The System of Governance Introduced by Stalin - Essay Example

The USSRs need for economic reform Introduction Prior to Joseph Stalin’s ascent to power, Vladimir Lenin had introduced the new economic policy in the early 1920s. Stalin viewed most of the provisions of the economic plan as retrogressive thereby introducing his own policies that he believed would lead the country to industrialization. His policies were radical but began with an accurate description of the state of Russian economy at the time. According to his description of Lenin’s policies, the policies would not transform the country into an industrial economy. His radical policies thus sought to increase government control of the economy a feature that would grant him unparalleled access of different functions of both the government and the economy1. Through such radical changes in the economic policies, Stalin led the country into industrialization within fifteen years of his tenure in office. Stalin was a charismatic leader who used every possible means to eliminate opposition. Among the policies, that Lenin had introduced was to give land back to the people in 1918. This led to subdivision of land in the country as the leader ensured that everyone including the country’s poor had a piece of land. This resulted in further subdivision of the land into smaller units that were barely productive. While the people had land, the land was no productive owing to the small size that as Stalin observed discouraged mechanization of the farms. However, a few of the peasant farmers worked hard and accumulated adequate resources under the Lenin’s policies. The group called Kulaks was happy since their agricultural endeavors were doing well as they continued to accumulate wealth much to the impoverishment of the poor people in the country who could afford neither the means of production nor the food products produced by the kulaks2. When Stalin ascended into power and evaluated the economic system in the country, his primary objective was to change the agricultural system by a proactive system that would hasten the industrialization of the country. His solution was a system of agriculture called collectivization. The system vouched for the unification of the smaller parcels of land previously belonging to the peasant farmers into bigger farms that could easily be mechanized. While the policy presented realistic solutions to the problems, Stalin foresaw resistances especially from the few kulaks who as explained had worked hard and were better off that the millions of the poor peasant farmers in the society. In his charisma, Stalin turned the poor people against the kulaks thereby presenting himself as a populist leader a feature that enabled him to implement the policy of collectivization without much oppositions. The system of agriculture sought to provide rapid solutions to some of the major problems that Stalin had observed as obstructing the development of the country. Apparently, the small-scale peasant farmers could not affords the machinery used in agricultures; furthermore, the farms were small and could permit the mechanization of the farms. The system of agriculture thus had myriad effects on the country’s economy especially owing to the development of industries in the urban centers most of which depended on the farmers to provide them with raw materials. Stalin observed that if the trend continued, the industries would not get the much desired raw materials a feature that would curb the development of the country as the population would remain impoverished thereby domesticating the poverty in the country. Stalin observed that the country would only developed if he could revamp agricultural production thereby sustaining the demand for raw materials emanating from the factories. The policy of collectivization presented realistic solutions that would pioneer the development of the country as was later observed3. Through the system, the government grouped the small-scale peasant farmers into larger groups thereby consolidating their farms. Through farm consolidation, the land became big enough to permit the use of machines. Additionally, the socialist government provided the people with agricultural services permitting the people to hire tractors and combined harvesters that they later used in the large tracts of land. Using the machines, agriculture in the country ceased being labor intensive as it had been in the past since few individuals would operate the machines thereby realizing greater returns and rapid cultivation of the land. Such were new and profitable trends that the country could not record under the new economic policies developed by Lenin. With larger pieces of land, Stalin sought to improve the quality and quantity of agricultural production. He succeeded in doing this by purchasing heavy machines that the farmers would hire and use in their farms. Additionally, he sought to introduce scientific techniques of doing agriculture. The government developed large laboratories that carried out sustained agricultural studies thereby developing new breeds of both plants and animals that could withstand the undesirable ecological features. Through such studies, the government provided farmers with seeds, machines and fertilizers that pioneered the rapid growth of the country’s economy. Through such policies, the quality and quantity of food produce in the country improved within the first five years thereby marking a great success for the Stalin’s five-year plan. Additionally, the policy of collectivization would later have myriad other positive effects in the country’s economy. Unlike in the past that millions of peasant farmers had to work in their small-dilapidated parcels of land, the new system of agricultures was less labor intensive. This implied that the surplus human resource worked in other industries. The increased agricultural production coupled with the increased in human resource thus pioneered the economic development in the country as other people sought to develop and utilize their skills in other industries. The economy of the country thus developed rapidly with new sectors such as commerce and creativity began developing. Additionally, the farmers could now afford to take their children to school. This implied that the quality of the human resources was appreciating as the economy began appreciating the rapid industrialization resulting from the improved food security4. Collectivization further promoted the spirit of socialism as Stalin had foreseen. Socialism was appropriate in facilitating the implementation of the policies that Stalin had in mind. The people integrated as they readily gave their land away to the government. Stalin used effective methods in ensuring that he got the land. He talked to the people and used propaganda to dissuade and convince the people into rejecting the ideas proposed by Lenin5. Those who refused to relinquish their land became enemies of the state and were thus treated as such. Armies shot at as such people thereby reclaiming the lands forcefully. However, within the first few years, the people began realizing the positive effects of the policy thereby earning Stalin adoration from the people including those who had opposed him at the inception of the policy. This way, the people appreciated socialism thereby giving the government increased authority as it oversaw every aspect of governance and the economy in the country. Stalin further concentrated in other aspects of both governance and the economy with the view of developing a conducive environment for the rapid development and industrialization of the country. Among the policies that he introduced were an efficient system of state ownership, industrial manufacturing, collective farming and central system of administrative planning. The policies did not only seek to improve the efficiency of production in the country but also enhance Stalin’s governance by increasing his control and influence on different aspects of the society6. Most of Stalin’s policies sought to increase efficiency in the operations of the government especially as it sought to champion the industrialization process. The increased state control coupled with the state ownership of the means of production would enhance the process of decision making thereby making it easier or the state to influence the different aspects of governance thereby influencing the industrialization of the country as Stalin had foresaw. As explained earlier, the policy of collectivization was not a populist idea at the beginning since the middle class who owned most of the land saw the idea as a way of denying them an opportunity to foster their economic growth. However as discussed earlier, Stalin proved to the people that the idea was the only way of developing the country within the shortest time possible. In order to achieve this, Stalin needed effective structures that would enhance decision-making in order to expedite the development process. Stalin therefore introduced the central system of government planning. The system ensured that decision flowed efficiently from the higher authorities to the implementing organs of the government. In the five year plan for example, the government developed an effective plan outlining the time within which to make specific undertakings including regaining the land7. The central system of planning was fundamental especially owing to Stalin’s introduction of the system of state ownership to the means of production. This implied that the government owned the machinery used in farming among other vital features including the laboratories. With such resources, the government thus required an effective decision making system that would ensue that the decision flowed efficiently to the people who would implement them within the set timelines. This way, the government made such vital decisions as the type of crops to plant and the animals to rare in specific regions thereby influencing the provision of raw materials to the industries in the urban centers. The development of industries in the urban centers relied on the availability of raw materials. The system of governance introduced by Stalin thus resulted in the rapid development of the country since he ensured the development of the industries closer to the farmers thereby ensuring that the farmers did not waste time accessing either the markets or the companies as was the case during Lenin’s time. This way, the Russian economy thus took off spontaneously as Stalin had envisioned thus succeeding in presenting his ideas as populist8. Joseph Stalin sought to industrialize the country within his tenure and he succeeded in achieving the objective through systematic governance and management of the industrialization process. During his tenure, agriculture became the predominate occupation accredited with the provision of raw materials that sustained the operations of the millions of industries that developed in the country at the time. Additionally, by mechanizing the farms Stalin succeeded in eliminating the previously labor intensive system of agriculture thereby providing an efficient mechanism of agriculture that ensured the production of high quality and improved quantity of farm produce. The supplanted labor from the farms found work in the developing industries in the country. By the 1940s, 153.3 million Russians were employed in industries in different parts of the country. The system of governance thus revitalized the economy owing to the charismatic leadership that Joseph Stalin exhibited. He ensured that he developed effective structured that enhanced his autonomy in the region thereby enhancing the decision making process. Besides the effective agricultural system that Stalin developed, the autocratic leader further succeeded in domesticating the country’s economy as he discouraged external trade. Stalin sought to domesticate the economy by ensuring that the USSR was self-sufficient. The country therefore remained secretive while developing rapidly. Through such secretive mechanisms of governance and operations, Stalin ensured that the country remained communist especially in the changing times with the west adopting free market economic systems. This worked to the advantage of Stalin who had sought to secure his hold on power. Through such mechanisms, USSR remained a mystery to her neighbors since it limited its international trade often engaging in trade with few communist countries in the region while avoiding any form of economic relations with the west. This way, Stalin minimized contact with the west thereby eliminating any aggression that could arise from such interactions thereby fortifying his tenure as the autocratic leader of the USSR. Among the products that the country exported were oil, metals and timber. The country produced such materials in surplus. Furthermore, Stalin instituted an efficient state authority to oversee such international trade often limiting the goods to either import or export. The country imported such goods as consumer goods and machinery. This portrayed the country’s priorities as Stalin sought to industrialize the country within the shortest time possible. He therefore joined the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON), a regional state organ that would enhance the country’s international trade thereby permitting the USSR to import machinery and arms in a bid to improve its military and industrial might. Additionally, Russian currency, ruble, remained inconvertible at the time as Stalin sought to domesticate his economy. The move made it difficult for the country to hold international trade with other countries. Gosbank was the country’s only financial institution that controlled the banking industry thereby permitting increased state control of the country’s resources. As discussed earlier, the government developed a centralized planning system, which ensured that the decisions and policies were systematic and uniformly applied throughout the country. Control of the country’s financial institutions was therefore an equally important aspect of the centralized governance in order to curb the loss of resources through wastage and corruption among other unprecedented means. Stalin therefore developed the Gosbank, a state owned financial institution that remained the only financial institution in the country. Through the financial institution, Stalin ensured that had control of the fundamental sector of the economy as he controlled the countries resources thereby making the implementation of different tax regimes more efficient. This way, the state safeguarded its interest in private property by making investigations easier and increasing the state control on the national resources. More fundamentally, Stalin introduced effective ways of classifying property. The populace enjoyed both private and collective property. The government outlined the type of property that the people could own either privately or collectively. Any property considered a capital, means of production, was collectively owned. Land and industrial property among other types of capital were collective property owned by the people collectively. The controversial system ensured efficient management of the means of production thereby championing the rapid industrialization of the country during Stalin’s tenure9. However, the populace could own other personal property that did not influence production. The unique policy earned Stalin unparalleled control of the fundamental resources thereby making it possible for the government to make and influence the production techniques. In a summary, the centrally planned system of government coupled with the state ownership to thee means of production implied that the government had increased influence over the individual spaces with the government enjoying increased control of the economy. Stalin therefore required appropriate policies and ideologies that would sustain the operation of such a government. The definition of property in the country would thus help increase his control on the public resources as he set out developing appropriate structures that would ensure that his system of governance succeeds. Through the mechanism of defining state owned and private property would help him develop a similar structure of governance. References Allen, R. C. (2003). Farm to Factory: A Reinterpretation of the Soviet Industrial Revolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bradley, M. P. (2010). "Decolonization, the global South, and the Cold War, 1919–1962". In Melvyn P. Leffler and Odd Arne Westad, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, Volume 1: Origins (pp. 464–485). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Daniels, R. V. (1993). The End of the Communist Revolution. London: Routledge. Davies, R.W. (1998). Soviet Economic Development from Lenin to Khrushchev. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Davies, R. W. ed. (1990). From Tsarism to the New Economic Policy: Continuity and Change in the Economy of the USSR. London: Routledge. Goldman, M. (1991). What Went Wrong With Perestroika. New York: W. W. Norton. Goldman, M. (1994). Lost Opportunity: Why Economic Reforms in Russia Have Not Worked. New York: W. W. Norton. Gregory, P. & Stuart, R. (2001). Soviet and Post Soviet Economic Structure and Performance (7th ed.). Boston: Addison Wesley. Read More