• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Collectivisation of Agriculture in the Soviet Union in the years 1929-1941 was a Triumph for Communist Ideas but a Social and Economic Disaster. How far do you agree with this Opinion?

Extracts from this document...


Collectivisation of Agriculture in the Soviet Union in the years 1929-1941 was a Triumph for Communist Ideas but a Social and Economic Disaster. How far do you agree with this Opinion? (/40) Stalin's policy of collectivisation of agriculture can be seen as a communist triumph yet there were many flaws in this policy that show it wasn't as successful as it may have seemed. This policy seemed to have also caused the Soviet Union to be plunged into an economic and social disaster, yet there are factors that show that this isn't absolutely true. Collectivisation was a policy introduced by Stalin which had the aim of creating an increase in agricultural productivity, as this would help develop the industry in the Soviet Union as a whole. Stalin did this by creating larger agricultural sections where the peasants would farm collectively rather than on individual farms. This policy had a big effect in the Soviet Union on the economy, socially and politically. Collectivisation can be seen as a triumph for communist ideas because of many reasons. Communism is a political theory, which means abolishing private ownership and supporting collectivism in a classless society. ...read more.


This consequence of collectivisation did not support any communist ideas such as collectively working together as it just deepened divisions between the peasants and the Government and caused hostility towards the party in power. So, although the policy of collectivisation showed some ideas of communism being triumphant, it was not a complete success for this political ideology. Stalin's policy of Collectivisation can be seen as a social disaster because of many reasons. One of these reasons is that many of the peasants did not want to be part of collective farms and when they were forced to do so in late 1929; it made people livid and caused the peasants to be deeply angry with the Government. This was not a social success. Also, collectivisation meant that the influence of some traditional social roles such as the village priest was removed. This shows that, socially, the rural areas were weakened as the Government took control by separating people from influential roles such as the school teacher. A further reason as to the policy of how collectivisation was a social disaster is because it abolished peasant controlled mir which is a village commune made up of peasant elders. ...read more.


The fact that the rural population starved was because they had to make food for export to achieve foreign exchange that was necessary, and a lot of their food was given to feed the towns, so the peasants themselves were, in the end, deprived of food. The policy of collectivisation can be described as an economic disaster partly because of the rushed way in which it was set up. There was not enough planning and the way in which the policy was carried out was very disorganised, so these factors contributed to the economic disaster that collectivisation introduced. However, it can't be said that the Soviet Union suffered from complete economic disaster because the creation of Motor Tractor Stations meant that the collective farms were supplied with tractors, machinery and also political lectures to help the peasants with farming. Although this certain strategy became despised by the peasants as they believed that the Government was interfering with the countryside, it was an economic success, though not a social or political success. In conclusion, the introduction of collectivisation of agriculture cannot be seen to be a complete economic and social disaster, as there were certain good factors that came out of this policy. This policy was also not a complete triumph for communism as there were certain aspects of collectivisation that did not fit in with communist ideologies. Shaheen Munshi 62B ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. To what extent was Collectivisation a success?

    tractors, rather than providing food for the towns), peasants driven out from the countryside were provided with employment from new factories, it introduced modern/new technology which helped to further grain production and procurement and towns benefited; Robert Service said 'After collectivisation it was the countryside, not the towns which went hungry if the harvest was bad'.


    Stalin and political control: his use of the party machine and terror How did Stalin establish control over the Soviet Union? * First of all Stalin had to establish control over the Party. He did this by a combination of terror - see below - and delivering what party members wanted.

  1. What were the causes of the disintegration of the Soviet Union as a socialist ...

    Marx argues that these will then be followed by socialism and then, ultimately, communism. Furthermore, he argues that the development of a society from one stage to another comes about when all of the productive forces that can be developed under that stage have been done so, and the class

  2. How far did the policy of 'Collectivisation of Agriculture' meets Stalin's objectives by the ...

    Under Gorbachev there was a renewed freedom to criticise Stalin and his era. Since the end of communism, freedom of speech for historians has reached western levels, though Russian historians often have a different perspective and opening of the archives is far from complete.Many western historians have concentrated on the mishandling of collectivisation, e.g.

  1. chernobyl disaster

    Specifically, the report cited 4000 thyroid cancer cases among children diagnosed by 2002. Although the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone and certain limited areas will remain off limits, the majority of affected areas are now safe for settlement and economic activity. Causes There are two conflicting official theories about the cause of the accident.

  2. Rationality, Educated Opinion and Peace

    To proceed, we adopt James Mill's argument for the rational public opinion quoted in Carr as a guide to what rational behaviour entails: Every man possessed of reason is accustomed to weigh evidence and to be guided and determined by its preponderance.

  1. How far did Kennan's ideas actually shape US policy towards the Soviet Union?

    George Kennan is cited as one of the original authors of the policy of containment. In describing the USSR's expansionist tendencies, he concluded that its political action is a fluid stream which moves constantly, wherever it is permitted to move, toward a given goal.

  2. How Far Were the Soviet People Better off in 1941 than 1928?

    Also the political state of Russia was not good as the Communists had created a one party state, while in the early part of the century the Tsarist regime had a puppet democracy. Also the Cheka police had been put into practice, therefore causing fear within the people.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work