NEP and the accelerated construction of socialism

The New Economic Policy proclaimed by the Tenth Congress of the RCP(b) was a whole system of measures aimed at creating conditions for the revival of the Russian economy. These measures were developed already in the course of the announced new economic policy, which can be represented as a series of successive stages. The main efforts had to be directed against the growing food crisis, which could only be eliminated by raising Agriculture. In the absence of state funds for this, it was necessary to liberate the manufacturer, give him incentives for the development of production. It was precisely for this that the central measure of the NEP was directed - the replacement of the surplus appropriation with the tax in kind. The size of the tax was much less than the apportionment, it was progressive in nature, i.e. decreased in the event that the peasant took care of increasing production, and allowed the peasant to freely dispose of the surplus products that he had left after paying the tax.

In 1922 measures to help the peasantry were intensified. The tax in kind was reduced by 10% compared to the previous year, but most importantly: it was announced that the peasant was free to choose the forms of land use and even hiring labor and renting land was allowed. The peasantry of Russia has already realized the advantage of the new policy; favorable weather, which allowed to grow and harvest a good harvest. It was the most significant in all the years since the October Revolution. As a result, after the tax was handed over to the state, the peasant had a surplus that he could dispose of freely.

However, it was necessary to create conditions for the free sale of agricultural products. This was to be facilitated by commercial and financial side new economic policy. The freedom of private trade was announced simultaneously with the transition from allotment to tax in kind. But in the speech of V.I. Lenin at the Tenth Party Congress, free trade was understood only as a product exchange between town and countryside, within the limits of local economic turnover. At the same time, preference was given to exchange through cooperatives, and not through the market. Such an exchange seemed unprofitable to the peasantry, and Lenin already in the autumn of 1921 admitted that the exchange of goods between the city and the countryside had broken down and resulted in buying and selling at "black market" prices. I had to go to the removal of limited free trade, encourage retail trade and put the private trader on an equal footing in trade with the state and cooperatives.

In turn, free trade demanded order in the financial system of the state, which in the early 20s. existed only nominally, because in the concept of the Bolsheviks on the creation of a socialist state, except for the nationalization of banks, no place was given to finance.

Even the introduction of the New Economic Policy did not provide for measures to restore order in the financial sphere, because the exchange of goods could be carried out without money. The state budget was drawn up formally, the estimates of enterprises and institutions were also formally approved. All expenses were covered by printing unsecured paper money, so the rate of inflation was uncontrollable. Already in 1921, the state was forced to take a number of steps aimed at the rehabilitation of money. Individuals and organizations were allowed to keep any amount of money in savings banks and use their deposits without restrictions. Then the state ceased uncontrolled financing of industrial enterprises, some of which were transferred to self-financing, and some were leased. These enterprises had to pay taxes to the state budget, which covered a certain part of state revenues. The status of the State Bank was approved, which also switched to self-supporting principles, was interested in receiving income from lending to industry, agriculture and trade. Finally, measures were taken to stabilize the Russian currency, which were carried out in 1922-1924. and received the name of financial reform. Its creators are considered to be People's Commissar for Finance G. Sokolnikov, the director of the State Bank, the Bolshevik Sheiman, and a member of the board of the bank, the former minister of the tsarist government under S.Yu. Witte N.N. Cutler.

The rapid rise of agriculture, the revival of trade and measures to strengthen the financial system made it possible to move on to measures to stabilize the situation in industry, on the fate of which depended the fate of the working class and the entire Soviet state. Industrial policy was not formulated immediately, since the rise of industry depended on the state of affairs in other sectors of the national economy, primarily in the agricultural sector. In addition, it was beyond the power of the state to raise the entire industry at once, and a number of priorities had to be identified with which to start. They were formulated in a speech by V.I. Lenin at the XI Conference of the RCP (b) in May 1921 and were as follows: support for small and medium-sized enterprises with the participation of private and equity capital; reorientation of the production programs of a part of large enterprises to the production of consumer and peasant products; the transfer of all large-scale industry to self-financing, while expanding the independence and initiative of each enterprise. These provisions formed the basis of industrial policy, which began to be implemented in stages.

The new economic policy came into life gradually, manifested itself in different ways in various sectors of the national economy and provoked sharp criticism both from the part of the working class, concentrated primarily on large industrial enterprises, the fate of which was to be decided last, and from the part of the working class. leadership of the Bolshevik Party, who did not want to "compromise principles." As a result, the new economic policy went through a series of acute socio-political and economic crises that kept the whole country in suspense in the 1920s. The first crisis occurred already in 1922, when successes in stabilizing the national economy were not yet visible, but some negative aspects of the NEP appeared: the role of private capital increased, especially in trade, the term “Nepman” appeared, and a revival of bourgeois ideology was observed. Part of the Bolshevik leadership began to openly express dissatisfaction with the NEP, and its creator V.I. Lenin was forced to declare at the 11th Party Congress that the retreat in the sense of concessions to capitalism was over and private capital had to be placed within the proper limits and regulated.

However, the successes in the agricultural sector in 1922-1923. somewhat reduced the severity of the confrontation in the leadership and gave the NEP internal impulses for development. In 1923, the disproportion in the development of agriculture, which had been accelerating for two years already, and in industry, which had just begun to emerge from the crisis, had its effect. A concrete manifestation of this disproportion was the "price crisis", or "price scissors". In conditions when agricultural production was already 70% of the 1913 level, and large-scale industrial production - only 39%, prices for agricultural products fell sharply, while prices for manufactured goods continued to remain high. On these "scissors" the village lost 500 million rubles, or half of its effective demand.

The discussion of the "price crisis" turned into an open party discussion, and a solution was found as a result of the application of purely economic measures. Prices for manufactured goods fell, and a good harvest in agriculture allowed the industry to find a wide and capacious market for selling their goods.

In 1924 a new "price crisis" began, but for other reasons. The peasants, having gathered a good harvest, decided not to sell it (bread) to the state at fixed prices, but to sell it on the market, where private merchants gave the peasants a good price. By the end of 1924, prices for agricultural products rose sharply and the bulk of the profits went into the hands of the most prosperous peasants - the holders of grain. The discussion about the "crisis of prices" broke out again in the party, which was already more acute, as the leaders of the party split into supporters of continued encouragement of the development of the agrarian sector and further concessions to the peasantry and a very influential force that insisted on increased attention to the development of heavy industry. And although the supporters of the first point of view formally won and also got out of this crisis by economic methods, this was their last victory. In addition, hasty measures were taken to restrict the private trader in the market, which led to its disorganization and discontent of the working masses.

In the mid 20s. NEP's success in reviving the Russian economy was obvious. They were especially affected in the field of agriculture, which practically restored the level of pre-war production. State purchases of grain from the peasants in 1925 amounted to 8.9 million tons. Funds for the development of industry were accumulated in the countryside as a result of overpayments by the peasants for industrial goods, which continued to be sold at inflated prices. Strengthened the financial system of the Soviet state. The gold chervonets, universally introduced in March 1924, became a stable national currency, quite popular on the world market. The implementation of a strict credit and tax policy, the profitable sale of bread allowed the Soviet state to make big profits. Rates of growth industrial production in 1922 - 1927 averaged 30 - 40%, and agriculture - 12 - 14%.

However, despite the significant pace of development, the situation in industry, and especially in heavy industry, did not look very good. Industrial production by the mid-20s. still far behind the pre-war level. Difficulties in industrial development caused huge unemployment, which in 1923-1924. exceeded 1 million people. Unemployment mainly hit young people, who made up no more than 20% of those employed in production. These distortions in the development of the national economy began to be viewed by part of the leadership as undermining the social base Soviet power.

These two reasons: the euphoria from the real successes in the economy and the difficulties in implementing industrial policy led to the beginning of a turn in the implementation of the NEP, which took place in the second half of the 1920s. Already in 1925-26 households. In 1999, the Soviet government planned a huge export of grain for the purchase of foreign equipment for the re-equipment of domestic industry. In addition, measures were envisaged to strengthen the centralized management of the economy and to strengthen the public sector in the national economy. This policy ran into new economic difficulties. In 1925, the volume of grain procurements was reduced and the government was forced to abandon its plans. Investment in industry declined, imports fell, and the countryside again experienced a shortage of manufactured goods. It was decided to increase the agricultural tax on kulaks and at the same time to think over a system of state measures to regulate prices. These measures were already administrative, not economic in nature.

Despite the measures taken, state grain procurements not only did not grow, but even decreased. In 1926, 11.6 million tons of grain were harvested, in 1927 - 11, and in 1928 - 10.9. Meanwhile, the industry demanded an increase in capital investments. In 1927, the volume of industrial production for the first time exceeded the pre-war level. New industrial construction began. In 1926, 4 large power plants were built in the country and 7 new mines were put into operation, and in 1927 another 14 power plants were built, among them the Dneproges and 16 mines. Money for industry was sought through emission, which in 1926-1928. amounted to 1.3-1.4 billion rubles; by raising prices; through the export of grain, which in 1928 amounted to 89 thousand tons; by seeking funds within industry itself—as early as 1925, large-scale industry's own savings covered 41.5 percent of all its expenditures.

However, all these sources could not cover the shortage of funds for financing industry in conditions when the pace of its development began to increase. The fate of industry was in the hands of the peasant, who had to be forced again to give everything he produced to the state. The fate of NEP depended on the methods used to resolve the issue of relations between town and countryside.

Meanwhile, the state of affairs in agriculture and the countryside was not easy. On the one hand, the rise of industry and the introduction of hard currency stimulated the restoration of agriculture. The sown areas began to gradually increase: in 1923 they reached 91.7 million hectares, which was 99.3% of the level of 1913. In 1925, the gross grain harvest was almost 20.7% higher than the average annual harvest for 1909-1913 . By 1927, the pre-war level was almost reached in animal husbandry. However, the growth of large commodity peasant farming was restrained by tax policy. In 1922-1923. was exempted from agricultural tax 3%, in 1923-1924. - 14%, in 1925-1926. - 25%, in 1927 - 35% of the poorest peasant farms. Wealthy peasants and kulaks, who made up in 1923-1924. 9.6% of peasant households paid 29.2% of the tax amount. In the future, the share of this group in taxation increased even more. As a result, the rate of fragmentation of peasant farms was in the 20s. twice as high as before the revolution, with all the ensuing negative consequences for the development of production and especially its marketability. By separating the farms, the wealthy sections of the countryside tried to escape from the tax pressure. The low marketability of peasant farms held back, and then led to underestimated exports of agricultural products, and hence imports, which are so necessary for the modernization of the country's equipment.

Already at the XV Congress of the CPSU (b) in December 1927, in a speech by I.V. Stalin emphasized the need for a gradual but steady unification of individual peasant farms into large economic collectives. The crisis in grain procurements in the winter of 1928 played an important role in the transition to a different variant of the country's development. After his trip to Siberia in January 1928, I.V. Stalin became a supporter of the use of emergency measures during grain procurements: the application of the relevant articles of the criminal code, the forcible seizure of grain from the peasants.

The results of the new economic policy cannot be assessed unambiguously. On the one hand, its impact on the economy should be recognized as favorable. In the 20s. managed to restore the national economy and even surpass the pre-war level solely at the expense of internal reserves. Successes in the revival of agriculture made it possible to feed the population of the country, and in 1927-28. The USSR overtook pre-revolutionary Russia in terms of food consumption: the townspeople and especially the peasants began to eat better than before the revolution. Thus, the consumption of bread per capita by peasants increased in 1928 to 250 kg (before 1921 - 217), meat - 25 kg (before 1917 - 12 kg). The national income at that time increased by 18% per year and by 1928 it was 10% higher per capita than the level of 1913. And this was not a simple quantitative increase. During 1924-1928, when industry was not just recovering, but switched to expanded reproduction, with an increase in the number of labor forces by 10% per year, the growth industrial products amounted to 30% annually, which testified to the rapid growth of labor productivity. The strong national currency of the Soviet country made it possible to use export-import operations to revive the economy, although their scale was insignificant due to the intransigence of both sides. The material well-being of the population increased. In 1925-1926. the average working day for industrial workers was 7.4 hours. The share of those who worked overtime gradually decreased from 23.1% in 1923 to 18% in 1928. All workers and employees had the right to regular annual leave of at least two weeks. The years of NEP are characterized by an increase in the real wages of workers, which in 1925-1926. the average for industry was 93.7% of the pre-war level.

On the other hand, the implementation of the NEP was difficult and was accompanied by a number of negative aspects. The main one was associated with the disproportionate development of the main sectors of the country's economy. Successes in the restoration of agriculture and the obvious lag in the pace of the revival of industry led the New Economic Policy through a period of economic crises, which were extremely difficult to resolve by economic methods alone. In the countryside, there was a social and property differentiation of the peasantry, which led to an increase in tension between the various poles. in the city throughout the 1920s. unemployment increased, which by the end of the NEP amounted to more than 2 million people. Unemployment created an unhealthy climate in the city. The financial system got stronger only for a while. Already in the second half of the 20s. in connection with the active financing of heavy industry, the market equilibrium was disturbed, inflation began, which undermined the financial and credit system. However, the main contradiction that led to the collapse of the New Economic Policy lay not in the sphere of the economy, which could develop further on the principles of the NEP, but between the economy and the political system, designed to use administrative-command methods of management. This contradiction became irreconcilable in the late 1920s, and politic system resolved it by curtailing the NEP.

It must be emphasized that in the specific conditions of the existence of the USSR at the turn of the 1920s and 1930s, in a situation where the country was surrounded by a ring of hostile states, when, in order to solve a qualitatively new and super-difficult task of modernizing the country with the aim of decisive, and most importantly, quickly overcoming backwardness, the USSR could not count on the influx of foreign capital (a prerequisite for industrialization is the example of France, the USA, tsarist Russia and other countries), and the possibilities of the NEP were very limited.

At the same time, it should be noted that the Leninist NEP, as the famous American historian W. Davis wrote, gave the world three elements of the economy of the future: state regulation, a mixed economy, and private enterprise. The example of today's China, which successfully solves the problems of its economic development on the principles of neo-nep, testifies to the great historical significance of the economic policy of the Bolsheviks in the 1920s.

Intra-party struggle

As already noted, the new economic policy gave rise to a number of serious contradictions. A large proportion of them were of a political nature, because the "private revival of capitalism" was carried out by the party, the formation of which took place not on the path of compromise with capital, but in a tough and merciless struggle against it. A significant part of the communists, as well as significant segments of the population, perceived the NEP as a return to private property, and with it to social injustice and inequality. The “Workers' Opposition”, which had a fairly broad base in the party and the working class, practically did not accept the new course. Its leaders A. Shlyapnikov and V. Medvedev openly declared that the NEP was incompatible with the principles of the dictatorship of the proletariat and contrary to the spirit and letter of the party program. They believed that the peasantry, the bourgeoisie and the urban philistinism took advantage of the fruits of the victory of the working class, while the proletarians again turned into exploited sections of society. The "Working Group" headed by A. Myasnikov opposed NEP, deciphering this abbreviation as "new exploitation of the proletariat." The party leadership could not disregard the forecasts of the Russian emigration about the development of the Soviet state along the paths of the New Economic Policy. In the early 20s. “Smenovekhovism” appeared, the ideologists of which, in particular N. Ustryalov, called on the emigration to make peace with the Soviet government and abandon active struggle against it, because “ revolutionary Russia is transformed in its social essence into a "bourgeois", proprietary country". Such assessments echoed the assessments of the NEP within the Bolshevik Party, in which significant sections of the communists associated the possibility of restoring capitalism with the private-property psychology of the peasantry, which, under favorable conditions, could become the mass support of the counter-revolution. Many party members believed that the NEP did not advance, but threw back, conserving the routine and backwardness of the country.

If the party leaders were relatively easy to remove from the active political life leaders of the "workers' opposition", then with the oppositions that were already taking shape within the framework of the NEP course, the situation was much more complicated. Among the party elite, heated discussions are unfolding on key issues of the country's socio-economic development, which have become to a large extent a kind of ideological veil of the struggle for power, characteristic of the internal party life of the 1920s.

L. Trotsky was the first to attack the Politburo. In the conditions of the crisis of 1923, he accused the "dictatorship of the party apparatus" of unsystematic economic decisions and of imposing in the RCP (b) orders incompatible with party democracy. Trotsky insisted on the "dictatorship of industry" in the national economy, which ultimately did not fit into the course adopted at the Tenth Congress for an equal economic union of the working class and the peasantry. Simultaneously with Trotsky, 46 prominent members of the party addressed the Politburo with a letter (“Statement of the 46”, signed by E. Preobrazhensky, V. Serebryakov, A. Bubnov, G. Pyatakov and others), in which the majority faction in the Politburo was accused of inconsistent politics. The triumvirate formed on the basis of the struggle against Trotsky - Stalin - Zinoviev - Kamenev - managed at the Thirteenth Party Conference (January 1924) to pass a resolution characterizing the views of Trotsky and his supporters as a "direct departure from Leninism" and as a "petty-bourgeois" deviation in the party. The XIII Congress of the RCP (b) supported the decisions of the party conference. Trotsky soon loses leading positions in the party and the army, but continues to be an authoritative leader, to claim leading roles in the party and the state.

Since the mid 20s. The question of the possibility of building socialism in one country became the center of attention of intra-party discussions. Back in 1916, V.I. Lenin theoretically substantiated the possibility of the victory of the socialist revolution in one country, and then later, in his last articles, gave a positive answer to this question. After the death of Lenin, I. Stalin firmly defended the Leninist course of building socialism in one country. It was obvious to Stalin that the industrial potential inherited from old Russia did not provide acceptable rates of economic development, since the main production assets of factories and plants were obsolete and hopelessly lagged behind modern requirements.

Foreign policy factors also played a role. In the mid 20s. relations between the USSR and Great Britain and China worsened. In August 1924, the "Dawes Plan" was adopted, and foreign, mainly American, loans went to Germany in a wide stream. The party leadership has repeatedly stressed that the country is in a hostile imperialist environment and lives under the constant threat of war. The agrarian country had no chance to survive in the event of a military confrontation with the industrialized powers. The need to modernize the country was increasingly evident. Finally, the problem of locating the economic potential, which was mainly concentrated in the European part of the country, had to be solved. A new location of production facilities was required.

Under conditions of changing international conditions, above all the stabilization of capitalism in America and Europe, which made the possibility of a world revolution unrealistic, Stalin abandoned the concept of world revolution and world socialism and transferred the problem of building socialism in one country from an abstract theoretical area to the area of ​​party practice. In the autumn of 1925, G. Zinoviev spoke out against the theory of "socialism in one country". He criticized Stalin's "nationally limited" views, linking the possibilities of socialist construction in the USSR only with the victory of revolutions in Europe and the USA. At the same time, Zinoviev took a step towards Trotsky, supporting his conclusions about the impossibility of the victory of socialism in the USSR without the support of the world revolution. A "new opposition" has arisen. At the Fourteenth Party Congress, the "new opposition" tried to give battle to Stalin and Bukharin. At the center of criticism of the party leadership by the opposition were Stalin's ideas about the possibility of building socialism in the USSR, as well as the thesis about underestimating the danger of strengthening capitalist elements under the NEP. However, Stalin managed to carry out his decisions at the congress. The XIV Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks went down in history as an industrialization congress: it made an extremely important decision to take a course towards achieving the economic independence of the USSR. In the field of development of the national economy, the congress set the following tasks: To ensure economic independence for the USSR, protecting the USSR from becoming an appendage of the capitalist world economy, for which purpose to steer a course towards the industrialization of the country, the development of production, the means of production and the formation of reserves for economic maneuvering».

After the Fourteenth Congress, the struggle in the party unfolded over the methods, rates and sources of accumulation for industrialization. Two approaches emerged: the left, led by L. Trotsky, called for super-industrialization, while the right, led by N. Bukharin, advocated softer transformations. Bukharin emphasized that the policy of over-industrialization, the transfer of funds from the agrarian sector of the economy to the industrial sector, would destroy the alliance between the working class and peasants. Stalin supported Bukharin's point of view until 1928. Speaking at the Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (April 1926), Stalin defended the thesis about " the minimum rate of development of industry, which is necessary for the victory of socialist construction". The 15th Party Congress in December 1927 adopted directives for drawing up the first five-year plan. This document formulated planning principles based on strict observance of proportions between accumulation and consumption, industry and agriculture, heavy and light industry, resources, and so on. The congress proceeded from the correct orientation towards the balanced development of the national economy. At the suggestion of the Chairman of the State Planning Committee of the USSR Krzhizhanovsky, two versions of the five-year plan were developed - the starting (minimum) and optimal. The tasks of the optimal variant were about 20% higher than the minimum. The Central Committee of the party took as a basis the best version of the plan, which in May 1929 the All-Union Congress of Soviets adopted as a law. Historians, when evaluating the first five-year plan, unanimously note the balance of its tasks, which, despite their scale, were quite real.

However, at the end of 1929, I. Stalin switched to the point of view of the policy of a super-industrial leap. Speaking in December 1929 at the congress of shock workers, he put forward the slogan “ Five years - four years!". At the same time, planned targets were revised in the direction of their increase. The task was set to double capital investments and increase production by 30% annually. A course is taken for the implementation of an industrial breakthrough in the shortest possible historical period. The course towards super-industrialization was largely due to the impatience of the party leadership, as well as of the general population, to put an end to acute socio-economic problems at once and ensure the victory of socialism in the USSR by revolutionary methods of radically breaking the existing economic structure and national economic proportions. The bet on the industrial breakthrough was also closely connected with the course towards the complete collectivization of agriculture, which subordinated this vast sector of the economy to the state and created favorable conditions for the transfer of financial, raw materials and labor resources from the agricultural sector of the economy to the industrial one.

Speaking about the reasons for the turn to an industrial leap, one should also keep in mind foreign policy aspects. In the second half of 1929 Western countries from a period of stabilization enter a period of severe economic crisis and in the Soviet leadership again there are hopes and the conviction grows stronger in the approaching collapse of the bourgeois world. Under these conditions, as the Kremlin believed, a favorable moment had come for an industrial breakthrough into the advanced powers, thus the historical dispute with capitalism could be resolved in favor of socialism. Therefore, it is no coincidence that, justifying the turn to forced industrialization, Stalin emphasized: … to slow down is to fall behind. And the retards are beaten. But we do not want to be beaten ... We have fallen behind advanced countries for 50 - 100 years. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it or we will be crushed.". Such an appeal seemed to many to be the only right decision and found a response in the general population.

From point of view internal development countries forced industrialization was dictated, according to Stalin, as already noted, the need to create prerequisites for the speedy collectivization of the peasantry. Stalin and his supporters believed that it was impossible to somehow base Soviet power on both large-scale state industry and individual small-scale production, since the growth and aggravation of the class struggle on a scale dangerous for the existence of the Soviet system is inevitable.

The Stalinist model of development was a variant of stepwise modernization, based on the maximum concentration of resources in the main direction due to the tension of the entire economic system. In this strategy, everything was aimed at increasing the pace of industrial development, so that in the shortest possible historical period not only to overcome backwardness, but also to bring the country to the rank of the great powers of the world. For the sake of high rates and their constant maintenance, it is proposed to expand investment in industry in every possible way, including through a reduction in the consumption fund and the most severe savings in funds that determine the standard of living of the masses, the transfer of funds from the area of ​​\u200b\u200bproduction of group B to group A, although this inevitably led to acute shortage of consumer goods, to commodity hunger. It was proclaimed acceptable to use not quite balanced, tense plans, which, in conditions of a shortage of goods, inevitably led to an inflationary rise in prices.

A detailed justification for the option of forced construction of socialism was given in the documents of the XVI-XVII congresses of the CPSU (b), in the reports and speeches of I.V. Stalin 1928-1934 The logical continuation of the adoption of the maximum rate of industrialization as essential funds its achievement is the line for the restructuring of the methods, the very style of managing the national economy. Neither the rapid "transfer" of funds from consumption funds to the accumulation fund, nor the widespread use of non-economic measures of pressure on the peasantry are possible in the context of the NEP and the development of commodity market relations. Therefore, the abolition of the main provisions of the NEP was a necessary condition for the implementation of the development option that Stalin advocated. Instead of economic in the Stalinist version, the main place was to be occupied by administrative-command forms of managing the national economy.

How vital was Bukharin's model? In those specific political, socio-economic and foreign policy conditions in which the USSR found itself, the idea of ​​a balanced development of the industrial and agricultural sectors of the economy, its implementation was significantly limited due to the lack of an influx of foreign capital. In addition, the USSR did not have and could not have colonies. Also, our country could not use such a traditional source of "capitalist" industrialization as indemnity as a result of a victorious war of conquest. The complete absence of an influx of foreign capital and other traditional sources of Western modernization began to be compensated by minimizing non-production costs, the labor enthusiasm of the people, the transfer of funds from the agricultural sector to the industrial sector, and the widespread use of non-economic coercion.

Collectivization became an integral part of the Bolshevik modernization of the country. Collectivization had several main goals. First of all, this is the official goal, fixed in party and state documents, in speeches, etc., to carry out socialist transformations in the countryside: to create large mechanized collective farms instead of unprofitable small-scale peasant farms, capable of providing the country with products and raw materials. However, this goal did not justify the often crude methods and extremely short deadlines for collectivization. In many respects, the forms, methods and timing of collectivization were explained by its second goal - to ensure at any cost an uninterrupted supply of cities that were growing rapidly in the course of industrial construction. The main features of collectivization, as it were, were projected from the strategy of forced industrialization. The frantic pace of industrial growth, urbanization required a sharp increase in extremely short periods of food supplies to the city, for export. This, in turn, determined the appropriate pace of collectivization and the methods of its implementation: the lack of capital, the shortage of goods inevitably led to the growth of non-economic coercion in the agrarian sector; bread, other products, the further, the more they did not buy from the peasants, but "took". This led to a reduction in production by prosperous households, to open actions of kulaks against local authorities and village activists.

By 1927 collectivization was completed. Instead of 25 million small peasant farms, 400,000 collective farms began to operate.

Based on the subordinate position of collectivization in relation to industrialization, it fulfilled the tasks assigned to it: 1) reduced the number of people employed in agriculture; 2) supported with a smaller number of employed food production at a level that does not allow hunger; 3) provided the industry with irreplaceable technical raw materials. After the severe upheavals of the early 30s. in the middle of the decade the situation in the agrarian sector stabilized: in 1935 the card system was abolished, labor productivity increased, the country gained cotton independence; during the 30s. 20 million people were released from agriculture, which made it possible to increase the size of the working class from 9 to 24 million.

The main result of collectivization was that it ensured the solution of the main strategic task - the implementation of the industrial breakthrough. As a result, the transition of the entire economy to a single state track was ensured. The state approved its ownership not only of the land, but also of the products produced on it. It got the opportunity to plan the development of agriculture, to strengthen its material and technical base. An important result of collectivization was the increase in the marketability of agriculture. This led not only to the stabilization of the supply of grain to cities, workers, employees and the army, but also made it possible to increase the state stocks of grain, which was extremely important in case of war. It should also be noted that the policy of collectivization, despite all its shortcomings and difficulties, was supported by the poorest peasantry and significant sections of the middle peasants, who hoped to improve their position in the collective farms.

So, the Bolshevik modernization of the Soviet state had its own characteristics. It was carried out without an injection of foreign capital. Its tasks were solved at the expense of the country's internal resources. It was carried out directly in heavy industry without preliminary development of light industry. The primary tasks of industrialization were solved in the first and second five-year plans. The first five-year plan developed the GOELRO plan. It was designed to ensure that in 1929-1933. turn the USSR into an industrial power. It was a top priority. In the course of its implementation, the initial indicators increased, measures were taken to spur the pace of construction. The country's leadership stated that the targets set by the five-year plan were achieved ahead of schedule. The data show that this was not the case. But they cannot belittle the progress made. History cannot forget the commissioning of the Dneproges, the creation of the 2nd coal and metallurgical base in the east (Ural-Kuznetsk Combine), the construction of the Kuznetsk and Magnitogorsk metallurgical plants, coal mines in the Donbass, Kuzbass and Karaganda, the Stalingrad and Kharkov tractor plants, Moscow and Gorky automobile plants and many other enterprises, the total number of which was 1500.

The second five-year plan, covering 1933-1937, set itself the task of completing the creation of a technical base in all sectors. As a result, 4,500 large state-owned enterprises were put into operation. Among the largest are the Ural and Kramatorsk Heavy Engineering Plants, the Ural Carriage and Chelyabinsk Tractor Plants, metallurgical plants"Azovstal", "Zaporozhstal" and many other plants, industrial enterprises. These were labor exploits of the Soviet industry. They included the Stakhanov movement and other labor initiatives. The organizer of mass labor enthusiasm was the established party-administrative system, the activities of trade union and Komsomol organizations. Labor enthusiasm was also born under the powerful ideological influence propagated by political slogans. A certain material interest in production and construction was also manifested in this. The system of moral encouragement for those who distinguished themselves in work was also important. An important driver of the labor enthusiasm of many heroes of industrialization was their belief that they were really building a bright future for themselves and their Motherland. An important source labor exploits of the 30s. there was, of course, Russian patriotism, which always rescued the country in difficult and responsible times for it, the awareness of the historical necessity of the industrial breakthrough of their homeland.

The results of the pre-war five-year plans

The enormous efforts of many millions of people made it possible to make a grandiose shift in the Soviet state. For 1928-1941 Almost 9,000 large and medium-sized enterprises were built in the USSR. During this period, the growth rate of industrial production in the USSR exceeded the corresponding indicators in Russia in 1900-1913 by about 2 times. and amounted to almost 11% per year. In the 30s. The USSR became one of the four countries in the world capable of producing any kind of industrial product. In terms of absolute indicators of the volume of industrial production, the USSR came in 2nd place in the world after the USA (Russia in 1913 - 5th place). In 1940, the USSR surpassed Britain in electricity production by 21%, France - by 45%, Germany - by 32%; in the extraction of the main types of fuel, respectively, England - by 32%, France - by more than 4 times, Germany - by 33%; in terms of steel production, the USSR during this period surpassed England by 39%, France - four times, Germany - by 8%. The backlog of the USSR from the advanced countries of the world in terms of industrial output per capita has also decreased.

In the 20s. this gap was 5-10 times, and in 1940 - from 1.5 to 4 times. Finally, Soviet Union eliminated its stage gap from the West: from a pre-industrial country, the USSR turned into a powerful industrial power.

Major changes in the socio-economic sphere in the 30s. in the USSR were also accompanied by the implementation of the policy of the cultural revolution. The purpose of such a revolution from above was to create a new socialist culture. Clearly organized state measures during this period actively solved the problem of eliminating the illiteracy of the population. On the eve of the implementation of the industrialization policy in the USSR, there were practically no own cadres of industry managers, their own engineering and technical staff, there were even no qualified workers. In 1940, there were almost 200,000 general education schools in the USSR with 35 million students. Over 600,000 studied at vocational schools. Almost 4,600 universities and technical schools worked. The USSR came out on top in the world in terms of the number of pupils and students. Significant progress was also made in the development of science and technology. More than 1800 scientific institutions operated. The largest were the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences (VASKhNIL), the Research Physics Institute. P.N.Lebedeva, institutes of organic chemistry, physical problems, geophysics and others. Such scientists as N.I. Vavilov, S.V. Lebedev, D.V. Skobeltsin, D.D. Ivanenko, A.F. Ioffe, N.N. Semenov, K.E. Tsiolkovsky, F.A. Zander and others. New phenomena appeared in the development of fiction, various branches of art, and the formation of Soviet cinematography took place.

In the 30s. The political system of the Soviet society has undergone major changes. The core of this system - the CPSU (b) - increasingly grew into state structures. The old Bolsheviks were replaced by young cadres, who differed little from managers in the proper sense of the word. From January 1934 to March 1939, more than 500,000 new workers were promoted to leading party and government posts. Real political power concentrated in party organs. Soviets only formally, according to the Constitution, were the political basis of Soviet society. In the 30s. their activities are mainly focused on solving economic, cultural and educational problems. Legally, the supreme body of state power in the USSR, according to the Constitution of 1936, was the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, and the highest body government controlled- Advice people's commissars. However, in reality, the highest power was concentrated in the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks.

Summing up the qualitative political, socio-economic and cultural transformations, the party-state leadership announced at the end of the 30s. about the victory of socialism mainly in the USSR. This conclusion was justified by the fact that private ownership of the means of production was eliminated in the country, free enterprise disappeared, and a transition was made from a market economy to a state-planned economy. Has changed and social structure society. The exploiting classes have left the stage, the exploitation of man by man has been overcome, unemployment is gone. Other qualitative changes were noted in Soviet society. On this basis, the 18th Congress of the Bolshevik Party in 1939 set as the main political task in the Third Five-Year Plan the completion of the building of socialism in the USSR and the subsequent gradual transition to communism.

The level of human consumption remained low. Nevertheless, the country has achieved impressive economic results. Millions of Soviet people received an education, significantly improved their social status, joined the industrial culture; tens of thousands, having risen from the very bottom, took key positions in the economic, military, and political elite. For millions of Soviet people, the construction of a new society opened up a perspective, the meaning of life. Obviously, all these circumstances formed the basis of the cheerful attitude of a significant part of the Soviet people of that time that struck Western cultural figures and surprises us today. The writer Henri Gide, who visited the USSR in 1936 and noticed the “negative” in the then Soviet reality (poverty, the suppression of dissent, etc.), nevertheless notes: “ However, there is a fact: the Russian people seem happy. Here I have no differences with Wildrac and Jean Pons, and I read their essays with a feeling similar to nostalgia. Because I also argued: in no other country, except for the USSR, the people - met on the street (at least young people), factory workers relaxing in cultural parks - do not look so joyful and smiling».

Ultimately, the 20s. entered the history of the country as a stage when, in an extremely short historical period, a leap was made from an agrarian to an industrial society, thanks to which a powerful socio-economic and military potential of the Soviet Union was created and without which victory over Nazi Germany was impossible. This is what it consists historical meaning labor feat of millions of Soviet people.

The history of homeland. Edited by M.V. Zotova. — 2nd ed., corrected. and additional
M.: Publishing House of MGUP, 2001. 208 p. 1000 copies

REMINDER: The inscriptions may be inaccurate, and sometimes completely slurred. Let's try to bring them into a divine form together. And the author is not responsible for them.
Arrival of the participants of the international congress of soil scientists in Moscow. Russia, 1930

Opening of the international congress of soil scientists. In the background is a portrait of Lenin on the wall. Russia, 1930.

Members of the International Congress of Soil Scientists visiting the Moscow Kremlin. Russia, 1930.

A group of people during the 14th anniversary of the revolution on Red Square in Moscow on November 7, 1931.

The streets of Moscow are being built at a hasty pace. Moscow, 1931

The Kremlin (with a flag), and in the foreground the Lenin Mausoleum. Moscow, Russia, 1932.

A beggar in rags on a street in Moscow, 1932

Two men on the roof overlooking the center of Moscow and the Kremlin. 1932.

Boarding the tram. 1932

Women with children somewhere in the poor areas of Moscow. 1932

A man with a briefcase sits on a chair against the background of an artificial romantic landscape, waiting for a picture from a street photographer. Moscow, 1932.

Workers visit one of the many museums in Moscow.1932

Bolsheviks and the Church. 1932

View of pedestrians, cars, buses and trams on Sverdlov Square (formerly Teatralnaya Square) in Moscow. Photo taken from the top of the Bolshoi Theater 1932

This photograph was taken during a large parade on Red Square in Moscow, 1932.

Market in Moscow. Russia, 1933.

Top view of the May Day parade on Red Square. Moscow, USSR, 1933

Parts of the Russian army lined up on Red Square during the May Day parade. Moscow, USSR, 1933

Moscow during the celebration October revolution, 1933.

Tanks on Red Square in Moscow during the celebration of the October Revolution of 1917. Russia, 1933.

An impressive parade on Red Square in Moscow in honor of the 17th anniversary of the October Revolution. Russia, 1933.

A large parade on Red Square in Moscow during the celebration of the October Revolution of 1917. Russia, 1933.

The final part of the parade on Red Square in Moscow on the occasion of the 17th anniversary of the October Revolution was a parade of armored vehicles. Russia, 1933.

Hair extensions and wigs for sale. Moscow, 1933.

Professor Schmidt is the leader of the Arctic expedition on the icebreaker "Sibiryakov". At the North Station (?) in Moscow, he gives interviews to journalists. 1933

Red Square with a Soviet policeman, a traffic controller. Moscow, 1935

Metro tunnel in Moscow. 1935.

Panorama of Okhotny Ryad: metro station in the center of Moscow. On the left, a building under construction and a mountain of rubble in the foreground. Moscow, 1935.

Panorama of Okhotny Ryad: metro station in the center of Moscow, the square is filled with horses and carts. Moscow, 1935.

Semicircular subway platform and tunnel. Moscow, Russia 1935

Underground metro stations. Moscow, 1935.

A game of chess between Salomon Flor and Vyacheslav Vasilieviches Rogozhin (right) during a chess tournament in Moscow, 1936

Chess player Jose Raul Capablanca in a match against Ryumin at a chess tournament in Moscow in 1936.

Representatives of various ethnic minorities in the "new" Soviet parliament. Moscow, 1938

View of the Red Square, where the sports parade takes place. Moscow, Russia, 1938

Contrary to the horror stories that are now being written about that time, it was in prewar years there was a symphony of power and people that is not often found in life. The people, inspired by the great idea of ​​building the first just society in the history of mankind without oppressors and the oppressed, showed miracles of heroism and selflessness. And the state in those years, now portrayed by our liberal historians and publicists as a monstrous repressive machine, responded to the people by taking care of them.

Free medicine and education, sanatoriums and rest houses, pioneer camps, kindergartens, libraries, circles became a mass phenomenon and were available to everyone. It is no coincidence that during the war, according to the recollections of eyewitnesses, people dreamed of only one thing: that everything should become as it was before the war.

Here is what, for example, the US Ambassador wrote about that time in 1937-1938. Joseph E. Davis:

“I visited five cities with a group of American journalists, where I inspected the largest enterprises: a tractor plant (12 thousand workers), an electric motor plant (38 thousand workers), Dneproges, an aluminum plant (3 thousand workers), which is considered the largest in the world, Zaporizhstal (35 thousand workers), a hospital (18 doctors and 120 nurses), nurseries and kindergartens, the Rostselmash plant (16 thousand workers), the Palace of Pioneers (a building with 280 rooms for 320 teachers and 27 thousand children). The last of these institutions is one of the most interesting developments in the Soviet Union. Similar palaces are being built in all major cities and are intended to implement the Stalinist slogan about children as the most valuable asset of the country. Here, children reveal and develop their talents ... "

And everyone was sure that his talent would not wither and would not go to waste, that he had every opportunity to fulfill any dream in all spheres of life. The doors of secondary and higher schools were opened to the children of workers and peasants. Social elevators worked at full capacity, elevating yesterday's workers and peasants to the heights of power, opening before them the horizons of science, the wisdom of technology, the stages of the stage. "In the everyday life of great construction projects" a new country, unprecedented in the world, was rising - "the country of heroes, the country of dreamers, the country of scientists."

And in order to destroy any possibility of exploiting a person - whether it be a private trader or the state - the first decrees in the USSR introduced an eight-hour working day. In addition, a six-hour working day was established for adolescents, the work of children under 14 years of age was prohibited, labor protection was established, and production training for young people was introduced at the expense of the state. While the United States and the West were suffocating in the grip of the Great Depression, in the Soviet Union in 1936, 5 million workers had a six-hour or more reduced working day, almost 9% of industrial workers took a day off after four days of work, 10% of workers, employed in continuous production, after three eight-hour working days received two days off.

The wages of workers and employees, as well as the personal incomes of collective farmers, more than doubled. Adults probably don’t remember, and young people don’t even know that during the Great Patriotic War, some collective farmers donated planes and tanks to the front, built on personal savings, which they managed to accumulate in a not so long time that had passed after the “criminal” collectivization. How did they do it?

The fact is that the number of mandatory workdays for "free slaves" in the thirties was 60-100 (depending on the region). After that, the collective farmer could work for himself - on his plot or in a production cooperative, of which there were a huge number throughout the USSR. As the creator of the Russian Project website, publicist Pavel Krasnov, writes, “... In Stalinist USSR those wishing to show personal initiative had every opportunity to do so in the cooperative movement. It was impossible only to use hired labor, contractual cooperative - as much as you like.

There was a powerful cooperative movement in the country, almost 2 million people constantly worked in cooperatives, who produced 6% of the gross industrial output of the USSR: 40% of all furniture, 70% of all metal utensils, 35% of knitwear, almost 100% of toys.

In addition, there were 100 cooperative design bureaus, 22 experimental laboratories, and two research institutes in the country. This does not include part-time cooperative rural artels. Up to 30 million people worked in them in the 1930s.

It was possible to engage in individual work - for example, to have your own darkroom, paying taxes on it, doctors could have a private practice, and so on. The cooperatives usually involved high-class professionals in their field, organized in efficient structures, which explains their high contribution to the production of the USSR.

All this was liquidated by Khrushchev at an accelerated pace from the age of 56 - the property of cooperatives and private entrepreneurs was confiscated, even personal subsidiary plots and private livestock.

We add that at the same time, in 1956, the number of mandatory workdays was increased to three hundred. The results were not long in coming - the first problems with the products immediately appeared.

In the thirties, piecework wages were also widely used. Additional bonuses were practiced for the safety of mechanisms, savings in electricity, fuel, raw materials, and materials. Bonuses were introduced for overfulfillment of the plan, cost reduction, production output high quality. A well-thought-out system of training qualified workers in industry and agriculture was carried out. During the years of the second five-year plan alone, about 6 million people were trained instead of the 5 million envisaged by the plan.

Finally, in the USSR, for the first time in the world, unemployment was eliminated - the most difficult and insoluble social problem under the conditions of market capitalism. The right to work enshrined in the Constitution of the USSR has become real for everyone. Already in 1930, during the first five-year plan, labor exchanges ceased to exist.

Along with the industrialization of the country, with the construction of new plants and factories, housing construction was also carried out. State and cooperative enterprises and organizations, collective farms and the population put into operation 67.3 million square meters in the second five-year plan usable area dwellings. With the help of the state and collective farms, rural workers built 800,000 houses.

Investment investments by state and cooperative organizations in housing construction, together with individual investments, increased by 1.8 times compared with the first five-year plan. Apartments, as we remember, were provided free of charge at the lowest rent in the world. And, probably, few people know that during the second five-year plan, almost as much money was invested in housing, communal and cultural construction, in health care in the rapidly developing Soviet Union as in heavy industry.

In 1935, the best subway in the world in terms of technical equipment and decoration was put into operation. In the summer of 1937, the Moscow-Volga canal was put into operation, which solved the problem of the capital's water supply and improved its transport links.

In the 1930s, not only did dozens of new cities grow in the country, but water supply was built in 42 cities, sewerage was built in 38 cities, a transport network developed, new tram lines were launched, the bus fleet expanded, and a trolleybus began to be introduced.

During the years of the pre-war five-year plans in the country, for the first time in world practice, social forms of popular consumption, which, in addition to wages, each soviet family. Funds from them went to the construction and maintenance of housing, cultural and community institutions, free education and medical care, various pensions and allowances. Three times, in comparison with the first five-year plan, spending on social security and social insurance has increased.

The network of sanatoriums and rest houses expanded rapidly, vouchers to which, purchased with social insurance funds, were distributed by trade unions among workers and employees free of charge or on preferential terms. During the second five-year plan alone, 8.4 million people rested and received medical treatment in rest homes and sanatoriums, and the cost of maintaining children in nurseries and kindergartens increased 10.7 times compared to the first five-year plan. The average life expectancy has risen.

Such a state could not but be perceived by the people as their own, national, native, for which it is not a pity to give their lives, for which one wants to perform feats ... As the embodiment of that revolutionary dream of a promised country, where the great idea of ​​​​people's happiness was visibly, before our eyes embodied in life. Stalin's words "Life has become better, life has become more fun" in perestroika and post-perestroika years, it is customary to scoff, but they reflected real changes in the social and economic life Soviet society.

These changes could not go unnoticed in the West either. We have already become accustomed to the fact that one cannot trust Soviet propaganda, that the truth about how things are in our country is only spoken in the West. Well, let's see how the capitalists assessed the successes of the Soviet state.

Thus, Gibbson Jarvey, chairman of United Dominion Bank, stated in October 1932:

“I want to make it clear that I am not a communist or a Bolshevik, I am a definite capitalist and individualist… Russia is moving forward while too many of our factories are idle and about 3 million of our people are desperately looking for work. The five-year plan was ridiculed and predicted to fail. But you can consider it beyond doubt that, under the terms of the five-year plan, more has been done than planned.

... In all the industrial cities I have visited, new districts are springing up, built according to a certain plan, with wide streets, decorated with trees and squares, with houses of the most modern type, schools, hospitals, workers' clubs and the inevitable nurseries and kindergartens where care is taken. about the children of working mothers…

Do not try to underestimate the Russian plans and do not make the mistake of hoping that the Soviet government may fail... Today's Russia is a country with a soul and an ideal. Russia is a country of amazing activity. I believe that Russia's aspirations are healthy... Perhaps the most important thing is that all the youth and workers in Russia have one thing that is unfortunately lacking today in the capitalist countries, namely, hope.

And here is what the Forward magazine (England) wrote in the same 1932:

“The huge work that is going on in the USSR is striking. New factories, new schools, new cinemas, new clubs, new huge houses - new buildings everywhere. Many of them have already been completed, others are still surrounded by forests. It is difficult to tell the English reader what has been done in the last two years and what is being done next. You have to see it all in order to believe it.

Our own achievements, which we achieved during the war, are nothing compared to what is being done in the USSR. Americans admit that even during the period of the most rapid creative fever in the Western states, there was nothing like the current feverish creative activity in the USSR. Over the past two years, so many changes have taken place in the USSR that you refuse to even imagine what will happen in this country in another 10 years.

Get the fantasy out of your head horror stories, told by English newspapers, which lie so stubbornly and absurdly about the USSR. Also throw out of your mind all those half-truths and impressions based on misunderstanding, which are set in motion by amateurish intellectuals who patronizingly look at the USSR through the eyes of the middle class, but have not the slightest idea of ​​what is happening there: the USSR is building a new society on healthy people. basics.

In order to achieve this goal, one must take risks, one must work with enthusiasm, with such energy as the world has never known before, one must struggle with the enormous difficulties that are inevitable when trying to build socialism in a vast country isolated from the rest of the world. Visiting this country for the second time in two years, I got the impression that it is on the path of lasting progress, plans and builds, and all this on a scale that is a clear challenge to the hostile capitalist world.

The forward was echoed by the American "Nation":

“The four years of the five-year plan have brought with them truly remarkable achievements. The Soviet Union worked with wartime intensity on the creative task of building basic life. The face of the country is literally changing beyond recognition: this is true of Moscow with its hundreds of newly paved streets and squares, new buildings, new suburbs and a cordon of new factories on its outskirts. This is also true of smaller cities.

New cities arose in the steppes and deserts, at least 50 cities with a population of 50 to 250 thousand people. All of them have emerged in the last four years, each of them is the center of a new enterprise or a number of enterprises built to develop domestic resources. Hundreds of new power plants and a number of giants, like Dneprostroy, are constantly implementing Lenin's formula: "Socialism is Soviet power plus electrification."

The Soviet Union organized the mass production of an infinite number of items that Russia had never produced before: tractors, combine harvesters, high-quality steels, synthetic rubber, ball bearings, powerful diesel engines, 50 thousand kilowatt turbines, telephone equipment, electric mining machines, airplanes , cars, bicycles and several hundred new types of machines.

For the first time in history, Russia mines aluminum, magnesite, apatite, iodine, potash and many other valuable products. The guiding points of the Soviet plains are no longer crosses and church domes, but grain elevators and silos. Collective farms are building houses, stables, pigsties. Electricity penetrates the village, radio and newspapers have conquered it. Workers learn to work on the latest machines. The peasant boys build and maintain agricultural machines that are bigger and more complex than anything America has ever seen. Russia begins to "think in machines". Russia is rapidly moving from the age of wood to the age of iron, steel, concrete and motors.”

This is how the proud British and Americans spoke about the USSR in the 30s, envying the Soviet people - our parents.

From the book by Nelli Goreslavskaya “Joseph Stalin. The Father of Nations and His Children”, Moscow, Knizhny Mir, 2011, pages 52-58.

Introduction

A radical revolution in the spiritual development of society, carried out in the USSR in the 20-30s. 20th century component socialist transformations. The theory of the cultural revolution was developed by V.I. Lenin. The cultural revolution and the construction of a new socialist way of life is aimed at changing the social composition of the post-revolutionary intelligentsia and at breaking with the traditions of the pre-revolutionary cultural heritage through the ideology of culture. The task of creating the so-called "proletarian culture" based on the Marxist-class ideology, "communist education", mass culture was put forward to the fore.

The construction of a new socialist way of life provided for the elimination of illiteracy, the creation of a socialist system of public education and enlightenment, the formation of a new, socialist intelligentsia, the restructuring of life, the development of science, literature, and art under party control. As a result of the implementation of the cultural revolution of the USSR, significant successes were achieved: according to the 1939 census, the literacy of the population began to be 70%; a first-class general education school was created in the USSR, the number of Soviet intelligentsia reached 14 million people; there was a flourishing of science and art. In the cultural development of the USSR came to the forefront in the world.

A distinctive feature of the Soviet period in the history of culture is the enormous role played by the party and the state in its development. The party and the state have established complete control over the spiritual life of society.

In the 1920s and 1930s, there was undoubtedly a powerful cultural shift in the USSR. If the social revolution destroyed the semi-medieval estates in the country, which divided society into “people” and “tops”, then cultural transformations in two decades moved it along the path of overcoming the civilizational gap in Everyday life many tens of millions of people. In an unimaginably short period of time, the material possibilities of people ceased to be a significant barrier between them and at least elementary culture, and initiation into it became much less dependent on the socio-professional status of people. Both in scale and pace, these changes can indeed be considered a nationwide “cultural revolution”.

Significant changes took place in the 1920s. in the life of the population of Russia. Life, as a way of everyday life, cannot be considered for the entire population as a whole, because it is different for different segments of the population. The living conditions of the upper strata worsened Russian society who occupied the best apartments before the revolution, consumed high-quality food, and enjoyed the achievements of education and health care. A strict class principle was introduced for the distribution of material and spiritual values, and representatives of the upper strata were deprived of their privileges. True, the Soviet government supported the representatives of the old intelligentsia it needed through a system of rations, a commission to improve the life of scientists, and so on.

During the years of NEP, new strata were born that lived prosperously. These are the so-called Nepmen or the new bourgeoisie, whose way of life was determined by the thickness of their wallet. They were given the right to spend money in restaurants and other entertainment establishments. These layers include both party and state nomenklatura, whose incomes depended on how they performed their duties. The way of life of the working class has seriously changed. It was he who was to take a leading place in society and enjoy all the benefits. From the Soviet government, he received the right to free education and medical care, the state constantly raised his wages, provided social insurance and pension support, supported his desire for higher education through the workers' faculty. In the 20s. the state regularly conducted a survey of the budgets of working families and monitored their occupancy. However, words often disagreed with deeds, material difficulties hit primarily workers, whose incomes depended only on wages, mass unemployment during the NEP years, and a low cultural level did not allow workers to seriously improve their living conditions. In addition, the life of the workers was affected by numerous experiments in planting "socialist values", labor communes, "common boilers", hostels.

Peasant life during the NEP years has changed slightly. Patriarchal relations in the family, common work in the field from dawn to dusk, the desire to increase one's wealth characterized the way of life of the bulk of the Russian peasantry. It became more prosperous, he developed a sense of the owner. The weak peasantry united in communes and collective farms and organized collective labor. The peasantry most of all worried about the position of the church in the Soviet state, because it connected its future with it. The policy of the Soviet state towards the church in the 20s. was not constant. In the early 20s. repressions fell upon the church, church valuables were confiscated under the pretext of the need to fight hunger. Then in the very Orthodox Church there was a split on the issue of attitude towards the Soviet power and a group of priests formed a "living church", abolished the patriarchate and advocated the renewal of the church. Under Metropolitan Sergius, the church stood at the service of Soviet power. The state encouraged these new phenomena in the life of the church, continued to carry out repressions against supporters of the preservation of the old order in the church. At the same time, it carried out active anti-religious propaganda, created an extensive network of anti-religious societies and periodicals, introduced socialist holidays into the life of Soviet people as opposed to religious ones, and even went to change the terms of the working week so that days off did not coincide with Sundays and religious holidays.

Since the late 1920s, state authorities have increased control over the development of the spiritual life of society. There have been changes in the structure of the governing bodies of culture. The leadership of its individual branches was transferred to specialized committees (for higher education, radio and broadcasting, etc.). A.S. Bubnov, who had previously been in leadership work in the Red Army system, was appointed the new people's commissar of education. Prospects for the development of culture began to be determined by five-year national economic plans. The discussion of issues of cultural construction took place at congresses and plenums of the Central Committee of the Party. Work aimed at overcoming bourgeois ideology and the establishment of Marxism in the minds of people occupied a large place in the activities of party and state bodies. The main role in the unfolding socio-political struggle was assigned to the social sciences, press, literature and art.

The resolutions of the Central Committee of the party "On the journal "Under the banner of Marxism"" and "On the work of the Communist Academy" (1931) outlined the tasks and main directions for the development of the social sciences. They were required to overcome the gap between science and the practice of socialist construction. The resolutions formulated the thesis of "aggravation of the class struggle on the theoretical front." After that, the search began class enemies"on the "historical front", on the musical and literary "fronts". Historians E. V. Tarle and S. F. Platonov, and literary critic D. S. Likhachev were accused of “counter-revolutionary sabotage”. In the 1930s, many talented writers, poets, and artists were repressed (P. N. Vasiliev, O. E. Mandelstam, and others).

The transfer of the forms and methods of the class struggle to the sphere of culture had negative impact on the spiritual life of society.

Education and science

During the years of the pre-war five-year plans, work continued to eliminate illiteracy and semi-literacy, to raise the cultural level of the Soviet people. A unified plan for teaching reading and writing to the adult illiterate population was drawn up.

1930 was an important milestone in the work aimed at turning the USSR into a literate country. Compulsory universal primary (four-year) education was introduced. Significant funds were allocated for school construction. During the second five-year plan alone, more than 3,600 new schools were opened in cities and workers' settlements. More than 15,000 schools have started operating in rural areas.

The tasks of the industrial development of the country required all more competent and qualified personnel. However, educational level workers was low: the average duration of their schooling was 3.5 years. The voice of illiterate workers reached almost 14%. A gap has developed between the general education of the workers, the level of their general culture, and the needs of the national economy. To improve the training of personnel, a network of industrial training was created: technical schools, courses and circles to improve technical literacy.

Measures were taken to develop the system of secondary specialized and higher education. Restrictions were abolished for "class alien elements" when entering universities. The workers' faculties were liquidated. The network of higher educational institutions. By the beginning of the 1940s, there were 4.6 thousand universities in the country. The implementation of plans for national economic development required an increase in the training of specialists for all sectors of the economy. For the period from 1928 to 1940, the number of specialists with higher education increased from 233 thousand to 909 thousand, with secondary special - from 288 thousand to 1.5 million.

One of the features of the social consciousness of the 30s, which was reflected in the development of higher and high school, there was a comprehension of his time as a certain stage in national history. The Council of People's Commissars of the USSR and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution on the teaching of civil history in schools (1934). On its basis, the historical faculties were restored at Moscow and Leningrad universities. Another decree concerned the preparation of history textbooks.

Work continued on the creation of research centers, branch science developed. The Institutes of Organic Chemistry, Geophysics, the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences named after V.I. Lenin (VASKhNIL). Research was carried out on problems of microphysics (P. L. Kapitsa), semiconductor physics (A. F. Ioffe), atomic nucleus(I. V. Kurchatov, G. N. Flerov, A. I. Alikhanov and others). Works of K. E. Tsiolkovsky in the field rocket technology became the scientific basis for the creation of the first experimental rockets. The research of the chemist S. V. Lebedev made it possible to organize an industrial method for producing synthetic rubber. Shortly before the start of the Great Patriotic War were created under the leadership of A.P. Aleksandrov ways to protect ships from magnetic mines.

Branches of the USSR Academy of Sciences and research institutes were created in the regions of the RSFSR and in the Union republics. In the second half of the 1930s, over 850 research institutes and their branches worked in the country.

artistic life

Beginning in the second half of the 1920s, literature and art were regarded as one of the means of communist enlightenment and education of the masses. It was this that explained the intensification of the struggle against "counter-revolutionary" ideas and "bourgeois theories" in the sphere of artistic life.

In the second half of the 1920s, the number of literary associations increased. There were groups "Pass", "Lef" (Left front of art), the All-Russian Union of Writers, the Union of Peasant Writers. The Constructivist Literary Center (LCC) and others. They held their own congresses and had publications.

Several of the largest literary groups formed the Federation of United Soviet writers(FOSP). One of the tasks of the organization was to promote the construction of a socialist society. In the literature of these years, the theme of labor was developed. In particular, the novels of F. V. Gladkov "Cement" and F. I. Panferov "Badgers", essays by K. G. Paustovsky "Kara-Bugaz" and "Colchis" were published.

In 1932, the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On the restructuring of literary and artistic organizations” was adopted. In accordance with it, all literary groups were abolished. Writers and poets united in a single creative union (it consisted of 2.5 thousand people). In August 1934, the First All-Union Congress of Soviet Writers took place. A. M. Gorky made a report on the tasks of literature. Following the all-Union congresses, writers' congresses were held and writers' unions were created in some Union republics. Among the leaders of the Writers' Union of the USSR in the 1930s were A. M. Gorky and A. A. Fadeev. The Union of Soviet Composers was created. With the emergence of creative unions, relative freedom was eliminated artistic creativity. Questions of literature and art were discussed on the pages of newspapers as a matter of fundamental importance. Main creative method Literature and art became socialist realism, the most important principle of which was partisanship.

The regulation of artistic creativity restrained, but did not stop the development of literature, painting, theater and music. The musical culture of these years was represented by the works of D. D. Shostakovich (the operas The Nose and Katerina Izmailova), S. S. Prokofiev (the opera Semyon Kotko) and others.

At the turn of the 1920s and 1930s, a new generation of poets and composers came to literature and art. Many of them participated in the development of songwriting. The authors of the songs were the poets V. I. Lebedev-Kumach, M. V. Isakovsky, A. A-Prokofiev. Composers I. O. Dunaevsky, the Pokrass brothers, A. V. Aleksandrov worked in the song genre. In the 30s, the poetry of A. A. Akhmatova, B. L. Pasternak, K. M. Simonov, V. A. Lugovsky, N. S. Tikhonov, B. P. Kornilov, A. A. Prokofiev received wide recognition . The best traditions of Russian poetry were continued in their work by P. N. Vasiliev (poems "Christolyubov prints" and "") and A. T. Tvardovsky (poem "Country Ant"). A notable phenomenon in literary life were the works of A. N. Tolstoy, A. A. Fadeev.

Interest in the cultural and historical past of the country has increased. In 1937, the centenary of the death of A. S. Pushkin was solemnly celebrated. Films on historical themes (Alexander Nevsky by director S. M. Eisenstein, Peter the Great by V. M. Petrov, Suvorov by V. I. Pudovkin, etc.) were very popular. Theatrical art has made significant progress. The repertoire of theaters has firmly established works of Russian and foreign classics, plays by Soviet playwrights (N. F. Pogodin, N. R. Erdman, and others). Immortal creations were created by artists P. D. Korin and M. V. Nesterov, R. R. Falk and P. N. Filonov.

The industrialization of the late 20s - early 30s contributed to the development of mass urban planning and the formation of Soviet architecture. Near the factories, workers' settlements were built with a system of cultural and community services, schools and children's institutions. Palaces of culture, workers' clubs and health resorts were built. The architects I. V. Zholtovsky, I. A. Fomin, A. V. Shchusev, and the Vesnin brothers participated in their design. The architects sought to create new architectural forms that would correspond to the tasks of building a new society. The result of the search for new means of expression became public buildings, the appearance of which resembled either a giant gear - the Rusakov House of Culture in Moscow (architect K. S. Melnikov), or a five-pointed star - the theater of the Red (now Russian) Army in Moscow (architects K. S. Alabyan and V. N. Simbirtsev).

Work on the reconstruction of Moscow, the capital of the USSR, and other industrial centers acquired a wide scope. The desire to create cities of a new way of life, cities-gardens, in many cases led to great losses. In the course of construction work, the most valuable historical and cultural monuments (Sukharev Tower and the Red Gate in Moscow, numerous churches, etc.) were destroyed.

Russian Abroad

An integral part of the national culture of the 20-30s is the work of representatives of the artistic and scientific intelligentsia who found themselves abroad. By the end civil war the number of emigrants from Soviet Russia reached 1.5 million people. In subsequent years, emigration continued. Almost 2/3 of the total number of people who left Russia settled in France, Germany and Poland. Many emigrants settled in the countries of North and South America, in Australia. Cut off from their homeland, they sought to preserve their cultural traditions. Several Russian publishing houses were founded abroad. Newspapers and magazines in Russian were printed in Paris, Bernin, Prague and some other cities. Books by I. A. Bunin, M. I. Tsvetaeva, V. F. Khodasevich, I. V. Odoevtseva, G. V. Ivanov were published.

Many prominent scientists-philosophers ended up in emigration. Being far from their homeland, they tried to comprehend the place and role of Russia in the history and culture of mankind. N. S. Trubetskoy, L. P. Karsavin and others became the founders of the Eurasian movement. The program document of the Eurasians "Exodus to the East" spoke of Russia's belonging to two cultures and two worlds - Europe and Asia. Due to the special geopolitical position, they believed. Russia (Eurasia) represented a special historical and cultural community, distinct from both the East and the West. One of the scientific centers of the Russian emigration was the Economic Cabinet of S. N. Prokopovich. The economists who united around him analyzed the socio-economic processes in Soviet Russia in the 1920s, published scientific works on this topic.

Many emigrants returned to their homeland in the late 1930s. Others remained abroad, and their work became known in Russia only after several decades.

The results of fundamental transformations in the cultural sphere were ambiguous. As a result of these transformations, enduring values ​​were created in the field of spiritual and material culture. The literacy of the population has increased, the number of specialists has increased. At the same time, ideological pressure on public life, the regulation of artistic creativity was heavily reflected in the development of all spheres of culture.