What was the difference fists of wealthy farmers

The kulaks as a class

Cousins historians — physics — any discussion begins with the words "agree on the terms." Historians just fine without it. A pity. Sometimes it would be worth it. Here, for example, who's fist? Well, here, and think of nothing: it is "spravno" hard-working host, cruelly robbed and destroyed by Stalin's collectivization machine. Yes, but for what devilry car collectivization destroy "spravno" host that she is not a competitor and not a hindrance? He farms on its ten-twenty tithes oboch farm — and let yourself economy, and wants to — go to the farm. Why ruin it?

Not only as an inferno of rage — because there is no economic response. And it will not be, because the authorities in the directives of the USSR kept saying: do not confuse the kulaks and rich peasants! Consequently, the difference between them was available, and visible to the naked eye.

So what is seen naked eye semi-literate secretary of the county, which is not visible to the current historian to settle down? Let us remember the school Marxism — those who still have time to learn from the Soviet school. How is the class? And the memory on the machine shows: relationship to the means of production. What is the ratio of the means of production spravno host different from that of the middle peasants? Oh, nothing! A fist?

Well, if it was going to destroy "as a class", therefore, it is a class, and that attitude was different somehow.

Forever mess up these townspeople!

So who are these fists?

This issue is taken care of and the Soviet leadership. For example, Kamenev in 1925 claimed that the kulak is any sector that has over 10 acres of seeding. But the 10 acres in the Pskov region and Siberia — is a completely different areas. In addition, 10 acres per family of five, and of the fifteen — is also two big differences.

Molotov, who was responsible to the Central Committee for their work in the village, in 1927, attributed to the kulak farmers, renting land and hiring Srokowo (as opposed to seasonal) workers. But rent land and hire workers and middle peasants could — especially the first one.

Predsovnarkoma Rykov attributed to the well-to-kulak farms that use hired labor, and owners of rural industrial establishments. This is closer, but somehow vague. Why robust labor landlord not to have, for example, a mill or creamery?

What unites Kamenev, Rykov and Molotov? Only one thing: the three of them — native-born citizens. But the "All-Union Elder" Mikhail Kalinin, a peasant by birth, gives a very different definition. At a meeting of the Political Bureau of dedicated co-operation, he said: "A fist is not the owner of all the property, and it uses the kulak property, ie usurious exploiting the local population, who gives to the growth of capital using funds at usurious interest rates. "

Unexpected twist, is not it? And Kalinin in this approach is not alone. APSmirnov Commissar of Agriculture in 1925, wrote in "Pravda", which served as the main practical, corrective guidance to local leaders: "We have a well-off part of the village clearly distinguish between two types of economy. The first type is a prosperous economy usurious purely concerned with the operation of low-power farms not only in the production process (peonage), but mainly by all sorts of onerous deals by rural petty trading and mediation of all kinds of "friendly" with credit "with divine 'interest. The second type of a prosperous economy — is a strong farm labor, which tends to strengthen themselves in the most productive for … "

Now that's a different matter! Not only and not an exploiter of farm laborers, but the village shopkeeper, the mediator in any transaction, and, most importantly — the moneylender.

Rural usury — the phenomenon is very special. Money in the growth of the village is almost not allowed. There adopted a system of natural usury — payment on loans was bread by their own labor, or any services. (Looking ahead: this is why the so-called "prokulak" — "pressure group" fist — it's mostly the poor.) And in every village all the villagers knew very well who just gives in debt (even with interest, if necessary) And who did this fishery, which gets richer.

Technology miroedstva

Bright picture of such fishing is drawn in a letter to the magazine "Red Village" of a peasant Philip Ovseenko. He begins, however, so as not to undermine.

"… About the fist screaming that he so-and-so, but they do not fidget, and is always a fist and thrifty and hard-working, and paying taxes more than others. Shout that, say, the farmers do not have to use someone else's work, to hire an employee. But this I have to argue that this is all wrong. After all, in addition to agriculture to our state to raise, increase peasants' well, it is necessary to increase the seeding. And this can be done only wealthy owners … and that the farmer is an employee of this state only the good and because it is such a well-off should in the first instance to maintain, because they — support of the state. Yes, and the employee is also a pity, because if you do not give him a job, it does not find a way and a lot of unemployed people. And with the economy him well. Who will give the unemployed work in the village or in the spring to feed a neighbor who with his family ".

Learn reasoning? The rhetoric of "social partnership" for almost 90 years has not changed. But this, however, saying only, and that's a fairy tale began — how it is a good man with a family neighbor feeds …

"There are a lot of other would-be bitter peasants horses or not, or to sow nothing. And they, too, we come to the rescue, it is said that love their neighbors as brothers. One horse on the day you give, or plow, or take a trip into the woods, the other seeds otsypesh. Why, nothing, then you can not give, because we does not fall from the sky ahead. It is acquired by their labor. Another time and would be happy to not give, but will come straight laments: help out, they say, hope is on you. Well, give the seeds, and then take off using the half — this is something for their seeds. Yes, even at the gathering fist call or exploiter (that word too). This is for the fact that the good Christian thing to do … "

Use — it's half the crop. With the yield of 50 pounds per acre is obtained that the "benefactor" gives his neighbor seeds on loan at the rate of 100% for the three months to 35 pounds — 50%. Balzac Gobsek of envy would hang. Incidentally, he has mentioned that he takes for the horse. And for the horse relied working out — where three days, where the day and the week. Christ, if my memory serves me, as if something else was teaching …

"It turns out differently: another beating, beating, and cast earth, or for lease surrender. Each year, it is not treated. That will eat the seeds, the plow is not, then something else. He will come and beg for food. Earth, of course, take for themselves, it will treat you for the debts of the neighbors and take off your harvest from it. And the owner of the old well? What is sown, so shall you reap. Who does not work — do not eat. And though he voluntarily gave the land to rent in sober. After all, not again take her out, she would not have been developed, the state straight loss. And so again, I was rescued — sowed it means to me for this to be thankful for. But only where there! For such
works and defame me more … Let everyone know what a fist with their work lives, their economy is, neighbors helping out and it may be said, the state is held. Let there be a village of the name "fist" because the fist — this is the most hard-working farmer, from which there is no harm, but good, and this benefit is obtained and county farmers and the state itself. "

From this sentimental writing is clear why the peasants called kulaks parasite. In it, as in the textbook, painted almost the whole scheme vnutriderevenskoy operation. In the spring, when poor households remains of bread, it's time to lender. For the sack of grain to feed the starving poor family in August, will give two bags. For seed bread — half the crop. Horse on the day — a few days (up to a week) mining. In the spring of debt or a couple of bags of grain fist fucked horseless neighbor put it on, the other neighbors for the debts of this field is treated as a whole crop of leaves "good master." For economic power over its neighbors and political power should be: at the village meeting fist automatically can count on the support of all its debtors, held in the village council conducts himself or his people there, and so is the real master of the village, who is now no longer any council.

Well, here it is — is another matter. This is the class that uses the means of production is not the case, as the middle peasants. And so the question remains whether such a "benefactor" indifferent to the farm, which cooperates a poor part of the village, thus knocking out his prey?

Greed has destroyed

Another 'class' sign fist — his specific involvement in the grain trade. Accumulating at the great masses of bread, fists totally let them on the market, deliberately pushing up prices. In the circumstances it was actually the work on the famine, so that the 107th article on such citizens just cried.

… In January 1928, at the height of the "bread of war", the members of the Politburo had left the country, lead the grain procurements. January 15, Stalin went to Siberia. Here's what he said in a speech to the party and Soviet officials: "You say that the plan of grain stressful that it is impracticable. Why is not feasible, how do you get that? Is not it a fact that you harvest this year is really unprecedented? Is it not a fact that the plan of grain this year to Siberia almost the same as last year? "

Please note: the complaint on the impossibility of planning — it seems to be the leitmotif of all the grain procurement campaign. The reason is clear: complain, and maybe plan to knock off. 

"… You say you do not want to take the fists of bread, they are waiting for higher prices and prefer to unbridled speculation. This is true. But fists are waiting for not just higher prices and demand higher prices three times in comparison with the state prices. Do you think that it is possible to satisfy the fists? The poor and middle peasants, much of the bread is delivered to the state at government prices. Can we allow the government to pay three times more for bread fists than the poor and middle peasants? "

Now such actions are punishable under the antitrust laws, and the reason no one complains. Could it be in terms of allergies?

"… If the fists are unbridled speculation on grain prices, why do not attract them for speculation? Do not you know that there is a law against speculation — Article 107 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the perpetrators of speculation brought to justice, and the goods to be confiscated in favor of the state? Why do not you apply this law against the grain speculators? Are you afraid to disturb the tranquility of the gentlemen fists? ..

You say that your prosecuting and judicial authorities are not ready for that matter … I've seen a few dozen members of your prosecutorial and judicial authorities. Almost all of them live in fists are the kulaks in the freeloader and, of course, try to live in peace with his fists. When I asked they said that the kulaks in the apartment cleaner and better fed. It is clear that these representatives of the prosecution and the judiciary can not wait for something worthwhile and useful for the Soviet state … "

So we, too, so it seems for some reason …

"I propose:

a) require the immediate surrender of all the fists of surplus grain at state prices;

b) in the case of failure to obey the law fists — to bring them to justice by Article 107 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and to confiscate their surplus grain to the state, so that 25% of the confiscated grain was distributed among the poor and lower-middle peasants at low state prices or in OK long-term loan. "

Then, in January, the Siberian Regional Committee decided: the case of art. 107 to investigate an emergency basis, of a Session of the People's Courts in 24 hours, the sentences stand for three days without protection. At the same meeting it was decided to issue a circular of the regional court, the regional prosecutor and Plenipotentiary of the OGPU, which, inter alia, prohibits judges hand down suspended sentences or acquittals on the 107th article.

The definition of "mitigating factor" for the government can only serve as the level of corruption — no circular lured law enforcement in general would not have to do anything. In addition, the 107th article begins to apply when the size of the marketable surplus in the economy than 2000 pounds. Somehow hard to imagine the possibility of investigative or judicial error, if the barn is the owner of 32 tons of bread. What piled on a kernel and did not notice the accumulated? Even taking into account the fact that, subsequently, the size has been reduced — an average of 886 pounds were confiscated (14.5 tonnes) — it is still difficult.

However, given the itsy-bitsy sentence on the 107th article — up to one year (actually, up to three, but that in the case of collusive merchants, and you just try to prove this conspiracy), the main measure of punishment was just confiscation of surplus. Do not want to sell bread — You give nothing.

Why so much bread?

As you can see, nothing unusual in that. In emergency situations, even the market of market states occur on the throat of his own song, and introduced laws against speculation — if you do not want their people en masse to starve. In practice, the problem is simple: if the government loves bribes more than the fear of food riots — the laws are not introduced, if a little give or scared — are introduced. Even the interim government, corrupt to the last limit, and then attempted to implement the grain monopoly — though failed. A Bolshevik The CPC was able to — actually, that's the difference, and hence the entire offense to them, "fellow socialists" on the part of agricultural policy.

But back to our fists. Let's take a little math. With the yield of 50 pounds per acre 800 pounds — that's 18 acres. Plus the owners have their own consumption, sustenance laborers and cattle, seed fund — that will pull in the big farm acres, say, seven. Total — 25 acres. In 1928, the holdings of 25 acres and above had only 34 million households — less than one per village. A kulak recognized around 3% of households, ie 750 thousand and as many were not 800 pounds, but thousands, if not tens of thousands. Where, I wonder, took the figure of Stalin, which he called in Siberia? "Look at the kulaks: there barns and sheds full of bread, the bread is under the eaves due to lack of storage facilities, in the kulaks have surplus grain at 50-60 thousand pounds for each household, not including reserves for seed, food for fodder. .. "Where did he find such stocks in the economy? The Don, Terek region, Kuban? Or is it a p
oetic exaggeration? But even if we reduce them voiced a number on the order, it still turns on 5-6 thousand pounds.

But it is more important than another question. Even if we are talking about 800 poods — how much bread? From their field? Was not in the USSR as many of these fields. So why?

A, in general, on the surface. First, do not forget about the natural usury, which was entangled in the village. All of these "votes", the return of debts "use" of land and mining lease for debt, bag for bag, went to the barns and hundreds of thousands of pounds. And secondly, let's think: how in the village held for sale of grain? This is good if fair located on the edge of the village, so that their few bags there can be attributed to the hump. And if not? And the horse either, so as to take out on anything? However, even if there is Sivka — as if to drive her hunt for dozens of miles with ten poods? And the money in the meantime needed — to pay tax, and buy anything, but it is necessary.

Between the farmer and the low-power market must exist rustic buyer-grain — one which, in turn, will have to deal with the urban wholesaler. Depending on the combination of greed and businesslike, he can give his fellow villagers or slightly more or slightly less than the state rates — so that this penny did not make the poor peasants go to the market or to ssyppunkt.

Village fist just could not be a buyer for bread — is it possible to lose that income. However, and as such he was. To quote again report GPU — all-seeing eye of the Soviet government:"Lower Volga edge. In Lysogorsky district of the Saratov region fists and prosperous systematically engaged in speculation bread. Fists in a. B.-A shock of buying bread from farmers and exported in large quantities in the city of Saratov. To grind the bread out of the lineup, fists solder workers and head mill.

North Caucasus Territory. In a number of places and Kuschevskiy Myasnikovske areas (Don District) notes the massive grinding grain into flour. Part of the grain growers engaged in the systematic removal and sale of flour in the city market … Wheat prices reach up to 3 rubles. for pud. Wealthy and strong kulaks, buying locally at 200-300 pounds. bread, grind it into flour and taken on carts in other areas, where they sell for 6-7 rubles. for pud.

Ukraine.Fist Huth. Novoselovka (Romenskii District) is buying bread by means of three poor, who under the guise of buying bread for the personal consumption of the grain harvest for him. Fist purchased grinds grain into flour and sells at the market.

Belotserkovskii District. In Fastovsky and Mironovsky areas fists organized their agents on buying bread, which prepares them for the bread in the surrounding villages and the surrounding areas. "

As we can see, at the village-level private trader and wholesaler fist — it is one and the same person, the natural intermediary between the manufacturer and the market. In fact, the fist and Nepman — two links in a chain, and their interests are quite the same: podgresti market for themselves, do not let go the other players, and above all — the state.

The problem was not only that they themselves played fists at higher prices, but even more so in the fact that they were for an other farmers. In the high grain prices have been of interest to all those who took out anything on the market, and join a boycott of the public procurement middle peasants, which draw on Article 107 can not — if you apply it to those who have in the barn, not a thousand, and a hundred pounds, why would not immediately start-universal requisition?

At the same time, almost half of the households in the country was so weak that she could not feed her bread until the next harvest. The high price of these peasants completely devastated, and they hung around the neck of the state. Thus, when the free market state twice sponsored dealers — first buying their corn at high prices set by them, and then supplying cheap bread ruined by the same hlebotorgovtsami poor. If the country has a powerful trade lobby who pays for politicians, this transfer can go on forever, but it was poorly Nepmen buy Politburo members. Simply kill …

***

All of these problems — and miroedstvo and gouging — conceived during the Bolshevik agrarian reform were solved economically, and quite quickly. If we consider the vector of development, it is clear that the collective farms, backed by public benefits and government support, have a good chance in a few years become quite the cultural sector with a decent marketability (in the early 30's grain procurement plan for them was set in the amount of approximately 30-35% of total yield). And what does that mean? A consequence of this is that if the collectivized is not 5%, and 50% of farms, the private traders simply do not lose the opportunity to play on the fact that the market in general and the influence it — public procurement farms will cover all the needs of the country. And given the fact that the population of the USSR bread sold at very low prices, meaning engage hlebotorgovley disappear completely.

Fist of the same, devoid of, on the one hand, the poor have siphoned off for the debts of bread, and the other — to influence the price, products can sell his farm, as he wants and where he wants. Do not put in the position of large and small-scale farmer, he was out of his closet-economic niche, do not determine or can not solve.

Rhetorical question: Is meekly put up Nepman and fist with such plans of the authorities?

About it — in the next article …


magazine "Expert"

writer-historian Elena Prudnikova

Like this post? Please share to your friends: