MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
BELGOROD LAW INSTITUTE
Department of Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Disciplines
Discipline: Russian history
ABSTRACT
on topic No. 8: “USSR in the 20s – 30s”
Prepared by: Student 453 group
Pronkin N.N.
Prepared by: teacher of the department of G and SED, police captain Khryakov R.N.
Belgorod – 2008 The civil war was a terrible disaster for Russia. It led to a further deterioration of the economic situation in the country, to complete economic ruin. Material damage amounted to more than 50 billion rubles. gold. Industrial production decreased by 7 times. The transport system was completely paralyzed. Many segments of the population, forcibly drawn into the war by the warring parties, became its innocent victims. In battles, from hunger, disease and terror, 8 million people died, 2 million people were forced to emigrate. Among them were many representatives of the intellectual elite. Irreparable moral and ethical losses had deep sociocultural consequences that were reflected in the history of the Soviet country for a long time. In the first half of the 20s, the main task of domestic policy was to restore the destroyed economy, create a material, technical and socio-cultural basis for building socialism, promised by the Bolsheviks to the people. During the civil war, the Soviet government was forced to mobilize all its available resources and turn the country into a single military camp. To this end, the Bolshevik Party subordinates all spheres of social life to its control. From the second half of 1918, the Soviet state implemented a number of measures aimed at centralizing state control and management of all spheres of economic life. The complex of these emergency actions was called “war communism”. The components of the policy of war communism were: 1) in the city: abolition of utility bills, introduction of payment in kind for labor (food is distributed at enterprises through cooperatives). Labor conscription is introduced for mental workers. In the sphere of industrial production, enterprises are nationalized, first large, then smaller, down to handicrafts (in total, 38.2 thousand enterprises were nationalized). To manage enterprises, a system of government bodies was created: the Supreme Council of the National Economy - provincial councils of the national economy - Main Committees for Sectors (GLAVKi). In 1920, 52 Glavkas were created in the country, to which enterprises of state importance were directly subordinate. A system of strict vertical subordination of enterprises to committees and centers was created. In fact, the tendency to over-centralize Russia's industrial life has triumphed; 2) in the countryside: a series of emergency measures taken in connection with the need to supply food to the gigantic army and industrial workers, expressed in the introduction of food taxes or surplus appropriation. In May 1918, the Soviet government took a series of measures called the food dictatorship. According to the decree of May 13, 1918, the People's Commissariat of Food was endowed with extraordinary powers in the field of food procurement and distribution, the state grain monopoly and fixed prices for bread were confirmed. To collect taxes in kind, special food detachments were created, later the Food Army, endowed with emergency powers. It should be noted that the implementation of emergency measures in the countryside contributed to the growth of food collections mainly at the expense of the central provinces. On the outskirts of the country (Don region, Ukraine), the efficiency of these innovations turned out to be extremely low, causing a wave of discontent and mass uprisings. The peasantry refused to supply the required amount of grain to the city. A wave of peasant uprisings swept through: in Ukraine the anarchist movement (N. Makhno) was gaining wide popularity, and a partisan army rebelled in Western Siberia. The largest uprising was the rebellion in Tambov and in a number of adjacent provinces (the uprising was led by A.S. Antonov, who was a member of the Socialist Revolutionary Party). The Red Army threw its best forces against the Antonovites under the command of the talented commander M.N. Tukhachevsky. The suppression of the uprising was carried out exclusively by military measures using artillery and poisonous gases, claiming 50 thousand lives on both sides. The apogee of discontent was the uprising of the Kronstadt sailors, who had previously supported the Bolsheviks. The sailors demanded respect for the rights and freedoms proclaimed in October 1917, an end to forced confiscations, etc. Despite the fact that the Bolsheviks managed to suppress the uprising, it came as a real shock to them. Members of the party leadership realized that the policy of war communism had exhausted itself; As a result, the Bolsheviks were forced to retreat, developing a new economic policy. The essence of the new economic policy of the Bolsheviks. At the X Congress of the RCP (b), decisions were made to change policy: in particular, the surplus appropriation system was replaced by a tax in kind (collected based on the real share of sown areas and was approximately half as much). Free trade in surpluses was allowed, that is, what remained after the withdrawal of the tax in kind. These measures were the beginning of a new economic policy - the economic sphere underwent decentralization: the largest technically equipped enterprises were united into trusts endowed with planning rights, distribution of funds, and conducting trade operations. The piecework wage system began to be widely used again. Wages depended on the qualifications of the worker and the quantity of products produced. The state began to lease small enterprises to private individuals, and they were allowed to sell private industry items. One of the characteristic features of the NEP was concessions - enterprises based on agreements between the state and foreign firms. Thus, with the transition to the New Economic Policy, an impetus was given to private capitalist entrepreneurship. Despite this, state regulation remained at a fairly high level in the form of supervision, control, etc. The scope of activity of private owners in industry was limited to the production of consumer goods, the extraction and processing of certain types of raw materials, the manufacture of simple tools, and in trade - mediation between small commodity producers, sales of private industry goods. The state reserved heavy industry enterprises, the extraction of priority types of raw materials, and foreign trade. In an effort to prevent excessive concentration of capital among private individuals, the state used tax oppression through financial authorities. As for, for example, concessions, they were also placed under the control of the Soviet state apparatus and labor legislation. As a result, the state, even after partial denationalization, had at its disposal the most powerful sector of the national economy, “the commanding heights of the economy.” At the end of 1922, the USSR was formed. It included 4 republics: the RSFSR, the Ukrainian SSR, the Belarusian SSR and the Transcaucasian Federation, which united Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. All the republics that became part of the USSR previously formed the territory of the Russian Empire. There were historically established economic ties between them. After the October Revolution of 1917, the communists of the republics, who fought to establish Soviet power, created a military-political union. Thus, on June 1, 1919, a military alliance between Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus was concluded “to fight world imperialism.” In 1922, in connection with the preparation of the Genoa Conference, a diplomatic alliance was formed between the republics. The RSFSR was entrusted with representing the interests of all republics at the conference. In the early 1920s, military-economic treaties were signed between individual republics and Soviet Russia. In the process of development of military, economic and diplomatic cooperation, the leading role belonged to the RSFSR, because This process was led by the Central Committee of the RCP(b). As a result, the functions of the general body began to be performed by the Council of Labor and Defense, the State Planning Committee of the RSFSR and the Council of National Economy of the RSFSR, and representatives of all Soviet republics began to take part in the work of the All-Russian Congresses of Soviets. On August 10, 1922, the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) created a commission to prepare for the Plenum the issue of relations between the RSFSR and the independent Soviet republics. In August - September 1922, a commission of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b), under the leadership of Stalin, prepared a unification project (the so-called “autonomization plan”). In accordance with this project, all Soviet republics were to join the RSFSR with autonomous rights. This approach met with sharp objections from Lenin, who proposed creating a new union state by uniting all Soviet republics on an equal basis. The Plenum of the Central Committee approved this proposal. On December 30, 1922, the First Congress of Soviets of the USSR adopted the Declaration and Treaty on the Formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. These documents recorded the main principles of the formation of a new state, which were based on federalism. The First Congress of Soviets of the USSR elected the highest legislative body - the Central Executive Committee (Central Executive Committee of the USSR) and its four chairmen - one from each republic. The proclaimed creation of the USSR on a federal basis was not actually implemented. In the process of developing the Constitution of the USSR, a number of amendments were included in its draft, expanding the competence of all-Union government bodies and limiting the rights of the republics. In addition, in the House of Nationalities - the second chamber of the Central Executive Committee - the RSFSR was supposed to have 64 - 72 votes, the Transcaucasian Federation - 12, and the BSSR and the Ukrainian SSR - 4 votes each. On January 31, 1924, at the Second All-Union Congress of Soviets, the first Constitution of the USSR was adopted. In accordance with the Constitution, the following issues fell within the competence of the highest authorities of the USSR: foreign policy, borders, armed forces, transport, communications, national economic planning, declaration of war and conclusion of peace. Formally, each republic had the right to secede from the Union. The supreme authority was the All-Union Congress of Soviets, in between - the Central Executive Committee, consisting of two chambers: the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities. Speaking about the results of the new economic policy, it can be noted that they contributed to the stabilization of the economy and the growth of production indicators. Already in the fall of 1922, the famine ended. By the mid-20s, light and heavy industry enterprises had largely restored their pre-war production volumes. Economic indicators in the countryside also improved: after the abolition of surplus appropriation and its replacement with a tax in kind, which was much lower than the first, the peasant had incentives to work. At the same time, the additional allocation of land under the decree “On Land” also had an impact. The permission of small private entrepreneurship and private trade made it possible to relatively quickly revive small industry and fill store shelves with everyday goods. Within the framework of the NEP, the Soviet government managed to achieve some successes. But as the recovery progressed, the old problems of the Russian economy, its structural imbalances and contradictions, returned. If pre-revolutionary Russia was not among the advanced economically developed states, then in the 20s its lag worsened. The country became even more agrarian than it was, its industrial development directly depended on the state of agriculture. Neither industry nor agriculture have created markets for expanded production for themselves. The village could not satisfy the needs of industry and the city for commercial agricultural products, acquiring a semi-natural character. In turn, the needs of industrialization required a different orientation of production than rural demand. The exchange of goods between the village and the city was disrupted. The first had nothing to give for the surplus of goods and the peasants began to leave them on their farms. In the second half of the 1920s, established grain procurement plans failed. Due to economic turmoil, a split emerged within the ruling elite. One of the first critics of the NEP were representatives of the labor opposition associated with the state sector of the economy (Leningrad workers). They criticized the party, which, according to them, had forgotten about its main task - the development of large-scale industry. Gradually, the idea of the need for radical changes in the country's economy is maturing in the leadership of the party. Part of the party elite saw a way out of this situation in the reconstruction of the NEP, the implementation of “super-industrialization”, and the development of heavy industry in order to hold the approaches to the world revolution. It is worth noting that the new economic policy was initially considered only as a temporary measure, a retreat, and not a line designed for the long term. Even Lenin, in the last years of his life, warned that in connection with the transition to the NEP, on the basis of free trade, there would be a revival of the petty bourgeoisie and capitalism, which could actually cancel the achievements of the revolution. Representatives of the left wing in the party in the mid-20s stated that the USSR economy, as a result of the measures taken, was increasingly integrated into the world economy and thereby turning into a state capitalist one. If we take into account that in terms of economic indicators and the level of industrial production at the end of the 20s, the USSR was 5-10 times inferior to the leading Western countries, it becomes obvious that further development of the economy within the framework of the NEP would threaten to turn the Soviet Union into a minor power. The Soviet Union was in a position of catching up, lagging behind (outsider). In this “race for the leader,” in the opinion of the party leadership, it was impossible to make mistakes and act for sure. The crisis that broke out in the West in 1929 strengthened the confidence of the political elite of the USSR that the market economic model was unpredictable and unstable, and therefore a different approach to the economic development of the country was needed. Factors of the international situation played a large role in the choice of the country's economic development model. At the end of the 20s, few people doubted that a world revolution would not happen in the near future, and the young Soviet republic would find itself in an atmosphere of capitalist encirclement under the pressure of a rapidly growing military threat. The course towards world revolution, the initial revolutionary romanticism is replaced by a focus on pragmatism - a line towards building “socialism in a single country”. A group of pragmatists led by Stalin, who concentrated enormous power in their hands and took control of the party apparatus and nomenklatura, took the leading roles in the leadership of the party and the country. The party apparatus is gradually ousting the opposition from its posts, putting forward the idea of the need to catch up and overtake the advanced capitalist countries in the shortest historical period. The XV Congress of the CPSU (b) in 1927 adopted a five-year plan for the development of the national economy. The plan was based on high rates of industrialization, an attack on the private capitalist elements of the city and countryside through a significant increase in tax rates and increased cooperation in the countryside. To successfully resist the capitalist camp, the creation of a strong economic base was required. It was necessary to create a powerful industry, primarily heavy industry related to the production of weapons. As a result, at the end of the 20s, the party leadership set a course for industrializing the country, strengthening the planned and directive construction of socialism, and “winding down the NEP.” The XVI Party Conference (April 1929), and then the V Congress of Soviets, approved, after repeated upward revisions, the “optimal option” of the five-year plan. This plan provided for an increase in industrial production by 136%, labor productivity by 110%, and a reduction in the cost of industrial products by 35%. The plan gave priority to heavy industry, which received 78% of all capital investments. The old industrial areas were to become the supporting points, the main base for the ongoing industrialization of the country. It was assumed that they would be the foundations for increasing the industrial power of the country; they were subject to a system of priorities in the distribution of raw materials, equipment, and labor (Central Industrial Region, Leningrad Region, Donetsk-Krivoy Rog region of Ukraine and the Urals). Economic policy was aimed at strengthening the role of directive planning and the deployment of grandiose mass campaigns aimed at accelerating the pace of socialist construction. The industrialization plan provided for a change in technology and production methods in the direction of developing energy capacities, expanding mass production, transferring advanced American and European technology to the country's economy, rationalization, and scientific organization of labor. In practice, this policy resulted in the active construction of new industrial facilities against the backdrop of strengthening the austerity regime, the voluntary-compulsory distribution of industrialization loans, and the establishment of rationing supplies to the population of cities and workers' settlements. The party leadership is developing mass socialist competition in factories, factories, transport, construction, etc. In connection with the transition to directive central planning, the entire system of national economic management is being transformed. On the basis of production syndicates, production associations are created that subordinate production to centralized regulation. Unity of command was introduced in production; enterprise managers were made directly responsible for the implementation of the plan. The managers of enterprises and construction sites themselves were now appointed according to a special nomenclature list in a centralized manner. Speaking about the economic results of industrialization, it can be noted that the Soviet leadership as a whole was able to overcome the absolute lag behind the countries of Western Europe in the production of main types of industrial products. At the end of the 30s (unlike the previous decade and pre-revolutionary times), the production of electricity, fuel, cast iron, steel, and cement in our country exceeded the corresponding indicators in England, France and Germany. In terms of absolute volume of industrial output, the Soviet Union was second only to the United States. A number of modern industries are emerging, such as the aviation and automobile industries, tractor and combine production, tank production and much more, which were previously practically absent in our country before the turn to forced industrialization. The country's leadership made huge investments in industry, relying exclusively on internal sources of accumulation. Forced industrialization, according to Stalin’s plan, was initially supposed to be carried out by “pumping funds” from villages to cities. The process of expanding industrial production itself was impossible without a regular supply of food to workers, but the grain crisis of 1927-1928 jeopardized the plan for accelerated industrialization and the supply of food to the city. In this situation, the government set a course for agricultural production cooperation and an attack on the kulaks. It was in the collective farms that the Stalinist leadership saw the production and distribution mechanism that made it possible to distribute funds and supply cities and the army with bread without creating the threat of economic and political upheaval. Representing socialist society in the form of a “single factory,” subordinate and controlled by Soviet society, Stalin and his supporters sought to involve the entire population in the workshops of this factory as quickly as possible. Moreover, in the villages it was decided to implement this through complete collectivization, which began to be implemented in the autumn of 1929. The collectivization policy included the abolition of land leases, a ban on hired labor, and the confiscation of means of production, farm and residential buildings, and agricultural processing enterprises from wealthy peasants (kulaks). The means of production and property were transferred to the indivisible funds of collective farms as contributions for the poor and farm laborers, with the exception of the part that went to pay off the debts of kulak farms to the state. At the same time, part of the kulaks were supposed to be arrested and repressed as political criminals, another part was to be deported along with their families to the northern and remote regions of the country, and the third was to be resettled within the region on lands specially allocated for them outside the collective farm tracts. Such measures naturally met with massive resistance from the peasantry. Anti-collective farm protests and other acts of disobedience on the part of the kulaks, middle peasants and part of the poor were suppressed through the use of the most severe measures of violence. The Stalinist leadership dispossessed and repressed approximately 900 thousand farms. 250 thousand households “dispossessed themselves,” that is, they sold or abandoned their property and fled from villages, hamlets, and villages. By 1932, the collectivization policy had created 211.1 thousand collective farms (61.5% of peasant farms). Around 1937-1938, the complete collectivization of the country was completed. The country's leadership used “carrot and stick” methods in relation to collective farmers. On the one hand, the party-state apparatus is carrying out the most severe repressive measures, reprisals against opponents of grain procurement requisitions, on the other hand, it is trying to create among collective farmers factors of interest in the results of their labor by introducing a grain procurement system, allowing them to create personal subsidiary plots. Peasants were also allowed to sell their products in the market. Thus, the party and the state managed to find a compromise with the peasantry for some time. The created large-scale collective production demonstrated a number of economic and social advantages. During the years of collectivization, over 5,000 machine and tractor stations (MTS) were built, which provided the village with agricultural machinery: tractors, combines and other machines. Labor productivity increased by 71% from 1928 to 1940. The structure of sown areas has changed towards increasing the production of industrial crops (sugar beets, cotton, potatoes, sunflowers) necessary for an industrialized country. The country produced a minimum sufficient amount of bread, which exceeded its production before collectivization. The main social consequence of industrialization and collectivization was the formation of a massive multi-million core of industrial workers. The total number of workers grew from 8-9 million in 1928 to 23-24 million in 1940. On the other hand, employment in agriculture fell significantly: from 80% in 1928 to 54% in 1940. The freed population (15 - 20 million people) moved into industry. The policy of forced industrialization plunged the country into a state of general, war-like mobilization and tension. The choice of a forced strategy implied a sharp weakening, if not the complete elimination of commodity-money mechanisms for regulating the economy and the absolute predominance of the administrative-economic system. This version of economic development contributed to the growth of totalitarian principles in the political system of Soviet society and sharply increased the need for the widespread use of administrative-command forms of political organization. Totalitarianism is a political regime in which full control and strict regulation by the state of all spheres of society and the life of every person is exercised, ensured primarily by force, including the means of armed violence. The main features of a totalitarian regime include: 1) the supremacy of the state, which is total in nature. The state not only interferes in the economic, political, social, spiritual, family and everyday life of society, it seeks to completely subjugate and nationalize any manifestations of life; 2) concentration of all state political power in the hands of the party leader, entailing the actual exclusion of the population and ordinary party members from participation in the formation and activities of state bodies; 4) the dominance in society of one all-powerful state ideology, which maintains among the masses the conviction of the justice of this system of power and the correctness of the chosen path; 5) centralized system of control and management of the economy; 6) complete lack of human rights. Political freedoms and rights are formally recorded, but in reality they are absent; 7) there is strict censorship over all mass media and publishing activities. It is prohibited to criticize government officials, state ideology, or speak positively about the life of states with other political regimes; 8) the police and intelligence services, along with the functions of ensuring law and order, perform the functions of punitive bodies and act as an instrument of mass repression; 9) suppression of any opposition and dissent through systematic and mass terror, which is based on both physical and spiritual violence; 10) suppression of personality, depersonalization of a person, turning him into a similar cog in the party-state machine. The state strives for the complete transformation of a person in accordance with its adopted ideology. The main factors that contributed to the formation of the totalitarian regime in our country can be identified as economic, political and sociocultural. Forced economic development, as already noted in one of the previous sections, led to a tightening of the political regime in the country. Let us recall that the choice of a forced strategy presupposed a sharp weakening, if not complete destruction, of commodity-money mechanisms for regulating the economy with the absolute predominance of the administrative-economic system. Planning, production, and technical discipline in an economy devoid of levers of economic interest were most easily achieved by relying on the political apparatus, state sanction, and administrative coercion. As a result, the same forms of strict obedience to the directive on which the economic system was built prevailed in the political sphere. Strengthening the totalitarian principles of the political system was also required by the very low level of material well-being of the overwhelming majority of society, which accompanied the forced version of industrialization and attempts to overcome economic backwardness. The enthusiasm and conviction of the advanced strata of society alone was not enough to maintain, during a quarter of a century of peacetime, the standard of living of millions of people at a level that usually exists for short periods of time during years of war and social catastrophes. Enthusiasm, in this situation, had to be supported by other factors, primarily organizational and political, regulation of measures of labor and consumption (severe punishments for the theft of public property, for absenteeism and lateness to work, restrictions on movement, etc.). The need to take these measures, naturally, did not in any way favor the democratization of political life. The formation of a totalitarian regime was also favored by a special type of political culture, characteristic of Russian society throughout its history. A disdainful attitude towards the law and justice is combined in it with the obedience of the bulk of the population to the authorities, the violent nature of the authorities, the absence of legal opposition, the idealization of the population of the head of government, etc. (submissive type of political culture). Characteristic of the bulk of society, this type of political culture is also reproduced within the Bolshevik Party, which was formed mainly by people from the people. Coming from war communism, the “Red Guard attack on capital,” the overestimation of the role of violence in the political struggle, indifference to cruelty weakened the sense of moral validity and justification for many political actions that the party activists had to carry out. The Stalinist regime, as a result, did not encounter active resistance within the party apparatus itself. Thus, we can conclude that a combination of economic, political, and cultural factors contributed to the formation of a totalitarian regime in the USSR in the 30s, the system of Stalin’s personal dictatorship. The main characteristic feature of the political regime in the 30s was the shift of the center of gravity to the party, emergency and punitive bodies. The decisions of the XVH Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) significantly strengthened the role of the party apparatus: it received the right to directly engage in state and economic management, the top party leadership acquired unlimited freedom, and ordinary communists were obliged to strictly obey the leadership centers of the party hierarchy. Along with the executive committees of the Soviets, party committees functioned in industry, agriculture, science, and culture, whose role in fact becomes decisive. In conditions of concentration of real political power in party committees, the Soviets carried out primarily economic, cultural and organizational functions. The ingrowth of the party into the economy and the public sphere from that time on became a distinctive feature of the Soviet political system. A kind of pyramid of party and state administration was built, the top of which was firmly occupied by Stalin as the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. Thus, the initially secondary position of the Secretary General turned into a primary one, giving its holder the right to supreme power in the country. The establishment of the power of the party-state apparatus was accompanied by the rise and strengthening of the power structures of the state and its repressive bodies. Already in 1929, so-called “troikas” were created in each district, which included the first secretary of the district party committee, the chairman of the district executive committee and a representative of the Main Political Directorate (GPU). They began to carry out out-of-court proceedings against the perpetrators, passing their own verdicts. In 1934, on the basis of the OGPU, the Main Directorate of State Security was formed, which became part of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD). Under him, a Special Conference (SCO) was established, which at the union level consolidated the practice of extrajudicial verdicts. Relying on a powerful system of punitive authorities, the Stalinist leadership in the 30s spun the flywheel of repression. According to a number of modern historians, repressive policies in this period pursued three main goals: 1) real cleansing of functionaries who have “decayed” from the often uncontrolled power; 2) suppression in the bud of departmental, parochial, separatist, clan, opposition sentiments, ensuring the unconditional power of the center over the periphery; 3) relieving social tension by identifying and punishing enemies. The data known today about the mechanism of the “Great Terror” allows us to say that among the many reasons for these actions, the desire of the Soviet leadership to destroy the potential “fifth column” in the face of a growing military threat was of particular importance. During the repressions, national economic, party, government, military, scientific and technical personnel, and representatives of the creative intelligentsia were purged. The number of prisoners in the Soviet Union in the 30s is determined by figures from 3.5 million to 9 - 10 million people. What were the consequences of the policy of mass repression? On the one hand, it cannot be denied that this policy really increased the level of “cohesion” of the country’s population, which was then able to unite in the face of fascist aggression. But at the same time, without even taking into account the moral and ethical side of the process (torture and death of millions of people), it is difficult to deny the fact that mass repressions disorganized the life of the country. Constant arrests among the managers of enterprises and collective farms led to a decline in discipline and responsibility in production. There was a huge shortage of military personnel. The Stalinist leadership itself abandoned mass repressions in 1938 and purged the NKVD, but fundamentally this punitive machine remained intact. As a result of mass repressions, a political system took hold, which is called the regime of Stalin's personal power (Stalinist totalitarianism). During the repressions, most of the country's top leaders were killed. They were replaced by a new generation of leaders (“promoters of terror”), completely devoted to Stalin. Thus, the adoption of fundamentally important decisions finally passed into the hands of the General Secretary of the CPSU (b). The evolution of Stalinist totalitarianism is usually divided into four stages. 1. 1923-1934 - the process of formation of Stalinism, the formation of its main trends. 2. Mid-30s - 1941 - implementation of the Stalinist model of social development and the creation of a bureaucratic basis for power. 3. The period of the Great Patriotic War, 1941 - 1945 - the partial retreat of Stalinism, highlighting the historical role of the people, the growth of national self-awareness, the expectation of democratic changes in the internal life of the country after the victory over fascism. 4. 1946 - 1953 - the apogee of Stalinism, developing into the collapse of the system, the beginning of the regressive evolution of Stalinism. In the second half of the 50s, during the implementation of the decisions of the 20th Congress of the CPSU, a partial de-Stalinization of Soviet society was carried out, but a number of signs of totalitarianism remained in the political system until the 80s. 1. Velidov A.S. On the way to terror // Questions of history. - 2002. - No. 6. 2. Zelenin I.E. The culmination of the “Great Terror” in the village. Zigzags of agrarian policy (1937-1938) // Domestic history. - 2004. - No. 1. 3. History of Russia. Russia in world civilization. - M., 1998. 4. History of Russia: textbook / A.S. Orlov, V.A. Georgiev, N.G. Georgieva, T.A. Sivokhina. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Prospekt, 2004. 5. Mikhailova N.V. Domestic history: Textbook / N.V. Mikhailova. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: IMC GUK MIA of Russia, 2002. 6. Pavlov B.V. The formation of control of the party nomenklatura over the law enforcement system in 1921-1925 // Questions of history. - 2004. - No. 1. 7. Pavlova I.V. Power and society in the USSR in the 1930s // Questions of history. - 2001. - No. 10. 8. Semennikova L.I. Russia in the world community of civilizations. Textbook for universities. - Bryansk, 1999. 9. Telitsyn V.L. New economic policy: a view from Russia abroad // Questions of history. - 2000. - No. 8 10.
Fedorov O.A. Russian history. XX century: textbook for universities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia / O. A. Fedorov. - Orel: OYUI Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 1999.
Introduction
1. Economic and political crises of 1920 -1921. Transition to New Economic Policy
2. Education of the USSR
3. Results of the NEP, reasons for its collapse
4. Social and economic development of the USSR in the 30s
5. The formation of a totalitarian regime in the USSR in the 30s
Conclusion
Bibliography
Economic policy:
In the second half of the 1920s, the most important task of economic development was the transformation of the country from an agricultural to an industrial one, ensuring its economic independence and strengthening its defense capability. An urgent need was the modernization of the economy, the main condition of which was the technical improvement (re-equipment) of the entire national economy.
Industrialization policy. The course towards industrialization was proclaimed in December 1925 by the XIV Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (renamed after the formation of the USSR). At the congress they discussed the need to transform the USSR from a country importing machinery and equipment into a country producing them. His documents substantiated the need for maximum development of production of means of production (group “A”) to ensure the economic independence of the country. The importance of creating a socialist industry based on increasing its technical equipment was emphasized. The beginning of the industrialization policy was legislated in April 1927 by the IV Congress of Soviets of the USSR. In the early years, the main attention was paid to the reconstruction of old industrial enterprises. At the same time, over 500 new plants were built, including the Saratov and Rostov agricultural machinery plants, the Karsaknai copper smelter, etc. The construction of the Turkestan-Siberian Railway (Turksib) and the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station (Dneproges) began. The development and expansion of industrial production by almost 40% was carried out at the expense of the enterprise’s own resources; in addition to intra-industrial accumulation, the source of financing was the redistribution in favor of the industry of national income.
The implementation of the industrialization policy required changes in the industrial management system. There was a transition to a sectoral management system, unity of command and centralization in the distribution of raw materials, labor and manufactured products were strengthened. On the basis of the Supreme Economic Council of the USSR, the People's Commissariats of heavy, light and forestry industries were formed. The forms and methods of industrial management that emerged in the 20s and 30s became part of the economic mechanism that persisted for a long time. It was characterized by excessive centralization, directive command and suppression of local initiative. The functions of economic and party bodies, which interfered in all aspects of the activities of industrial enterprises, were not clearly delineated.
Industrial development. The first five-year plan. At the turn of the 1920s and 1930s, the country's leadership adopted a policy of fully accelerating, “spurring up” industrial development, and accelerating the creation of socialist industry. This policy was most fully embodied in the five-year plans for the development of the national economy. The first five-year plan (1928/29-1932/33) came into force on October 1, 1928. By this time, the tasks of the five-year plan had not yet been approved, and the development of some sections (in particular, on industry) continued. The five-year plan was developed with the participation of major specialists. A. N. Bakh, a famous biochemist and public figure, I. G. Alexandrov and A. V. Winter, leading energy scientists, D. N. Pryanishnikov, the founder of the scientific school of agrochemistry, and others were involved in its compilation.
The section of the five-year plan regarding industrial development was created by workers of the Supreme Economic Council under the leadership of its chairman V.V. Kuibyshev. It provided for an average annual increase in industrial output of 19-20%. Ensuring such high rates of development required maximum effort, which was well understood by many leaders of the party and state. N.I. Bukharin, in his article “Notes of an Economist” (1929), supported the need for high rates of industrialization. In his opinion, the implementation of such rates could be facilitated by increasing efficiency and reducing production costs, saving resources and reducing unproductive costs, increasing the role of science and the fight against bureaucracy. At the same time, the author of the article warned against “communist” hobbies and called for a more complete account of objective economic laws.
The plan was approved at the V All-Union Congress of Soviets in May 1929. The main task of the five-year plan was to transform the country from an agrarian-industrial one to an industrial one. In accordance with this, the construction of metallurgy, tractor, automobile and aircraft manufacturing enterprises began (in Stalingrad, Magnitogorsk, Kuznetsk, Rostov-on-Don, Kerch, Moscow and other cities). The construction of the Dneproges and Turksib was in full swing.
However, very soon a revision of industry targets began to increase them. The tasks for the production of building materials, the smelting of iron and steel, and the production of agricultural machinery were “adjusted”. The plenum of the Central Committee of the Party, held in November 1929, approved new target figures for industrial development in the direction of their sharp increase. According to I.V. Stalin and his inner circle, by the end of the five-year plan it was possible to smelt pig iron instead of the planned 10 million tons - 17 million, produce 170 thousand tractors instead of 55 thousand, produce 200 thousand cars instead of 100 thousand and etc. The new control figures were not thought out and had no basis in reality.
The country's leadership put forward the slogan - in the shortest possible time to catch up and surpass the advanced capitalist countries in technical and economic terms. Behind him was the desire to eliminate the backlog in the country's development as soon as possible at any cost and build a new society. Industrial backwardness and international isolation of the USSR stimulated the choice of a plan for the accelerated development of heavy industry.
In the first two years of the Five-Year Plan, until NEP reserves were exhausted, industry developed in accordance with planned targets and even exceeded them. In the early 1930s, its growth rate dropped significantly: in 1933 it was 5% versus 23.7% in 1928-1929. The accelerated pace of industrialization required increased capital investment. Industry was subsidized mainly through intra-industrial accumulation and redistribution of national income through the state budget in its favor. The most important source of its financing was the “pumping” of funds from the agricultural sector to the industrial sector. In addition, to obtain additional funds, the government began to issue loans and issued money, which caused a sharp increase in inflation. And although it was announced that the five-year plan would be completed in 4 years and 3 months, the “adjusted” targets of the plan for the production of most types of products could not be fulfilled.
Second five-year plan. The Second Five-Year Plan (1933-1937), approved by the 17th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) at the beginning of 1934, maintained the tendency to prioritize the development of heavy industry to the detriment of light industry. His main economic task was to complete the reconstruction of the national economy on the basis of the latest technology for all its sectors. Planned targets in the industry compared to the previous five years were more moderate and seemed realistic for implementation. During the years of the Second Five-Year Plan, 4.5 thousand large industrial enterprises were built. The Ural Machine-Building and Chelyabinsk Tractor Plants, Novo-Tula Metallurgical and other plants, dozens of blast furnaces and open-hearth furnaces, mines and power plants came into operation. The first metro line was built in Moscow. The industry of the Union republics developed at an accelerated pace. Mechanical engineering enterprises were built in Ukraine, and metal processing plants were built in Uzbekistan.
The completion of the second five-year plan was announced ahead of schedule - again in 4 years and 3 months. In some industries, very good results have indeed been achieved. Steel production increased 3 times, and electricity production increased 2.5 times. Powerful industrial centers and new industries emerged: chemical, machine tool, tractor and aircraft manufacturing. At the same time, the development of light industry producing consumer goods was not given due attention. Limited financial and material resources were directed here, so the results of the second five-year plan for group “B” turned out to be significantly lower than planned (from 40 to 80% in different industries).
The scale of industrial construction infected many Soviet people with enthusiasm. Call XV! Thousands of factory workers responded to the conference of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) to organize socialist competition.
The Stakhanov movement developed widely among workers in various industries. Its initiator, miner Alexei Stakhanov, set an outstanding record in September 1935, fulfilling 14 labor standards during a shift. A. Stakhanov's followers showed examples of an unprecedented increase in labor productivity. Many enterprises put forward counter plans for production development that were higher than those established. The labor enthusiasm of the working class was of great importance in solving the problems of industrialization. At the same time, workers often succumbed to unrealistic calls, such as calls to fulfill the five-year plan in four years or to catch up and overtake the capitalist countries. The desire to set records also had a downside. The insufficient preparedness of newly appointed economic managers and the inability of the majority of workers to master new equipment sometimes led to its damage and disorganization of production.
Agrarian policy. The industrial breakthrough had a hard impact on the situation of peasant farms. Excessive taxation aroused discontent among the rural population. Prices for industrial goods increased exorbitantly. At the same time, government purchase prices for bread were artificially lowered. As a result, grain supplies to the state sharply decreased. This caused complications with grain procurements and a deep grain crisis at the end of 1927. It worsened the economic situation in the country and jeopardized the implementation of the industrialization plan. Some economists and business executives saw the cause of the crisis in the error of the party's course. To get out of this situation, it was proposed to change the relationship between the city and the countryside, to achieve greater balance. But to combat the grain procurement crisis, a different path was chosen.
To intensify grain procurements, the country's leadership resorted to emergency measures reminiscent of the policies of the period of “war communism.” Free market trade in grain was prohibited. If they refused to sell grain at fixed prices, peasants were subject to criminal liability, and local Soviets could confiscate part of their property. Special “investigative officers” and “work detachments” confiscated not only surpluses, but also the bread necessary for the peasant family. These actions led to a worsening of relations between the state and the rural population, which in 1929 reduced the area under cultivation.
The transition to collectivization. Crisis of the procurement campaign of 1927/28. and the tendency of some of the workers of the apparatus of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks to centralized, administrative-command management of all sectors of the economy accelerated the transition to general collectivization. Held in December. 1927 The XV Congress of the CPSU (b) adopted a special resolution on the issue of work in the countryside. It talked about the development of all forms of cooperation in the countryside, which by this time united almost a third of peasant farms. A gradual transition to collective cultivation of the land was planned as a long-term task. But already in March 1928, the Party Central Committee, in a circular letter to local party organizations, demanded the strengthening of existing collective and state farms and the creation of new ones.
The practical implementation of the collectivization course was expressed in the widespread creation of new collective farms. Significant sums were allocated from the state budget to finance collective farms. They were provided with benefits in the field of credit, taxation, and the supply of agricultural machinery. Measures were taken to limit the possibilities for the development of kulak farms (limiting land rental, etc.). Direct supervision of collective farm construction was carried out by the Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks for work in the village V. M. Molotov. The Collective Farm Center of the USSR was created, headed by G. N. Kaminsky.
In January 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution “On the pace of collectivization and measures of state assistance to collective farm construction.” It outlined strict deadlines for its implementation. In the main grain-growing regions of the country (Middle and Lower Volga region, Northern Caucasus) it was supposed to be completed by the spring of 1931, in the Central Chernozem region, in Ukraine, the Urals, Siberia and Kazakhstan - by the spring of 1932. By the end of the first five-year plan, collectivization was planned implement on a national scale.
Despite the decision, both the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the grassroots party organizations intended to carry out collectivization in a more compressed form. A “competition” between local authorities began for the record-breaking rapid creation of “districts of complete collectivization.” In March 1930, the Model Charter of the Agricultural Artel was adopted. It proclaimed the principle of voluntariness in joining a collective farm, determined the procedure for unification and the volume of socialized means of production. However, in practice, these provisions were widely violated, which caused resistance from the peasants. Therefore, many of the first collective farms, created in the spring of 1930, quickly disintegrated. It was necessary to send detachments of “conscious” party workers (“twenty-five thousanders”) to the villages. Together with workers of local party organizations and the OGPU, moving from persuasion to threats, they convinced peasants to join collective farms. To provide technical services to newly emerging peasant production cooperatives in rural areas, machine and tractor stations (MTS) were organized.
During mass collectivization, kulak farms were liquidated[i]. (In previous years, a policy was implemented to limit their development.) In accordance with the regulations of the late 20s and early 30s, lending was stopped and taxation of private households was increased, and laws on land leasing and labor hiring were abolished. It was forbidden to admit kulaks to collective farms. All these measures caused their protests and terrorist actions against collective farm activists. In February 1930, a law was adopted that determined the procedure for the liquidation of kulak farms. In accordance with it, the layers of the kulaks were divided into three categories. The first included the organizers of anti-Soviet and anti-collective farm protests. They were arrested and tried. The largest kulaks classified as the second category were to be resettled to other regions. The remaining kulak farms were subject to partial confiscation, and their owners were subject to eviction to new territories from the areas of their previous residence. During the process of dispossession, 1-1.1 million farms were liquidated (up to 15% of peasant households).
Results of collectivization. The disruption of existing forms of management in the countryside has caused serious difficulties in the development of the agricultural sector. Average annual grain production in 1933-1937. decreased to the level of 1909-1913, the number of livestock decreased by 40-50%. This was a direct consequence of the forced creation of collective farms and the inept leadership of the chairmen sent to them. At the same time, plans for food procurement grew. Following the harvest year of 1930, the grain regions of Ukraine, the Lower Volga and Western Siberia were gripped by crop failure. To fulfill grain procurement plans, emergency measures were reintroduced. 70% of the harvest was confiscated from collective farms, up to the seed fund. In the winter of 1932-1933. many newly collectivized farms were gripped by famine, from which, according to various sources, from 3 million to 5 million people died (the exact figure is unknown, information about the famine was carefully hidden),
The economic costs of collectivization did not stop its implementation. By the end of the second five-year plan, over 243 thousand collective farms were organized. They included over 93% of the total number of peasant households. In 1933, a system of compulsory deliveries of agricultural products to the state was introduced. The state prices set for it were several times lower than market prices. Plans for collective farm crops were drawn up by the leadership of the MTS, approved by the executive committees of the district Soviets, and then reported to agricultural enterprises. Payment in kind (in grain and agricultural products) for the labor of MTS machine operators was introduced; its size was determined not by collective farms, but by higher authorities. The passport regime introduced in 1932 limited the rights of peasants to travel. The administrative-command system of collective farm management, high levels of government supplies, and low procurement prices for agricultural products hampered the economic development of farms.
By the mid-1930s, the bureaucratization of economic management intensified. The deformations in the development of the national economy deepened: light industry lagged further and further behind heavy industry. Agriculture, railway and river transport experienced serious difficulties.
The fight against dissent. In parallel with the formation of the regime of personal power of I. V: Stalin, the struggle against dissent unfolded. The scale of repression against “class-hostile” individuals increased. Punitive measures affected almost all segments of the population. Following dispossession, repressive measures were taken against the urban population. Many senior officials of the State Planning Committee, the Supreme Economic Council, and the People's Commissariats fell into the category of “enemies of the people.” Business executives and engineers, primarily representatives of old (bourgeois) specialists, were declared to be the culprits for the failure of industrial plans. At the end of 1930, in the “Industrial Party” case, a group of scientific and technical intelligentsia led by the director of the Research Thermal Engineering Institute L.K. Ramzin was brought to trial and convicted. Prominent agricultural scientists N.D. Kondratyev, A.V. Chayanov and others were in the dock on charges of belonging to the Labor Peasant Party. The “fault” of the scientists was that their views on the ongoing collectivization differed from the official views. In particular, they considered the presence of a market to be a necessary condition for the development of rural cooperation. A group of former leaders of the Menshevik Party, as well as former tsarist generals and officers who served in the Red Army, were arrested.
The expansion of the scale of repression was accompanied by a violation of the rule of law. The USSR Central Executive Committee adopted several resolutions that became the basis for the ongoing lawlessness. A special meeting was created - an extrajudicial body in the state security system. His decision on the basis and measures of repression was not subject to control. Other extrajudicial, unconstitutional bodies—the “troikas” and “twos” of the NKVD—based their work on the same principle. A new procedure for conducting cases of terrorist acts was established. Their consideration was carried out within ten days without the participation of the defense and prosecution. One of the legal theorists who provided a “scientific basis” for the arbitrariness of the 30s was the USSR Prosecutor General A. Ya. Vyshinsky.
Administrative-command methods of managing the socio-political and cultural life of the country were strengthened. Many public organizations were liquidated. The reasons for their abolition were varied. In some cases - small numbers or financial troubles. In others - being part of societies of “enemies of the people”. The All-Union Association of Engineers and the Russian Society of Radio Engineers were liquidated. Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, Society of Russian History and Antiquities. The Society of Old Bolsheviks and the Society of Former Political Prisoners and Exiled Settlers, which united, in addition to the Bolsheviks, former anarchists, Mensheviks, Bundists, Socialist Revolutionaries, etc., ceased to exist. Mainly those associations continued to operate that could be used in the interests of the state (Osoaviakhim, Red Cross Society and the Red Crescent, International Organization for Assistance to Fighters of the Revolution - MOPR, etc.). Professional associations of the creative intelligentsia were placed under the control of party and government officials.
Constitution of the USSR of 1936. The transformation of the economy and increased centralization in the management system led to the formation of a new model of society, to the almost complete “nationalization” of the national economy. The changes that have occurred in the economic, socio-political and national-state development of the Soviet Union since the mid-20s required changes to the Basic Law. Prominent government and party workers took part in the development of the draft of the new Constitution, including M. I. Kalinin, N. I. Bukharin, A. S. Bubnov, G. K. Ordzhonikidze, as well as a large group of legal experts.
On December 5, 1936, the VIII Extraordinary Congress of Soviets approved the new Constitution of the USSR. It recorded the characteristic features of the administrative-command system that had formed in the country. However, during that period (and in the subsequent years of the existence of the Soviet state), it was believed that the Constitution legislated the construction of a socialist society in the USSR.
The Basic Law reflected changes in the national state structure of the USSR, the emergence of new union and autonomous republics and regions. In connection with the liquidation of the TSFSR, independent republics arose: the Armenian, Azerbaijan and Georgian SSR. The Kazakh Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and the Kirghiz Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic were transformed into union republics. The total number of union republics directly included in the USSR increased to 11. The voluntary nature of the state unification of the Soviet socialist republics was confirmed.
The political basis of the country was the Soviets of Working People's Deputies. The structure of state power changed: the Supreme Council, consisting of two chambers (the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities), became its highest legislative body. His tasks included approving the composition of the USSR government. The responsibilities of the all-Union People's Commissariats in the field of legislation, national economic development, and strengthening the country's defense capability expanded. At the same time, the rights of some republican authorities were unjustifiably narrowed, in particular in the legislative sphere.
The social basis of the state was declared as an alliance of workers and peasants while maintaining the dictatorship of the proletariat. (In practice, this was expressed in the dictatorship of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and its apparatus.) The socialist economic system and socialist ownership of the tools and means of production were declared the economic basis of the USSR. This property existed in two forms: state (mines, factories in industry, state farms and MTS in the countryside) and collective farm-cooperative property.
In connection with the liquidation of the former exploiting classes and private property, changes were made to the electoral system. Restrictions on voting rights for the rural population were abolished. The system of multi-stage elections to government bodies and open voting were abolished. The Constitution legally established universal, secret, equal and direct elections to Councils at all levels.
Citizens of the USSR were guaranteed the rights to work, rest, education, and material security in old age. Work was declared the duty of every citizen capable of it, according to the principle: “He who does not work, does not eat.” Freedom of religious worship was proclaimed. At the same time, freedom of anti-religious propaganda was introduced.
In the book “History of the Bolshevik Communist Party. Short Course,” prepared with the direct participation of J.V. Stalin and published in 1938, the new Basic Law was called the Constitution of “the victory of socialism and workers’ and peasants’ democracy.” History has shown the illusory nature of this conclusion by the head of state. However, the position about the victory of socialism in the USSR, about the completion of the transition period from capitalism to socialism in the mid-30s, was strengthened in Soviet historical literature for many decades.
Political processes of the 30s. The political course of I.V. Stalin, the concentration of unlimited power in his hands aroused opposition sentiments among many leading party workers and ordinary members of the CPSU(b). JV Stalin was called “the evil genius of the Russian revolution” by opponents of repression who sought to counteract them. A group of Moscow party workers (“Union for the Defense of Leninism”), led by M. N. Ryutin, addressed a manifesto “To all members of the EKGT (b).” It proposed removing I.V. Stalin from the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee and making adjustments to the system of managing the national economy. In 1932, the group members were arrested, accused of attempting to restore capitalism, and executed. The introduction of methods of arbitrariness and lawlessness created a climate of fear, suspicion, and mutual distrust of each other in the country.
In the mid-30s, repressions began against old party members who did not agree with the established methods of leading the country. The reason for the mass repressions was the murder on December 1, 1934 of S. M. Kirov, the first secretary of the Leningrad city and regional party committees, a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. The investigation into the circumstances of this terrorist act was directed by I.V. Stalin. According to the official version, the murder was committed on behalf of an underground Trotskyist-Zinovy group in order to disorganize the country's leadership. Several party and government workers were sentenced to capital punishment, although their participation in the assassination attempt on S. M. Kirov was not proven.
In 1937, in the case of the so-called parallel anti-Soviet Trotskyist center, a group of senior officials from the People's Commissariat of Heavy and Timber Industry was brought to trial. Among them were Yu. L. Pyatakov (in the past - one of the participants in the opposition to J. V. Stalin) and G. Ya. Sokolnikov. They were accused, among other things, of attempts to undermine the economic power of the USSR, of sabotage, of organizing accidents at enterprises, of deliberately disrupting state plans. Thirteen defendants were sentenced to death and four to prison. An attempt to prevent lawlessness was made by the People's Commissar of Heavy Industry G. K. Ordzhonikidze. Together with employees of the People's Commissariat, he checked the affairs of a group of “enemies of the people” engaged in the construction of heavy industry enterprises, and proved their innocence.
In 1936, former party leaders G. E. Zinoviev, L. B. Kamenev and others were convicted on fictitious charges of anti-Soviet activities and espionage (the case of the anti-Soviet “united Trotskyist-Zinoviev center”). Thousands of political emigrants and many workers became victims of repression Comintern. Repressive policies were carried out against entire peoples. In 1937, the Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks decided to immediately evict the Korean population living there from the Far Eastern Territory. The need for this act was motivated by the possible sending of Chinese and Korean spies to the Far East by Japanese intelligence services. Subsequently, over 36 thousand Korean families (more than 170 thousand people) were deported to the regions of Central Asia.
The repressions affected the command cadres of the Red Army (M. N. Tukhachevsky, I. E. Yakir, I. P. Uborevich, A. I. Egorov, V. K. Blyukher). In 1938, another political trial was fabricated in the case of the “anti-Soviet right-wing Trotskyist bloc” (N.I. Bukharin, A.I. Rykov, etc.). The defendants were accused of intending to liquidate the existing social and state system in the USSR and restore capitalism. They allegedly intended to achieve this goal by means of espionage and... sabotage activities by undermining the country's economy. All these actions took place in violation of the rules of justice and ended in the execution of the convicts.
Tens of thousands of innocent people were arrested based on false denunciations and accusations of “counter-revolutionary” activities. They were sentenced to imprisonment and forced labor in the system of the State Administration of Camps (GULAG). Prisoner labor was used in logging, construction of new factories and railways. By the end of the 30s, the Gulag system included more than 50 camps, over 420 correctional colonies, and 50 colonies for minors. The number of people imprisoned there increased from 179 thousand in 1930 to 839.4 thousand at the end of 1935 and to 996.4 thousand at the end of 1937 (official data). However, the total number of victims of repression was significantly higher. One of the indirect indicators of the scale of repression is data on population dynamics in the USSR. From January 1, 1929 to January 1, 1933, the number of residents increased by 11 million people. From January 1, 1933 to December 1937, the population decreased by almost 2 million.
The attitude of the state to religion. At the end of the 1920s, state regulation of the activities of religious associations increased. By this time, almost all religious organizations declared their loyalty to the new system. The development of a union law on religious cults began. Discussion of his project was carried out in the departments implementing “church policy”: the NKVD, the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR. During the discussion, a discussion arose about the prospects of religion in Soviet society, about the nature of the activities of religious organizations, and about the forms of anti-religious propaganda. It was argued that the work of many church communities had acquired an anti-Soviet character. It was proposed to intensify the fight against them as a counter-revolutionary force. It was decided to preserve the existing legislation in the republics in relation to religion.
In the spring of 1930, the Presidium of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the RSFSR adopted a resolution “On Religious Associations.” A ban was introduced on economic (creation of cooperatives) and charitable work of communities. The teaching of religious doctrines in educational institutions - state, public, and private - was prohibited. To communicate with religious organizations, a commission on religious issues was created under the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. It included representatives of the People's Commissariats of Justice, Internal Affairs, Education, and the OGPU. Later, the commission was transformed into an all-Union commission under the Presidium of the USSR Central Executive Committee (P. L. Krasikov became its chairman).
The propaganda campaign intensified to explain to the population the “failure” of religious beliefs. The center of atheistic propaganda was the “Union of Militant Atheists,” headed by the publicist and author of many anti-religious books Km. Yaroslavsky. The Union published newspapers and magazines with circulations of many thousands (“Militant Atheism”, “Atheist at the Machine”, “Anti-Religious”, “Young Atheists”, etc.). Anti-religious museums and exhibitions were created, courses were organized to train propagandists of atheism. The Second Congress of the Union of Atheists (1929) proclaimed atheistic work to be the most important area of the class struggle. The fight against religion was declared a fight for socialism.
In February 1930, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars adopted a resolution “On the fight against counter-revolutionary elements in the governing bodies of religious associations.” Local authorities were recommended to strengthen control over the composition of community leaders. It was proposed to exclude persons “hostile” to the Soviet system from the active membership of religious associations. Targeted repressions against the clergy have become more frequent. Taxation of clergy was increased. In case of non-payment of taxes, their property was confiscated, and they themselves were evicted to other parts of the country. The procedure for closing churches was simplified: the decision on this issue was transferred to the regional executive committees and regional executive committees of the Soviets. In the mid-30s, the number of operating religious buildings (temples, churches, mosques, synagogues, etc.) amounted to 28.5% of those available in pre-revolutionary Russia. In this regard, the Central Election Commission considered it necessary to abolish the previously created commission on religious issues. The new Constitution of the USSR did not include a provision on freedom of religious propaganda.
By the mid-30s, the formation of the administrative-command system was completed in the USSR. Its most important features were: centralization of the economic management system, merging of political management with economic management, strengthening of authoritarian principles in the management of socio-political life. The narrowing of democratic freedoms and rights of citizens and public institutions was accompanied by the growth and strengthening of the personality cult of J.V. Stalin. Many domestic and foreign historians consider it possible to say that in the 30s a totalitarian society was formed in the USSR.
USSR in 1938 - early 1941:
The internal political and economic development of the USSR remained complex and contradictory. This was explained by the strengthening of the personality cult of J.V. Stalin, the omnipotence of the party leadership, and the further strengthening of bureaucratization and centralization of management. At the same time, the faith of the majority of the people in socialist ideals, labor enthusiasm and high citizenship grew.
The personality cult of J.V. Stalin was caused by various factors; the lack of democratic traditions in the country; largely preserved monarchist psychology of the masses, generating the illusion of wisdom and infallibility of the leader, an atmosphere of fear in conditions of repression and political processes. The real and imaginary (propagandized) successes of socialist construction also contributed to the strengthening of the people's faith in J.V. Stalin. The cult of J.V. Stalin was propagated by his inner circle, who made a quick political career out of it: K.E. Voroshilov, L.M. Kaganovich, V.M. Molotov, G.M. Malenkov, N.S. Khrushchev, L. P. Beria and others. Throughout the country, the cult of J.V. Stalin was introduced into the consciousness of the people by numerous party workers and civil servants.
In the economic field, the system of state socialism continued to develop - strict planning, distribution and control in all spheres of economic activity. The powers of the State Planning Committee were expanded, and the People's Commissariat of State Control was created. Command-administrative management methods were strengthened, which, despite their shortcomings, played a positive role in mobilizing economic and human resources to repel fascist aggression. The Soviet government carried out a series of economic, military, socio-political and ideological measures to strengthen the country's defense capability.
Economic policy. The development of the USSR was determined by the tasks of the third five-year plan (1938-1942), approved by the XVIII Congress of the CPSU (b) in March 1939. A political slogan was put forward - to catch up and surpass the developed capitalist countries in terms of production per capita. This attitude was demagogic. It was based on falsified and inflated indicators of the results of the implementation of the second five-year plan. Despite undoubted successes (in 1937 the USSR took second place in the world in terms of production after the USA), the industrial (and especially technical) lag behind the West was not overcome. Distortions in the economy were clearly evident. The advanced positions achieved in the metallurgical, chemical, and some branches of the engineering industry were combined with a noticeable lag in the development of new technologies, and especially in the production of consumer goods. In light industry, plans were fulfilled by 40-60% and did not meet the level of needs of the population. A difficult situation was also observed in agriculture, where production by 1938 had sharply decreased compared to the end of the 20s.
The main efforts in the third five-year plan were aimed at developing industries that ensure defense capability from the outside. Their growth rates significantly exceeded the growth rates of industry as a whole. By 1941, up to 43% of total capital investments were directed to these industries.
The essence of the New Economic Policy was the use of some hastily abolished market methods and principles in order to stabilize the economy, but with the constant preservation and tightening of the ideological inviolability of the existing order.
The main steps of the NEP were: Liberalization of the economy; Replacement of surplus appropriation with a tax in kind, and then with a cash tax; Authorization of lease and concession of enterprises; Development of cooperatives; Reform in industry (trusts, syndicates); Restructuring the industrial management system; Creation of a central planning body - Gosplan; Cash wages; private trade creation of exchanges; Financial reform of Sokolnikov 1922-1924. (reduction of government spending + formation of a deficit-free budget; unified reporting; tax policy: single agricultural tax, trade tax, income tax (basic and progressive), indirect taxes; separation of state and local budgets; introduction of hard, freely convertible currency - chervonets; restoration State Bank)
However, the contradiction between market methods and, to put it mildly, non-market ideology followed the fundamental contradictions that led to the collapse of the NEP. The process of coagulation occurred gradually. The 15th Congress of the RCP (B) begins to sum up: the question is in the direction of economic development. 1927 – a clear trend towards a change in political course. This course is shifting sharply to the left: strengthening the role of social. elements in the villages - limiting the activities of kulaks and Nepmen by means. tax increases will encourage measures for the poorest peasantry. Deep differences of opinion. Stalin and Molotov - take as much as possible from the village and invest in industry. The 15th Congress did not adopt a specific program.
The critical and key moment was the severe grain procurement crisis in January 1928. The reasons for this were: worsening imbalances in exchange between industry and the agricultural sector of the economy, low prices - this ultimately led to a decrease in supplies abroad and a decrease in foreign exchange earnings. Despite the good harvest, the peasants supplied only 300 million poods instead of 430.
To get out of the crisis, Stalin and Molotov wanted to resort to food appropriation. Stalin travels to Siberia and regions that produce grain. People were sent to the village to confiscate the land (whoever finds the grain will receive a portion). 1928 – closing of markets, inability to sell grain. On the trail. year they did not reduce grain crops.
From this, Stalin drew conclusions about the need for a speedy curtailment of the NEP, and the beginning of the brutal exploitation of the peasants, because they are unwilling to voluntarily cooperate with the state.
Despite the opinion of the opposition (Bukharin, Molotov) that the crisis occurred due to defective planning, pricing errors, and now it is necessary to change course through concessions to the peasantry: opening markets, purchasing grain abroad. November 1928 - the plenum of the Central Committee condemns the right deviation and abandons opposition views (Bukharin, Rykov, Tomsky).
Thus, due to the fundamental contradictions of the NEP (the use of most market elements to build a planned socialist economy, and the absence of political changes in the presence of economic ones), in 1928 the NEP was practically curtailed, due to:
Bread preparation. Crises
Education: Adm.-com. syst.
Beneficial to the influential forces of the country (bureaucratic apparatus, which had its own interests, different from the interests of workers and citizens.
There was no accumulation of capital, cat. owls the government wanted to invest in industrialization
The NEP was beneficial to the population, but not beneficial to the state.
Since 1929, the NEP has been abolished. In the beginning. 30s crowding out private capital, tax reform.
Analyzing socio-political life, we will focus on key processes.
The first group included the formal strengthening of the rule of law. but in fact the creation of a special meeting in the OGPU with the right of extrajudicial prosecution. Closing legally published opposition newspapers and magazines and ending the existence of these parties and movements themselves, holding public and closed trials against opposition leaders. Creation of a network of secret employees (informers) to control political sentiments in society. Particular attention was paid to the intelligentsia, entrepreneurs and kulaks. Creating a vicious circle for political exiles with the aim of making it impossible for them to return to their former places.
The second group concerned public organizations of a non-political nature. There are dual trends here. On the one hand, democratization took place, but on the other, the strengthening of the role of trade unions in society was accompanied by their simultaneous subordination to the party and the state. Strengthening the state control over the cooperative movement established control over their finances, “for the benefit of the state.” Under the control of the party, all kinds of social, cultural and educational circles and societies were created. A separate issue was the church, which the Bolsheviks had long wanted to subjugate or destroy. The carrot and stick policy was used to the fullest, including the confiscation and closure of churches. The Church was forced to give up its anti-Bolshevik positions, but this did not save it, and in 25 the election of a patriarch was not allowed, and in July 27, 9 bishops signed a “Declaration” calling for the resignation of all clergy who did not accept the new order. The power and authority of the church was undermined.
The third group dealt with issues such as the expulsion of scientists, especially humanists, under the pretext of being unscientific, counter-revolutionary, etc. persecution of old and foreign specialists in various fields of activity. Courses in history, economics, and other sciences were revised.
Such was life during these years. Life deteriorated and orders became stricter. The people became only a means to achieve “great” goals.
The main directions of foreign policy of the Soviet state and the Communist Party in the 20s were
(2) cooperation with foreign countries in restoring the Soviet economy,
(3) the spread of the communist movement in the world.
As part of this direction, agreements were signed with border countries in 20-21, which marked the beginning of widespread international recognition of the USSR. The main issue and resource for negotiations was the issue of the debts of the tsarist and provisional governments. After a number of concessions made in favor of small holders and an agreement to negotiate, leaders of Western countries, primarily the English Prime Minister Lloyd George, convened an international conference in Genoa (1922), inviting Russia. The main task assigned to the Soviet delegation was the establishment of economic and trade relations with the West, but a rigid position regarding nationalized property. monopoly on foreign trade and debts (recognition of debts and concessions in exchange for compensation for damage from the intervention, estimated by member of the delegation M. Litvinov at 35-50 billion gold rubles) The conference did not produce practical results, but served as a catalyst for the subsequent abandonment of joint claims and recognition by Germany.
The conference in Genoa was followed by the Hague, where the Soviet side presented a list of enterprises for concessions, but the West's ultimatum regarding debts and nationalized property led to the interruption of negotiations by the Russian side.
In 22, in Genoa, the first Soviet proposal for general disarmament was made, and after its rejection, the USSR invited its western neighbors, the Baltic countries, Poland and Finland, to hold a conference in Moscow to discuss issues of army reduction, but it only ended in a non-aggression pact. This conference had important propaganda significance, as did the meeting of the League of Nations during the IV session in November 27, when the USSR put forward a program of general and complete disarmament, which was met with refusal.
As for the international recognition of the USSR, after the agreement with Germany the process went quickly to 24 - Great Britain (mutual financial claims were postponed indefinitely), Italy, Norway, Sweden, Mexico, China. 1924 came as a year of widespread diplomatic recognition. In 25, relations were established with 12 more countries - one could talk about a breakthrough in international isolation, and most of the countries were actively seeking close cooperation with Russia. Only the United States formally rejected Soviet proposals to normalize relations.
During this time, the SSR participated in 3 conflicts. The first happened with England regarding anti-English propaganda and the execution of an English spy (1920), which took place in the spring of 23, ended diplomatically. The next aggravation occurred in 27 and also with England. The gap continued until 29. And at the end of the decade there was a conflict on the CER with China, which led to a rupture in 29 (August 20) of diplomatic relations.
Summarizing the results of Soviet foreign policy in the 20s. we get:
The USSR successfully broke through global isolation and established beneficial cooperation;
close cooperation was established with Germany;
the tasks of achieving world revolution were failed.
One of the main reasons for industrialization must be called the lag behind European states, and everything connected with this (military and economic power).
The course for economic development was expressed in the following tasks;
reconstruction of heavy industry and military production;
USSR in the 20-30s.A guide to preparing for the Unified State Exam in History
The topics discussed correspond to the Unified State Exam codifier in history 2010.
Author: Bocharov A.Yu., teacher of history and social studies, Municipal Educational Institution “Novichikhinskaya Secondary School” p. Novichikha, Altai Territory
NEP (New Economic Policy) Historical necessity of NEP
The change in policy was forced by the comprehensiveeconomic and political crisis, threat of loss of power. To that
over time, industrial production in the country decreased by
compared to 1913 by 7 times, agricultural production amounted to
only 2/3 of the pre-war level. People's discontent is growing, most
a clear expression of which was the peasant uprisings (especially
"rebellions" in the Tambov province and Western Siberia) and the uprising
sailors in Kronstadt.
In March 1921, at the X Party Congress, a decision was made to replace
surplus appropriation tax in kind. Now the state was taking away
peasants not all the grain, but a certain, firmly established share.
The peasant could dispose of the remaining products in his own way.
discretion, which naturally revived labor incentives.
Later, free trade was also explicitly allowed.
The essence of the NEP
Two points of view on the essence of NEP:NEP is a fundamental policy change,
long-term course based on
realism, at a compromise with the private
sector.
NEP - forced retreat
preserving the foundations of the regime and, above all,
the Communist Party's monopoly on power. This
understanding of NEP is closer to the truth.
Main directions and results of the NEP
Partial privatization of industry. The strongest wereposition of the “private sector” in trade in 1923 it accounted for
80% retail trade. To attract foreign
capital investments, went towards the commissioning of some enterprises (formerly
total in the extraction of raw materials) to foreign capitalists (“concessions”).
Currency reform was important. The situation is changing
state enterprises: they are transferred to self-sufficiency.
Under the NEP, a kind of “mixed” economy emerged, an economy in
in the hands of the state was combined with the assumption of commodity-money
relations and the "private trader".
The result of the NEP is economic recovery. Pacification of the country
ending mass uprisings accompanied by terror with
both sides.
Measures to revive basic legality: being restored
prosecutorial supervision, advocacy, a new civil law is accepted
code.
Contradictions of the NEP and its significance
The most important contradiction in the economy - the Bolshevik regime, having made concessions to the “private owner”, continueddictatorship over the economy, subordinating it to ideological priorities.
The bureaucratic system of industrial management was maintained. All leadership positions were occupied by
communists who did not have the necessary competence. Required significant expenses
the maintenance of this numerous administrative apparatus.
The regime artificially maintained a relatively high level of
wages that do not correspond to real labor productivity - increased costs
products. Private entrepreneurs and traders have not acquired the necessary social and legal
guarantees. Overcoming devastation and the economic revival of the countryside led to the stratification of the peasantry.
Large peasant farms were more efficient and marketable.
In an effort to avoid the exorbitant tax pressure, strong farms were split up, artificially
turning into "poor people". In the 20s the rate of fragmentation of peasant farms was 2 times higher than before
revolution, which became one of the most important reasons for the decline in agricultural marketability.
He allowed us to save the country from complete disaster, feed it, and overcome the devastation. But new ones accumulated
contradictions, which became an important prerequisite for policy changes in the late 20s.
Education of the USSR. National question
The national issue was of great importance for the country, because Russia is one ofmost multinational states.
After the October Revolution - two main directions in the national
politics. On the one hand, the “principle of self-determination” is put forward. This
was necessary for the conquest and retention of power, for the acquisition
support among the broad masses. Moreover, it was a recognition of the real
state of affairs, the actual collapse of the former state territory
(a number of peoples could not be kept from leaving anyway).
November 2, 1917 - “Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia.” Her point 2: “The right
peoples of Russia to free self-determination up to secession and
formation of independent states." In accordance with this, in December
The independence of Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia was recognized.
On the other hand, the Bolsheviks are “exporting revolution”, under
under the pretext of “help” they strive to establish their power in the outskirts. This
concerned, first of all, Ukraine. In January 1918 an attempt was made
"export of revolution" and to Finland. The Bolshevik regime is here
held out until May and was suppressed by German troops.
Education of the USSR. Nation-state building by the beginning of the 20s.
By the end of the civil war, there was a whole system of national states of two types:autonomy within the RSFSR. The first of them is the Tatar-Bashkir Republic - since March
1918 In addition, various forms of autonomy were granted to the Kyrgyz,
Mari, Dagestanis, Buryats, Mongols, Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars, Germans
Volga region, etc.
sovereign Soviet republics. In addition to the RSFSR: proclaimed in December 1917
Ukrainian Soviet Republic, in January 1919 - Belarusian. In 1920 - early 1921
gg. with the help of Soviet troops, “exporting revolution” to Transcaucasia. Education of new
Soviet republics: April 1920 – Azerbaijan, November – Armenia, February 1921 –
Georgia. In March 1922 they were united into the Transcaucasian Federation (TSFSR). So 4
"independent" republics. In addition, in 1920, with the help of Soviet troops, they
"people's republics" were created in Central Asia (Turkestan) Khiva and Bukhara,
which were actually under Russian protectorate.
The independence of all these states is very relative. Firstly, the overwhelming
superiority of the RSFSR. Secondly, the concentration of power in the party leadership.
A “military-political” union of republics was formed - in fact, a common military
command, unified socio-economic policy.
After the end of the civil war - the establishment of a system of bilateral treaties
between the republics (“contractual federation”), which significantly limited
independence of the republics. For example, the agreement between the RSFSR and Azerbaijan in
November 1920 provided for the unification of six industries: defense, economics,
foreign trade, food, transport, post telegraph, finance.
Education of the USSR. The struggle of opinions on the ways of forming a state
The party has outlined two approaches to this problem. On the one hand, there wasthe revival of imperial traditions, the dictate of the center over the outskirts. Lenin called it
"Great Russian chauvinism" and considered it the main danger in the national
question.
On the other hand, the communist elite sought to preserve greater
independence, opposed closer relations, fearing dictatorship
Moscow. This trend was called “national deviationism” and was especially evident in
Ukraine and Georgia.
The intensification of the struggle between the two movements became especially pronounced in 1922 in
called the "Georgian incident". This showed that postponing drastic
a solution to the national question was impossible. In August 1922, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (b)
formed a commission headed by Stalin to prepare a draft of the principles of the new
systems of relations between nationalities in Russia. Stalin was decisive
supporter of a centralized state.
Having learned about the “autonomization plan,” Lenin resolutely opposed it in his work “On the Question
about nationalities or “autonomization”. Stalin's version - poorly hidden
expression of "Great Russian chauvinism". Lenin proposed a project according to which
all republics, including Russia, were supposed to enter into a “union” among themselves
based on the principle of equality and federation. With great difficulty Lenin, in essence,
forced the Politburo to reject Stalin's idea.
Education of the USSR. Its characteristics as a multinational state
On January 31, 1924, the Second Congress of Soviets approved the Constitution of the USSR.Basic moments:
The republics were proclaimed equal, sovereign, with the right to secede.
They transferred the most important powers to the allied bodies: international representation,
defense, border revision, internal security, foreign trade, planning, transport,
budget, communication, money and credit.
Allied bodies:
The highest body is the Congress of Soviets, elected on the basis of indirect, non-universal, disproportionate
voting rights. It met once every two years.
Between congresses - Central Election Commission. It consisted of two chambers - the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities. Was going to three
once a year.
Between sessions of the Central Election Commission its Presidium. The post of its chairman was held in turn by the chairmen of the Central Election Commission
four republics (Kalinin, Petrovsky, Chervyakov, Narimanov). The highest administrative body –
SNK. The Council of People's Commissars has a number of the most important allied people's commissariats and departments, incl. OGPU.
Experience has shown: the solution found to the national question was not the best of all possible
decisions. On the one hand, the “union” structure of the state was largely a fiction, on the other
On the other hand, the division of the country along national lines inevitably gave rise to the danger of separatism
(desire for separation from a single state). The implementation of Lenin's project laid a mine
delayed action" under the created multinational state. While it existed
a totalitarian regime, it held back interethnic contradictions with an “iron hand.” After that
falls, they manifested themselves, as we see now, with all their severity.
10. Industrialization of the USSR. Historical pattern of industrialization
Was industrialization necessary? At the end of the 20s. Vthe leadership circles of the USSR kept approving the idea
forced (accelerated) industrialization, which
would allow the USSR to “catch up and overtake11 developed
Western countries. The novelty was that there was
the task of industrialization in the shortest possible time has been set
and "at any cost". Industrialization was justified
factor of external danger, threat from
"world imperialism", the need to create
powerful defense potential. Hostility
capitalist countries to the Soviet Union was
reaction to the Bolshevik policy of "export
revolution." A direct threat arises only with
establishment of the Hitler regime in Germany (1933)
11. Main stages of industrialization. First Five Year Plan
It begins with the XIV Congress ("Congress of Industrialization") in 1925. The decisive stage of this process is the pre-war yearsfive-year plans and, above all, the first of them (1928 - 1933). The implementation of the first five-year plan began back in 1928,
although her plan was adopted only in April 1929 at the XVI Party Conference.
The main feature of the first five-year plan was the accelerated construction of heavy industrial enterprises. The most
famous of them were the DneproGES, the Magnitogorsk metallurgical plants in the Urals and Kuznetsk in Western
Siberia; Stalingrad, Chelyabinsk and Kharkov tractor plants, automobile plants in Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod.
Feat of the people. Carrying out accelerated industrialization, the country's leadership relied on the mass enthusiasm of the people,
especially young people. The Stalinist leadership shamelessly exploited this enthusiasm, mercilessly
wasted the people's strength. In order to obtain the currency necessary to pay for foreign equipment, from
countries exported grain, timber, oil, furs, and art treasures from museums. For individuals using the GPU and the network
gold was confiscated from special stores. An important role in the implementation of plans for accelerated industrialization
played by a system of forced, essentially slave labor, which is being formalized on a large scale precisely at this time
period. "Dekulakization" and other repressions provided a large amount of cheap labor."
By the end of the five-year plan, the planned targets even in the field of heavy industry, to which fixed assets were allocated,
were not fulfilled. The production of capital goods increased by 170% instead of the planned 230%, it was
not 17 million tons of iron and steel were smelted, but only 6 million tons, electricity generation amounted to 1–3.5 billion square meters. h instead of 42
billion
Investments in industry amounted to 3 billion rubles. Product quality has deteriorated sharply. In the economy of the USSR
Serious problems arose for years to come, which determined the features of the country's development.
Forced industrial growth was accompanied by further nationalization of the economy, the elimination of various
forms of private economic activity. Collectivization was carried out through exorbitant taxes and various
persecution, private industry and trade were forced out of the economy, many "nepmen" were
arrested.
12. Industrialization of the USSR. Second Five-Year Plan, 1933–1937
The new five-year plan began in an environment of socio-economic crisis, the failure of adventuristicplans, exacerbation of all contradictions. The efficiency of enterprises is very low due to economic
imbalances, low discipline and poor training of management and workers - for the most part
recent peasants. The situation was also difficult in the famine-stricken village; collective and state farms
were on the verge of collapse.
Stalin was forced to retreat to more sober positions. A slowdown was announced
heavy industry and the intention to accelerate the development of industry in the near future,
producing consumer goods. Greater attention began to be paid to improving living standards, in
in particular, in 1935 the card system was abolished.
Some improvement in the situation of the people made it possible to increase their labor activity to some extent. This
manifested itself in the development of the “Stakhanov movement.” In various sectors of the economy there have appeared
followers of A. Stakhanov: metallurgist M. Mazai, machinist P. Krivonos, blacksmith A. Busygin, milling machine operator
I. Gudov, weavers Evdokia and Maria Vinogradov and thousands of others. The records of the "Stakhanovites" could not
compensate for such typical phenomena for our economy as the lack of material
interest among the majority of workers, low discipline, poor organization of work.
By encouraging the “Stakhanov movement,” the authorities sought to expand the social support of the regime and create a layer
privileged workers. The “Stakhanovites” turned into a peculiar caste, sharply differing in
their standard of living from ordinary workers: they received very high salaries, good apartments,
sometimes cars. However, soon the period of concessions to realism and softening of policy ended. In
second half of the 30s. The "Great Terror" begins.
13. Industrialization of the USSR. Results
In terms of absolute volumes of industrial production of the USSR at the end of the 30s. reached 2nd place in the world after the USA (5th place in 1913). In the 30sgg. The USSR became one of three or four countries capable of producing
any type of industrial product. Entire new industries have emerged
– production of cars, tractors, airplanes, etc.
The significance of all these achievements is devalued by the following: high
industrial growth rates were obtained at excessively high cost
at a price, due to the merciless exploitation of all the country’s resources; V
the country has never managed to form a modern economic
structure. Successes mainly in heavy industry: first
all military. All other industries have just begun the transition to
machine production. Social consequences of industrialization
- elimination of “non-socialist structures”. Meant complete
the establishment of a nationalization system in our country, the first steps towards
which were made after October 1917. Stalin called all these
transformation by the “second revolution” (after the “Great October”) or
"revolution from above".
14. Collectivization. Historical background
The first attempts to collectivize peasants - during the civil war, whenCollective and state farms began to be established in every possible way in the villages. In 1922, along with
other works that made up Lenin’s “testament”, his article also appeared
"On Cooperation", which set the task of gradual and voluntary
bringing peasants to collective farms through cooperation. It is believed that
subsequent policy in the village was the embodiment of "Lenin's
cooperative plan."
At the XV Party Congress (December 1927), the task of collectivization was set in
as the party's main task in the countryside. The further course of events was
largely determined by the “grain procurement crisis” in the late 20s.
Industrialization required more and more funds that could be
obtained through the export of bread. But the peasants did not want to surrender it for
a pittance, grain procurement plans were disrupted. 1928–1929 passed in
in an environment of “squeezing out” bread through various repressions. Conclusion -
accelerated unification of peasants into collective farms.
The sharp turn towards emergency measures has raised concerns among some,
more realistically thinking party leaders (N. Bukharin, A. Rykov,
M. Tomsky). Elimination of the last "doubters" from the party
leadership allowed Stalin and his supporters to move freely
to the implementation of forced collectivization.
15. Collectivization. "The Great Break"
In November 1929, at the Plenum of the Party Central Committee, it was concluded that, in the moodthe main masses of the peasantry, a “great turning point” is taking place towards
collective farms. The plenum created a special commission of the Politburo, which
developed a specific plan for collectivization.
On January 5, 1930, a resolution was adopted by the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, proclaiming
“complete collectivization” and “liquidation of the kulaks as a class.”
The main means of forcing peasants to unite into collective farms is the threat
"dekulakization". The secret resolution of the Party Central Committee provided for
"dekulakization" of up to 5% of peasant households.
In March 1930, Stalin, in his article “Dizziness from Success,” condemned
words "perversion". But the pressure on the peasants continued towards the end of the first
five-year plan (1932) on collective farms - more than 60% of peasant farms. Important
The famine of 193233 played a role in the final victory of the regime over the peasantry. It was caused by the policy of the state, which confiscated all the grain from the village.
In 1933-34 to restore “order” in the village, emergency measures were in effect
bodies - political departments of MTS and state farms (they combined the functions
party leadership and state security). With the help of repression they
managed to at least partially overcome the chaos.
16. Collectivization. Results and consequences
Collectivization dealt a severe blow to agricultural production. Gross productiongrain decreased in 1932 to 69.9 million tons against 78.3 million in 1928. The number of horses decreased from
36 million to 20, cows - from 68 to 30. But the regime received unlimited opportunities to siphon funds
from the village for the needs of industrialization.
Collectivization is the most important stage in the establishment of a totalitarian system. Deprived of the means of production,
Completely dependent on the local “bosses,” the peasants turned into state serfs.
This was legalized by the introduction of passports in 1932: the rural population does not receive them and could not without
"special permission" to leave their place of residence.
The poor (“poor”, “farmers”): they got something from the “kulak” property, they were primarily
were accepted into the party (and this opened up access to power), tractor drivers and
combine operators. In (1933–1937) there was some stabilization, an increase in production and
improving the situation of peasants. Stalin allowed collective farmers to run their own small farms
called a personal assistant. Shock workers and Stakhanovites also appear in the village, among them
The tractor driver Pasha Angelina became the most famous.
In a significant part of the collective farms, mismanagement and poor discipline reigned. Peasants often
They actually worked for free (for “sticks”). Despite harsh measures (like the 1932 law on
protection of “public property”), theft of collective farm property flourished. It was all doomed
our agriculture is chronically lagging behind.
The largest tragic event in our history, collectivization has become an important topic in Russian
literature. At one time, one of the most popular books was M. Sholokhov’s novel “Raised
virgin soil."
17. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 20s.
The “two-story” nature of the Bolshevik foreignpoliticians:
on the one hand, various peace-loving
on the other hand, the policy of "exporting revolution"
by supporting all "revolutionary
movements", and, if possible, direct
military intervention.
In turn, this line is to some extent
coincided with traditional directions
Russian foreign policy.
18. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 20s. The Genoa Conference and the “streak of recognition”
Leading countries refrained from establishing diplomatic relations withSoviets, demanding payment of pre-revolutionary debts and compensation for losses from
nationalization of property of foreign states and citizens. Governments
European countries decided to convene an international economic conference and
invite Soviet Russia to it.
The conference was held in Genoa in 1922. At the conference, the parties failed to achieve
agreements. However, during its work, a Soviet-German agreement was signed on
renunciation of mutual claims and establishment of diplomatic relations. Germany
became the first major power to recognize Soviet Russia.
In subsequent years, the "Rapallo policy" - close ties between Soviet Russia and
Germany has become an important factor in international relations. Parties
carried out secret military cooperation (on Soviet territory
German pilots and tank crews were trained).
1924 became the year of diplomatic recognition of the USSR. Relationships were established with
England, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Greece, Mexico, France, China,
in 1925 - with Japan. The term “streak of recognition” appeared in Soviet propaganda.
Just in the mid-20s. The USSR maintained official relations with more than 20
countries of the world. Of the leading countries, only the USA refused to recognize the USSR (until 1933)
19. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 20s. Conflicts of the USSR with other countries
The policy of “exporting revolution” caused natural oppositionother countries.
The first major conflict - in 1923 was caused by a memorandum
English Foreign Minister. to the Soviet government:
demand to end Soviet intervention in Iran and
Afghanistan, persecution of the church in the USSR, liberate the English
trawlers detained in our waters. We had deployed
the strongest propaganda campaign against the "intrigues
imperialism", but in the end the USSR made concessions on almost all
points.
Second conflict in 1926–27 Protests in England against the Soviet
interference in the strike. In May 1927, England tore
diplomatic relations with the USSR. This became the reason for an unprecedented
propaganda campaign in the USSR about the threat of war.
In 1927, Chiang Kai-shek broke his alliance with the communists, resulting in
He also quarreled with the USSR. At the end of 1929 it came to war
conflict with China over the CER.
20. Culture of the USSR in the 20-30s. General characteristics of cultural construction
Three different periods of cultural construction:After the revolution, during the civil war - as well as during
applied to all other areas of life; military methods
communism (including mobilization of specialists, etc.).
The task was to quickly overcome illiteracy,
Why were emergency methods of “educational education” used?
(up to the arrest of those who did not want to study).
NEP: rejection of emergency methods, defined
pluralism in cultural policy. At the same time at the beginning
NEP "crisis of culture" - the removal of many institutions from
budgets and their closure.
Since the late 20s. in many ways a return to emergency
methods.
21. Culture of the USSR in the 20-30s. Education and science
In 1934, a decision was made to resume teaching history, which was canceled after the revolution. A whole one is being preparedseries of history textbooks. Great attention is paid to adult education. A public organization is being created
“Down with illiteracy”, its funds support thousands of literacy centers (educational education centers).
In 1919, “workers’ faculties” were created in universities to prepare illiterate youth for higher education.
The teaching of social sciences in universities is being reformed and is being concentrated in the hands of party members. "Purges"
teachers and students: expulsion of “socially alien” and “hostile” elements.
Universal primary education was introduced. Illiteracy among the adult population was largely eliminated. In 1926
43% of those aged 9–49 were illiterate. In 1939, the proportion of literate people exceeded 80%.
In the field of specialist training in the early 30s. – Assault methods are spreading. Many universities are turning into
“technical colleges” where narrow “specialists” were trained in a matter of years. Universities were liquidated for several years. System
“promotion”: workers and peasants loyal to the regime without education are placed in various positions and only
then they receive some training. A striking example is the biography of Khrushchev.
Suppression of dissent. In 1919, the greatest historian, Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich, was shot; in 1921, together
with the poet Gumilev - prominent lawyer V. Tagantsev. In 1922 - the expulsion of the intellectual elite (philosophers Berdyaev,
Lossky, historian Karsavin, sociologist Sorokin - about 200 people in total). Since the late 20s. - a series of trials
engineering and technical intelligentsia: “the Shakhty affair”, “the academic affair” (most Russians were arrested
historians), the trial of the "Industrial Party" (among those convicted was the famous inventor Ramzin). The intelligentsia is broken.
To strengthen the economic and military power of the country, some areas of science that have
practical significance. For the first time in Russia, a research institute has been created to study atomic problems
under the leadership of Academician Ioffe. By 1937, the country had 867 research institutes with 37,600 researchers.
In the 20-30s, a number of major achievements: Lebedev - production of synthetic rubber. Through the works of Tsiolkovsky, Zander,
Kondratyuk created the prerequisites for the creation of rocket and space technology. Work continues successfully
a classic of physiology by academician Pavlov and the famous breeder Michurin. Naturally, the main research and development forces are concentrating on strengthening military power. The best examples in the world were designed
military equipment, in particular, the T-34 tank and the Katyusha rocket launcher.
22. Culture of the USSR in the 20-30s. Artistic life
There were many different movements and groups. Extremistcurrent - for a complete break with the “old culture”. For example, an organization
Proletkult: "throw Pushkin off the ship of modernity." Among
writers' organizations - RAPP: persecuted "bourgeois" writers,
advocated purely “proletarian literature.”
Resolution of the Party Central Committee on policy in the field of fiction in
1925 “Class alien” cultural creators are under suspicion. OGPU already in the 20s
gg. closely monitored Mikhail Bulgakov. At the end of the 20s. appear
the first chapters of Sholokhov's epic "Quiet Don" and this author is exposed
attacks for “praising the White Guard.” The fate of Mayakovsky: he was
the most ardent supporter of the revolution and Bolshevism. His suicide
reflected the poet's disappointment, his despair at the sight of the growing dominance
bureaucrats and careerists.
From the late 20s and especially in the 30s. – policy of “cultural unification”, suppression
all diversity and dissent. In 1934, the Union of Soviet
writers - an organization that gave its members great privileges."
23. Social and political life in the 30s. Formation of the Stalinist regime. Main trends, increasing repression
In the 30s – strengthening of repressive bureaucratic orders and personal powerStalin. Submission of peasants to the state, repressions against the intelligentsia
and other groups of society strengthened the atmosphere of fear and submission in the country. U
cadres of the administrative apparatus have strengthened the habit of violent
leadership methods
The existence of dissatisfaction with Stalin's policies was revealed at the XVII Congress
party at the beginning of 1934. During the elections to the central bodies
party, Stalin’s name was crossed out in a number of ballots. Even weak
the shadow of the opposition alarmed Stalin and prompted him to intensify preparations for
the destruction of all dissatisfied and "dubious"
On December 1, 1934, Kirov, a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, secretary, was killed
Leningrad Regional Committee - used by Stalin to intensify repression. IN
"Trotskyists" were accused of murder. (Zinoviev and Kamenev), they
"confessed" to preparing the murder of Stalin and were sentenced to death.
On December 5, 1936, the new Constitution of the USSR was approved. The Soviet Union was
proclaimed a socialist state of workers and peasants. His
the Soviets were declared the political basis, the social
own. The Constitution spoke of broad democratic rights
citizens - freedom of the press, speech, meetings, demonstrations, etc.
24. Social and political life in the 30s. Formation of the Stalinist regime. "Great Terror"
Repression reached its peak in 1937–1938. By this time, Stalin had matured the idea of a general purgeleading cadres, "personnel revolution". The executor of the idea is the head of the NKVD N. Yezhov (period of terror
called "Yezhovshchina").
In February–March 1937 – plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. Stalin's thesis about the continuous "exacerbation of the class struggle in
as we move towards socialism." He argued that the entire country, the party, including the leading cadres
crowded with disguised “enemies”, the need for mass repression was justified.
N. Bukharin and A. Rykov were expelled from the party and arrested. People's Commissar of Heavy Commitment committed suicide
Ordzhonikidze industry (possibly as a sign of protest against repression). In June 1937 there were
Prominent military leaders of the Red Army led by M. Tukhachevsky, whom
accused of preparing a “conspiracy” against Stalin. The wave of repression grew, capturing party,
economic, military personnel, as well as ordinary people. The prisons were overcrowded. NKVD officially
received permission to torture. Mass terror began to decline only at the end of 1938.
Responsibility for the “excesses” was assigned by Stalin to N. Yezhov, who was removed from his post, and
later arrested and shot. Beria became the new head of the NKVD, under which, to calm the people
some of the repressed were even released.
In historical literature one can find at least three points of view on the causes and essence
"Great Terror":
it made no sense and was generated by Stalin's morbid suspicion
these were repressions against “real Leninists”, opponents of Stalinism
it was a fight against the real enemies of Soviet power
25. Social and political life in the 30s. Formation of the Stalinist regime. The essence of the Stalinist regime
Communists believe that it was socialism, their opponents talk about totalitarianism.The following approach is possible: the main feature of this system is maximum dominance
state over the entire society. The basis of the system is the nationalization of the economy, -
concentration of all resources in the hands of the state, which in turn was
under the control of the party leadership. Inextricably linked with this is the formation
repressive bureaucratic order. Stalin's personal power was the most
in a concentrated expression: this political regime.
The system was based on a certain social structure. Main
the privileged layer of Soviet society was numerous and quickly
growing "nomenklatura" (leading party, state, economic,
military personnel, the top intelligentsia).
To strengthen its social base, the regime also sought to form
privileged strata of the working people, a kind of "labor aristocracy", formerly
only from among the "Stakhanovites". The basis of this pyramid was made up of those who did not have
no privileges for the masses of workers and collective farmers, and even lower - prisoners.
As a result of Stalin's modernization, millions of people became literate, some
the poorest received some benefits. For some, this is a time of enthusiasm,
great successes of the country. For others - a time of disaster, half-starvation
existence, camps.
26. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 30s.
In the 30s three main stages of foreign policy:until 1933 – good relations with Germany, but
instability of relations with
"democratic" countries
1933-1939: rapprochement between the USSR and England, France
and USA against Germany and Japan
1939-June 1941: rapprochement with Germany and
Japan.
27. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 30s. Relations with Western countries before 1933
The main problems are in the Far East. The best relationship– with Germany: continuation of the Rapallo policy, incl. help
Germany in reviving its military capabilities, including training
its pilots and tank crews in the USSR (on this occasion a publication has now been published
special collection of documents "The fascist sword was forged in the USSR").
Big trade: in 1931, the USSR received a loan of 300 from Germany
million marks to finance it. The share of Soviet imports
Germany reached almost 50%, 43% of German machinery exports
accounted for the USSR.
England: in 1929: restoration of diplomatic relations,
broken in 1927 1933: – new conflict due to arrest in the USSR
English specialists. France: early 30s sharp deterioration
relations due to the USSR's support of the French communists. After
reducing this support - improving relations and in 1932
a non-aggression pact was concluded. USA: the only great one
a power that did not recognize the USSR because of the problem of tsarist debts.
However, the big trade is the purchase of machine tools for industrialization. IN
early 30s – a sharp deterioration in relations: the United States accused the USSR of
interference in their internal affairs and took measures against our
exports, the USSR reduced its imports by 8 times.
28. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 30s. Politics in the Far East
1929 – conflict over the Chinese Eastern Railway, military operations between the USSR and China.1931 – the beginning of Japanese aggression in China, its seizure of Manchuria.
The emergence of a hotbed of war in the Far East and military
bridgehead on the border of the USSR. Deterioration of relations with Japan and
improvement with China. Diplomatic relations have been restored with China
relationship.
1937: Japan started a war to conquer all of China. As a result, immediately
a non-aggression treaty was concluded between the USSR and China, he
Great military assistance was provided. Aid has dropped sharply
after the Soviet-German non-aggression pact (August 23, 1939) and
completely ceased after the Soviet-Japanese treaty (13
April 1941).
At the end of the 30s. - worsening relations with Japan. July–August 1938
- fighting on the Soviet-Manchurian border near Lake Khasan. August 1939 –
major military operations on the Manchurian-Mongolian border in
as a result of the Japanese invasion.
29. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 30s. Relations with Western countries after 1933
At the end of 1933, the Comintern, which served as the conductor of Soviet policy, called fascist Germanythe main warmonger in Europe. In 1935, the VII Congress of the Comintern: fascism is the main danger and
orientation of the communists towards the creation of an anti-fascist popular front (with the participation of representatives
bourgeoisie).
Since 1933 - the rapprochement of the USSR with democratic countries to confront Japan and Germany, -
support for the idea of collective security in Europe and the Far East. In 1933 - establishment
diplomatic relations with the USA. 1934 – admission of the USSR to the League of Nations. 1935: Soviet-French
and the Soviet-Czechoslovak treaty on mutual assistance.
The West began to pursue a policy of “appeasement” towards Germany, hoping to improve
relations with her and direct her against the USSR.
1935: Italian attack on Ethiopia, introduction of universal conscription in Germany and introduction
German troops into the demilitarized Rhineland. The West refused to support the Soviets
proposals for collective measures to suppress these actions. 1936–39: Civil War in
Spain and the intervention here of Germany and Italy. USSR assistance to the Republicans and at the same time
the desire to bring the country under control, to establish a communist regime. The NKVD has already begun
crack down on the opposition in Spain (this topic is touched upon in Hemingway’s famous novel “For Whom
the bell is ringing," which is why we didn’t publish it for a long time.) The West announced a policy of “non-interference.”
By the end of the 30s. fundamental changes are ripe in the international situation, in the priorities of the Soviet
foreign policy.
30. Concepts
In-kind tax is a food tax in kind levied onpeasant farms, introduced by decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of March 21, 1921
year in return for surplus appropriation.
The tax in kind was levied “in the form of a percentage or fractional deduction from
products produced on the farm, based on the harvest, number
eaters on the farm and the presence of livestock on it.” Tax in kind was established
as a progressive tax, with increasing severity of taxation for
kulak part of the village. Farms of the poorest peasants
were exempt from tax in kind.
The tax in kind was abolished along with the existing household money tax, general civil tax, labor tax and other local taxes.
taxes in connection with the strengthening of the monetary system and the introduction
unified agricultural tax on May 10, 1923 according to
decision of the XII Congress of the RCP(b) on tax policy in the countryside in order
to “decisively put an end to the plurality of taxation” and to
so that the peasant could know in advance and firmly the amount
direct tax due from him and deal only with
one collector of this tax."
31. Concepts
Concession - implies that the grantor(the state) transfers to the concessionaire the right to
exploitation of natural resources, objects
infrastructure, enterprises, equipment.
Persons: L. B. Kamenev, G. E. Zinoviev, A. I. Rykov, N. I. Bukharin. S. M. Kirov, K. B. Radek, M. N. Tukhachevsky, V. K. Blucher.
Dates:
1921 - X Party Congress, resolution “On Party Unity”,
1921 - the beginning of the NEP,
1925 - XVI Party Congress,
1929 - the year of the “great turning point”, the beginning of collectivization and industrialization,
1932-1933 - famine, 1934 - XVII Party Congress (“Congress of Winners”),
1933 - recognition of the USSR by the USA,
1934 - inclusion of the USSR in the League of Nations,
1936 - Constitution of the USSR, 1938 - clash With Japan near Lake Khasan,
May 1939 - clash with Japan at the Khalkhin Gol River.
The struggle for power after the death of V.I. Lenin. Education of the USSR. New economic policy. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 1920s. Collectivization. Hunger. Industrialization. Constitution of 1936. The policy of great terror. Foreign policy in the 1930s.
After the end of the Civil War (1921) and the death of V.I. Lenin (January 21, 1924 d) a fierce struggle for power began among the party elite. Already in March 1921 at X Congress the party adopted a resolution “On the unity of the party”, in accordance with which it was forbidden to form groups within party factions. The decision of the Central Committee was considered decisive. During the continuous confrontation, Stalin, with the active assistance G. E. Zinovieva And L. B. Kameneva, managed to deprive the main opponent of L. D. Trotsky of all levers of power (in 1926 Trotsky was expelled from the Politburo). The same fate soon befell Zinoviev and Kamenev, whom Stalin, now with the support of N. I. Bukharin and A. I. Rykov (1926 g.) also removed from the Politburo. IN 1929 g. was expelled from the country and then killed on the orders of I.V. Stalin L. D. Trotsky. Thus, Stalin eliminated his main rivals in the struggle for sole power. This made it possible to create a vertical scheme of appointments to all significant posts.
In subsequent years, Stalin continued to strengthen his personal power, who purposefully continued the policy of destroying his possible competitors and those who could represent at least some kind of opposition. XVII congress VKP (b), held in 1934 g., actually put an end to the struggle for political power in the country. Any alternative to the regime of personal power of J.V. Stalin was abolished. The functions of the Politburo, which previously could influence the course of political life, were reduced to nothing.
After the collapse of the Russian Empire, a mass of state or semi-state entities were formed on its territory. To reunify the territory, it was decided to create a special commission that considered various options for unification. As a result, the final word went to Lenin, who proposed the principle of unification with Russia while maintaining his representation in the highest bodies of power. Signed December 29, 1922 Union Treaty became the basis for subsequent unification. By 1924, the process of creating a new state entity, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, was completed.
At the same time (January 31, 1924) The Constitution of the USSR was adopted, which specifically stipulated the possibility of each republic to secede from the Union, and enshrined the principle of indivisibility of the territories of the republics. The main institutions of power and their functions were also outlined: two chambers of the Central Executive Committee, 10 people's commissariats, the OGPU, the State Planning Committee and others. Due to the deteriorating economic situation in the country in 1921 The state was forced to make some concessions in the economic sphere. New economic policy(NEP) was intended to revive the country's economy, which by this time was threatened by mass famine.
Specific measures to introduce the new economic policy were as follows:
1) to replace the surplus appropriation system, which caused mass discontent and sabotage among the peasants, a tax in kind was introduced, which meant for the peasants the opportunity to sell the products remaining after paying the tax,
2) convertible currency was introduced and monetary reform was carried out,
3) some industrial enterprises ended up in private hands. At the same time, numerous trade unions began to form, which managed to defend their interests; at least their role increased significantly compared to the previous period.
These measures led at the first stage to rapid growth of the country's economy, but state policy continued to be based on the principle of command-administrative management methods, including in the economic sphere. As a result, an acute shortage of both food and industrial goods arose, in connection with which food cards were introduced, then the state actually returned to its previous policy of confiscating food from the peasants. 1929 The year is considered the final end of the NEP and the beginning of mass collectivization.
The implementation of the new economic policy led to some improvement in the standard of living, both in the city and in the countryside. The working day at industrial enterprises became fixed, workers received some social guarantees (sick leave, etc.). The food situation in the village has improved significantly, which is confirmed by statistics from those years. However, both in the village and in the city there continued to be an acute shortage of jobs; in the city, the majority of the population did not have their own housing and lived in communal apartments or barracks.
(There is a debate in historiography: was the NEP a temporary retreat of Soviet power, or was it really, in the words of V.I. Lenin, introduced “seriously and for a long time.” Domestic researcher of economic history V. May believes that the intermediate nature of the reforms carried out within the framework of the NEP made a command-administrative reaction to them inevitable.)
Foreign policy.
In 1920-1921 Despite the problems of external debts and the refusal of the Soviet government to repay them, as well as the support of communist parties in a number of Western European countries, the process of recognition of Soviet Russia began. The first on this path were the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), as well as Finland and Poland.
The Genoa Conference (spring 1921), led by G.V. Chicherin, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR, was unable to resolve all the problems associated with the external debt of Tsarist Russia, which the new government once again refused to recognize. Claims for the return of nationalized property to the former owners were also rejected. Thus, Soviet Russia, in conditions of virtually complete isolation, was forced to enter into an agreement with Germany, which was concluded in Rapallo April 16, 1922 d. Under this agreement, diplomatic relations were resumed and both parties renounced mutual claims against each other, i.e. Soviet Russia refused the reparations that Germany had to pay after the end of the First World War, and Germany did not claim on the nationalized property of its citizens on the territory of the former Russian Empire.
The next conference in The Hague (summer 1922) was also intended to resolve issues related to debts and nationalized property. Some concessions offered by the Soviet delegation were insufficient, and again no real progress was made on this issue. Participation of Soviet Russia in a number of other conferences (Moscow, Lausanne) was of a purely formal nature: all proposals made (on disarmament, on the status of the Black Sea straits, etc.) were rejected, i.e., the opinion of the Soviet delegation was not taken into account.
However, in 1924, the USSR was recognized by a number of states, which was associated with the advent of new governments in these countries, more focused on contacts with Soviet Russia. Diplomatic relations were established with Great Britain, Austria, Denmark, Italy, Norway, and France. However, already in 1927, diplomatic relations with England were severed, as the Conservatives came to power to replace the Laborites. At the same time, diplomatic relations are established with its eastern neighbors: Japan (Under the terms of the agreement, Japan could defend its commercial interests on the territory of the USSR, and for this it would withdraw its troops from Northern Sakhalin).
Collectivization (1928-1935).
In fact, collectivization (i.e., the unification of all private peasant farms into collective and state farms) began in 1929 when, to solve the problem of acute food shortages (peasants refused to sell products, primarily grain, at prices dictated by the state), taxes on private owners were increased and the government proclaimed a policy of preferential taxation for newly created collective farms. Thus, collectivization meant the curtailment of the New Economic Policy.
Collectivization was based on the idea of destroying the wealthy class of peasants, the kulaks, who, since 1929, found themselves in a virtually hopeless situation: they were not accepted into collective farms and they could not sell their property and go to the city. The very next year, a program was adopted according to which all the property of the kulaks was confiscated, and the kulaks themselves were subject to mass eviction. In parallel, there was a process of creating collective farms, which were supposed to completely replace individual farms in the very near future (the process should have taken no more than 1-2 years).
This policy caused massive discontent among the peasants, which was expressed in uprisings that broke out throughout the country and were suppressed with particular cruelty by special units of the OGPU. However, it was impossible not to take into account the mood of the peasants, and it was decided to preserve small household plots, which was supposed to soften the ongoing policy of forced confiscation and transfer of peasants to collective farms.
The famine of 1932-1933 broke out. only aggravated the situation of the peasants, whose passports were taken away, and with a strict passport system, movement around the country was impossible. IN 1935 took place II All-Union Congress of Collective Farmers, at which collective farms were finally proclaimed the only possible form of peasant farming in the country. Collective farms, as well as industrial enterprises throughout the country, had production plans that had to be strictly implemented. However, unlike urban enterprises, collective farmers had practically no rights, such as social security, etc., since collective farms did not have the status of state enterprises, but were considered a form of cooperative farming.
Industrialization.
After the civil war, the country's industry was in a very poor situation, and to solve this problem, the state needed to find funds for the construction of new enterprises and the modernization of old ones. Since external loans were no longer possible due to the refusal to pay the royal debts, the party announced a course towards industrialization (XVI Congress, December 1925). From now on, all the country's financial and human resources were to be devoted to restoring the country's industrial potential.
In accordance with the developed industrialization program, a specific plan was established for each five-year plan, the implementation of which was strictly controlled. As a result, by the end of the 30s it was possible to approach the leading Western European countries in terms of industrial indicators. This was achieved to a large extent by attracting peasants to the construction of new enterprises and using the forces of prisoners. Enterprises such as Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station, Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works, White Sea-Baltic Canal and others.
The 1936 Constitution finally established the structure of the political apparatus of the state. Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which was divided into two chambers - Council of the Union And Council of Nationalities,- was proclaimed by the highest authority. The number of republics that were part of the USSR reached 12. The rights and freedoms of Soviet citizens proclaimed in the new constitution turned out to be not only a declaration, which was confirmed by the unfolding political processes of the 30s, the victims of which were both Stalin’s political opponents and -those people caught up in the machinery of state terror.
After the murder of S. M. Kirov (1st Secretary of the Leningrad Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)) in 1934, Stalin had a reason to begin mass repressions against party leaders he disliked. Already in 1936, Kamenev and Zinoviev were shot. K. B. Radek was arrested on charges of Trotskyism , N. I. Bukharin, A. I. Rykov. At the same time, Stalin began a purge of the army, as a result of which the higher education (incl. M. N. Tukhachevsky, V. K. Blyukher, I. P. Uborevich, I. E. Yakir) and the middle army command. Subsequently, this played an extremely negative role when it turned out that by the beginning of the Great Patriotic War there were practically no qualified personnel left in the army, which led to colossal losses at the initial stage of the war.
The repressions affected both Stalin’s inner circle and ordinary people who found themselves drawn into the neglected machine of mass terror. The closest relatives of those repressed did not escape repression and persecution. The exact number of victims during the repressions cannot be accurately calculated. Researchers cite numbers ranging from hundreds of thousands to several million people. (In historiography, the problem of motivation for the “Great Terror” is a controversial issue.
Famous historian O.V. Khlevnyuk gives a number of versions on this matter. Firstly, terror was supposed to contribute to the development of fear in society, which in turn would contribute to the consolidation of Soviet citizens. Secondly, in anticipation of an imminent war, terror was supposed to bring society into a state of total mobilization, a feeling of the proximity of the enemy. Thirdly, by the beginning of the 30s. Soviet society had not yet fully developed: society remained too complex - it had to be simplified. Fourthly, each member of the Politburo had a significant network with the help of which he could influence political decision-making. Accordingly, repressions against one political figure caused a whole chain of persecutions.)
Foreign policy in the second half of the 20s -30s.
Already in the early 30s, it was possible to write off part of the royal debts, which greatly facilitated communication with Western European countries. Recognition of Soviet Russia by the United States in 1933 g., as well as the admission of the USSR into 1934. into the League of Nations meant a final exit from international isolation. Hitler's coming to power in Germany radically changed the situation in the foreign policy arena. The annexation of Austria to Germany (Anschluss, 1938), and then the occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 showed the final balance of power. Even before this, the Soviet Union provided assistance to Spain in the war between the Republicans and Francoists (1936-1938), speaking on the side of the Republicans, however, despite military support, supporters of General Franco won. Simultaneously with the USSR, Italy and Germany also intervened in the war in Spain, which openly supported the Francoist forces.
If in the previous period the countries of Western Europe pursued a policy of “pacification,” then already in 1939 England and France pledged to provide military assistance to the countries of Eastern Europe in the event of an attack by Germany. At the same time, England and France began negotiations with the USSR about the possible balance of power in the event of the outbreak of war. The main idea of the Western European countries was to oppose the Soviet Union to Germany, and thus avoid war on their territory and the territory of their closest neighbors. However, the USSR pursued its own policy and just a few days after the termination of trilateral negotiations with France and England, August 23, 1939 g. concluded a non-aggression pact (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), hoping in this way to protect himself from the growing appetites of the German military machine. In accordance with this treaty, the parties pledged not to attack each other for 10 years and not to enter into coalitions with countries that entered into a military conflict with one of the parties to the treaty. In addition, in the secret part of the agreement, the parties divided spheres of influence in Eastern and Central Europe. A significant part of Poland remained behind Germany, and the Baltic states, Bessarabia, Finland, etc. remained behind the USSR.
In parallel with the aggravation of the political situation on its western borders, the Soviet Union was forced to resolve territorial and economic disagreements with its eastern neighbors. And in this direction, the Soviet Union did not achieve much success: it was never possible to return the Chinese-Eastern Railway under its control (the armed conflict of 1929 did not lead to a long-term consolidation in this territory and in 1935 control over the Chinese Eastern Railway was completely lost to the Japanese). With Japan itself, by the end of the 30s, the situation also became tense (which was due to the assistance that the USSR provided to China in the Japanese-Chinese military conflict). In summer 1938 years in the lake area Hasan A border conflict broke out between Japan and Russia. After fierce military clashes, the parties managed to agree on a peaceful solution to the problem; in May 1939, Soviet troops managed to drive the Japanese out of the river area Khalkhin Gol, which was the territory of Mongolia, friendly to the USSR. However, already in April 1941, a non-aggression pact was signed between the USSR and Japan.