Russian Revolution - Collectivisation

Stalin's rule - Collectivisation

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Collectivisation

[Aj489]

where can i find the rest of this video??

[siaobai77]

PBS - Communism - A Promise and Reality

[ramberghini]

I would say that Stalin didn't collectivize, which should be a duty performed by the workers of the land. Rather, he nationalized, because he placed them under direct state control.

[IneptTroopr]

I'm sorry, but if you think what Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. was doing was communism, than the word has no meaning.

Its like calling the authoritarian regimes like Egypt or Russia, democracies because they have elections.

[derek5116pwnz]

Loot @ the url and find the secret word: /watch?v=FcumJNNX0qc TEEHEE

[gukow1]

@Xanaseb

The collectivization was saved of the Soviet Union. Due to collectivization, increased productivity of agricultural enterprises. In 1917 the urban population accounted for 17% and 83% rural. Hunger was every 5 years. In 1991 the urban population, 73% and 27% rural. Hunger was not. After collectivization, industrialization could begin. Industrialization helped defeat Nazi Europe during WWII.

[tagaphon]

Kolkhozes proved to be most effective producer of food. Even now after forced closing of kolkhozes by Yeltsyn they produce most agricultural goods in Russia. These smartasses talk about famines forgetting that in ANY country there were famines, silenced by their media, much bigger than any famine in Soviet time, even that of 1947 caused by results of German occupation.

[elyseBee1]

@JakeFuyou

actually the Tsar abdicated in 1917, yes there was famine whilst the Tsar was in power but the famine reffered to in the clip is the famine that occured in 1930, Stalin announced collectivisation in 1927 and the farmers did burn their crops and kill their cattle in protests, it's the whole 'if i can't have it no one can' thing. trust me i'm studying Russian History.

[Xanaseb]

@JakeFuyou They resisted it because they knew how their individuality and freedom from the state would be stripped from them and how they would be confined in virtual prisons. Collectivisation prevented progress! It never improved life, or modernised agriculture! That is precisely why Russia's countryside is still has "backwardness" as you say. Just read Robert Conquest, Richard Pipes and Moshe Lewin, they'll show you the truth!

[Xanaseb]

@JakeFuyou I'm sorry, but you are severely flawed in your argument. Please justify how you think collectivisation actually benefitted anyone (apart from the ruling elite)! Collectivisation never was efficient or prodcuctive, all it did was control the peasants who were forced to feed workers and Army who they never had contact with!

[JakeFuyou]

This 'documentary' does not mention that these famines happened before the Revolution, during the time of the Tsar.

It wasn't the Communists who burnt the grain, or slaughtered the cattle, rather than give them over to the poor peasants, it was the kulaks who did this. If they had not resisted collectivization, and cooperated with it, the backwardness of Russia's countryside could have been eliminated with much less suffering.

[smoochym]

The New Economic Policy was in 1921, Kulaks were already firmly established by then. Also, the period prior to the NEP was "War Communism" and certainly wasn't sympathetic to private ownership.

[smoochym]

Also, Dekulakization was straight out of communist theory, an effort to create a classless society - through murder, starvation and theft. Despite your protestations, these sad theories were put to test in Cambodia, China and many other places, and your blanket denial of the link between communist theory and what happened is frankly laughable.

[smoochym]

All those regimes were entirely socialist, with absolute economic power resting with the state.