Evaluation of Collectivisation

Question 1

How many kulak families were affected by dekulakisation? Why was this a success?

Answer 1

1 million
This meant that the USSR was able to remove widespread anti-socialist elements from the countryside. It sent a clear message about their ideology.

Question 2

How was the culture in villages affected by collectivisation? Why was this a success?

Answer 2

Culture became more socialist and less christian. For example, the League of the Militant Godless destroyed churchs, icons and deported priests. Festivals were renamed e.g. Easter became the “Day of the Furrow”. In this way, collectivisation went some way to promoting a socialist way of thinking and life

Question 3

How many farms were collectivised by 1937? March 1930?

Answer 3

1937 - 93%

March 1930 - 60%

Question 4

What did the incentive to denounce Kulaks create?

Answer 4

A degree of class warfare

Question 5

What happened to state grain procurement? What did this mean for the cities?

Answer 5

Apart from 1932, state grain procurement increased year on year. This meant that the cities were receiving a more reliable supply of grain which alleviated social suffering there.

Question 6

How many 7 year olds were enrolled in school in 1928 compared to 1938?

Answer 6

1928 - 6 million

1938 - 7.6 million

Question 7

What was the response to the widespread destruction of culture?

Answer 7

Widespread opposition

Question 8

How many peasants withdrew from collective farms after Stalin’s “Dizzy with Success” article?

Answer 8

40%

Question 9

How did collectivisation harm Smychka?

Answer 9

Peasants no longer worked to produce a surplus to buy goods from workers and workers were part of the collectivisation squads which the peasants disliked. They no longer worked to the mutual benefit of one another. Peasants were even stopped from reaching cities during the famine and workers couldn’t even talk about the famine without a 5 year sentence in jail.

Question 10

How many peasants died during the famine, aggravated by the state’s high procurement and minimal pay to farmers?

Answer 10

4-5 million

Question 11

What did dekulakisation do to the social element of the countryside?

Answer 11

Removed a key element of the community who peasants looked up to and often didn’t even consider to be ‘kulaks’

Question 12

What was the grain harvest in 1928? 1930? What does this show?

Answer 12

1928 - 73.3m tonnes
1930 - 83.5m tonnes
May potentially show how the economies of scale were already having a positive impact on the grain harvest

Question 13

What were grain exports in 1930 and 1931? How did that compare to 1928? What was the situation during the famine years?

Answer 13

1928 exports = 0.3m tonnes
1930 and 1931 = approx 5m tonnes
Even during the famine years, the exports remained higher than the 1928 levels even if they were lower than the couple of previous years

Question 14

What happened to state procurement between 1928 and 1935? How was this an economic success?

Answer 14

Continually increased (apart from in 1932)
This improved the food supply to the workers and growing urban populations. This was needed to satisfy them and to aid industrialisation. Similarly, it allowed more grain exports which also helped industrialisation.

Question 15

How much of land was made up of private plots? How much of the agricultural output did these account for?

Answer 15

4%, yet 25-25% of output came from the private plots.

Question 16

What was the issue of removing Kulaks for the efficiency of the land? What experience did the activists running the farms have?

Answer 16

Kulaks were often the most successful and knowledgeable peasants when it came to farming. The activists brought in from the cities on the other hand had very little experience.

Question 17

What proportion of the necessary tractors did the USSR have?

Answer 17

only 4%

Question 18

Between 1929 and 1933, how many animals were slaughtered to prevent them from being requisitioned?

Answer 18

40 million

Question 19

How much were grain exports between 1932-34 during the famine? What was the problem with this?

Answer 19

1932 = 1.8m 1933 = 1.7m 1934 = 0.8m This was a problem because it meant the USSR could not raise as much capital from abroad to aid industrialisation and modernisation in the Soviet Union.

Question 20

What did the famine do to the agricultural labour force?

Answer 20

It decimated the labour force, rendering certain farms more inefficient and others were even forced to close.

Question 21

How did livestock on state owned farms compare to private holdings? What happened to horse numbers between 1929 and 1933?

Answer 21

Livestock on state owned farms was much less than that on private holdings. The number of horses halved between 1929 and 1933.

Question 22

How did the fact that 93% of farms were collectivised by 1937 symbolise a political success?

Answer 22

Showed how the democratically centralist leaders were effectively able to coordinate a nationwide transformation to farming

Question 23

Which western visitor fell into the Soviet façade that “all talk of famine is ridiculous”?

Answer 23

Walter Durranty

Question 24

What did the Law of Seventh-Eights do to the Soviet Union’s political control in the countryside?

Answer 24

It increased it by making punishments for theft of Kolkhoz and cooperative property or violence, threats and intimidation in them 10 years of imprisonment. This coerced peasants into line

Question 25

Which other body in the countryside increased the Soviet Union’s control there?

Answer 25

Motor Tractor Stations

Question 26

How many people were convicted under the Law of Spikelets within the first half year?

Answer 26

150,000

Question 27

Which loyal, powerful bodies exerted political control over the peasantry during collectivisation?

Answer 27

OGPU, the League for the Militant Godless and collectivisation squads

Question 28

What did the impact of “Dizzy with Success” suggest about the political influence Stalin had in the country?

Answer 28

His political influence was farily high since his voice was adhered to and believed

Question 29

How can the deaths of many Ukrainians during the famine be seen perhaps as a political success for Stalin?

Answer 29

Since Ukraine was the scene of a lot of unrest towards the Soviet regime and hence the deaths of many of them damaged the rebel movement and intimidated them into line.

Question 30

What did the writing of “Dizzy with success” do to the political image of the USSR perhaps?

Answer 30

The article can be seen as an admission of political failure since the state was unable to control the actions of those which it sent into the countryside. It brought about mass de-collectivisation which was embarrassing for the program.

Question 31

What did the granting of private holdings to peasants at the 1935 congress mean for the political status of the Bolsheviks?

Answer 31

It weakened the ideological strength of the Bolsheviks since they were forced to make ‘capitalist’ concessions. Private land holdings were essential to agricultural production

Question 32

What would news of the struggling farms and the famine do to the reputation of Stalin?

Answer 32

News of struggling farms and famine, although attempted to be silenced by the state, would not have helped the reputation of Stalin. He would appear incapable of providing for his people and dealing with the issues at hand.

Question 33

What proportion of the peasantry were believers in the Russian Orthodox Church by 1937?

Answer 33

57% of the population

Question 34

What proportion of the work force in 1928 were farmers or craftspeople? How had this changed by 1938?

Answer 34

1928 = 75% of workforce were either farmers or craftspeople
1938 = 47% were farmers in the Kolkhoz