Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    okay im struggling with a few things and wondering if anyone could help!
    1. What is collectivisation and why was it enforced?
    2. I know the kulaks were 'rich peasants' but why did the government hate them so much and vice versa.
    and finally was the importance of the grain due to the fact that the USSR could use it to trade with other countries to help them industrialise? As no other countries would have been willing to give them loans etc? Is that right?
    If you have read any good books that might help, they would be greatly appreciated!!!
    Cheers xxxxxx
    PS. did anyone start there AS struggling and finding a subject hard, but actually did ok in the end? xxx
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Well as someone who has being doing Russian History since yr9, I hope I'm qualified enough to answer:

    1. Collectivisation was the combining of small peasant farms into large co-operative or State owned farms to increase yields. It was enforced to maximise the production of grain to export. So they sold the grain and with the capital paid to produce iron, coal, steel, oil and electricity necessary to achieve industrialisation.

    2. The government hated the Kulaks because they were seen as greedy capitalist enemies of Bolshevism by the left wing of the party.

    Hope this helps, feel free to ask if you have any more questions & I'll try and answer them!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smile-Like-You-Mean-It)
    okay im struggling with a few things and wondering if anyone could help!
    1. What is collectivisation and why was it enforced?
    2. I know the kulaks were 'rich peasants' but why did the government hate them so much and vice versa.
    and finally was the importance of the grain due to the fact that the USSR could use it to trade with other countries to help them industrialise? As no other countries would have been willing to give them loans etc? Is that right?
    If you have read any good books that might help, they would be greatly appreciated!!!
    Cheers xxxxxx
    PS. did anyone start there AS struggling and finding a subject hard, but actually did ok in the end? xxx
    The government did not so much hate the Kulaks (although they were often vilified politically) as the masses living in poverty. They were often blamed for hording food when quotas came up short and people went hungry. I believe the Kulaks were actually allowed to sell excess grain as an incentive to increase yields.

    This sounds like a homework assignment and neither concept is that difficult....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kondar)
    The government did not so much hate the Kulaks (although they were often vilified politically) as the masses living in poverty. They were often blamed for hording food when quotas came up short and people went hungry. I believe the Kulaks were actually allowed to sell excess grain as an incentive to increase yields.

    This sounds like a homework assignment and neither concept is that difficult....
    alright...they had a bit of trouble
    no need to put them down for asking
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ha.. has been a while since I've done Russian history...

    Most of the above is correct... For me personally, the idea of 'Kulaks' was mainly a propaganda stunt by Stalin and the government. Basically the vast majority of farmers were poor.. there were some wealthy ones ('kulaks') and the government manipulated the situation. They used the hatred of the poorer peasants for the richer landowners in order to take their grain and attack 'grain horders.'

    So basically the idea of 'de-kulakisation' helped the government deter 'grain horders' and also gain support from the poorer peasants.

    It also helped the process of collectivisation as more and more peasants believed that this would be a fairer system where everyone would be equal... parting from the previous years of landowner- farmer conflict.

    About grain.... it was important as Russia was mostly an argricultural country as opposed to industrial (i.e Britain and France.) Therefore the grain was the main resource Stalin could utilise in order to modernise the USSR. The government pretty much 'stole' must of the peasants grain in order for abroad trade to raise capital for machinery and also to feed the cities.

    Stalin felt that the 'surplus' grain (in reality there was no grain 'surplus' and millions of peasants died as their food was taken from them) was vital in order to help industrialise Russia basically and used the money raised from grain sales to bulid huge industrial works, machinery etc.....

    Oh and History really isn't that bad! The first couple of months may seem hard.. but once you grasp the concepts you'll be fine!
    :cool: :o:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    . What is collectivisation and why was it enforced?
    The NEP was a mixed economic policy to revive the shattered Russian economy following the civil war. During this period the peasants were able to make a profit from this policy but it was feared by Lenin's successors that the peasantry have a strangle hold over the government's industrial development (selling grain for capial) to withstand another foriegn intervention. Stalin enforced collectivization effectively to control agriculture and achieve rapid industrial growth through the 5 year plans.

    Is that right?
    Partially, Russia historically was an exporter when it came to the agricultural sector although nations were prepared to hand financial assistance to the USSR when it was recognised as the successor state of the Russian Empire. One school of thought believe thats that the Soviet Union was such dire need of major development (remember there were constant fears of western intervention) that it collectivized land to sell it at very low prices in global terms in order to accumulate capital.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    1) It is imperitive that the state had control of Russian farming and agriculture in order to carry out the industrialisation process by the way of 5-Year plans, and that they would have enough grain to export for technology. However, Stalin would allow private plots for a short while after implementing collectivisation, before banning them altogether. The progress made by collectivization did bring in a new way of farming, with new methods and techonolgy - namely tractors and combine harvesters that were being produced by Russian factories during the 5 -Year plans. Progress made by the state in implementing the policy was outstanding - by 1936 94% of the sown land was collectivised. However, whether it actually increased yields is a different matter, I think I read somewhere that grain production did not actually rise from 1929 - 1940. Remember though that Stalin was building upon this from Lenin. Collectivisation was a short-lived part of war communism that was abandoned. Also, maybe an idea to link this with Witte's 'Great Spurt' period where a heavy burden was also placed on the peasants in an effort to modernise, and contrast with Stolypin's policies which were aimed towards the betterment of the peasantry, in order to create the kulak class.

    2. Countries did trade with Russia. It had long since used grain export to try and get the expertise and technology it needed from western nations, with Witte being a good example. The kulaks were seen by the Bolsheviks as people who hoarded grain for themselves to sell to others, and not the state. They were going against what was in the interest by the state by not giving the grain needed to export and feed the growing industrial classes. Kulaks hated the state as it gave them no real stake in the system, and the state would not pay them the value of their produce, as they needed it to be 'cheap' to sell to the working classes and to export.

    Most people find the step from GCSE's to AS - level tough, esp history, where the style of writing is far for evaluative and analytical. But you'll get through it with perseverance and there will be a point where it will click. For AS level history, reading the Access to History series for your course is good to start of with. You can use course specific revision guides produced by the exam board itself. Otherwise books like Russia and the USSR 1855 - 1991 by Stephen J Lee is good, as well as Russia 1855-1991: From Tsars to Commissars by Peter Oxley.

    Hope this helps!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Progress made by the state in implementing the policy was outstanding - by 1936 94% of the sown land was collectivised. However, whether it actually increased yields is a different matter, I think I read somewhere that grain production did not actually rise from 1929 - 1940.
    It is argued that within the collectivized farms a degree of private ownership and entrepreneurship was tolerated and there was growth, hence two sectors. Agriculture production did rise overall but it was relatively stagnant within the state sector.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vincente)
    It is argued that within the collectivized farms a degree of private ownership and entrepreneurship was tolerated and there was growth, hence two sectors. Agriculture production did rise overall but it was relatively stagnant within the state sector.
    Oh ok....shows how long these A-Level subjects really stay in the memory.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Oh ok....shows how long these A-Level subjects really stay in the memory.
    Well I actually got this from university, so don't worry about it!
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: November 14, 2008
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.