Russia and the Soviet Union

Historian Quotes and and russian terms and stats

Eric Dorn Brose on the period of conolidation for the Bolsheviks

Eric Dorn Brose argues that the period of consolidation did not just allow the Bolsheviks to eliminate the most organised opposition within the former empire, but also affected their internal culture and their view of the task that lay ahead of them.

Micheal Lynch on Lenin’s opinion of Stalin

“Ironically, it was Commissar for Nationalities that Stalin, the ‘wonderful Georgian’, first aroused Lenin’s distrust…Lenin expressed [this] in a written statement that became known as ‘Lenin’s Testament.’

… had concentrated too much power in his hands. He went on to propose that Stalin be removed from his position. But this was not done.” –

What does Micheal Lynch say about the CPSU system of govermet and Stalin’s emergence as leader

 argues that in a more traditional system of government with a “clearly defined pattern of promotion”, Stalin’s attempts to rise up through the ranks would have been more noticeable and preventable.

Isaace Deutscher on Stalin dealing with Trotsky

[Stalin] never seemed to impose his views on his colleagues… he carefully followed the course of debate to see what way the wind was blowing and invariably voted with the majority… to Party audiences he appeared as a man… who criticised others only for the sake of the cause

Political Scientist Graeme Gill on Trotsky and Zinoviev(dealing with the left) in Stalin’s emergence as leader of the USSR

“Both Trotsky and Zinoviev portrayed themselves as Lenin’s colleagues and equals, a picture that did not sit easily with the growing air of veneration around [Lenin]. In contrast, Stalin projected himself as Lenin’s disciple… this sort of image was much more prevailing party mood than were those of Trotsky and Zinoviev.”

What does Micheal Lynch Argue about Stalin’s victory

Michael Lynch, historian argues that Stalin’s victory is primarily because he had a strong power base, while Trotsky had none. The former’s superiority as an orator and a theorist meant little when it was set against Stalin’s control of the political system. 

What does Historian and scholar Lynne Viola, argue about the Soviet System under Stalin and whether it was totalitarian

 argues that the Soviet system under Stalin was not tightly controlled or efficiently managed and thus could not be argued as totalitarian

 – the collectivisation era involved the process of dekulakisation and peasant relocation; which was often chaotic, poorly organised and unproductive (due to areas having no housing + poor food supplies). However, Stalinism not being totalitarian does not make it any less destructive to the lives of the people who lived through it

What does revisionist historian Sheila Fitzpatrick state about individual life under Stalin

Concludes that this society was a lot more complicated

Soviet citizens tended towards passive conformity and outward obedience, they were not robbed of independent thought – there were still avenues for social mobility, ways of expressing frustration with the state and opportunities for humour,

What does revisionist historian Sheila Fitzpatrick state about individual life under Stalin QUOTE

“Though people conformed outwardly, they remained independent thinkers, sceptical of what the authorities said and indeed took risks in declaring their dissatisfaction with things.”

Statistic on economic output before the five year plans

1913: Russia exported 12 million tons of grain; in the best years of the NEP the amount never exceeded three milliion

1926-27: Exports were at 33% and imports at 38% of their 1913 levels due to the decline in grain exports.

Statistic on the peasant hoarding ans state procurement

As a result [of peasants hoarding their grain], the grain procured by the state at the end of 1927 was about three-quarters of what it had been in 1926

What does Sheila Fitzpatrick argue about the “Great Turn” (industrialisation and economic modernisation)

argues that industrialisation and economic modernisation were to Stalin’s government merely a means to an end (socialism → communism); however as these plans developed, the end goal seemed to become more impractical and less realistic.

Toz

peasants owned their own land but shared machinery and cooperated in agricultural activity (more common pre-30s)

Sovkhoz

owned and run by the state → peasants were paid a regular wage

Kolkhoz

all land held in common and run by an elected committee, all land, tools and livestock had to be pooled, each household was allowed to keep its own private plot of up to one acre.

Statistics on the contextual factors for introducing collectivisation

Grain procurement crisis of 1928-29: only 17% of the total grain harvest went to the cities + difficult to get grain from the peasants → had to be forced

Historian quote on the perspective that the procurement crisit was used deliberately by Stalin

Historian Vladimir Brovkin argues that by the late 1920s Russian society had recovered from the Civil War, and that since the NEP was evolving away from communist dictatorship, Stalin felt he had to act before the NEP returned the USSR to the capitalist system

Historian quote on the perspective that Stalin was pushed by the crisis

Historian Moshe Lewin argues the opposite of Brovkin: the NEP had ceased to function properly because it could not satisfy consumer needs and that Stalin was forced to react. When faced with the procurement, Lewin says, he resorted to force.

Statistic on the proces of dekulakisation

 Stalin enlisted an army of 25000 urban party activists (to root out the kulaks and to oversee the collectivisation process

In the Pravda, March 1930 entitled “Dizzy with Success" Stalin criticised lower level officials for being over-zealous.

“Collective farms must not be established by force. That would be foolish and reactionary. The collective farm movement must rest on the active support of the main mass of the peasantry”

Statistic on peasas elaving the collective farms

By mid-1930 only 2.5% of the peasants remained on the collective farms

Statistic on the percentage of collectvised farms by 1941

By 1941, over 90% of Soviet agriculture had been collectivised

smychka

alliance, union