherwise it was impossible to make a quick leap into the future, to overcome the gap with the leading powers of the world by 50-100 years.
          You cannot do otherwise, without millions who died of hunger and extortionate tribute from the already poor peasants, do not take it: no one for such a thing, t.s. , "construction" never gave permission from the people.
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 16 March 2021 10: 27
            +6
            But the thieves promised milk rivers and jelly banks

            What, they just promised like this and right away? Who is this, where is it? )
            armed coup and forceful seizure of power by the losing minority, peace with the occupiers will not lead to GW and intervention

            And the events of the autumn of 1917 themselves were not a catalyst for the Civil War and intervention, the majority did not care about the change of power until the summer of 1918, especially since the very first decrees showed that the steps postulated by the party program and real actions coincide, which was not previously observed in the country. The Brest Peace Treaty became the catalyst, which made it possible to shake the masses of those who fell under the decree on nationalization.
            PS By the way, why do you have the abbreviation "THIEF"? Just to reflect your attitude towards this event? )))
            PPS
            to the level of 1913 it was possible to barely climb only by the 1950s

            On New Year's Eve, I'll make a wish for Santa Claus so that you still answer my long-standing question about the population in 1940 and 1913 within the borders of the USSR. )))
        2. evgen1221
          evgen1221 16 March 2021 10: 00
          +4
          Crimean, Japanese not even apparently?
          1. Trapperxnumx
            Trapperxnumx 16 March 2021 12: 46
            -2
            Crimean - is it when three for one? Give me an example of a successful (for one) end of the war with a similar alignment since the 19th century.
            The Japanese partly agree. Except for the wild remoteness of the theater of operations. The British with the Boers wandered for more than 2 years, and no one bothered them)
            1. Foul skeptic
              Foul skeptic 16 March 2021 17: 54
              +3
              Crimean - is it when three for one? Give me an example of a successful (for one) end of the war with a similar alignment since the 19th century.

              Why are you looking at the number of countries, and not at the number of troops of the countries? A million versus 700 thousand - this is perhaps three for one.
  • Free wind
    Free wind 16 March 2021 05: 12
    +3
    The sackers, and actually even now sometimes you can hear it, were called beggars, or people who dragged everything into their sack, but not the whistle traders. Although I may be wrong. There was hunger, my grandfather and grandmother from under Tsaritsin. How they themselves survived were surprised. The grandmother also recalled the American aid from the ARA. Cornmeal has saved many lives. It seems to me that the NEP was necessary, at that time the intensive development of industry was not possible, and it would be fatal. But then the Americans, due to the crisis, were ready to help us build factories much cheaper.
    1. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 16 March 2021 07: 39
      +11
      Why did the NEP collapse? Duc, Bukharin honestly said, "why": "... the state has lost to a private trader ..". In other words, "the desire to live normally and eat well" won the slogan: everything is for the sake of the world revolution "(well, just like now," refrigerator "wins" TV " wink ). The NEP led to the fact that people began to get richer, and not the state, which did not get as much from taxes and other extortions as the then "Kremlin saddlers" wanted (as well as the present ones, by the way). And then they wanted a lot and most importantly - "fast". That is, the "Kremlin" needed to quickly prepare the country for the "battle with the" world capital "(yes, as now," enemies are all around "," the Englishwoman shits "- so the Bolsheviks then saw the English-French squadrons in the Gulf of Finland and The Black Sea, ...) to carry out both an economic breakthrough and a world revolution, as well as their other "revolutionary wishes" and "dreams", and under the NEP, people who finally began to eat more or less satisfyingly, earn, accumulate capital did not they really wanted to build "communism" in a single country and all over the world, and barefoot, in torn shirts and on an empty stomach at a fire rate, they had enough of the "charms" of the civil war "and what followed. But the" Kremlin " many cheap slaves were needed, who would have to inject for a bowl of stew at numerous construction sites, who were supposed to provide advice to them - "catch up and overtake ... pass in 10 years, then that pass in 100 ...", and then march in orderly rows to help the workers the whole world will to drive a "world revolution". That is, the "Kremlin" needed a "command economy" based on the wishes of the Bolsheviks, which they called "plans", and not the normal economic relations that were established under the NEP. The NEP and its economic laws did not allow the "command economy" to roam, for any work it was necessary to pay people, and the councils could not afford it. In addition, the NEP did not allow the economy to painlessly carry out "distortions" in production and commodity-money relations. So they turned down the NEP, replaced it with the so-called "command-planned economy", under which various dispossessions, purges, and other measures were carried out to provide this "economy" with millions of cheap slaves. The country at an accelerated pace, began to build a mobilization, military economy. Precisely the military economy. Naturally, all over the world, it was regarded precisely as the preparation of the Soviets for the expansion of the "world revolution". There is even an opinion that if the NEP had not been curtailed then in favor of preparing the country for the notorious battles of the "world revolution", then the USSR would now be in the place of today's China, or the United States, and there would not even have been World War II.
      1. WHAT IS
        WHAT IS 16 March 2021 07: 47
        +12
        If only, if only ... History does not know the word "If", and the NEP pursued understandable goals: the political goal is to remove social tension. The economic goal is to stop the devastation in the country and restore the economy. The social goal is to create favorable conditions for the formation of a social society. Despite a number of mistakes and shortcomings, the New Economic Policy was able to bring the country out of a state of complete ruin, it was not in vain. And then a socially oriented state was built for the working people, and not for a handful bar and lords of the backbone.
        1. Trapperxnumx
          Trapperxnumx 16 March 2021 12: 50
          0
          Quote: WHAT IS
          And then a socially oriented state was built for the working people, and not for a handful of bars and gentlemen-backers.

          Correctly. A state was built for a handful of party members and their hangers-on.
      2. Andrey VOV
        Andrey VOV 16 March 2021 09: 01
        +4
        Let me disagree with you in some part ... at the time of the collapse of the NEP, Stalin had the strongest position, and he actually abandoned the idea of ​​a world revolution, of which his antipode Trotsky was a passionate and orthodox fan.
    2. Foul skeptic
      Foul skeptic 16 March 2021 09: 01
      +5
      The sackers, and actually even now sometimes you can hear it, were called beggars, or people who dragged everything into their sack, but not the whistle traders.

      About the bagmen in the "Republic" SHKID "":
      And so his mother waved her hand at him, and Grishka again got freedom.

      He dragged himself to kinushkas, traded in cigarettes, then even bought a sled and became a “Soviet horse”. For hours he stood at the railway stations, waiting for the arrival of speculators-bagmen, whom he took to the address for bread or money. But the work fell through: the "horse" was rather weak.

      Once, on a dull winter evening, throwing his tattered overcoat over his brother's shoulders and dressing up his boots, Grishka went to Varshavsky to meet the distant train. The streets are already empty. Whistling softly, Grishka drove up to the station and took his usual place at the exit. A lot of "horses" have already gathered. Grishka greeted his neighbors and, sitting more comfortably on the sled, began to wait.

      Every now and then, new sledges arrived from all sides, waiting for the "bread" train.
      It was getting quieter. Already the "horses" had departed in all directions, and Grishka still stood and waited. Only he and two old women with children's sleds remained. There was no longer any hope of earning money, but I didn't want to go home empty-handed.

      Suddenly a man came out of the station, looked around and barked:

      - Hey, sovets!

      - Yes, father, - the old women mumbled.

      “Please, citizen,” Grishka said quietly.

      The man looked around the three sledges and muttered doubtfully:

      - Yes, why should you take it?

      Then he chose Grishka and began to take out the sacks tightly packed with potatoes. Grishka was frightened. His sleigh groaned with the weight. There was nowhere to put it, but the man wore everything. Grishka was about to refuse, but then with despair he decided:

      - Eh, I was not, I will take you out!

      And I was lucky. They had to drive far, beyond the outpost. Grishka was soaked with sweat, his hands were numb, the rope was cutting his chest, and he was carrying everything. In the evening, broken, he came home and brought with him three pounds of black, red-roasted bread mixed with oats. Earnings were large at that time, but also the last. Grishka overstrained himself.
  • parusnik
    parusnik 16 March 2021 06: 06
    +11
    The Samsonov corporation is at work. I just sketched it. And you figure it out. laughing
    1. apro
      apro 16 March 2021 07: 21
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      I just sketched it.

      The main thing is to throw some heroose.
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 16 March 2021 09: 36
      +4
      Quote: parusnik
      The Samsonov corporation is at work. I just sketched it. And you figure it out. laughing

      Now plots appear on the network, such as ---- if Bukharin would become ... if Trotsky would become ... and others ...
      Different options for the development of events. What is interesting here? Word sort it out , YES! I have to figure it out somehow recourse , the current de-Sovietization is hindering this with all its might.
  • apro
    apro 16 March 2021 07: 07
    +1
    NEP is still a path to disaster. The reason is simple. The rural small-scale owner does not need any industrialization. And it’s beyond his powers. To create an industrial society in evolutionary ways. It would drag out the process for decades, and there was no time.
  • Darkness
    Darkness 16 March 2021 07: 12
    +2
    The author selectively, on the fingers, explains the Leninist policy
  • Meine
    Meine 16 March 2021 07: 15
    +2
    Any forecasting of the future based on some past "experience" is nonsense. There are too many factors left out.
  • north 2
    north 2 16 March 2021 07: 45
    +6
    If before NEP, 70% of agricultural products were withdrawn from peasants during surplus appropriation, then under NEP, only 30% of products were withdrawn from peasants with a tax in kind. Under the NEP, the currency of Soviet Russia became a convertible currency. And how, without foreign capital, it was possible to lay the foundations for that coming gigantic industrialization.
    1. apro
      apro 16 March 2021 07: 59
      -1
      Quote: north 2
      And how, without foreign capital, it was possible to lay the foundations for that coming gigantic industrialization.

      Somehow they could ... the communists lay down without Western capital ... here it is necessary to distinguish somewhat between Western investments and commodity-money relations with the West.
      1. mat-vey
        mat-vey 16 March 2021 08: 03
        0
        Quote: apro
        Somehow they could ... the communists lay down without Western capital ..

        So this "Western capital" would not exist, so there would be no need to hurry up with industrialization ..
        1. Andrey VOV
          Andrey VOV 16 March 2021 09: 04
          +7
          I disagree ... Western capital was, but not in the form of loans or investments, but in the form of goods, technologies, machines, etc., which were bought for gold, which was confiscated like from the population, from the Orthodox Church, from the sale of some historical values. and so on ... and I also disagree that the country then did not need an accelerated rate of industrialization
          1. mat-vey
            mat-vey 16 March 2021 09: 09
            +2
            Quote: Andrey VOV
            and I also disagree that the country then did not need an accelerated rate of industrialization

            Yes, for God's sake .. "Western capital" is, first of all, the capitalists themselves ... If the USSR were not in their throats, then there would be no need to run and rush ...
          2. apro
            apro 16 March 2021 09: 38
            0
            Quote: Andrey VOV
            etc. that were bought for gold, which was confiscated both from the population, from the Orthodox Church, from the sale of some historical values, and so on.

            The total amount spent by the USSR on industrialization is about 9000 tons in gold equivalent. And the amount of what you say is withdrawn. Obviously did not cover these costs.
            1. Andrey VOV
              Andrey VOV 16 March 2021 10: 17
              0
              well, it’s clear that not all that was spent was exactly what was withdrawn ..
              1. apro
                apro 16 March 2021 10: 29
                -3
                Quote: Andrey VOV
                well, it’s clear that not all that was spent was exactly what was withdrawn ..

                A smaller part of the base is oil, forest, mineral raw materials, products of industrial gold, but for some reason they always say that it is due to the robbery of citizens.
  • Darkesstcat
    Darkesstcat 16 March 2021 08: 31
    +1
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    But the "Kremlin" needed a lot of cheap slaves who would have to work hard for a bowl of stew at numerous construction sites

    Sounds familiar, reminiscent of the industrial revolution in Western countries, at the time of the abolition of serfdom.
  • north 2
    north 2 16 March 2021 08: 34
    +4
    Quote: apro
    Quote: north 2
    And how, without foreign capital, it was possible to lay the foundations for that coming gigantic industrialization.

    Somehow they could ... the communists lay down without Western capital ... here it is necessary to distinguish somewhat between Western investments and commodity-money relations with the West.

    Bolsheviks and Communists, to put it mildly, are not the same thing. The Bolsheviks did not manage without Western capital only when they began to build socialism, and the communists did not do without Western capital
    did not get along even when they shouted to the whole world that socialism had already been built, but
    The West bought millions of tons of grain. After all, capital is not only money, but also a commodity ...
    1. apro
      apro 16 March 2021 08: 49
      -3
      Quote: north 2
      After all, capital is not only money, but also a commodity ...

      And what are the problems with the product ??? even more so if it is paid.
      1. north 2
        north 2 16 March 2021 08: 58
        +1
        so you just wrote that the communists were able to do without Western capital, consider the goods.
        1. apro
          apro 16 March 2021 09: 05
          -1
          Quote: apro
          ... here it is necessary to distinguish somewhat between Western investments and commodity-money relations with the West.

          This is what I wrote. Goods and capital are somewhat different things.
  • nikvic46
    nikvic46 16 March 2021 08: 59
    +3
    This is most likely a conversation about the role of small business. Now it is already clear that for the future there is only socialism or capitalism. The search for a third way led some countries to a brown dead end. I am surprised by the people who confuse socialism in Nazi Germany and socialism in the USSR. There was simply no socialism in Germany; all the cool industrialists stayed in their places. And if someone was removed, then they passed it into the hands of an acquaintance, a relative, a brother in the party. Yes, there are countries that liberals call countries with a mixed economy. But as for pensioners, their lot is to buy a pound of minced meat. And this is considered a reliable purchase. The role of Stalin's cooperatives was several points higher than that of Gorbachev's, the ruble did not fall, and the people needed them too.
    1. north 2
      north 2 16 March 2021 09: 46
      +1
      socialism in fascist Germany "confuses" with socialism in the USSR not just people, but liberals with tolerasts, and Russophobes and haters of Russia and haters of the USSR. National Socialism in Nazi Germany is just declared socialism under the camouflage of a purely right-wing state. And there is not nationalism, but Nazism in reality. And the mistake of the USSR was that in the USSR they imposed on people that the USSR was fighting not with the German people, but with Nazism and fascism. But with what enthusiasm these German people built planes and tanks for Hitler and the Nazis, and received parcels with gold crowns of people burnt in concentration camp crematoria. Especially after that German people also received letters at the beginning of the war from the Eastern Front, where the Nazi soldiers of the Germans in Germany were encouraging that soon the German people in Russia, in Ukraine, in Belarus would receive lands with estates and with Russian slaves in addition ... So who can confuse or compare socialism in Germany with socialism in the USSR?
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 16 March 2021 18: 06
      +1
      It is now clear that for the future there is only socialism or capitalism.
      For those who can read this, Lenin wrote laughing But it's great that you got to this point without him drinks
    3. Bar1
      Bar1 16 March 2021 19: 43
      0
      Quote: nikvic46
      It is now clear that for the future there is only socialism or capitalism.


      funny of course. What kind of "socialism" if, according to the same Marx, this formation should irrevocably follow capitalism, which is a lower level of human development. But in the USSR there was a type of "socialism", and then once capitalism appeared. can.
      In addition: In his later works, Marx considered three "modes of production": "Asiatic", "antique" and "Germanic" and NO "socialism"
      Marx did not consider, but the Bolsheviks and Stalin invented the FIVE-STAGE line of human development.
      Who, in your opinion, built the pyramids, huge temples and aqueducts that modern mankind is unable to build? What formation? According to OI, it was in the ancient period, or maybe it was in the "primitive communal" or Asian period of human development?
      One thing is clear that the "socialism" invented by the Bolsheviks is not at all what Marx had in mind, but something else. After the revolution, the Bolsheviks IMMEDIATELY wanted to build communism - a moneyless / marketless society, but only ruined the Russian people and therefore returned to market relations, i.e. e. to the NEP.
      So, socialism is a bluff and it has been proven historically.
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 16 March 2021 11: 18
    +1
    Two of the most respected agricultural economists in Russia, L. Litoshenko and A. Chayanov, were instructed to prepare two alternative projects. Litoshenko proposed to continue in the new conditions the "Stolypin reform" - a stake on farming with large land plots and hired workers. Chayanov proceeded from the development of peasant farms without wage labor with their gradual cooperation. These projects were discussed in the summer of 1920 at the GOELRO commission (the prototype of the planning body) and at the People's Commissariat of Agriculture. They decided to put the Chayanov plan at the heart of state policy.

    Chayanov will be chipped in the 26th year, in the 30th they will be imprisoned, and after serving the sentence, they will be arrested again and shot in the 37th. Litoshenko will bend in 43rd in Kolyma ...
    1. apro
      apro 16 March 2021 11: 26
      -3
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Chayanov will be chipped in the 26th year, in the 30th they will be imprisoned, and after serving the sentence, they will be arrested again and shot in the 37th. Litoshenko will bend in 43rd in Kolyma ...

      And this suggests what ???? that they were right or not. In their actions. That their activities corresponded to the interests of the state of the USSR ??
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 16 March 2021 11: 36
        +1
        Quote: apro
        And this suggests what ???? that they were right or not. In their actions. That their activities corresponded to the interests of the state of the USSR ??

        This suggests that "the Moor did his job" (c). They were no longer needed. Otherwise, they undermined the authority of Joseph Vissarionovich. They should have been removed.
        1. apro
          apro 16 March 2021 11: 45
          -1
          Quote: A. Privalov
          This suggests that "the Moor did his job" (c). They were no longer needed. Otherwise, they undermined the authority of Joseph Vissarionovich. They should have been removed.

          It is not clear. Did it well or harm ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 16 March 2021 12: 08
            +2
            In 1926, Chayanov was accused of being petty-bourgeois and anti-Marxist in his interpretation of the essence of peasant farming.
            With the beginning of collectivization in 1928-1929, a wave of ideological and political criticism against Chayanov grew. If earlier he was criticized for "neo-popularism", now he was accused of defending the interests of the kulaks and pushing through bourgeois agrarian theories.
            At the Conference of Agrarian Marxists (December 20-29, 1929) the so-called. "Chayanovism" was declared an "agent of imperialism" in connection with the right deviation in the CPSU (b); JV Stalin, who spoke at the Conference, attacked "the antiscientific theories of 'Soviet' economists like Chayanov."

            In July 1930, Chayanov, along with other major economists, was arrested in connection with the fictional "Kulak-Socialist-Revolutionary group of Kondratyev - Chayanov", which was part of fabricated "Labor Peasant Party", which was accused of intending to organize kulak uprisings.
            On January 26, 1932, Chayanov was sentenced by the board of the OGPU under the USSR Council of People's Commissars to five years in prison, four of which he spent in prisons (the OGPU remand prison, Butyrskaya and Yaroslavskaya). The last year of imprisonment was replaced by a link to Alma-Ata, where Chayanov worked at the Agricultural Institute, the Research Institute of Agricultural Economics and the People's Commissariat of Agriculture of Kazakhstan. In 1935, the link was extended for three years.
            In March 1937, A.V. Chayanov was again arrested by the NKVD, and on October 3, 1937, he was shot in Alma-Ata.
            1. apro
              apro 16 March 2021 12: 10
              -5
              Thank you. So the Soviet leadership was right in relation to these characters.
              1. A. Privalov
                A. Privalov 16 March 2021 12: 17
                +4
                Quote: apro
                Thank you. So the Soviet leadership was right in relation to these characters.

                Of course, right.
                A lot of smart ones - who did not fit into the "general line", were hidden away from sin in the grave. And there is no threat to authority, and it is discouraging to others.
                1. apro
                  apro 16 March 2021 12: 26
                  -1
                  Quote: A. Privalov
                  A lot of smart - who did not fit into the "general line",

                  And today this is so called ... not causing damage to the state ... but the authorities did not like how smart I am and everyone around me does not shine with intelligence ...
    2. Foul skeptic
      Foul skeptic 16 March 2021 13: 01
      +1
      Chayanov will begin to chmyr already in the year 26

      He has been heavily criticized since at least 1923. And the most interesting thing is that the goal of criticism, in many respects, was to defend the ideological image of "a peasant who is not limited in his individualism," while Chayanov showed the opposite in his works. And he was right in this, as subsequent events showed.
  • Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV 16 March 2021 13: 56
    0
    Quote: apro
    Quote: Andrey VOV
    well, it’s clear that not all that was spent was exactly what was withdrawn ..

    A smaller part of the base is oil, forest, mineral raw materials, products of industrial gold, but for some reason they always say that it is due to the robbery of citizens.

    it seems to me all the same that in the days of the New Economic Policy people were mainly paid with real gold ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. apro
      apro 16 March 2021 14: 23
      +1
      Quote: Andrey VOV
      at the time of the New Economic Policy

      During the NEP times, the volumes were not large. In comparison with industrialization. But all the same, the Soviet government tried to pay in counter deliveries. And so no gold will be saved.
  • iouris
    iouris 16 March 2021 17: 23
    -3
    What is the discussion about? This issue has long been resolved (positively). Evidence: victory in the war, Sputnik, the world socialist system ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 March 2021 23: 08
      +1
      "The world system of socialism ..." Tell me where it is now - in the dustbin of history, just like the USSR.
  • ivan2022
    ivan2022 16 March 2021 20: 07
    +2
    M. GORKY - "ABOUT THE RUSSIAN PEASANTRY" (1922)
    "The Grand Duke Sergei Romanov told me that in 1913, when the three-hundredth anniversary of the Romanov dynasty was celebrated and Tsar Nikolai was in Kostroma, Nikolai Mikhailovich was also a Grand Duke, a talented author of a number of solid historical works," he said to the tsar, pointing to a crowd of thousands of peasants :
    “But they are exactly the same as they were in the XNUMXth century, choosing Michael for the kingdom, the same; is it bad, do you think? "
    The king was silent. They say he was always silent in response to serious questions. "

    We read the article and comments and what do we see? There is one thing behind all the discussions;
    Tsarism is when the Tsar,
    Communism is when communists
    democracy is when democrats.

    One gentleman in different guises. But both the one and the other and the third are robbing and "where should the peasant go?"
    Some slaves shout about every master; "right!", others - "not right!" And they clean each other's mordulences no worse than the "peasants-truth-seekers" from Nekrasov's poem ...... THE MAIN THING IS THAT THE BARIN WAS RIGHT! And we will serve him.
    It is unknown where the society, which in the 21st century remained at the level of the 17th, will develop.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 17 March 2021 08: 15
    +1
    The peasants have reduced the production of agricultural products to the minimum necessary to feed one family.


    The author is generally aware of what proportion of the peasant population bought bread?

    However, even if we imagine a strong economic cultured man who had surplus grain for sale and does not want to sell it to the state for fix. price, then I'm afraid that such actions mean that:
    1) The grain needed for the physiological norm was not taken from the peasants.
    2) The urban population and the army are doomed to simply die. Since they do not want this, well-organized and armed, including cannons, hungry people will come to the village, after which momentary greed will turn into much greater trouble for the peasants than the missed opportunity to sell grain on the market at horse prices.

    But gradually the NEP led to the restoration of agriculture.


    NEP is the liberalization of trade, including the trade in bread, simply the abolition of wartime restrictions. In conditions of a shortage of bread, this leads exclusively to speculation, and to riots.

    This is what really could raise grain production, so this is the banal end of the civil war, when gangs stopped rushing around the country. After the revolution, the peasants already received landlord and church lands, an increase of 25 percent. True, there was little sense from this, because during the agri-culture of the times of Tsar Pea, this only led to the fact that the new land was polluted. Both Stolypin and Lenin understood that this would be the case, Stolypin wanted to resettle the peasants somehow, but could not do anything that would not lead to mass deaths of the population, Lenin tried to preserve the landowners' farms in the form of state farms.

    As for the rest, the Soviet government still did not really know what to do with agriculture, and only unsuccessfully fought the entire NEP with economic methods against the kulaks and city speculators. Then the NEP was closed, the kulaks remained, they were dealt with already during collectivization.
  • dgonni
    dgonni 17 March 2021 13: 26
    +1
    Well Samsonov in his style
  • Lyabaka
    Lyabaka 27 March 2021 21: 47
    0
    Thank you for the article. Such adequate and competent articles with the current FRAGMENTARY training have become very rare.
  • Lyabaka
    Lyabaka 27 March 2021 21: 55
    0
    Looked at the comments. 95% ABSOLUTELY ILLITERATE. The result of the current fragmented education under the leadership of all sorts of Chubais and Grefs.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 1 May 2021 00: 16
    -1
    As you can see, in order to save socialism, capitalism had to be introduced. Interesting: wherever capitalism is expelled from, famine and devastation immediately begins. It seems that poverty and backwardness are natural companions of the non-capitalist path.