Russia is working with wartime intensity on the positive task of building the physical and social moulds of a new life. But, then, they are capitalist countries. So he needed to destroy the power of the Kulaks to control grain prices.
Stalin felt that proper education would lead to more innovative ideas and ways and means of industrialising Russia. It had this possibility, not only because it succeeded in good time in rousing the country to make rapid progress, but above all because in the work of extensive new construction it could rely on the old or renovated factories and plants which the workers and engineering and technical personnel had already mastered, and which, therefore, enabled us to achieve the utmost acceleration of development.
Secondly, Stalin called for the beginnings of major industrial development, especially in the areas of heavy industry. Stalin was given control of the effort, and he singled out West Siberia for his personal attention since the harvest there had been excellent and the peasants were believed to be holding back substantial grain supplies.
Has it fulfilled this programme, or has it failed? It must be noted that, although the objectives of the plan had not fully been reached, there was in fact tremendous growth in industry between and The results of the five-year plan have shown that the capitalist system of economy is bankrupt and unstable; that it has outlived its day and must give way to another, a higher, Soviet, socialist system of economy; that the only system of economy that has no fear of crises and is able to overcome the difficulties which capitalism cannot solve, is Impact of stalin s first five year Soviet system of economy.
According to the figures of the United States Department of Agriculture, the value of the gross output of agriculture in the U. Because of such measures, the Fifteenth Congress is often cited as marking the end of the N. The second plan employed incentives as well as punishments and the targets were eased as a reward for the first plan being finished ahead of schedule in only four years.
Furthermore, he insisted that the proportion of investment devoted to heavy industry increase each year. They remain blind to these facts and take the view that "there is nothing particular in it.
Secondly, we now have a fairly widely developed state industry and a whole system of collective farms and state farms, which provide the state with huge reserves of agricultural and manufactured goods for the development of Soviet trade. Was the Party right in pursuing the policy of an accelerated tempo of collectivisation?
And yet it is a very interesting one. We had only one centre of the textile industry — in the North of our country.
New railway links were built, like the Turkestan-Siberian line, and old ones were upgraded. Many families lived in 2 rooms. Can it be said that this is the position now? Of course, not everything with us is yet as it should be.
History has shown, however, that the international significance of the five-year plan is immeasurable. We have not only succeeded in improving this base, but have created a new coal and metallurgical base — in the East — which is the pride of our country.
Such in general are the results of the five-year plan in four years in the sphere of agriculture. Mikhail Alexandrov writes, "The collectivization of the early s and subsequent famine led to a significant fall in Kazakh numbers due to deaths and migration out of the USSR.
This we have achieved. There was also a return to inequality in society; to improve production, managers, scientists and party bosses were given much higher standards of living as incentives — they earned more bonuses and had perks such as holidays in state-run resorts.
In Britain, according to official figures, the number of unemployed increased from 1, in to 2, in It is hardly worth while to criticise those who gave utterance to these opinions.
By the tolkachi emerged occupying a key position mediating between the enterprises and the commissariat. Our executives in industry pay little attention to this question. And, indeed, it has achieved tremendous successes in this sphere; for it has fulfilled the programme of the five-year plan of collectivisation three times over.
The former group considered that the NEP provided sufficient state control of the economy and sufficiently rapid development, while the latter argued in favour of more rapid development and greater state control, taking the view, among other things, that profits should be shared among all people, and not just among a privileged few.
It appears, however, that there are people who demand that these enterprises should immediately become profitable, and if they do not become so immediately, they should be destroyed and dissolved.
The Soviet Union then decided that the workers necessary for further industrialization should be given most of the available food.
In output of oil products and coal we were last on the list. To change from the muzhik horse of poverty to the horse of large-scale machine industry — such was the aim of the Party in drawing up the five-year plan and striving for its fulfilment. Consideration of the fact that until agriculture was placed on the basis of large-scale production, until the small peasant farms were united into large collective farms, the danger of the restoration of capitalism in the U.
In this connection, the task of the five-year plan in the sphere of agriculture was to unite the scattered and small, individual peasant farms, which lacked the possibility of using tractors and modern agricultural machinery, into large collective farms, equipped with all the modern implements of highly developed agriculture, and to cover unoccupied land with model state farms.
Now let us take the year Certainly many died along the way.In the ensuing years, the effects of these policies would have a profound impact not only upon the Russian peoples, but the Soviet Republics as well.
Kazakhstan was no exception.
Inthe Communist Party approved the first of Stalin's proposed Five-Year Plans. The launch of the first Five-Year Plan and a collectivisation drive dramatically reversed the NEP model. The Congress of the Communist Party accepted Stalin's national economic plan in The plan was to run from toand the objectives of this plan were.
The effects of his plan can be investigated through sources such as Stalin’s speech on the results of the first Five Year Plan, for a view on Stalin’s perspective of how successful the Five Year Plan was.
Stalin’s speech will be evaluated for its origin, purpose, values and limitations. Summary of Evidence Before Stalin, Russia existed in a poor state. The first Five-Year Plan did not get off to a successful start in all sectors.
One of the most controversial aspects of the Five Year Plan was Stalin's decision to move away from the principle of equal pay. Under the rule of Lenin, for example, the leaders of the Bolshevik Party could not receive more than the wages of a skilled labourer.
From the very beginning, Stalin’s proposal of a Five-Year Plan for the Soviet Union economy was severely criticized. Although many warned that the plan was unrealistic, irrational, and even mathematically impossible, Stalin went ahead and began his first Five-Year plan in This was the first year of Stalin's Five Year Plan.
While it did make the Soviets into a modern industrial power it caused devastating effects on the people. The First Five-Year Plan called for rapid industrialization of the economy, with particular emphasis on heavy industry.Download