Stalin saw the elimination of the kulak class as a manner by which he could ‘socialise’ the peasantry and in turn a vital stepping-stone towards achieving the ‘perfect’ socialist state. This target was inarguably met by 1941 and in fact perhaps a number of years earlier. The kulaks fought against forced collectivisation because they saw it as an end to their freedom but their efforts were in vain. The secret police arrested anyone denounced as a kulak and organised mass deportations to Siberia. Many kulaks were shot or sent to forced labour settlements. Each region was given a certain number of kulaks to find and they were always found, whether or not they existed. Overall, 15 million kulaks were successfully eliminated by Stalin.
Collective farms were intended to replace small-scale peasant farms in order to allow large units of land to be farmed more efficiently through the use of machinery. This would be supplied by the state and experts could teach peasants how to use the agricultural tools necessary to achieve a net result of higher food production. Ultimately it also meant it was much easier to cease grain. The main purpose of this was to ensure that large amounts of grain could be exported and industry would benefit greatly as a result. The ‘kolkhoz’ farms were the most favoured by communists and in these farms all the land was pooled together as well as tools and livestock. Under the direction of a committee, the peasants would farm the land as one unit but be allowed to keep their own private plots for growing vegetables or keeping animals. It was hoped this was that grain production would rise and the peasants would also be kept suitably satisfied. This would encourage them to cooperate with the government and in turn help industry to grow.
By February 1930, party members claimed that a half of all peasant households had been collectivised. In reality this was at the very least a terrible exaggeration. The agricultural ‘achievements’ of collectivisation were nothing short of disastrous. Peasants resisted ferociously. One riot lasted almost a week and armoured cars had to be brought in order to control the peasants. The peasants slaughtered their animals and ate them and burnt tools, crops and houses rather than give them over to the kolkhoz. The number of cattle in particular was cut in half from 1928-1933. This in turn led to a mass shortage of meat and milk in many areas of the USSR. In order to calm the situation down, Stalin blamed his officials in an article in Pravada calling them ‘dizzy with success’. He then halted collectivisation much to the shock of many peasants as well as party officials. However, once the peasants calmed down and the harvest was gathered, the campaign was restarted even more brutally than before.
However, the worst of the peasants’ suffering came in late 1932. Famine hit the USSR and around 5 million died. The government largely ignored the enormous scale of human suffering. The soviet regime would sacrifice anything before admitting that collectivisation had not worked. Overall grain production fell from 73.3 million tonnes in 1928 to 67.6 million tonnes in 1934. Despite this and the mass deaths the communist government continued to export grain. 1.73 million tons were exported in 1932 and only slightly less during 1933- the worst period of the famine. The famine was without a doubt man-made. It was the direct result of the government’s chaotic and completely ineffective planning and seizure of excessive amounts of grain to pay for industrial equipment.
Collectivisation achieved two vital aims. Soviet agriculture had been crippled in the long term. Grain harvest had dropped dramatically in the early 1930s when the USSR needed it most and it took around four years for the grain to recover to its 1928 level. This clearly demonstrates the failure of collectivisation agriculturally. However, it is crucial to note that even though grain harvest declined in the early 1930s, state procurements did not. This is the first vital aim that was successfully met. Grain exports were used to buy foreign exchange, which was vital for building the economy. More grain went to towns to feed people and support the industrial growth. Many peasants fled to towns where they could now be used as workers.
The second and almost equally important aim achieved is the extension of governmental control and the spreading and enforcing of communist ideal, whether or not they were desired. The state was strengthened and firmly controlled the countryside. Historian Viola states that collectivisation ‘served to brutalise and perhaps to atomise the rural population’. This shows that the government could now extend its reach wherever required. Secret police were rife and reported any areas of concern. The peasants who had just began to strengthen their positions, were ultimately crushed socially and emotionally. Village commune was banned and the influence of traditional social roles removed. This included priests, teachers and anyone else who may have caused trouble for Stalin and the communist government. As well as strengthening his position within his own party, Stalin had shown his willingness to sacrifice lives in order to achieve his goals and this was not something the peasants would ever forget.
Under no circumstances had collectivisation met even nearly all the aims it had set out to do. For the peasants it was a social and agricultural disaster, which involved mass suffering and death. But the Communist government chose to brush aside the clearly disastrous effects of collectivisation. Instead they continued to export grain in huge amounts regardless of the condition of the USSR’s own people. The government very selectively focused on the political and industrial successes brought about by collectivisation whilst choosing not to acknowledge mistakes and an obvious lack of planning and organisation with the campaign. In conclusion, it can certainly be argued that despite all the failures particularly economically, collectivisation succeeded in it’s main purpose which was to provide the necessary resources for industrialisation no matter what the cost.
