1. Collectivisation - Group 4
By Fatema, Julia, Olivia R, Laura

2. Instructions
Stalin hoped that peasants working on large farms together would be more productive than working alone.
You are going to test this theory by producing a collectivised presentation on ‘collectivisation’.
In your groups you will need to divide up the tasks. Use the headings on the following slides to help you. Remember the success of this task relies on you working collectively as a group.
See next page for further instructions.

3. Instructions
Use the chat function to decide who is going to do which section. Allocate tasks fairly!
Information can be found in Bunce p Other textbooks will also be provided.
Avoid copying information word for word. Carefully summarise the key points. Create extra slides if necessary.
Pictures must be included to illustrate your points.
Check carefully for spelling mistakes.

4. What is collectivisation?
The taking over by the Soviets state of the land property previously owned by the peasants accompanied by the requirement that the peasants now live and work communally.

5. Why did Stalin introduce collectivisation?
Ideological factors
Communists have done little to change the Russian agriculture. Peasants used old traditional farming techniques. Their lack of revolutionary spirit was evident in the way they farmed. The farmers produced for themselves and their profits, this led communists to believe collectivisation was essential if the capitalist peasants were to embrace socialism.

6. Why did Stalin introduce collectivisation?
Political factors
One of Stalin’s aims of introducing collectivisation was motivated by his struggle against Bukharin and the Party’s right wing. The radical nature of collectivisation appealed to party’s left wing. This was more appealing in the communist party than the right wing alternative of importing grain which wouldn’t improve industrialisation.
Stalin’s had very little understanding of agriculture despite his peasant background which did affect his decision to collectivisation.

7. Why did Stalin introduce collectivisation?
Economic factors
in 1927 and 1928 the harvests were very poor which caused concern for the Soviet government as it was relying on grain production to export.
The aim of the collectivisation was to produce grain more efficiently as everyone would be working together and helping each other. Also the collectivisation would be accompanied by mechanisation which would increase efficiency and less workers would be needed. Then those workers could move to cities and work.
The collectivisation would increase production of which would allow the government to sell more overseas providing more resources for industrialisation and higher standard living of urban workers.

8. Why did Stalin introduce collectivisation?
The Grain Procurement Crisis,
The crisis illustrated the economic, ideological and political causes of the new policy.
It also acted as a catalyst which ended the NEP and introduced a new era of collectivisation.
Poor harvests from 1927 onwards forced the price of grain to rise.
The richer peasants- the kulaks- started to withhold grain from the market it order to push the price further up, Stalin called this the ’Kulak Grain Strike’. Stalin used this as an excuse to revive the policy of grain requisitioning.
The strike highlighted the fact that peasant ideology was essentially capitalist and therefore in conflict with the government.
Stalin used the crisis as evidence of the NEP’s failure.

9. The Course of Collectivisation (main stages-Emergency measures)
Stalin responded to the Grain Procurement Crisis by increasing the power of the government over the economy.
The scarcity of bread and sugar forced Stalin to re-introduce rationing, resume requisitioning and further punish ‘richer’ Peasants of which were accused of hoarding grain.
Poorer Peasants were rewarded with former land of the Kulaks.
Many Peasants resented the idea of shared power, leading Bukharin to persuade the party to abandon the new policy.
In 1929 the policy was then restarted and further requisitioning occurred (meat)
Police then gained power to send Kulaks to labour camps for up to two years for failing to carry out general state instructions.

10. The course of Collectivisation (main stages)
The liquidation of the Kulaks
Mass collectivisation began in December 1929 with Stalin’s instruction to ‘liquidate the kulaks as a class’.
‘Dekulakisation’ marked the end of capitalism and independent farming in the countryside.
The speed of collectivisation was vastly increased.
The new collective farms would control all the land in the local area, and the peasants would pool their resources. The meant that the poorest peasants would be able to use the kulak’s resources and share in a much greater harvest.
For the majority of peasants, collectivisation meant a loss of independence and financial loss. The peasants therefore rebelled.
They chose to destroy grain and livestock. 18 million horses and 100 million sheep and goats were killed between 1929 and 1933.

11. The course of Collectivisation (main stages)
The twenty five thousanders
Prior to the start of forced collectivisation, Stalin initiated a new policy.
Local Communists were unhappy about the collectivisation plans and therefore unwilling to implement them.
Stalin issued a decree sending 25,000 ‘socially conscious’ industrial workers into the countryside.
The ‘Twenty-five-thousanders’ were supposed to offer technical help to peasants and instruct them on how to use the new more complex machinery.
In reality, they were used to enforce dekulakisation. They were expected to find secret stores of grain, round up the kulaks and organise their exile, and force the remaining peasants into collective farms.

12. ‘Dizzy with Success’
Human suffering was the result of collectivisation.
Majority of Kulaks and families killed or exiled to Siberia
Stalin remained unsympathetic towards his victims announcing ‘Moscow does not believe in tears.’
Resistance to forced collectivisation led to the wholesale slaughter of livestock, the destruction of tractors, the burning of crops and the resentment towards the government
Stalin abandoned Collectivisation in March 1930 yet still defended it in the article ‘Dizzy with success’, reasoning the failure to an ‘over enthusiasm’
Half of Russia’s farms had been collectivised, by August many Peasants went back to their own farms.

13. The course of Collectivisation (main stages)
Famine
This famine was the result of government policy rather than natural disaster.
The government issued hugely unrealistic targets to Russian farmers.
When the farmers failed to meet their targets Stalin ordered the seizure of grain by the Red Army and the secret police.
International offers were rejected as Stalin claimed there was no famine in socialist Russia.
People were forced to take drastic measures to survive, such as fighting over horse manure which contained some undigested grain.
The conservative estimates suggest that at least ten million died during the famine.

14. Consequences of Collectivisation- Effects on rural areas
Between 9,500,000 and 10,000,000 people exiled as a part of ‘dekulakisation drive’
150,000 Kulaks to Siberia in 1929, rising to 285,000 in 1931
Peasants left to endure Collectivisation were being forced to meet unrealistic targets and paid hardly anything for what they did produce, leading to farms barely covering their production costs.
This all lead to further resentment towards the government and labour productivity in rural areas declining.
Therefore Stalin had failed in his attempt to raise agricultural production

15. Consequences of Collectivisation
Industrialisation and urbanisation
Although the amount of grain produced fell from 1926 onwards,more grain was procured and exported by the state. In 1928 the state procured 11 million tonnes, in 1933 it procured 23 million tonnes.
There was no famine in cities but living standards dropped and this lead to disunity between the workers and peasants, as the government blamed the poor harvests on ‘kulak spirit’ and so workers believed the peasants were not helping to build socialism.
Collectivisation did increase urbanisation as in 1928, 18% of people were workers in cities which grew to 50% by In some cities the urban population trebled in the 1930s.

16. Consequences of Collectivisation
Political consequences
The famine in the countryside and poverty in the cities created a crisis in the top levels of the Communist Party. However, instead of criticising Stalin, the chaos united the Party behind him. Fearing a civil war, they became fiercely loyal to their policies and blamed the Kulaks for their problems that Russia was experiencing. Left Communists viewed the policy as a return to the heroic tradition of the Civil War. Stalin emerged from collectivisation politically stronger than ever.

17. Conclusion
Collectivisation led to the deaths of over 10 million peasants in the famine of and roughly another 10 million were moved to Gulags in Siberia. It was successful in terms of Stalin’s personal ambition as he became the undisputed leader of Soviet Russia and achieved strong political backing from the party. The state also procured and exported more grain than ever before.
However in terms of cost of human life, this was the most destructive policy in history, as it lead to mass starvation on an unprecedented level. According to Stalin, “one death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic”

18. Final task - Do not attempt this task until you have finished your presentation.
This task should be completed on your own. Do not use Google Docs. Please use word.
Write an introduction, conclusion and one of the middle paragraphs for the following essay
‘How far is it accurate to describe Stalin’s policy of collectivisation as a failure?’
You must follow the top tips on introductions, conclusions and paragraphs. (Available on the website if you need them)
Tips:
Consider political and social as well as an economic criteria.
In reaching a judgement you need to be clear about what the aims of collectivisation were and take them into account as part of the process of deciding whether or not it was, overall, a failure?