Housing, 1917–53 (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
Housing, 1917–53
Introduction
Soviet citizens faced persistent housing challenges throughout the period from 1917 to 1953. Multiple factors contributed to this ongoing crisis. Both the Civil War and the Second World War resulted in extensive destruction of residential buildings. Additionally, during the early 1930s, large numbers of people migrated from rural areas to cities seeking employment in newly established factories, which placed enormous strain on already overcrowded urban centres. Housing construction was expensive, and the Soviet Government consistently prioritised other areas, particularly industrial development, over residential building projects.
The housing crisis had four main interconnected causes:
- War destruction - Both Civil War (1918-21) and WWII (1941-45) devastated urban housing
- Rural-urban migration - Millions fled collectivised farms to seek factory work
- High construction costs - Building new housing was economically expensive
- Government priorities - Industry was always favoured over residential construction
During the 1920s, Soviet authorities focused on redistributing existing housing stock, confiscating property from wealthy owners and allocating it to poorer citizens. Under Stalin's leadership, some house building occurred, though the quality was generally poor. Apart from a small number of showcase developments, most housing was constructed cheaply and lacked basic facilities such as running water, electricity, and proper sewerage systems.
Redistribution of property, 1918–28
Early seizures and Lenin's decree
From the beginning of 1918, working-class people in cities forcibly seized property from members of the aristocracy and middle class. These individuals, known as former people, faced various outcomes: some were killed, others were expelled from their homes entirely, while some were permitted to keep just a single room for themselves and their families. Many others simply occupied abandoned buildings without official permission.
"Former people" (byvshie liudi) was the term used to describe aristocrats and members of the middle class whose property and social status were taken away during the Revolution. They became targets for property seizures and faced discrimination throughout the Soviet period.
In August 1918, Lenin issued a decree attempting to bring this chaotic process under governmental control. The decree gave local soviets (local councils) the power to confiscate property from its owners and redistribute it to poor and homeless people.
Lenin's decree of August 1918 was crucial because it attempted to impose government control over what had been a spontaneous and violent process. Rather than allowing random seizures, the decree gave legal authority to local soviets to manage redistribution, though enforcement remained inconsistent.
Civil War period
By the time the Civil War ended, workers were actually leaving cities in search of food as factories closed down. In response to fuel shortages during this period, the government authorised the demolition of houses to provide timber for heating.
NEP period changes
Under the New Economic Policy (NEP), between 60 and 80 per cent of urban housing was denationalised (returned to private ownership). Initially, property redistribution was prohibited. However, following Lenin's death, fresh attempts at redistribution began. During 1923-24, large townhouses were 'socialised' (brought under state control). Property owners were compelled to live in a single room, whilst working-class families were moved into the remaining rooms. Authorities typically assumed that one room provided sufficient space for an entire family, regardless of its size.
The NEP period saw a significant reversal of earlier policies:
- Denationalisation - Property returned to private ownership
- Prohibition of redistribution - Initially stopped the forced seizures
- Resocialisation (from 1923-24) - Renewed attempts to bring property under state control after Lenin's death
Church property
During this period, Church property was nationalised. Priests were evicted from their cottages, and Church buildings were converted into warehouses, civic centres, or residential accommodation.
Rent and house building
Experiments with rent-free housing ended in 1921 when rent charges were reintroduced. House building resumed after the Civil War in 1923. Under NEP conditions, private companies undertook 89 per cent of all house construction.
Constructivist architecture
Small-scale attempts were made to create buildings reflecting revolutionary values in major Soviet cities. Notable examples included the Zuev Club, the Rusakov Club, and the Burevestnik Factory Club, all constructed between 1927 and 1929. These buildings were designed in a Constructivist style, serving as social, educational, and cultural centres for Soviet workers.
Constructivism was an avant-garde artistic and architectural style popular in Russia during the late 1910s and continuing through the 1920s. Constructivist architecture was deliberately futuristic in appearance. Building designs echoed the aesthetic of machines, typically based on dramatic geometric shapes such as cylinders and cubes.
Constructivist residential buildings were also erected, including the Narkomfin Apartment House in Moscow. This building was specifically designed to facilitate collective living by providing shared facilities: a collective kitchen, crèche, library, gymnasium, and laundry facilities, plus a roof garden. The communal kitchen, crèche, and laundry provision reflected a commitment to women's liberation by sharing domestic responsibilities. Four such blocks were originally planned with construction beginning in 1928, but only two were actually built.
Although Constructivist buildings were revolutionary and exceptionally well designed, very few were constructed, and consequently they had minimal impact on the lives of ordinary Soviet citizens. These showcase projects were never replicated on a scale that would have solved housing problems.
Housing under Stalin
The urban housing crisis
Under Stalin's leadership, housing in cities became an acute problem. The urban population tripled between 1929 and 1940 as peasants fled collective farms to seek jobs in cities. This massive population movement significantly increased demand for accommodation. The government deliberately attempted to keep the housing budget to an absolute minimum and addressed the housing shortage through various methods that prioritised cramming more people into smaller spaces.
Stalin's housing crisis was self-inflicted: The rapid industrialisation drive and forced collectivisation of agriculture caused millions of peasants to flee to cities. The urban population tripled in just over a decade, but Stalin refused to prioritise housing construction, choosing instead to invest in industry. This created a severe and deliberate housing shortage.
Kommunalka
In existing cities, Soviet authorities divided buildings into small kommunalka (communal apartments). Entire families shared a single small room. Bathrooms (where they existed) and kitchens were shared between multiple families. The average family kommunalka measured 5.5 square metres in 1930. However, increasing pressure for housing meant that kommunalka were repeatedly subdivided. By 1940, the average kommunalka had shrunk to just 4 square metres.
Kommunalka (communal apartments) were the standard form of Soviet urban housing under Stalin. In these arrangements:
- Each family occupied a single small room
- Bathrooms and kitchens were shared between multiple families
- Average space per family continuously decreased as more people were crammed in
- Privacy was essentially non-existent
Buildings were frequently divided into barely useable spaces. For instance, rooms would be partitioned without rewiring, meaning one light switch controlled lighting for several separate apartments.
The government failed to invest in sewerage or communal facilities. Bathhouses, for example, were scarce. The Liubertsy district of Moscow, with a population of 650,000 people, did not have a single bathhouse.
Modernisation of urban centres received low priority. During the 1930s, electrification and provision of street lighting actually slowed down. Similarly, authorities made no attempt to introduce modern sewerage systems.
Coal sheds and under-stairs cupboards were converted into living accommodation. In one documented case in Moscow, a family of six lived in an under-stairs cupboard. The 1930s also witnessed the emergence of 'corner-dwellers': people who lived in corridors or communal kitchens within kommunalka buildings. Corner-living could be expensive, with space in corridors costing as much as half a month's wage. Moreover, corridor living was often permanent rather than temporary. One worker in Leningrad lived in a corridor for five years before being allocated a kommunalka.
Example: Living Conditions in Moscow Kommunalka
The desperation of the housing shortage led to extreme measures:
- A family of six lived in an under-stairs cupboard
- 'Corner-dwellers' occupied corridors and communal kitchens
- Corridor space could cost half a month's wage
- One Leningrad worker lived in a corridor for five years before getting a room
These conditions demonstrate how severe overcrowding created a new class of people living in spaces never intended for habitation.
Factory towns
New buildings were constructed under Stalin to support newly established factory towns like Magnitogorsk. However, factory construction was consistently prioritised over housing provision. Accommodation in these new factory towns was often inferior to even the kommunalka. Rather than allocating one family per room, several families would occupy a barrack-style dormitory. The best of these were constructed from timber and insulated with straw, but they lacked running water or bathrooms. New factory towns also lacked other basic necessities, such as paved streets and electric lighting.
Case Study: Magnitogorsk - Ambitious Plans vs. Reality
Initial Vision (1929):
- Commissioned a radical German architect to design the model town
- Plans included clean, modern, state-of-the-art accommodation
- Even these designs assumed workers would eat in factory canteens (no kitchens)
Reality (1930s):
- The planned houses proved too expensive
- The few houses built were given to American specialists and managers, not workers
- Within one year, housing plans were abandoned
- Majority of workers lived in barrack-style dormitories
- Approximately 20 per cent lived in mud huts
- Poor sanitation led to disease and lice infestations
This case demonstrates how even showcase projects failed to prioritise worker housing, with Stalin consistently choosing industrial construction over accommodation.
New factory towns built near the Ukrainian city of Dnepropetrovsk were similarly basic. They had no sewerage system, streets were not paved, and there were no electrical lights, despite being extremely close to the Dnieper hydroelectric power station.
Housing, 1941–53
Second World War destruction
The Second World War made the housing situation considerably worse. The destruction caused by the war was immense. Approximately one-third of urban housing was damaged or destroyed between 1941 and 1945. However, Stalin continued to prioritise industrial buildings over housing provision. The official pre-war policy of cramming more people into smaller spaces continued and even intensified.
The Second World War destroyed approximately one-third of all urban housing in the Soviet Union. Despite this catastrophic loss, Stalin continued to prioritise industrial reconstruction over housing. Rather than addressing the crisis, the government simply intensified its pre-war policy of overcrowding.
Post-war conditions
By 1947, the average worker in a kommunalka had 4 square metres of space, whilst the average worker living in a dormitory had just 3 square metres. Conditions in dormitories were extremely poor. Workers in the Moscow coalfields, for example, were housed in dormitories where there were only 15,000 beds for 26,000 workers. All types of furniture were scarce. There was one table for every 10 workers, one wardrobe for every 27 workers, and one wash basin for every 70 people.
Example: Moscow Coalfields Dormitory Conditions (1947)
The post-war housing shortage created impossible living conditions:
- 15,000 beds available for 26,000 workers (11,000 workers without beds)
- 1 table for every 10 workers
- 1 wardrobe for every 27 workers
- 1 wash basin for every 70 people
These figures show that workers lacked even basic furniture and facilities, making daily life extremely difficult.
Failed self-build schemes
The government initiated a scheme to encourage workers to build their own homes. However, building materials were scarce, there were numerous administrative obstacles, and the process was expensive. Consequently, the scheme proved largely unsuccessful.
Fourth Five-Year Plan
House building was not a major priority under the Fourth Five-Year Plan (1945–50). Budgets were small, and management was inefficient. Workers were frequently reassigned to other projects, which meant that even the limited number of building projects that were started progressed extremely slowly. For example, in the first half of 1948, housebuilding projects outside Moscow spent 40 per cent of their budget but were then suspended, resulting in not a single house being completed. Houses that were constructed in the early 1950s, like much of what was produced under Stalin's Plans, were often of extremely poor quality. Roofs leaked, plaster fell off walls, and there was no gas, electricity, or sewerage provision.
Common misconception: The Fourth Five-Year Plan (1945-50) might seem like it would prioritise housing reconstruction after the war. In reality, housing received low priority, budgets were minimal, and management was so inefficient that projects were frequently suspended incomplete. Even completed houses were of extremely poor quality.
Collective farm housing priority
Housing on collective farms received priority attention. Stalin's general indifference to agriculture and Khrushchev's energy led to a massive housing project in Ukraine after the war. As a result, between 1945 and 1950, 4,500 farming villages were built. This led to the construction or renovation of 919,000 houses, 250,000 agricultural production buildings, and 31,000 communal buildings. Khrushchev proposed a similar plan for Moscow, but Stalin vetoed it due to its expense.
An exception to Stalin's neglect: The Ukraine collective farm housing project (1945-50) was unusually successful, largely due to Khrushchev's personal involvement:
- 4,500 farming villages built
- 919,000 houses constructed or renovated
- 250,000 agricultural buildings created
- 31,000 communal buildings established
However, when Khrushchev proposed a similar plan for Moscow, Stalin rejected it as too expensive, showing that even successful housing projects were not replicated elsewhere.
Conclusion
Housing was never one of Stalin's priorities. Industrialisation consistently took precedence over residential construction. In many respects, Stalin's own policies created the housing crisis, which was then severely exacerbated by the devastating destruction caused by the Second World War. His policies did little to solve the problems, and consequently Soviet workers were forced to live in squalid accommodation with no amenities or privacy.
Key Points to Remember:
Housing problems had multiple causes:
- War destruction (Civil War and WWII)
- Mass migration from countryside to cities
- Expensive construction costs
- Government prioritising industry over housing
1918-28 redistribution era:
- Property was forcibly seized from 'former people' (aristocrats and middle class)
- NEP partially reversed this but later resocialisation occurred
- Limited Constructivist architecture experiments had minimal impact on ordinary citizens
Stalin's kommunalka system:
- Average living space shrank from 5.5 square metres (1930) to 4 square metres (1940)
- 'Corner-dwellers' lived in corridors and cupboards
- Factory towns had poor barrack dormitories lacking basic facilities
WWII worsened the crisis:
- One-third of urban housing destroyed
- By 1947 average space was 4 square metres (kommunalka) or 3 square metres (dormitory)
- Fourth Five-Year Plan gave low priority to housing with inefficient management
Stalin consistently prioritised industrialisation over housing, creating and perpetuating a severe housing crisis that left Soviet workers living in cramped, squalid conditions throughout the period.