Launch of the First Five Year Plan (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
Launch of the First Five Year Plan
In 1928, Stalin introduced his programme for rapid industrialisation through the First Five Year Plan. Rather than viewing this as a single initiative, Stalin presented it as merely the beginning of sustained industrial transformation that would continue through subsequent Five Year Plans extending into the future. The approach relied on centralised planning, meaning that the state would directly control economic decision-making rather than allowing market forces to determine production and distribution. Systematic targets were established to maximise output across different sectors of the economy.
The plan set out several interconnected aims that together would modernise the Soviet economy:
- Developing heavy industry formed the cornerstone of the plan. The focus fell on coal, iron, steel, oil, and machinery production. These industries received priority because they provided the foundation for all other industrial development. Without adequate steel production, for example, railways could not be expanded, factories could not be built, and machinery could not be manufactured. Heavy industry took precedence over consumer goods because Stalin and his planners believed that short-term sacrifices in living standards would enable long-term economic strength.
- Improving the transport system featured as another major objective, with railways receiving particular attention. Russia's vast geographical expanse meant that effective transport infrastructure was essential for moving raw materials to factories and finished goods to where they were needed. Better railways would also facilitate the movement of workers to new industrial centres and enable the state to exercise greater control over distant regions.
- Transforming society and the economy through electrification represented an ambitious technological goal. The target aimed to generate six times more electric power by 1933 than the total produced in 1928. Electrification would enable factories to operate more efficiently, bring modern technology to backward rural areas, and symbolise Soviet progress and modernity. Lenin had famously declared that "Communism equals Soviet power plus electrification of the whole country", making this goal ideologically charged as well as economically important.
- Feeding the expanding industrial workforce through increased agricultural production addressed a practical necessity. As millions of peasants moved to cities to work in new factories, food production needed to rise substantially to prevent urban starvation and social unrest. This aim connected directly to the policy of collectivisation, which sought to reorganise agriculture to serve industrial needs more effectively.
The Priority System:
Light industry, which produced chemicals, household goods, and consumer products, was deliberately given low priority. Nevertheless, planners still expected this sector to double its output. The subordination of consumer needs to heavy industry reflected the regime's determination to prioritise long-term industrial capacity over immediate improvements in living standards. This meant Soviet citizens would face continued shortages of basic consumer goods throughout the plan's implementation.
The plan established a target of boosting overall production by 300 per cent, an extraordinarily ambitious goal that would require unprecedented effort and sacrifice from the Soviet population.
Implementation and propaganda
These ambitious targets were designed to compel managers and workers to devote maximum effort to fulfilling the Five Year Plan. The launch of the plan was accompanied by an extensive propaganda campaign aimed at generating enthusiasm among the population. The regime presented industrialisation as a grand endeavour that would benefit all Soviet citizens and secure the country's future.
The Role of Propaganda:
Stalin claimed that the mass enthusiasm of the workers, all united in pursuit of shared goals, would ensure the targets were met. This propaganda served multiple purposes:
- Created social pressure on individuals to work harder
- Attempted to build genuine commitment to the plan's objectives
- Provided justification for the hardships that implementation would inevitably cause
To support the plan, the state committed to substantial new investment in infrastructure, particularly in railways and industrial production facilities. Vast new industrial complexes were designed and construction began on multiple projects simultaneously. New tractor factories were planned for Stalingrad on the Volga and Kharkiv in Ukraine, enabling mechanised agriculture to support collectivisation. These facilities would produce the machinery needed to transform Soviet agriculture from traditional peasant farming to modern mechanised production.
Magnitogorsk: showpiece of Soviet industry
Case Study: Magnitogorsk - Building a Steel City from Nothing
One of the most striking examples of the First Five Year Plan's ambitions was Magnitogorsk, a completely new steel city planned near Chelyabinsk and Stalinsk in the coal basin of Kuznetsk.
The Planning Process: In 1928, a Soviet delegation travelled to Cleveland, Ohio, to consult with experts at the US Steel Company about how to replicate American technology and construct a showcase of Soviet industrial capability.
Location Selection: The Magnitaya area in western Siberia was selected because of its vast reserves of iron ore, providing the raw materials needed for large-scale steel production. The city was to be named Magnitogorsk after these iron ore deposits.
Significance: The planning and construction of Magnitogorsk embodied the regime's vision of socialist modernity. This was not merely a factory but an entire urban centre built from nothing, representing the capacity of centralised planning to transform empty landscapes into productive industrial spaces. The project attracted both genuine enthusiasts who believed in the socialist vision and many workers who simply needed employment or were coerced into participation.
Responses to the First Five Year Plan
Stalin's determination to transform Russia through industrialisation and collectivisation generated varied reactions across Soviet society. Within the Party, many members felt pleased to see a commitment to radical social change and an end to the compromises represented by the NEP. For convinced communists, the shift towards rapid industrialisation and direct state control aligned more closely with Marxist ideology than the market-oriented policies of NEP had done.
The regime's propaganda, whilst often exaggerated and overblown, nevertheless had a real impact on popular attitudes. Urban workers entertained hopes for better employment prospects and higher living standards once industrialisation succeeded. Many poor and 'middle' peasants were led to believe they would benefit from further land reform and the introduction of more modern agricultural methods, which the regime promised would accompany collectivisation.
Opposition and Concerns from the Start:
However, from the outset, the 'Stalin Revolution' provoked opposition and pessimism among substantial sections of society:
Party Members' Fears: Many in the Party regarded kulaks as essential to agricultural productivity because these more prosperous peasants produced much of the country's food surplus. They feared that harsh policies towards kulaks and forced collectivisation would reduce food production, potentially causing famine. These fears would prove well-founded.
Kulak Resistance: Kulaks themselves naturally opposed collectivisation, recognising that it would result in the confiscation of their land, livestock, and equipment. They understood that the imposition of collective farming would destroy their relative prosperity and independence. Their resistance would become a major problem for the regime as it attempted to implement its plans.
Industrial Managers' Doubts: Those managing industrial production were already expressing concern about the adverse effects of centralised planning. Many industrial managers doubted whether a huge new emphasis on central planning would solve the problems facing Soviet industry. They recognised the challenges of coordinating complex production processes across vast distances through bureaucratic diktat rather than market mechanisms. They regarded the new policy as a high-risk gamble that might fail catastrophically, disrupting production rather than enhancing it.
Key Points to Remember:
- In December 1927, the Fifteenth Party Congress announced the end of NEP and the beginning of the First Five Year Plan, marking the Great Turn towards rapid industrialisation
- The First Five Year Plan launched in 1928 prioritised heavy industry (coal, iron, steel, oil, machinery), aiming for 300% increase in overall production and sixfold increase in electric power by 1933
- Magnitogorsk represented the plan's ambitions: a new steel city built in western Siberia with American technical assistance, symbolising Soviet industrial transformation
- The plan used centralised planning with systematic targets, supported by extensive propaganda claiming mass enthusiasm would ensure success
- Reactions varied sharply: Party members and urban workers showed enthusiasm for radical change and better prospects, whilst kulaks, industrial managers, and many Party members feared the policy would fail and cause food shortages