4 State Control of Industry and Agriculture (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
4 State Control of Industry and Agriculture
Introduction: The debate over economic policy
The New Economic Policy (NEP) sparked intense debate within the Communist Party during the 1920s. Whilst all communists agreed that the Soviet Union needed to industrialise, they disagreed sharply over how this should be achieved. Three main positions emerged within the Party, each advocating different approaches to state control of industry and agriculture.
Three Main Positions on Economic Policy:
- The Left (led by Trotsky): advocated radical socialist policies through the "Dictatorship of Industry"
- The Right (led by Bukharin): supported continuing the NEP to maintain social peace
- The Centre (led by Stalin): took a pragmatic approach, supporting whichever policy appeared to work
This debate became known as the Great Industrialisation Debate and was central to the leadership struggle following Lenin's death.
The Left: the Dictatorship of Industry
Trotsky's radical vision
Left-wing communists, led by Trotsky, favoured a policy of forced agricultural collectivisation. This involved merging farms together and placing them under direct state control.
Trotsky argued this approach would deliver several key benefits:
- The state could seize all profits generated by farming
- These profits could then fund rapid industrialisation
- All private property would be eliminated
- The capitalist market would be abolished
- Economic inequality would end
Drawbacks acknowledged
Trotsky openly acknowledged that his policy would create massive discontent among the peasants. However, he believed this was a necessary price to pay for achieving true socialism and rapid industrial growth. The Left saw this radical approach as the only way to build a genuinely socialist economy.
Links to War Communism
The Left viewed War Communism (1918-21) as a heroic period when the government implemented truly socialist policies. In contrast, they saw the NEP as a period of compromise that lost sight of genuine socialist principles. They wanted to return to policies similar to War Communism's radical state control.
The Right: building socialism with capitalist hands
Bukharin's gradual approach
Right-wing communists, such as Bukharin, argued that the NEP represented the best way forward for Soviet industrialisation. Their position rested on several key arguments:
- The NEP was allowing the economy to grow slowly but steadily
- Industrialisation would happen eventually through this gradual process
- The NEP maintained a harmonious society by keeping peasants satisfied
- Peasants could own and work their own farms, which kept them content
- Slow economic growth was necessary to preserve peasant support
Response to left-wing criticism
The Left dismissed this approach as "riding the peasant nag" to socialism. They argued it was highly dangerous because it could lead to the re-emergence of a capitalist class determined to overthrow Communism.
Views on War Communism
The Right pointed to War Communism as proof that extreme measures caused chaos and rebellion. They believed the lessons of that period showed the need for caution and compromise with the peasantry.
The Centre: whatever works
Stalin's pragmatic position
Centrists or pragmatists, led by Stalin, took a different approach entirely. They argued that:
- The correct policy was simply the one that worked in practice
- Economic policy was a practical issue, not an ideological one
- There was no need to commit rigidly to either left or right positions
Stalin's shifting support
Stalin's position changed according to circumstances:
Stalin's Changing Position:
- Until 1927: Stalin supported the NEP because it was delivering economic growth
- After 1927: When growth rates declined, Stalin shifted his position towards more left-wing policies
This flexibility proved crucial in the leadership struggle, as it allowed Stalin to position himself as a practical leader focused on results rather than ideology.
The legacy of War Communism in the debate
The experience of War Communism (1918-21) shaped how different factions viewed economic policy:
The Left's interpretation:
- Saw War Communism as a heroic period
- Believed it represented truly socialist policy in action
- Viewed the NEP as a retreat from genuine socialism
The Right's interpretation:
- Saw War Communism as proof that extreme measures caused disaster
- Pointed to the chaos and rebellion it created
- Used it as evidence for the need for gradual, cautious policies
This fundamental disagreement about the lessons of War Communism deepened the divide between Left and Right within the Party.
Economic debate and the leadership struggle
The Great Industrialisation Debate
The debate over economic policy became central to the leadership struggle in the 1920s. Key features included:
- Contenders presented rival economic plans to the Party Congress
- Debates occurred repeatedly throughout the 1920s
- Economic policy became a way to win or lose political power
Outcomes of the debates
Pattern of Debate Outcomes in the 1920s:
During the 1920s, a clear pattern emerged:
- The Right consistently won debates at Party Congress
- Leaders associated with the NEP (like Bukharin) retained power
- Leaders advocating radical left-wing solutions (like Trotsky) failed to win power
- Most communists were centrists who supported the NEP for pragmatic reasons
The turning point
The political situation changed when the NEP began to fail:
- Stalin began advocating more left-wing policies
- This attracted significant support from both the Left and Centre of the Party
- Stalin's pragmatic approach allowed him to shift position as circumstances changed
- The NEP's inability to create significant industrial growth, even in good years, undermined right-wing arguments
Key issues in the debate
Speed of industrialisation
- Left: Rapid industrialisation through forced collectivisation
- Right: Slow, gradual industrialisation through the NEP
- Centre: Whatever speed worked in practice
Treatment of the peasantry
- Left: Accept peasant discontent as necessary for socialism
- Right: Maintain peasant satisfaction to preserve social harmony
- Centre: Adjust policy based on results
Role of capitalism
- Left: Eliminate all capitalist elements immediately
- Right: Use capitalist methods temporarily ("building socialism with capitalist hands")
- Centre: Use whatever economic methods delivered results
The NEP's limitations
Even supporters of the NEP acknowledged its problems:
- Slow industrial growth
- Inability to create significant industrial expansion, even in successful years
- Economic growth plateaued at the end of the 1920s
- This failure gave ammunition to critics and allowed Stalin to justify abandoning the policy
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
- Three positions emerged in the debate over state control: Left (Trotsky - radical collectivisation), Right (Bukharin - gradual NEP approach), and Centre (Stalin - pragmatic)
- The Left wanted rapid industrialisation through forced collectivisation and state seizure of agricultural profits, despite acknowledging it would cause massive peasant discontent
- The Right favoured continuing the NEP to maintain social harmony and allow slow, gradual industrialisation whilst keeping peasants satisfied with private farming
- Stalin took a pragmatic approach, supporting the NEP until 1927 when growth declined, then shifting towards left-wing policies
- The economic debate was central to the leadership struggle, with the Right winning most debates until the NEP's failure allowed Stalin to win support for more radical policies