Collectivization in the Soviet Union - A Necessary Evil?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лип 2024
- Collectivization of agriculture in the USSR was a transformation of small, one-person peasant farms into large public socialist farms through cooperization. There were two types of collective farms - kolkhozes and sovkhozes. In theory, a kolkhoz was a collective farm managed by the members of the cooperative and getting paid according to the earnings of the kolkhoz, while a sovkhoz was a collective farm managed by the state, with its workers treated as salaried state employees with guaranteed earnings. In reality, both types of farms were strictly controlled by the Soviet government. Stalin's collectivization became one of the symbols and phenomena of the Soviet era, the tragedy of the Soviet village. In people's memory, it is associated primarily with the dekulakization of hard-working peasants, exile and mass starvation of 1932-1933. Let us examine why the USSR needed to unite peasant farms, how it was done, and whether the desired result was achieved.
00:00 - Kolkhoz as the USSR in miniature
03:35 - Why the Soviet Union needed to unify agriculture
09:08 - Forced collectivization
11:24 - Dekulakization
14:50 - After the famines
If you'd like to support the channel:
💵 Patreon (early access to videos) - / setarko
🪙 BTC - bc1qh8szz62crxu9ylg2jx9dz3t6vzzjdw2rheft2m
🪙 ETH - 0x19F11A86adf1ec4DDebEC0f27982805B1d1aba67
🪙 USDT (TRC20) - TYG76yndvrDD8WM9TtkBGauT7682esKZfu
🪙 Other crypto - nowpayments.io/donation/setarko
Special thanks to my Patrons:
Petar Ilic, Jordan LaMothe, Kirill Klimuk; Simon Böse; Steak221; Steven; Yelizaveta Zakharova; Adam Stakhanov; Devon Hodgson; Joseph; Mike Pearce; Niels Dowgwillo; Osas; Ravenghast; Sarah McMaster; Triskelia; Petar Kerelov; Yuval Carmon; Peter Lassen; Jimmy Albin; Eli; Michael
Links:
Discord - / discord
Twitter - / setarkoyt
Hey there. Somehow you found my video and decided to watch it. So let me introduce myself. I'm Sergei and I'm from Russia. My channel is about my native country. I want to tell English-speaking viewers about the real Russia, about its past and present. Unfortunately, you can find a lot of propaganda about Russia on the Internet, both from the Russian media and from the Western ones. I want to tell you about Russia, as it really is, the country in which I was born, grew up, and lived all my life.
Free Stock Footage provided by Videvo.net and Videezy.com. - Розваги
I also read somewhere that traditionally nomadic peoples like the Nenets were also forced to collectivize, which devastated their ways of life (and allowed for forced Russification). Kind of wild that a country that ostensibly sought to do away with repression ended up trading machines for the lives of millions.
The people of the Kolkhozy may have achieved a measure of stability, but Setarko’s right in distinguishing that from prosperity
The problem is collection is how we can handle or manage the supply in and out. This means we handle also the spread of every territory and district's needs, the fatal mistake is the Soviet government itself forcing industrial rapidly and centralized supply in the Muscovite. Which is their policy and action also their consequences and result in their disaster.
The best option is this, we manage the collection as moderate, adapt or I called sharp or idk which word I call for we hear our situation in the present, and plan due short and long terms as soon as have enough of what sources we collectivize.
It's kinda obvious, that Setarko isn't happy or backing that deeds. He said that state basically traded people for machinery. And he pointed a VERY horrible notion - from point of the state - governing beaurocracy - they thought that they didn't anything wrong. That is even more horrific, than even the fact itself.
@tyryonolofing3405 tbh not different from any government even today...
@@Rrgr5 incomparable. Death's of millions, not even condemned as something bad and making career on those death's because they make money.
And some unclear vague speaking about "not thinking enough about our life".
@@tyryonolofing3405literally the same lol. You say all this as if it should sound different to the modern state of affairs, but it really is not.
From family farm to collective farm and back to family farm.
History in a nutshell for comunist countries.
True
I would like to see a video about collective farms after ww2, and also about farms in general after the end of ussr
In short, the Soviet countryside was effectively dead. Growth of labour productivity was close to zero, standard of living of rural population was stagnant even by soviet standards, no improvement of civilian infrastructure (no gas heating, no tap water, no sewage, no road pavement). The economical stagnation of soviet agriculture was so bad that since 1960's USSR began to import grain from US and Canada just to feed its population.
Most of the youth even with tiniest career ambitions left their village for the cities asap, leaving behind only old people and marginalized alcoholics. By the 1970s (only 40 years into collectivization) there were already some entirely depopulated villages in non-Chernozem regions of Russian SFSR. The number of these ghost villages continues to grow to this day throughout the ex-Soviet Union.
At some point even party officials came to understand what kind of damage they have done to the countryside but all government efforts to revitalize Soviet agriculture were unseccesful. So at some point government positions in Ministry of Agriculture were assigned almost as a form of soft punishment for disliked party members. Because if it was you who was assigned to solve issues in Soviet farming it means that Politburo purposely decided that it doesn't want you to have any success in your political career ever again.
@mastersafari5349 don't forget to mention Kruschev failed reforms, in the post-war they had a reforestation program which is unique even by today's standards, but as soon as Kruschev became the secretary general he pretty much scraped and began a terrible program of maze monoculture, if you know how maze production works you know how they are sensitive to low temperatures and needed a lot of water, we are talking about the USSR, literally not the best place to produce maze, but there was a reason, he wanted to boost meat production using maze as ration, I don't need to say how wrong he was and what happened right? Because is exactly what you just said, it wasn't because of the collectivization itself, but since it was bound to governmental decision which was also bound to the secretary general decisions, not a considerable committee with specialists and stuff the bad call was already done, wasn't the only one, Kruschev had a crazy policy of impressing the west, so he mimics stuff (maze like the US for example) and try to do better, ended up with everything worst.
Yes. Please, definitely make a video o late USSR agriculture; you channel is one of the best online sources of soviet life.👍
I love this channel.
Always a joy. Thank you.
In Western countries, the consolidation and modernization of peasant farms occurred much earlier, often due to events such as Enclosure, or due to the impoverishment of most farmers and the purchase of their plots by monopolists (for example, during the Great Depression in USA).
yes, and it was as violent as in the soviet union
@@markcorrigan3930 Keep deluding yourself communist
Hi Setarka! As a Hungarian who's obsessed with the USSR and all things Communist, Socialist and Retro your videos have been great and really entertaining to watch, they are really accurate relative to the stories my parents and grandparents have been telling me who grew up in that system, but I would like to suggest a possible subject for you to explore that I've been thinking about since the Trabant video and it's this: the production of small motorcycles like the Riga and Verhovina and their roles in mobilising the Soviet masses who couldn't afford a car.
Love your videos ❤keep up the great work!
Very nice video!
Yes i watched it
One of the few youtube channels that I enjoy anymore. :)
A video about the agriculture post-Stalin could be awesome. In my mind and in the mind of most people the USSR live on famine to famine, wich is not true on the most cases or that is what I know about.
Good day from Uruguay!
People in the USSR ate more in calories than the US, per the CIA.
Последний зафиксированный голод в СССР был в 46 году . Это последствия войны. Я могу рассказать о жизни среднестатистического колхозника 70 годов. Дед работал на тракторе . Бабушка не работала. 4 коровы. 50 соток виноградник. Делали примерно 4 тонны ординарного вина и сдавали на винзавод. Стоило 1 рубль литр. Колхоз имел инкубатор и раздавал по дворам циплят и комбикорм. Женщины брали по сотне . Осенью сдавали птицу на мясо. Свой дом. В селе был водовровод и свет. Топили углем. Колхоз закупал оптом для всех. Ветиринара животным оплачивал колхоз. Ну и школа , поликлиника и клуб с кино .Союзе
у людей была одна проблемма куда девать деньги.
@@tatyanaishchenko3456 That's very interesting, here in South America, if the people is starving we don't called it "famine" we called it "we need dollars to pay our debts"
@@ShinigamiInuyasha777 в России до революции использовалось выражение недород. После отмены крепостного права крестьяне должны были заплатить за землю. За 50 лет образовались долги , рассплатится с которыми не представлялось возможным. Столыпинская реформа представляла собой то же огораживание в Англии в 16 веке. Бедных выживали на окраины империи и отбирали землю у местных народов. Народу России большевики предложили другой путь и большинство с ним согласилось. Либеральный миф о ужасах советской власти меня просто бесят. Ужас натупил после распада Союза . Именно так называемые рыночные реформы практически убили село . То что я описала сегодня не существует. Дешевый импортный виноматериал сделал виноделие не рентабельным. Животноводство перестало дотироваться и люди не могут позволить себе говядину. Птица выващивается большими фирмами, но о том, чем они там кормят кур ходят нехорошие слухи. Более 70 % по опросам желали бы возвращения в СССР. И если бы демократия была реальностью а не обманом , социализм существовал сегодня. Потому что несмотря на все недостатки системма была намного справедливее и более рационально устроена.
Random peasants getting accused of being kulaks by fellow greedy villagers and then sent off to prison labour reminds me of Afghan farmers accusing each other of being Taliban so the US/UK forces would kill them so they could take over their land.
I pretty sure even Stalin written something among those lines like "Stop being trigger happy. There is classification of different kulaks. If you immediately go for the kill I'd like you to provide some actual proof.
@@durema9720 Lmao
Believable
In Vietnam I was told a story about the black water buffalo and the red water buffalo. Farmers preferred the black water buffalo to the red water buffalo.
The black water buffalo fed by itself, drove by itself with little help almost never broke down and could be eaten if necessary. Even produced fertiliser.
Red water buffalo broke down often, needed a driver who was not always there, could not fix itself, needed special food (gasoline or diesel), could not reproduce itself, could not be used to warm the home.
I like that
@@Rabbi-Jill-kews The black water buffalo was a water buffalo.
The red water buffalo was a red tractor. Sent by the communist party to improve production, and farmer productivity.
It didn't work well.
This is actually an amazing and extremely informative channel.
Main problem about collectivizations is this "We collect, We share" but the controll of share and collect is totally blunder. After all problem collectivization is how manage we collect and share for everyone as soon as we have for short and long terms. And yea at famine and dekulakization itself happen because the management of collective goes worse by forcing industrialize and centralist economy in Moscuvite and the rest near of it.
Most of Peasants or Farmers for politely call, goes to city for better salary and better needs. While that's bring another calamity because everyone needs food and agriculture for survive cycle of needs both of city and village. In the end Collectivize is good *BUT* under good and sharp hearing what situation current and can handle *WITH MODERATELY* not in total force aggresive or rampant. Because if one mistakes or unbalanced in ideology thesis and practice that means another disaster and calamity come too fast and devastate enough.
Another great piece of Sertako content :D
I often find myself conflicted about collectivization so seeing your take at the end was refreshing. One the one hand, since no one could predict WWII and the plans of Operation Barbosa if Germany succeeded in taking the USSR, the life cost perhaps was technically worth it. On the other hand, the state could not predict WWII, so this does not justify the cost of lives from a moral perspective independent of other variables. An easier pace, all other things set aside, may have reduced needless causalities, but that just isn't the world they lived in.
There always was a race, always a national crisis or emergency.
So... I find myself equally conflicted but at least I am entertained! Thanks for the content, friend!
He was planning world communism, mostly by invading weak neighbours. Like the hitlerites he was running an economy on the exploitation of human lives and slave labour, like them he looted the occupied countries, unlike them he also got handouts from the west and plentiful intelligence from traitors.
@@vardekpetrovic9716 In 1931-32 there were no nazi Germany, so they cannot predicted it.
I agree. In the West, collectivization efforts are often presented as a cartoonishly evil effort and ultimately a failure. This is actually the first time I've heard the detailed rationale behind it's inception and implementation - as well as the first I've heard that the efforts in the end were actually successful at increasing agricultural output. Very eye opening.
@@mattgutierrez7651 yeah the idea that even the tragic results of its implementation actually ended up inadvertently saving an even greater number of people is quite humbling. History, even being 20/20, is not always clear cut or glamorous. It’s real eye opening indeed.
@@xsc1000 But the Nazis didn't just come from nowhere. They had to have been something then, even if they weren't the leading party of Germany. How else could they get into power, they had to start from somewhere. So the Nazis did exist just not as the leaders of Germany yet.
Conflict with the Nazis would have seemed inevitable especially once the Nazis were gaining popularity and were coming into power. So it is likely that conflict between the Soviets and Nazis would have been predicted. Since Nazis saw Bolshevism as an enemy to the Aryan race. So they probably wouldn't have though long term coexistence was an option.
The greatest advantage that capitalist development has in rhetoric is that it exacts the same forces as socialist guided development but the same negative results can be abstracted away from being “forced by the interests of capitalists” into “responding to market incentives” and when the working poor are violently punished or deprived for decades in this same process of industrialization, despite the deprivation being more terrorizing and the punishment being more constant, due to the values system of capitalism, the poor are the poor and they deserve their lot in life.
Capitalists only “care” about the poor in socialist countries inasmuch as it rhetorically advances anti-communist rhetoric because a socialist nation is one where external investment can not be relied on and which represents a sliver of hope that a better, or at least different arrangement of powers is possible.
Awesome Collectivization !
The running theme of the early Soviet Union was that they were always rushing against the clock and mistakes were made along the way. But with hind sight that WW2 was going to happen eventually because of the result of WW1, it was a correct choice but a costly one.
They actively sabotaged the country of the future, land lease saved them, not policies which killed millions for a slight bump to sectors of the economy which would have exploded under any conditions short of anarchy. Russia had a huge population and incredible resources, in a way it's impressive how little the Soviets did with them.
They actively sabotaged the country of the future, land lease saved them, not policies which killed millions for a slight bump to sectors of the economy which would have exploded under any conditions short of anarchy. Russia had a huge population and incredible resources, in a way it's impressive how little the Soviets did with them.
It wasnt correct choice. It was ideological stupidity. Production would rise naturally as the new technology was introduced to the agriculture segment. It happened in every developed country naturally without red terror and massive loses of lives.
@@vorynrosethorn903 without the vast industry built in these years no amount of lend lease would save the country. Russian agriculture was stagnant for a long time, the Russian Empire has regular famine every decade and agriculture technique was extreamely backwards with literally no machinery. Russia was an extreamely backwards country when compare to other great powers and that was the reason for its implosion, Stoylipin reform was the only thing that maybe could save the country but that is still a very far stretch.
@@vorynrosethorn903 Lend lease only accouted for ~4% of soviet equipment during the war
Setarko please do a future video on sports, fitness, martial arts, etc in the ussr.
It should also be noted that the prior Soviet approach, the very capitalistic NEP, resulted in failiure as the peasents refused to sell grain as the market prices (which were no longer set by the state but adjusted themselves via the open market) were too low due to low demand in the cities and the western emarbo preventing export.
The Soviet famine also did not just happen randomly because of collectivization which lead to an increase in food production, but to two consecutive droughts that hit the entire USSR coppled with a rapid demand for food in the growing cities.
I got the feeling of "it was bad but it could be worse" watching this video
Maoist China somehow managed to make it even worse than Stalins USSR. I bet those bastards were in some sort of unanounced competition
Сделай видео про то как строился, развивался Питер, Я думаю многим понравится
На болоте построили. хд
Boy, this guy is good. You get more out of this 20-minute video than if you read a 700-page book on the subject.
Can you please add a soundtrack list for the songs in the video? Especially the first two ones? (1:58)
Collectivization did not increase agricultural production; it increased the amount of agricultural output the government collected.
Which meant starvation for farmers
It actually did. It was inefficient, but the agricultural output did grow
@@alfaeco15 Not really since despite collectivisation being implemented from 1928 to 1991, the only famine came during 2 consecutive droughs and an allied embargo in 1930.
@@dwarow2508 I presume you are talking of grain, but this is only one part of Russian agriculture. For grain, some sources indicate that the total grain production increased from 69.5 million tons in 1928 to 97.1 million tons in 1937, while others say what I think is more credible is that it declined from 73.3 million tons in 1928 to 67.6 million tons in 1934 and only recovered to 75.8 million tons in 1937. Livestock was a disaster in this period, and there is no argument. The other issue is that Russian agriculture was more primitive in 1935 than in 1928.
@@WagesOfDestruction I am talking about total agricultural output. Not just grain, but also rye and all forms of goods from various livestock. Prior to the collectivization beginning 1929, the highest recorded Soviet agricultural output was in 1926/27 76.8 million tons of agricultural goods. This was also the highest on the planet although relatively low in terms of per capita output. This dropped in 1927/28 to just 65.7 million tons. Collectivization began the following year. The agricultural output in 1929/30 fell to 59.6 million tons. Note that in 1930 the Soviet famine began. This is despite the increase of food procurement by 44%. This trend continued the following year in 1931/32 with a drop to just 54.2 million tons. In 1932/1933 the situation stabelized with an increase to 58.3 million tons. In 1933 the Soviet famine ended despite a continious rise in state food procurement. The total agriculural output kept rising from that point on and surpassed the most prosperous year of 1926 in 1937 with 78.4 million tons being produced. Collectivization in the USSR never ended until 1991 meaning that an increase in food production over the NEP period meant an increase due to collectivization regardless of what year it happened in. Livestock being a disaster is irrelevant when total food production is still growing. Soviet agriculture in 1935 was definetly far ahead of agriculture in 1928. Just the fact that is was mechanized already dismisses your delusion. The reason for still a lower output in 1935 than in 1928 was the adaptation perdiod and the rapid reorganization of collective agriculture.
Source: Aaron Hale-Dorrell, "The Soviet Union, the United States, and Industrial Agriculture" pp 295-324
Starvation was a national sport back in the days
And now the russcist wants to spread hunger around the world (and rise the prices of grain) by destroing grain strorages in Ukraine. Russia is not able to change itself from barbarians.
The USSR ate more in calories than folks in the US
@@Ocinneade345 Since the 1960s people in the USSR had a stable amount of calories. Before that the USSR still didn't reach their pre war levels of agriculture. In the meantime the USSR prioritized the industrial sector
@@Ocinneade345 TOTAL BS 🙄
@@timkaradas3255 damn I wonder what could have happened before the 60 which the country would struggle to recover from. A major war in which 30 million people died perhaps?
Was this before or after they killed or imprisoned all the successful farmers?
Anyone else notice the VW Beatle in the St Peter’s Basilica video? It looks USSR dated, I would love to know the story behind that.
Seems like the famines were also the fault of the peasants themselves since they decided to protest by slaughtering their animals and destroying farm equipment. It seems the issue wasn't socialism but reactionism and idealism. Then they cry crocodile tears when they have to live through the consequences of those decisions and cannot sustain themselves on their idealism.
You can argue the collectivization was too heavy handed or wasn't done well, but on the other hand, the reasonable response to a less successful government policy isn't to have a temper tantrum and shit in your own bed. It's kind of aggravating that people see this as a sin of communism when it was the people themselves who witlessly decided to become martyrs.
There's something to be said that the Soviet government could have done more from the start to make life in the countryside better, like their amazing cities but on the other hand, developing industry also needed to come first before prosperity could be guaranteed. If it wasn't for collectivization and this method, then USSR would never have ended up as prosperous as it is now.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
equality is a social construct tbh
This is a boring take
If the state hadn't collectivized so quickly, the industry would hav had to make an even larger break and the country wouldn't have been ready industrially to face the Nazi invasion and probably would have cost the USSR even more men or even losing the war. So in the end, it was very much worth it for the people, in case they wanted to live.
ultimately not worth the ppl if u consider birthrates in cities eventually drop coz society
@@vardekpetrovic9716 maybe, but remember, that the invading Nazis considered the people of the USSR subhumans and their fate was inevitable death through extermination, starvation and overwork which is in my opinion worse than starvation "only".
If the tsar had remained the economy would have continued to skyrocket and millions of people wouldn't have died for it. Russia today might have half a billion people as the fertility rate would have remained high and people who otherwise died would have had children.
@@vorynrosethorn903 skyrocket? Seriously, you are stupid. There was no skyrocketing in the Russian Empire's economy, but only a SLIGHT increase. If you really wish the tsar should have remained, it would only cost hundreds of thousands of lives on the front and on the home front. You seriously need some mental treatment.
@@vorynrosethorn903 russian empire had skyrocketting economy? wut???
А нечего тут решать. Сам же сказал, что коллективизация помогла победить в т.ч. и в войне. Нацисты хотели забрать земли себе, а население местное уничтожить, а оставшихся поработить. Так что тут нечего решать. Оно того стоило. Иначе бы ни ты, ни я не сидели на тёплом диване и не рассуждали о гуманизме.
hola
Collectivization was not a success. The only upside you mentioned, increases in immediate food production for the cities, was achieved by mechanization, that is, general technological progress (and btw, those tractor factories were built mostly by invited western engenieers) , and complete elimination of human rights. This system always produced less food than it could have, if best farmers were not enslaved or executed.
It decreased total food production, but increased food supply to cities and for export... at the expense of farmers lives.
Mao followed the same script, with Chinese characteristics, to a more horrendous results.
Except that it solved the siscor crisis in the USSR, financed the industrialization and lead to a small increase in agricultural output. It failed only in the sense of not achieving the quotas set by the government. And btw. no, the tractor factories were not built be westerners but by Soviets. Yes the system was inefficient, but it was nevertheless an upgrade over the NEP.
@@alfaeco15 It clearly did not come at the expense of farmers lives as the policy continued for the duration of the entire USSR and yet total food production kept growing.
Mao did not not follow the same script, the opposite actually.
@@dwarow2508 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_Tractor_Plant#Building_of_the_Plant_in_the_First_Five_Year_Plan built by american and german egineers, because most Soviet ones - big surprise - have been executed or exiled by that time.
@@MagicNumberArg en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_five-year_plan#Rapid_growth_of_heavy_industry
Most designed and built by Soviet engineers because - big surprise -
A) The great terror had not begun until almost 10 years later
B) The US was very opposed to coorperating with the USSR
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractor,_timber_and_agricultural_machinery_in_the_Soviet_Union
Out of 14 large scale tractor plants built in the USSR before ww2, only 2 were build with western help.
Imagine trying to prove a statistic with 1 example lmfao. Try again.
Perhaps one of the weirdest facts of the USSR is that agriculture was one of their sectors that they struggled most to develop, depending of imports most of their existence. After the end of socialism, Russia became a breadbasket of the world.
Is this why the USSR always exported more agricultural goods than imported them except for 1977/78? The USSR was the breadbasket of the world from the moment the USSR was formed.
Thank you for enlightening us about another part of Russian history.
From serfdom to serfdom.
Ah yes, Serfs that could afford an own apartment lol
Reminds me of a Soviet era anecdote.
When the city has grain and the boondocks starve, that's Trotskyism.
When the city and the boondocks starve, that's proper application of the party line.
When the city and the boondocks have food, that's the horrors of capitalism.
Ah thats why Soviet people ate more than in the west...
Hmmmm… what are YOUR sorces?
1:09 “Buffalo Springfield” on the door of the truck?? Soviet Neil Young fans? American machinery sold to the enemy?
Buffalo Springfield Roller was an American tractor/roller building long before any of the members of the group you're talking about were born. Also, what enemy? The Soviets didn't become a rival until after WWII.
Is like every 10 year in Russia empire
In russia, when its bad, don't worry.
It'll get worse
Not really
@@dwarow2508
Yes, really
@@theimmortal4718 No, not really
@@dwarow2508
Yes, really 🤡
Meanwhile in China, with Dengism, they begrudgingly lowkey admitted Capitalism rules Communism drools
"It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice." - Deng Xiaoping
@@befeleme Your cat failed lol
Ah that is why all business is state owned lol. No wonder the US admitted with the New Deal that Socialism rules Capitalism drools
@@BichaelStevens Your cat failed lol
@@dwarow2508 Taiwan #1
Why does nobody mention Irish Potato Famine despite mentioning Holodomor all the time? Hypocrisy?
Because they happened in different places in a different century and one was caused by deliberate policy while the other was caused by an outbreak of crop disease, land inheritance rights and the subsequent small landholdings reliance on a single crop, government political nonsense about trade laws and failed relief programs. In Russia the soldiers came, they took the crops, and people starved. Even though they are both human tragedies the circumstances are not close enough to allow for easy comparison or association.
@@vorynrosethorn903 Even though the British deliberately withheld food assistance to the Irish? Even though they saw them starving as a victory for asserting control over the islands and getting rid of the Irish at which they looked at through the proto-darwinian view of being inferior human beings and promoted their immigration to America for that aim? Talk about being a bootlicker. Any more apologetics for crimes in the west?
@@vorynrosethorn903there was enough food in Ireland during the potato famine. It is just that those foods were exported.
@@vorynrosethorn903 "deliberate policy" of what exactly ?
@@vorynrosethorn903 Bruh what? The Soviet famine also happened because of 2 consecutive droughts. Meanwhile the Irish potato famine was caused by crop disease. Also you literally just noted deliberate policies as the reason for the Irish famine lmfao. In the USSR peasents were hiding crops and people starved, so the soldiers took them. The circumstances were very much similair and comparable.
Im so glad the baltics are finally free from commie rule
My grandma burns one ussr flag every year when the USSR collapsed 🙏🙏🙏
Brainrot
Post-soviet children are brainwashed by western propaganda harder than western children. If the global left wins, CIS countries unfortunately will remain last capitalists standing.
Pretty much all of modern young russian opposition are neolib tards, because socialism is the past, and the past is not cool. My heart bleeds for the motherland, but I have no hope of class consciousness there, my generation fetishizes capitalism like western millenials.
Collectivisation was not an evil. The way it was carried out unfortunately could be. (Treatment of the kulaks)
I'm sure your video will endorse a similar view.
As for whether or not it was necessary. Well ... Ehhhhh ... That's a much trickier question. Ideology determined your answer to this question for decades both in the East and the West. I prefer to say that change was inevitable in the Russian Empire/Soviet Union in the early 1900s. The czars had been far too slow to implement reforms. Modernisation was too far behind other European powers as well.
But ... If the whites had won the Russian civil war, they probably would have had at least moderate success in reforms.
I often think that Russia was the wrong country to be the first to try socialism.
Holodomor any one
Starvation should be included as a soviet tradition
*Western
Imagine marrying a woman at this period and telling her to be a sit at home Mom and doesn't have to work ... she will open her window every morning and see other people waking up to go to work and she doesn't have to. Modern women think its "Oppression" to be an housewife
A rather superficial and subjective review of collectivization. There is no explanation of who the kulaks are (who are not just rich peasants, but those who exploited other peasants, lent resources at high interest rates and were often the heads of bandit groups), nor an analysis of the causes of famine (among the causes of which are crop failure, the retention of grain by kulaks for speculation, as well as the "golden blockade" by Western countries).
And there are very big questions about the number of victims of hunger. Most estimates are based on the demographic method, which does not reflect the number of deaths and their causes at all. If we consider the same method, then more than 30 million Russians became victims of the 90s. However, in spite of everything, it is stupid to think that 30 million people died because of the collapse of the USSR.
In addition, it would be useful to make a historical footnote. With inefficient agriculture before collectivization, famine was commonplace. So according to some data, up to 2 million people died of hunger in 1891, 3 million in 1900-1903, and about 2 million more in 1911 (I would also treat these estimates of the number of victims very carefully)
Found the communist, were the gulags also summer camps and the nkvd a form of boy scout.
Your explanations are just soviet propaganda. In reality as a Kulak can be marked anyone who just had something that red comissar wanted. Succesful people were sent to death and the worst remained.
@@xsc1000 "Kulak is just a successful farmer" Sure Sure
@@konstantinkelekhsaev302 Dude it's common knowledge that villagers would sell each other out as kulaks to steal their shit - Witch Trials nonsense all over again
@@wheresmyeyebrow1608 Do you even know what a kulak is ?
Communism was thr best. I hope russia turn back to communism soon
Communism belongs in the dustbin of history. The best path for Russia is what kept it strong and stable for centuries. Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality.
Location USA
@@Scourge1990 location usa? What you mean by that? If you mean that i life in usa then no. I life in finland
@@kenseitakesi4521 💀 traitor
The commies killed your people and annexed Karelia
Plus no one misses the USSR outside of Russia
Look at Baltic's
Why support a system that the majority of civilians hated
we