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

How far do you agree Communist ideology influenced Stalin's decision to implement Collectivisation in 1928?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Personal Study How far do you agree Communist ideology influenced Stalin's decision to implement Collectivisation in 1928? Collectivisation was the agricultural policy, which Stalin adopted and began work on in the summer of 1928. The main features included, as Stalin quoted in Pravda "The transition from individual peasant farming to collective socialised farming," and the process of De-kulakisation. It was an agricultural policy necessary to try and combat the problem with the poor provision of grain by the peasants, a problem that had always been evident in Russia's agricultural management. The heavy cost and brutality has led historians to offer a variety of explanations for why Collectivisation was used. Some pragmatists argue the original aim was to increase the tempo of industrialisation by increasing the grain procurement. Others draw emphasis on the process of De-kulakisation as a way of showing Stalin's commitment to Marxism and Leninism by ridding the countryside of a 'class enemy.' Chapter 1 Marxism and feeding the revolution Marx argued the need for collective farming to benefit the needs of the workers therefore the ideology behind Collectivisation is its importance to the development of a Communist state, "They [the workers] must demand that the confiscated feudal property remain state property and be used for workers' colonies, cultivated collectively by the rural proletariat with all the advantages of large-scale farming."1 However Marx was a German lawyer with little knowledge of the rural way of life, his references to Collectivisation were sweeping generalisations and more suited to the analyses of the French Revolution to which his ideology had originally been based upon, whereby its relevance to Russia's agricultural problems in the 1930's were minimal. This raises the suspicion that Stalin may have had little idea of the Communist influences on Collectivisation and suggests he had other reasons to implement it. Yet in 1928 after exports there was 10 million tonnes of grain left for the urban working population yet by 1930 there was 18 million tonnes. ...read more.

Middle

"Stalin was basically carrying through what Lenin started,"11 Kolakowski made this comment without strong analysis of the differences between Lenin and Stalin's policies. It is a general comment made with Marxist philosophy in mind with little relevance to economic evidence. Stalin aimed to use Collectivisation as a way of widening the party's power within the countryside much like War Communism had suppressed the conservative 'Greens,' during the civil war. I believe Lenin's War Communism foreshadowed some of the main features of Collectivisation; therefore Leninism-Marxism influenced Stalin's decision to Collectivise in 1928 Stalin was attempting to be seen as Lenin's successor during the 'struggle for power' in 1928 Leninism-Marxism may have influenced the choice to Collectivise to a greater extent than Communist ideology. Chapter 4 Bureaucratic control and beating the 'right' in 1928 Stalin always maintained his political allegiance was to 'Marxism-Leninism.' Yet some of the key features of Stalinism go a long way to explain other influences on Collectivisation and why these, were more important then the Communist influence. Marx disagreed with the use of a dictatorship to achieve the prosperity of Communism. Yet Stalin's implementation of Collectivisation was an attempt at creating a centralised bureaucracy. The NEP had allowed the peasantry to do as they pleased with their grain and subsequently the peasants often decided to hoard grain and use it for their own ends. Therefore Stalin enforced Collectivisation to remove the control from the peasants and give it to the party. "The deposed and abused bureaucracy, from being a servant of society, has become its lord."12 This source supports the view that Stalin acted to centralise the bureaucracy, however it is victim to heavy bias against Stalin's character. 'From being a servant of society' highlights the limitations of the bias, as the source rather than being a balanced assessment of two leader's governments, implies Lenin did not use the bureaucracy to control, when in fact we know he did. ...read more.

Conclusion

But yet again the huge focus on competing with the west in both agriculture and industry was a form of propaganda to increase the popularity for Stalin's regime. Which it did very well. I do agree that the extent to which Collectivisation coerced and terrorised the peasantry was not intended when Stalin implement it in 1928, and that some of the brutality was due to the over zealousness of local party officials. Despite this Stalin's main reason for collectivising in 1928 was to further his own power, both by increasing his popularity amongst the party, applying a policy smacking of Marxism-Leninism, to destroy Bukharin during the succession for power. And to increase the Party grip over the countryside and put the country's most important raw material, grain, under Stalin's total control. The apparent strong influence of Communism was simply a form of propaganda to justify a bureaucratic, dictatorial policy, to the more dedicated Communists within the party clearly demonstrating the choice to Collectivise was influenced almost entirely by Stalin's desire to increase his power both within the party and the Russian populous. Word Count: 3500 1 Tony Cliff quoting Karl Marx, Marxism and the Collectivisation of Agriculture (1964) 2 Khrushchev (1949) 3 Khrushchev, Secret speech, (1956) 4 Isaac Deutscher 'Russia after Stalin' (1953) 5 Das Kapital, Karl Marx (1887) 6 Stalin, 'On the grain front' (1932) 7 Harvests of Sorrow, Robert Conquest (1986) 8 Stalin's Peasants, Sheila Fitzpatrick (1994) 9 Stalin's Peasants, Sheila Fitzpatrick (1994) 10 Roy Medvedev, Let History Judge, (1971) 11 Leszeck Kolakowski, Main Currents of Marxism, (1970) 12 Leon Trotsky, Miscellaneous quote. 13 Stalin's Peasants, Sheila Fitzpatrick, (1994) 14 Pravda Article, Stalin, (1932) 15 Alan Wood, Stalin and Stalinism (1990) 16 Leon Trotsky 17 Party Congress Meeting, Stalin (1928) 18 Chris Corin & Terry Fiehen, Communist Russia under Lenin and Stalin (2002) 19 Even Mawdsley, The Stalin years, (1998) 20 Bukharin (1931) Zak Smith U6AMO Candidate Number: 2125 Centre Number: 26233 ...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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Assess the economic, social and political consequences of the collectivisation of Russian agriculture in ...

    in industrial sectors suffered from a severe lack of training and thus were mostly unskilled for the job, despite being highly trained in agriculture (Millar 1982 p65). Additionally, they were also not used to the factory life and urban living.

  2. Evaluate historical comparisons of Hitler and Stalin and their regimes

    Hitler did not have this fear as his leadership position was structurally more safe than Stalin's. Stalin's paranoia ultimately led to the purges in which he killed many generals of the communist party out of fear for his own position.

  1. Role of Women Under Stalin

    "Case Study: Stalin's Purges". http://www.genocide.org/case_stalin.html. 1999. Lapidus, Gail Warshofsky. Women in Soviet Society: Equality, Development, and Social Change. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978. Lee, Stephen J. European Dictatorships, 1918-1945. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2000. Montefiore, Simon Seabag. Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar. New York: Vintage Books, 2003.

  2. Historians such as Pipes and Volkogonov have made the interpretation that Lenin was a ...

    Volkogonov expresses a view in which Lenin appears to have approved of complete control over all aspect of society, and it was his attitude towards the government of Russia that led the way for War Communism. Thus Volkogonov is stating that Lenin is a dictator because of the policies that he introduced to Russia.

  1. Why Stalin was able to hold on to power in the Soviet Union: ...

    reduced opposition to his policies, however it would have provoked aggravation amongst people involved in the production of films, books and arts. Stalin a Drawing to a conclusion, I believe that the way in which Stalin sustained his grip on power was extremely complex, and it is therefore very difficult

  2. Who Was More Important - Lenin Or Stalin?

    In March 1918, after a long period of waiting for a Socialist Revolution in Germany, Lenin was forced to accept the term in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. The Treaty was a severe blow to Russia as it lost so much: * 34% of the population.

  1. "Stalin transformed the Soviet Union from a backward country into a strong modern state ...

    The words "misery for the Soviet people" are incredibly emotive and strong ones. They also imply that all of the Soviet people were unhappy during Stalin's regime. There are certainly several arguments for and against that statement, but nevertheless during Stalin's autocracy he was loved and worshipped in an almost God-like capacity.

  2. Why was Stalin able to establish his dictatorship in Russia?

    He was able to control party membership and allocation of roles, meaning that supporters of his rivals were frequently assigned remote posts or denied membership. A new generation of ?Stalinist? politicians dominated the Politburo and Central Committee, and later on allowed him to conduct great purges to ?cleanse? the party of any remaining opposition.

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