They were called "the Mountain" because they sat as a group in the highest seats at the side or the back of the Chamber. See also the glossary entry "Montagnards. He he was removed from office by General Cavaignac during the period of martial law which was imposed after the June Days riots. Following the military crackdown after the demonstration in order to escape arrest he fled to London where he spent the next 20 years in exile. He was able to return to France only in Bastiat uses the character of Jacques Bonhomme frequently in his constructed dialogues in the Economic Sophisms as a foil to criticise protectionists and advocates of government regulation.
Thiers He was arrested, lost his parliamentary immunity, and was forced into exile in England. Bastiat was one of the few Deputies to oppose the Chamber's treatment of Blanc. The Fourierists advocated a utopian, communistic system for the reorganization of society. He was also an advocate of the "right to work" the right to a job , an idea which Bastiat opposed.
He was elected to the Constituent Assembly in representing La Seine and tried to set up a "Peoples Bank" which would provide workers with low or zero interest loans. What is Property? See the glossary entry on "The Right to Work. In he was instrumental in planning the construction of "Thiers' Wall" around Paris between See the glossary entries on "Thiers" and "The Fortifications of Paris.
Fould was an important part of the imperial household, serving as an adviser to the emperor, especially on economic matters. He was an ardent free trader but was close to the Saint—Simonians on matters of banking. On the other hand he supported one of Bastiat's favourite reforms, the uniform stamp for sending letters. He began in with the popular mass circulation La Presse which had sales of over 20, by One reason for his success was the introduction of serial novels which proved very popular with readers.
Girardin gradually turned against the July Monarchy on the grounds it was corrupt. In the Revolution he played a significant role in advising Louis Philippe to abdicate in February and then opposing General Cavaignac's repressive actions during the June Days riots. For the latter Girardin was imprisoned and his journal shut down. During the election campaign for the presidency he supported Louis Napoleon but ran afoul of him soon afterwards, selling his shares in La Presse in By contrast a professor in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Paris earned between 2, and 10, francs per annum.
Galignani and Co. During the campaign for free trade organised by the French Free Trade Association between and Lamartine often spoke at their large public meetings and was a big draw card. He was a member of the Provisional Government in February offering Bastiat a position in the government, which he declined and Minister of Foreign Affairs in June On the occasion of his article entitled: The Right to a Job" Feb.
Paris, 29 June To Julie Marsan," CW1, pp. He received 25, votes out of 49, Arbois, Imprimerie d'Aug. Javel, no date. Instead he wrote it out as a pamphlet and had it circulated around the Chamber. The reference to the Montagnard Manifesto is on p. Maudit Argent Paris: Guillaumin, First version words. Second revised and enlarged version 2, words. Joseph Garnier et Guillaumin et al. Maudit Argent Paris: Guillaumin, , pp. The third version is 3, words. The first English translation of the third version appeared under the title "Government" in an anonymous translation published in Essays on Political Economy.
By the Late M. Cash, An American edition by David Wells appeared in Essays on political economy. English translation Revised, with Notes by David A. Wells G. Putnam Sons, First ed. It contains "Capital and Interest," pp. Wells states that he revised the earlier anonymous English translation which he described as "exceedingly imperfect, and in some cases absolutely without meaning" p. Edited by George B. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. Copyright William Volker Fund , pp. These have been revised and updated by David M.
Hart in May I would like someone to sponsor a prize, not of five hundred francs but of a million, 38 with crowns, crosses, and ribbons for whoever can provide a good, simple, and understandable definition of the words "the state. All that we know about it is that it is a mysterious entity, and definitely the one that is most solicited, most bothered, the busiest, the one to whom the most advice is given, the most held responsible, the most called upon, and the most pushed to take action that there is in the world.
For, sir, I do not have the honor of knowing you, but I will bet ten to one that for the last six months you have been constructing utopias, 39 and if you have been doing so, I will bet ten to one that you will make the state responsible for making them happen. And you, madam, I am certain that in your heart of hearts you would like to cure all the ills of suffering humanity and that you would not be in the slightest put out if the state just wanted to help in this.
But alas! The unfortunate being, like Figaro, does not know whom to listen to nor which way to turn. Carry out research into fertiliser and egg production.
- The Commissioner (Dr. Mary Paul in Florida Book 4).
- The Love Potion (Waking up in Jamaica Book 4).
- The Royal Headley of Pohnpei : Upon a Stone Altar.
- Berchtold Alfred - AbeBooks.
- Awakening Kindness: Finding Joy Through Compassion for Others?
- Ohio Criminal Practice Rules Courtroom Quick Reference: 2013?
Criss-cross the country with railways. Re-forest the mountains. Set up model farms. Set up harmonious workshops. Educate the young. Assist the elderly. Send the inhabitants of towns to the country. Regulate the profits of all industries. Lend money, interest free, to those who want it. Encourage art and train musicians and dancers for our entertainment. Prohibit trade and at the same time create a merchant navy. Discover truth and knock a bit of sense into our heads. The state has set itself the mission of enlightening, developing, enlarging, fortifying, spiritualizing, and sanctifying the souls of the people.
I have prepared some projects relating to five or six brand new taxes that are the most benign the world has ever seen. You will see how pleased you will be to pay them. At that, a great cry arises: "Just a minute! Where is the merit in doing something with resources you already have? It would not be worth calling yourself the state. Far from imposing new taxes on us, we demand that you remove the old ones.
You must abolish: The tax on salt; 52 The tax on alcohol; 53 Postage tax; 54 City tolls; 55 Occupational licenses; 56 Compulsory labour obligations. In the middle of this tumult, and after the country has changed the form of the state two or three times because it has failed to satisfy all these demands, I wanted to point out that they were contradictory.
Good heavens, what was I thinking of?
- Condolences - Attack against Charlie Hebdo.
- The French Intifada: The Long War between France and it Arabs | School of Advanced Study!
- Elementary Drum Method.
- Arthurian Literature by Women: An Anthology (Garland Reference Library of the Humanities)?
Could I not keep this unfortunate remark to myself? Here I am, discredited forever, and it is now generally accepted that I am a man without any heart or compassion, 58 a dry philosopher, 59 an individualist, a bourgeois 60 and, to sum it up in a single word, an economist of the English or American school. Oh, excuse me, you sublime writers whom nothing stops, not even contradictions. I do not ask for more, you may be sure, than that you have genuinely discovered, independently from us, a bountiful and inexhaustible being that calls itself THE STATE, which has bread for every mouth, work for every arm, capital for all businesses, credit for all projects, ointment for all wounds, balm for all suffering, advice for all problems, solutions for all doubts, truths for all intelligent minds, distractions for all forms of boredom, milk for children, wine for the elderly, a being that meets all our needs, anticipates all our desires, satisfies all our curiosity, corrects all our errors, all our faults, and relieves us all henceforth of the need for foresight, prudence, judgment, wisdom, experience, order, economy, temperance, and action.
And why would I not desire this? May God forgive me, but the more I reflect on this, the more the convenience of the thing appeals to me, and I too am anxious to have access to this inexhaustible source of wealth and enlightenment, this universal doctor, this bottomless treasury, and this infallible counsel, or what you are calling THE STATE. This being so, I ask you to show it to me and define it for me, and this is why I am proposing the establishment of a prize for the first person who discovers this exceptional creature.
For in the end, people will agree with me that this precious discovery has not yet been made since up to now, all that has come forward under the name of THE STATE has been overturned instantly by the people, precisely because it does not fulfill the somewhat contradictory conditions of the program. Does this need to be said? I fear that we are, in this respect, the dupes 63 of one of the strangest illusions 64 ever to have taken hold of the human mind. Man rejects pain and suffering. And yet he is condemned by nature to the suffering which privation brings if he does not embark upon the pain of work.
All he has, therefore, is a choice between these two evils. How can he avoid both? Up to now, he has only found and will only ever find one means, that is, to enjoy the work of others , to act in such a way that pain and satisfaction do not fall to each person according to some natural share , but that all pain falls on some and all satisfaction goes to the others. From this we get slavery or even plunder, in whatever form it might take : wars, deception, violence, trade restrictions, fraud, etc.
We should hate and combat these oppressors but we cannot say that they are absurd. Slavery is receding, 67 thank heaven, and on the other hand, our aptitude for defending our property means that direct and open plunder is not easy to do. However, one thing has remained. It is this unfortunate primitive tendency within all men to divide into two our complex human lot, shifting pain onto others and keeping satisfaction for themselves. It remains to be seen in what new form this sorry tendency will manifest itself. Oppressors no longer act directly on the oppressed using their own forces.
No, our conscience has become too scrupulous for that. There are still tyrants and victims certainly, but between them has been placed the intermediary that is the state, that is to say, the law itself. For this reason, we all call upon the state on one ground or pretext or another. We tell it "I do not consider that there is a satisfactory relation between the goods I enjoy and my work. I would like to take a little from the property of others to establish the balance I desire. But this is dangerous. Can you not make my task easier? Could you not get me a good job in the government?
Or else hinder the production of my competitors? Or else make me an interest free loan of the capital you have taken from its owners? Or raise my children at public expense? Or award me subsidies? Or ensure my well-being when I reach the age of fifty? By these means I will achieve my aim with a perfectly clear conscience, since the law itself will have acted on my behalf and I will achieve all the advantages of plunder without ever having incurred either its risks or opprobrium! As it is certain, on the one hand, that we all address more or less similar requests to the State and, on the other, it is plain that the State cannot provide satisfaction for some without adding to the work of the others, while waiting for a new definition of the state, I think I am authorized to give my own here.
Who knows whether it will not carry off the prize? Here it is:. For today, as in the past, each person more or less wants to profit from the work of others. We design an intermediary, we address ourselves to the state, and each class in turn comes forward to say to it "You who can take things straightforwardly and honestly, take something from the general public and we will share it. The state has a very ready tendency to follow this diabolical advice as it is made up of ministers and civil servants, in short, men, who like all men are filled with the desire and are always quick to seize the opportunity to see their wealth and influence increase.
It will be the arbiter and master of every destiny. It will take a great deal; and therefore a great deal will be left over for itself. It will increase the number of its officials and widen the circle scope of its functions. It will end up acquiring an overwhelming size. But what we should clearly note is the astonishing blindness of the general public in all this.
When victorious soldiers reduced the conquered to slavery they were barbaric, but they were not absurd. Their aim, like ours, was to live at someone else's expense, but unlike us, they were able to achieve this. What should we think of a people who do not appear to have any idea that reciprocal pillage 73 is no less pillage because it is reciprocal, that it is no less criminal because it is executed legally and in an orderly fashion, that it adds nothing to public well-being and that, on the contrary, it reduces well-being by everything that this spendthrift of an intermediary that we call the state costs us?
And we have placed this great illusion in the opening lines of the Constitution to edify the people. These are the opening words of the preamble: Thus, it is France, an abstraction, 76 that calls upon French citizens, who are real existing things, to achieve greater morality, well-being, etc. Isn't this to accept completely this strange illusion that leads us to expect everything from some power other than our own?
Does it not give rise to the idea that there is, external to the French people, a being that is virtuous, enlightened, and rich that can and ought to bestow benefits on them? Is it not to presume, quite gratuitously of course, that there is between France and the French, between the simple, brief, and abstract term used to describe all of these individuals as a group as well as the individuals themselves, a relationship of father and child, tutor and pupil, teacher and schoolchild?
I am fully aware that it is sometimes metaphorically said that "the fatherland is a tender mother. Would accuracy have suffered if the preamble had said:. Well, what is the value of an axiom in which the subject and object can change places without causing trouble? Everyone understands that you can say: Mothers suckle their children. But it would be ridiculous to say: children suckle their mothers. The Americans had another concept of the relationship between citizens and the state when they placed at the head of their Constitution these simple words:.
Here we have no illusions, no abstraction from which its citizens ask everything.
They do not expect anything other than from themselves and their own energy. They place no expectations on anything other than themselves and their own energy. If I have taken the liberty of criticizing the opening words of our Constitution, it is because it is not a question, as one might believe, of wholly metaphysical subtlety. I claim that this personification of the state has been in the past and will be in the future a rich source of calamities and revolutions.
Here is the public on one side and the state on the other, considered to be two distinct beings, the latter obliged to spread goodness over 77 the former and the former having the right to claim from the latter a flood of human happiness. What is bound to happen? In fact, the state is not and cannot be one-handed. Strictly speaking, the state is able to take and does not give back. This has been seen and is explained by the porous and absorbent nature of its hands, which always retain part and sometimes all of what they touch. But what has never been seen, 80 will never be seen, and cannot even be conceived is that the state will give to the general public more than it has taken from them.
It is therefore sublime folly for us to adopt toward it the humble attitude of beggars. It is completely impossible for it to confer a particular advantage on some of the individuals who make up the community without inflicting greater damage on the community as a whole. If it refuses the services being demanded of it, it is accused of impotence, lack of willpower, and incapacity. If it tries to provide them, it is reduced to inflicting increased taxes on the people, doing more harm than good, and attracting to itself general dislike from the other direction.
Thus there are two hopes among the general public and two promises from the government: a host of benefits and no taxes. Hopes and promises which, as they are contradictory, can never be achieved. Is this not then the cause of all our revolutions? For between the state, which is hugely generous with impossible promises, and the general public, which has conceived unattainable hopes, have come two classes of men, those with ambition and those with utopian dreams.
Their role is clearly laid out by the situation. It is enough for these flatterers who seek popularity 81 to shout into the people's ears: "The authorities are misleading you, if we were in their place, we would shower you with benefits and relieve you of taxes. No sooner are their friends in power than they are required to fulfill these promises.
The new state is no less hampered that the former state since, when it comes to the impossible, promises may well be made but not kept. It tries to play for time, which it needs to bring its huge projects to fruition. First of all, it tries a few things timidly; on the one hand it expands primary education a little, 82 secondly, it makes slight modifications to the tax on wines and spirits These two promises always, 84 and of necessity, block each other.
Making use of borrowing, in other words consuming the future, is really a current means of reconciling them; efforts are made to do a little good in the present at the expense of a great deal of harm in the future. However, this procedure evokes the specter of bankruptcy, which chases credit away. What is to be done then? The new state in this case takes its medicine bravely. It calls together its coercive forces to keep itself in power, it stifles public opinion, it exercises arbitrary power, it mocks its own former slogans, and it declares that administration can be carried out only at the cost of being unpopular.
In short, it declares that it is acting like a government. And it is at this point that other flatterers who seek popularity lie in wait. They exploit the same illusion, go down the same road, obtain the same success, and within a short time are engulfed in the same abyss.
This is the situation we reached in February. More than ever, the people expected the state , in its republican form, to open wide the tap of bounty and close that of taxation. What could the provisional government do? Alas, only what has been always been done in a like situation: make promises and play for time. The government did not hesitate to do this, and to give their promises more solemnity they set them in decrees. The National Assembly met, and since two contradictory things cannot be achieved, its task, its sad task was to withdraw as gently as possible and one after the other all the decrees of the provisional government.
However, in order not to make the disappointment too cruel, a few compromises simply had to be undertaken. A few commitments have been maintained, and others have only barely begun to be implemented. The current government is therefore endeavoring to dream up new taxes. At this point, I will look ahead a few months into the future and ask myself, with sadness in my heart, what will happen when the newly appointed government officials go out into the countryside to raise the new taxes on inheritance, on income, and on the profits of agricultural production.
May the heavens give the lie to my presentiments, but I can still see a role in this for the flatterers who seek popularity. Read the latest Manifesto of the Montagnards, the one they issued regarding the presidential elections. This is always the same tactic, or if you prefer, the same error. The state owes "free instruction and education to all its citizens. It owes: "General and vocational education that is as appropriate as possible to the needs, vocations, and capacities of each citizen. It must: "Teach him his duties toward God, men, and himself; develop his feelings, aptitudes, and faculties and in short, give him the knowledge needed for his work, the enlightenment needed for his interests, and a knowledge of his rights.
It must: "Make available to everybody literature and the arts, the heritage of human thinking, the treasures of the mind, and all the intellectual enjoyment that elevates and strengthens the soul. It must: "Compensate any harm caused by accident, fire, flood, etc. It must: "Buy back the railways, canals, and mines," and doubtless also run them with its legendary capacity for industry. It must: "Stimulate and encourage large economic undertakings and provide them with all the resources needed to make them a triumphant success.
As the regulator of credit, it will sponsor manufacturing and farming associations fully in order to ensure their success. The state has to do all this without prejudicing the services which it currently carries out and, for example, it will have to maintain a constantly hostile attitude toward foreigners since, as the signatories of the Montagnard program state, "bound by this sacred solidarity and by the historical precedents of republican France, we extend our hopes and promises across the barriers that despotism raises between nations: the right we wish for ourselves we also wish for all those oppressed by the yoke of tyranny.
We want our glorious army to continue to be, if necessary the army of freedom. As you can see, the gentle hand of the state, that gentle hand that gives and spreads benefits widely, will be fully occupied under the Montagnard government. Might you perhaps be disposed to believe that this will be just as true of the rough hand that goes rummaging and rifling in our pockets? Don't you believe it! The flatterers who seek popularity would not be masters of their trade if they did not have the art of hiding an iron fist in a velvet glove.
Would it not be a fine day if, in order to shower us with benefits, the tax authorities were content to take their cut from our unessential luxuries. That is not all. The aim of the Montagnards is that "taxes will lose their oppressive character and become just a fraternal act. Good heavens!
I was well aware that it is fashionable to shove fraternity in everywhere, 91 but I did not think it could be inserted into the tax collector's regulations. Justice to be free of charge, that is to say, there should be a simplification of the forms and a reduction in the fees" Bastiat's aside: this is doubtless a reference to the stamp tax. Thus, land tax, city tolls, industrial licenses, stamp duty, salt tax, tax on wine and spirits and postage would all go. These gentlemen have found the secret of giving feverish activity to the gentle hand of the state while paralyzing its rough hand.
Well then, I ask the impartial reader, is this not childishness and, what is more, dangerous childishness? What is to stop the people mounting revolution after revolution once the decision has been taken to keep doing so until the following contradiction has been achieved: "Give nothing to the state and receive a great deal from it! Do people believe that if the Montagnards came to power they would not be victims of the same means they employed to seize it?
Fellow citizens, since time immemorial two political systems have confronted one another and both have good arguments to support them. According to one, the State has to do a great deal, but it also has to take a great deal. According to the other, its two activities should be barely felt. A choice has to be made between these two systems. But as for the third system, which takes something from each of the two others and which consists in demanding everything from the state while giving it nothing, this is illusionary, absurd, puerile, contradictory, and dangerous.
Those who are pushing for this in order to give themselves the pleasure of being able to accuse all forms of government of impotence, and of thus exposing them governments to your revolutionary attacks, those people are flattering and deceiving you, or at the very least they are deceiving themselves. As for us, we consider that the state is not, nor should it be, anything other than the coercive power of the community, which is instituted not to be an instrument of reciprocal oppression and plunder between all of its citizens, but on the contrary to guarantee to each person what is his and ensure the reign of justice and security.
It should have been updated to twelve months. When he wrote the second version in September the "six months" would have referred to the period since the outbreak of Revolution in February during which time socialists like Louis Blanc had been running the National Workshops program, Victor Considerant had been lobbying the government to fund an experimental socialist community north of Paris, and Ledru-Rollin was Minister of the Interior and a member of the Executive Commission in the Provisional Government until he was ousted by General Cavaignac during the period of martial law which was imposed after the June Days riots.
For these socialists, "L'Organisation" meant the organisation of labor and industry by the state for the benefit of the workers; and "l'Association" meant cooperative living and working arrangements as opposed to private property, exchange on the free market, and the family.
Louis Blanc was appointed by the Provisional Government to be the president of the "Commission du gouvernement pour les travailleurs" Government Commission for the Workers also known as the Luxembourg Commission which oversaw the National Workshops program and met in the Luxembourg Palace, the old meeting place for the Chamber of Peers see "Luxembourg Palace".
The National Workshops were created on February 27, , in one of the very first legislative acts of the Provisional government, to create government funded jobs for unemployed workers. In the government decided to encourage the building of a national network. Under the Railway Law of 11 June the government ruled that 5 main railways would be built radiating out of Paris which would be built in cooperation with private industry.
The government would build and own the right of way, bridges, tunnels and railway stations, while private industry would lay the tracks, and build and maintain the rolling stock and the lines. The government would also set rates and regulate safety. The first railway concessions were issued by the government in triggering a wave of speculation and attempts to secure concessions.
On 15 May, armed supporters of Blanc marched to the Chamber and forcibly entered in an attempt to seize control of the government. When the Chamber decided to close down the National Workshops its supporters took to the streets and began the bloody riots known as the June Days June which were suppressed by General Cavaignac with the loss of thousands of lives.
Martial law was declared on 24 which lasted until 19 October. According to the new constitution of the Second Republic Nov. Unquestionably, the Soviet government's grain- and livestock-procurement policy was its most short-sighted practice from In the North Caucasus Territory, according to the calculations of Oskolkov, while the gross grain yield rose from As Oskolkov pointed out, the North Caucasus Territory fulfilled not only its original but also an additional plan tacked on in September by handing over not only its "surplus, but also a part of its seed grain, fodder, and food provisions from the harvest of The 1 grain yield was approximately We labored an entire year and all we got for our efforts were marks on a piece of paper odni trudodni.
After the strike was broken, one's refusal to work enthusiastically in the collective fields became a badge of honor. The pressure to repay Germany the enormous, short-term loans taken out in 1 93 1 , which had helped to finance heavy industry and the mechanization of agriculture as quickly as possible was the central policy makers' main assumption that found expression in the procurement policy.
The VTsIK Commission, reporting on the state of affairs there as of January , noted that when translated into "horse units," between and the Territory gained the equivalent of , "horses" in the form of tractors and combines. In the 's, however, combines were not always more efficient than threshers, especially where weeds grew rampant and the grain ripened unevenly.
Weimar, the stacking of grain by horses was more cost effective than the use of combines by a factor of two. In Simferopol, Cairns was amused by the spectacle of "37 people [.
- With Love, Candy!
- Cosas de familia: ¿A dónde fue Nazario? (Spanish Edition).
- Yellow vests movement.
- Berchtold Alfred.
- Live Well, Love Much, Laugh Often?
- Online Library of Liberty.
Moreover, Soviet-style mechanization not only failed to solve, at least initially, the newly created production problems — it compounded them. The Russian combines in particular were notorious for the high percentage of wheat they left in the field. In , the Drusag management invested in ten Russian combines; after experimenting with them, the management put them aside, because, according to Dr.
The VTsIK Commission's final report on the harvest in the North Caucasus Territory was not objective in its assessment of blame, which it onesidedly pinned on peasants acting under "kulak influence. Between and , however, in the North Caucasus Territory the percentage of horses fell by another In some counties, Matveevo-Kurgansk former Taganrog district to take one example, the number of horses dropped in one year from 23, to 1 1 , The decrease resulted from a combination of meat-procurement orders and a grain deficit in the villages despite the splendid crop.
In the spring of , collective farm workers were underfed, a state some villagers attempted to remedy by selling or killing livestock from the collective herd to sate their own hunger. The goal of mechanization not only served as justification for leaving insufficient quantities of fodder in the countryside, it also encouraged a reckless abuse of livestock by non-rural supervisors under pressure to fulfill plans. In the North Caucasus Territory, 3. Of these 40, households, "25, kulak families and other 'counterrevolutionary elements'" were deported from the Territory.
According to one of the managers at the understaffed state farm near Drusag, "the food and living conditions on the farm were so bad that the workers would not stay. The planting season was doubled and in places tripled because the remaining workforce was responsible for working a higher percentage of acres than in previous years. The weed problem, the blame for which was laid solely on lazy collective farm workers and "kulaks" by the VTsIK report, also illustrates the interconnectedness between the deficit elements and the mutual but not equal responsibility of the state and its workforce.
A clean seed bed is the easiest way to prevent weeds and is the product of thorough, deep tilling followed by immediate planting which gives the wheat seed a head start over the dormant weed seed. Almost as remarkable to Cairns and Schiller as the pervasiveness of weeds was the uniform poor quality of the tilling done in both the fall of and the spring of Thus, the government's procurement strategy, which depleted the amount of grain available for cattle and sowing, helped to create conditions favorable to the proliferation of weeds.
Weeds can and were fought in the Russian fields of the 1 's and 's by manual labor. At Drusag, for example, the directors took advantage of the streams of hungry laborers offering their labor at a discount in order to clear their wheat and soybean fields of weeds. Famine was an all too familiar "guest," as Russian peasants sometimes described it, in peasant homes in pre-revolutionary times. Russian villagers traditionally set aside personal grain reserves and sometimes helped organize collective grain reserves in anticipation of future weather-related catastrophes, hi one Kuban Cossack market town, for example, Cossacks answered the question posed by a visiting Communist Cossack from Slaviansk — "Is the Party's hegemony over the social life of the village and the country necessary?
Since then, the fund has been governed and managed by Communists and there isn't a single kernel of grain left. You tell me," he challenged, "is Party leadership beneficial to us or not? By forbidding advance local initiatives, the government assumed moral responsibility for the creation of an emergency grain fund at the national level. Finally, if the Soviet government did not possess adequate grain reserves on the eve of the famine, the shortage was due to the amount of grain it chose to export from to From through , shortfalls in other areas wood, coal, and cattle were made up for by exporting more agricultural products.
Whereas in and , the NEP years with the most favorable harvests, total grain exports amounted to only 1. Russia, it was optimistically announced, no longer had a "grain problem. Stalin apparently put more stock in the correlation between collectivization figures and the amount of grain at the government's disposal than he did in crop estimates and harvest yield statistics. Because collectivization percentages were increased in , it stood to reason that more grain could be exported 5. In a telegram to V. The ital'ianka. Perhaps the cause that more than any other made a mass famine likely barring a reduction of grain exports and an increase in imports was the quota-setting strategy chosen by Stalin in June The announcement of the grain- procurement plan led to a total breakdown in political relations between the peasantry and the Party.
The Vice-Consulate of Italy stationed in Kharkov was intrigued: how could a hen be expected to "lay an egg unfailingly each day? Stalin's "insurance-policy" strategy backfired, exhausting the remainder of collective farm workers' already taxed patience. In Ukraine, the plan was reduced in November from to million poods. In Khataevich's opinion, "if Ukraine had been given an assignment of million poods right up front, the plan would more easily have been fulfilled. In the North Caucasus Territory, when the grain quota announcements for reached the hungry villages, peasants and Cossacks dug in their collective heels and prepared for a determined last-ditch defense of their grain.
In the summer and fall of , resistance in the Don area took many forms: united and independent, open and stealthy, armed with words, pitchforks, or guns. Quite a bit of it was cleverly designed. The three most important types, from the perspective of the famine, were: the slow-down strike, the agricultural strike, and the "misappropriation" of grain earmarked for government bins. The first two in particular further decreased the amount of grain available in the country. All three enraged Stalin, Molotov, and Kaganovich. The slow-down strike under conditions of collectivized agriculture could be defined as working with all deliberate slowness, often carelessly.
Shortly after the heavy rains in early August, Sholokhov rode his horse over to the Chukarinsk collective farm, where he fully expected to find the collective farm workers actively engaged in field work. Instead, he found the fields empty and approximately 50 men and women lazing about — some sleeping, other singing, none working. The group's self-appointed spokesperson, a woman, justified the behavior by pointing out the extreme weightiness of the grain quota. The second significant resistive strategy employed during the late summer and early fall was the refusal to work until certain demands were met.
Sometimes this occurred individually; other times it resembled an organized, small-scale agricultural strike. By the word "strike" I mean deliberate, openly expressed refusals by more than one person to work further until a clearly enunciated demand is met. A third major form of resistance in was the so-called "misappropriation of kolkhoz grain," either individually or as a united village effort. Pilferage was not a direct cause of the famine in the village, inasmuch as it kept grain in the village in protected spaces unlike the fields, where it was vulnerable to rain and snow.
It did, however, reduce the amount of grain readily made available to the government, thereby contributing indirectly to the famine by increasing Central Party hostility toward "thieving" collective farm workers. The "misappropriation" of grain earmarked for government coffers reached epidemic proportions in the fall of Resistance to unpopular government policies deemed unreasonable by the rural population was not unusual in the North Caucasus Territory in the early 's. By 1 , however, the demands of Don and Kuban villagers had changed: no longer were most of the efforts directed at dismantling the collective farm altogether, as had been the case in 1 and, to a lesser extent, in 1.
The change in content of the demands was noted at the November gathering of county secretaries convened by Kaganovich. The secretary from Novo-Pokrovsk county commented: "Last year, whenever I set foot in a Cossack market town, I was bombarded with complaints about the lack of manufactured goods and bread. In Bogoroditsk township, for example, the brigade demanded to be given two kilograms.
Un-Haunted House : Spirits, Solid Citizens, and Babbitt
Villagers' belief in the likelihood of a famine during the winter of in the absence of adverse climatic conditions should not be dismissed as irrational or alarmist. Not only Stalin was aware in June of that several "good-harvest counties" in Ukraine were facing ruin and famine. Collective farm workers' reluctance to trust government promises was also the result of experience. In the words of one overheard Kuban Cossack, "This year we need to act a little smarter. Before we give our grain to the government, we should make sure our own needs are covered. Whatever grain is left over, we'll deliver to the government.
This past year taught us how we should believe them — the masses are starving. Many of the acts of collective and to a lesser extent individual resistance were marked by an air of open defiance and intentionality. In memoir accounts, written years after the fact, Ukrainian emigres of peasant origin still proudly spoke of the various "illegal" ways they had attempted to survive a famine they believed forthcoming. I have never heard the people talk so much, so bitterly, or so openly before.
If you don't, bring in the harvest yourselves. None of it was by design. While the OGPU reporters mentioned individual cases of bed-ridden farm workers in the spring of and , I have discovered no such mentions in the summer or fall OGPU reports. Once the strike was broken, in the North Caucasus Territory most of the villagers returned, sullenly, to be sure, but en masse to their collective farms' fields in the spring and summer of What a remarkable accomplishment.
The food loans actually earmarked for collective farm workers and individual farmers were insignificant, or in the words of a collective farm worker in Eisk county, "such as one would give to chickens as a joke. Gone were the spirited demands: give us bread or bring in the harvest yourself. Instead, severely weakened villagers penned or signed carefully drafted letters first detailing the many farm tasks they had finished ahead of schedule, after which they politely requested sustenance in order to continue the weeding they feared their weakness might not allow them to finish.
A third characteristic of village resistance in was the increased predominance of orchestrated village efforts over spontaneous group protests or individualistic survival tactics. The collective strikes often developed as a brigade- wide action, frequently led by the brigadir himself. They have to be fed. Even more striking, however, was the prominence of local Communists in leadership roles. Kotov, the year-old secretary of the local Party cell, a native of the Don province, and a Civil War hero. Kotov organized the local authorities, from the collective farm presidents to the thresher drivers, who were instructed to step aside from their machines from time to time, allowing the collective farm workers the opportunity to augment their salary.
Finally, the three primary methods of resistance were marked by their mixed effectiveness. From the perspective of the villagers' fundamental goal, surviving the winter, only pilfering was consistently effective — as is especially clear from the. It was tempered by luck and skill. As a virtual orphan at the age of 16, Mariia was responsible for the care of her three younger siblings, all of whom survived because their father had hidden grain in various hiding places in a nearby stand of trees.
Still, the combined resistive efforts can be said to be effective in a different sense, inasmuch as they finally got the attention of Stalin and his allies, something well-articulated letters detailing rural conditions for villagers and cattle alike had not succeeded in doing between and Both villagers' deliberate practice of leaving as much grain in the fields as possible with the thought of future gleaning after the grain collectors returned home and their refusual to work in the collective farm fields significantly reduced the amount of grain at the government's disposal for export.
Refusals to show up at work until economic demands were met were reportedly widespread from July through October, the most crucial period in the agricultural cycle in an area where a great deal of winter wheat is usually sown. By deliberately reducing the amount of grain, especially wheat, available to the state, the villagers' threatened Bolshevik pride on an international level. By , the importance of wheat to the export plan was less than it had been the previous two years, especially because the price of wheat on the world market had so plummeted that, even though the amount of wheat exported by the Soviet Union in rose by In Stalin's eyes, the perceived success or failure of the Soviet experiment abroad was linked to wheat exports.
Schiller believed the Soviet government strove to conceal news of the famine from reaching the outside world because "the Soviet government [had] gotten itself so bogged down by the [incessant] five-year plan propaganda, which focused on exaggerated confirmations of victory, that the admission of an economic catastrophe such as the famine would be tantamount to an absolute declaration of bankruptcy [ Syrtsov in , "We can't import grain now because we have too little hard currency. But even if we did have enough hard currency, we still wouldn't have imported grain because to do so would have undermined our credit abroad.
By the fall of , collective farm workers were not alone in their impatience with their correctly perceived opposition. There is some evidence to suggest that at least in May and perhaps for a few months thereafter, the Central Party did consider easing the tension. A Central Executive Control Commission member who overlapped with Cairns at the Gigant State Farm told Cairns that the Party was aware of "the very bad living conditions" which were impairing workers' efficiency.
The Party, according to this informant, realized that the situation had to be "greatly improved in the near future. The second decree allowed collective farm workers to sell any remaining products at free market prices after their government obligations had been met. The "free-trade" decree did not bring about the immediate results the Party leaders had hoped for. In the heart of what in would be the famine zone, the "free-trade" decree was superfluous. In early May, very few collective farm workers in the fast- track collectivization regions had bread left for their own consumption, much less to sell to others.
The main point of the united efforts by protesting collective farm workers during the summer and fall of was to ensure that a minimum baseline of food be left in the kolkhoz for villagers and animals alike, in contradiction to the previous year. Unfortunately, peasants' failure to increase productivity as a result of the free-trade concession was read by Stalin, Molotov and Kaganovich as a snubbing of an olive branch, an action which in turn exhausted their will, never dominant in the best of times, to compromise. Breaking the ital'ianka. In its final report written in January , the Commission appointed by the Central Executive Committee to study economic and cultural development in the North Caucasus Territory concluded: "The final figures on the productivity of every grain culture except for rye show that the gross yield per hectare was significantly lower in than it was in It was, in a sense, the only logical assumption left, as collectivized agriculture, as they knew from Marx, was more productive by definition than individual farming, and Party policies once approved could not be wrong.
In both white- and black-listed areas, the Party's method of handling the disaster clearly aimed at breaking the peasants' collective resistive will once and for all, thereby going, in the Party's view, to the heart of the agrarian crisis. The primary reasons were fourfold: to end the productivity crisis; to establish several non- negotiable facts of post-collectivization life; to preserve the hegemony of the city over the countryside; and to protect the revolution's reputation.
The most basic cause of widespread hunger in the white-listed collective and state farms, i. Except in the case of a total crop failure, it would never be possible, legally, to end up with a year's salary of zero. The government decided what percentage of the crop it needed to finance its industrialization bills for the year. After the collective farm had met its government obligations in full, the grain that remained, minus grain to be set aside for livestock and seed stocks, was to be divided among the workers according to the amount of "labordays" they had earned throughout the year.
The amount of grain available per family depended on the ratio between working family members and dependents. According to Oskolkov, it was not uncommon for one family member to be responsible for feeding four others. In the fall of , after the grain quotas had been met, many collective farm managers were unable to reckon with their workers. The intentions of the government seemed clear to the rural agriculturalists, who lost relatives and neighbors in the famine because they did not receive enough poods of wheat in exchange for their labor to tide themselves and their families over until August of Kondrashin found that only five of the more than eye-witnesses he interviewed did not associate the famine in their villages with the government's act of removing every last kernel of grain.
Probably, the government will cheat us again and not pay us for the days we worked. The fact that, especially in Ukraine, government procurement campaigns left local stores depleted two years running, added an element of deliberateness to it. Legally, however, a unique subset of villagers was created by the government's decision to exert pressure pro-actively on uncooperative villagers by linking entitlement to food supplies to compliance with government orders.
In the North Caucasus Territory, 15 market towns and their surrounding environs, peasant villages as well as Cossack khutora were black-listed by December Likewise, all food supplies were literally and legally stripped away from individuals excluded from collective farms and individual farmers unable to meet their requirements. Both the politics of black-listing and the disbursement of grain loans in the spring of were used instrumental ly in accordance with the goal of breaking the ital'ianka. In the spring, when villagers' resistance was believed to have been vanquished not after the first deaths from starvation were reported , black-listed areas were returned to a legal status equivalent to their neighbors'.
By the early 's, the goverment had a remarkably complex, multi-layered information network. Between January 29 and February 1 , territorial-level OGPU reports, which were automatically forwarded to Moscow in triplicate, include excerpts from Veshensk county, for example, which alerted the readers to the unfolding disaster in two ways.
First, the villagers' own "complaints of famine," which were said to be on the increase, were recorded. In the market town of Bokovsk, an OGPU agent reported that during his house-to-house tour motivated by "the goal of uncovering food products" , he had seen a "significant number" of people sick from "systematic undereating.
Many of the February and March reports from Party men sent from Moscow to organize and run political departments in the Machine-Tractor Stations were filled with graphic details of the men and women dying in the areas under their charge. These reports were sent directly to Narkomzem in Moscow. From Tikhorets county, to take one example, the March report read: "The food-supply situation remains tense.
Deaths from under-nourishment and starvation have not stopped. Especially deplorable is the situation among the population of the black-listed collective farm, Krasnyi Kubanets. There the death rate is extremely high, both among adults and children. It is a rare household where, in the course of January, February, and March,. Shteingart, a leading territorial expert on agriculture, wrote in his summary report for March 5- 10 to his supervisors in Moscow: "In a whole series of political reports, the question has been raised about the tense food situation and even famine in individual collective farms.
Facts are reported of edema and death from emaciation, of the consumption of dogs, rats and frogs, and even of cannibalism. These reports, made through officially sanctioned channels, corroborated the efforts of high-ranking or respected local authorities ranging in the North Caucasus Territory from the Territorial Committee secretary to the novelist Sholokhov.
After being rebuffed, according to Oskolkov, he wrote Stalin a detailed letter describing the enormous percentage of bloated collective farm workers in Veshensk county. On February 23, at a closed Bureau session of the North Caucasus Territorial Committee, it was acknowledged that "famine was engulfing 48 of 75 of the grain-producing counties in the Territory.
The striking thing, however, about the OGPLJ reports in the spring of is the consistent way in which they all give pride of place to a different question, namely whether the villagers' resistant will had yet been broken. Parallel to these reports and guided by them, the giving and retracting of grain loans followed the ebbs and flows of the tide of resistance. The sequence of both the seed-grain and food loans in February and March is indicative.
The North Caucasus Territory met its yearly quota in early January only by relinquishing its seed grain fund to the Center. An effort to compile a new stock of seed grain from local resources was accompanied by the most severe attack on the peasantry in the history of Soviet power. Instead of garnering the desired results, seed grain and evidence of a less defiant spirit, the Party's measures drew two responses. The first was vocalized defiance which is best illustrated by the refusal of collective farm workers to ratify a new procurements' order in a black-listed village as reported by an OGPU agent: "We are dying from starvation and our children are eating frozen squash.
Even if you exile us, even if you shoot us — there still won't be any grain. In , entire villages had died out without disturbing the seed-grain supply, so great was the concern for the next crop. Weeks before the planting season was to begin, out of a concern for the harvest, the Central Party loaned the Territory some of its previously extracted seed grain. No attempt was made on the part of the government to loan collective farm management the funds to pay the collective farm workers back wages either in grain or in rubles. When resistance continued into early March, food-loan distribution instructions were revised.
The Territorial Committee found that the "inappropriate and equalizing distribution of seed, fodder, and food loans had led to a slurring over of the ongoing struggle to end sabotage. By mid-March, villagers were convinced of the futility of struggling further. From Bogoslovsk county it was reported: "All the collective farm workers now say: 'We understand our mistakes and we are ready to work.
We will do everything expected of us. The Party rewrote entitlement laws and used its armed agents to end rural resistance by checkmating agriculturalists' moves when they resorted to traditional means of famine survival. By stripping away even preserved goods, the peasant's belief that he could survive independent of the state by virtue of what he raised in his garden was undercut. Not only the Ukrainian but also the North Caucasus Territorial borders were closed to all peasants and Cossacks, not just those in black-listed regions, by an extemporaneous order signed by Molotov and Stalin on January The removing of seed grain from the territory, especially in the conditions of the 's, was not an economically prudent decision.
Each transfer of grain inevitably reduced the amount of grain available, in part because of spoilage. Especially in the remoter areas, kilometers or more from the nearest rail line, the spring planting season was delayed and the already severely underfed cattle population was further reduced by being required to transport heavy loads long distances. It did, however, serve to bring collective farm workers to the realization that without government intervention, death was inevitable. A third way the Party rendered villagers' resistance futile was through a demonstration of its view that resisting agriculturalists were replaceable.
This message was delivered to Kuban Cossacks by Kaganovich when he arrived in Rostov in early November. If you don't like working here, we will move you out and them in. In addition to transportation costs and the disruption caused to factory schedules, city workers, having never undertaken agricultural work before, often did more harm than good, not knowing the difference between a corn plant and a weed. Finally, there are three indications that the Party was not only willing to risk deaths by starvation in order to win the battle of wills, but actually greeted with opprobrium reports of the deaths of their rural opponents.
The contrasting responses by high-ranking Party members to reports of the deaths of "good" and "bad" agriculturalists is telling. From the letter of a VTsIK instructor surveying a famine- stricken township in Shakhtinsk county in April, it is clear that one of his assignments was to ascertain how well the starving collective farm workers had worked in 1 and whether they had stolen government grain. Kalinin's version is typical: "Every farmer knows that people who are in trouble because of lack of bread, are in that predicament not as the result of a poor harvest, but because they were lazy and refused to do an honest day's work.
Proletarsk county mentioned "incidents" of "starvation in partisan families. The high percentage of residents of black-listed areas and Cossacks killed by the famine in the North Caucasus Territory lends further support to the hypothesis that the famine was used as a weapon to end resistance. Summary MTS reports from black-listed Kuban and Don counties often mentioned the "especially sharp deficit of human resources" as one of the obstacles they had faced in the spring.
The Cossack market towns in Eisk county had a reputation for being "among the most counter-revolutionary of the Kuban market towns. The Central Committee's response to Sholokhov's April letter to Stalin offers a third confirmation of the hypothesis that the Party deliberately used the famine in its effort to defeat the peasantry.
In May, an investigative team was sent to Veshensk, ostensibly in order to confirm his letter. The Commission concluded that Sholokhov's letter was essentially correct; so too was the "absolutely necessary political pressure applied to the collective farm workers sabotaging the grain procurement campaign. All were forbidden from working in Veshensk county in the future and some from working in the countryside for at least one year; one was even given a promotion. The second item on the Party's rural agenda in the spring and summer of was to make unmistakably clear the outlines of the post-strike order.
The French Intifada: The Long War between France and it Arabs
The common. Agriculturalists were made to understand that the answer to their problems did not lie outside their villages. Starving peasants, adults and children, who found their way to the cities were deported without delay. Even after peasants were allowed to purchase for rubles the commercial bread sold only in cities, they were entitled to only 1 kilogram per person.
The other major unbendable rule of worker-management relations was the state- first, collective farm worker-last rule, which the Party categorically refused to make an exception to, even during the famine year. Molotov responded: "Your position is wrong to the core and un-Bolshevik. The main point is that we must tell collective farms to fulfill their government plans first, and then to worry about their own plan. Not allowing early harvesting of mature wheat did nothing to increase the quantity of wheat available in the country and possibly decreased it.
In the North Caucasus Territory, the number of deaths in August was nearly three times as high as it had been in and only 3, shy of the March totals. Viktor Kravchenko, in a young Party member sent in to help with the harvest in a Ukrainian village, broke regulations and, during the harvest season, allowed distribution of mature wheat among the collective farm workers who were nursed back to fuller strength. Not only were lives saved, but the harvest was brought in with greater efficiency and Kravchenko 's collective farm met the government's quota ahead of its competitors, where the workers were laboring at half-strength.
By his estimate, thousands of collective farm workers. His response is reminiscent of Kravchenko's strategy, where an illegal action not only saved lives, but also improved productivity within the collective farm system. MTS workers in Staro- Shcherobinovka literally went from hut to hut in search of dying people to nurse back to health. Centers were opened that offered over 2, villagers medical treatment and well-timed nourishment.
It was not uncommon, he noted, for the collective farm workers in his jurisdiction to voluntarily work night and day in order to cope with the colossal task facing the remaining collective farm workers. In April of , in a Sal'sk county center, a local OGPU agent overheard the following complaint: "I, a former worker myself, went to the mill to request grain, and they didn't give me any.
On March 1, when the famine had not yet even climaxed, Shteingardt acknowledged that collective farm workers and individual farmers would have "a great urge to steal from the seed grain fund. Efforts were made by means of a complicated rationing system to keep workers steadily supplied with bread.
Distinctions existed within the legally more protected social category. Even longshoremen, members of a higher category, were observed enhancing their diets by stealing raw grain from their cargo in April of In Taganrog, OGPU reporters uncovered evidence of two workers who had died from starvation as a result of a failure in the food-supply system; others, for identical reasons, were clearly under-nourished and many refused to appear for work.
One of two reasons Stalin gave for sanctioning a decrease in grain procurement quotas to some of the Ukrainian counties on the verge of starvation in the summer of was their proximity to the Polish border. In his final report to his Moscow supervisor, N. Frolovich, he pleaded for central aid to be dispensed, because he could not imagine "a situation in the Republic, wherein we are unable to help people who are dying from starvation. The decisions made by the Soviet Communist Party from to to pusil forward short-sighted, counter-productive, and unpopular plans led to a breakdown in political relations between the peasantry and the Party.
The dynamics between the Party and the collective farm workers in the second and critical phase of the grain- harvesting and -collecting season escalated the grain shortage from crisis to famine. The Party, not prone to candid self-criticism and well aware of villagers' resistance, blamed the deepening agricultural crisis almost exclusively on the peasants. Moreover, throughout the famine-stricken regions, famine was not only tolerated by the government even. To this end, the famine's final death toll was pushed considerably higher than it naturally would have been by several official choices that were economically unnecessary and even imprudent.
The point was not only, as has often been pointed out, that he who worked would eat. Rather, Soviet entitlement meant that only those who worked at government-approved tasks in their assigned places should have the right to eat once government dues had been met. In the post-famine years, RKI inspectors were routinely sent to collective farm workers' huts during the winter months to determine whether those who had died or were soon, without intervention, likely to die from sustained underconsumption were "bad collective farm workers- loafers and fakers" or "conscientious" ones.
The existence of villager resistance as a factor in the creation of the agricultural crisis of has been mentioned often enough in the literature. The Soviet literature, following Stalin, called it "kulak sabotage. Even prior to the Party's initiation of the second phase of the "Great Soviet Peasant War," to borrow a phrase from Andrea Graziosi, peasant, Cossack and inogorodnie farmers in the Don region, however, bore little predictable resemblance to the stereotypical Russian peasant.
A fair number, especially Cossacks, strongly opposed it, while a surprisingly large number of villagers mainly non- Cossacks were attracted to the idea of a worker-peasant or better still, peasant- worker state. From to , farmers who had fought with the Bolsheviks during the Civil War believed that the Communist Party might reasonably serve as a powerful partner in bringing to fruition the dreams they had actively pursued and risked their lives to make possible from to They spent much energy on attempts to bring rural reality into closer conformity with the farmers' expectations of a just, revolutionary society.
The basic cleavage in USSR society even prior to was the distinction between a more privileged worker stratum and a basically unprivileged peasant stratum. What many farmers wanted, in the words of an anonymous letter writer, "was to no longer be slaves of socialism, but rather to become full citizens of the Soviet Republic. In the village Soviet elections from through , to take only one example, farmers employed a wide array of unorthodox strategies that were often too effective to be tolerated.
In both cases, desired social changes were actively pursued, in the second instance despite intimidating and expected repressive government action. The contrast here is between the post- peasantry, disillusioned with political processes and skeptical of revolutionaries urging aggressive action, and the post- peasantry. The support of pro-Soviet. Whenever the Party's rural course disappointed the hopes of the revolutionary peasants, someone would assert: "We have absolutely no need of the Communists.
We accomplished a revolution without them. Similarly, in January , a Red partisan was overheard commenting, "soon we will have no choice but to go on strike. Surely we didn't risk our lives in the sand in order to starve to death now. Not infrequently the attempts to prepare for a hungry winter were accompanied by a very thinly veiled, at times not veiled at all, sense of outrage at the idea of grain growers being deprived of grain, while others were comparatively well fed.
Third, the small-scale, widespread, and deliberate agricultural "strikes" of compelled the Party to make a choice: either compromise on the terms of collectivization or employ a weapon more effective than the already dulled-from-overuse weapons of exile and execution. In Kondrashin's view, former loyalists led group resistance in the fall of because they felt personally responsible for having helped to establish Soviet power in the country during the Civil War.
When Kotov was led out of the courtroom, after having been sentenced to ten years hard labor, his father shouted: "It's o. We fought together for the collective farms, now we'll fight for the narod. The schism between the farmers and the Party can be traced to The struggle over total collectivization from to widened it. As Graziosi suggests, it may be that Stalin's reputation was actually enhanced by his new image as a "stern, master-like 'father' whom it was not possible to disobey" in regions where the famine was experienced only as severe hunger or as a fantastic rumor believed to have been experienced mainly by non-Russian "kulaks.
In , only actively defiant Cossacks looked forward to an invasion of the Soviet Union, reasoning that "no matter which [foreign] government declares war against us, life can only get better. As the OGPU reports of make. The famine removed forever the possibility of reconciliation from the perspective of the adult survivors. Mariia of Dudarevka was 16 when the famine descended on Veshensk county. Her life, as she describes it, has been dominated by work, disappointment and, increasingly, loneliness, as none of her surviving relatives have settled in her village.
Though bitter about many things, to this day Mariia reserves her special rancor for the Communists, whose worst crime, to use her words, was "leaving us to face a death from starvation. Memphis, The term "famine" will be used in this paper only when "an extreme and protracted shortage of food" can be linked to deaths "caused either by starvation or disease resulting from the weakened condition of the population"; the definition is D. Gale Johnson's in "Famine," in Encyclopaedia Britannica : Overall estimates are taken from N.
Ivnitskii, "Golod godov: kto vinovat? Osokina, "Zhertvy goloda g. Skol'ko ikh? Stalin made the comment in an offhand way in September during a discussion of the film, "Zakon zhizni The Law of Life : by A. IvniLskii and others estimate 50 million villagers, "Golod gg. The number of people who "starved" as opposed to those who died from starvation is relevant because the psychological experience of famine, especially one perceived to be "artificial," affects the survivors as well as the dead.
See V. Moscow, : In comparison with the first eight months of , premature deaths from severe malnutrition, malaria, and typhus occurred on a rather modest scale in the springs of both and In the spring of , to take the most numerically significant example, approximately , people died in Kazakhstan. IvniLskii, "Golod": All too often, the North Caucasus Territory has been conflated with the Kuban.
See, for example, Commission on the Ukraine Famine, "Italian diplomatic and consular dispatches," hereafter "Italian dispatches" in Investigation of the Ukrainian famine Report to Congress Washington, : , here — the reader is referred to the fuller Italian edition, A. La carestia in Ucraina e nel Caucaso del Nord nei rapporti dei diplomatici italiani, Torino: Einaudi, ; Sheila Fitzpatrick, Stalin's peasants: Resistance and survival in the Russian village after collectivization Oxford, : For the best discussion of the overall geography of the famine, see E.
Osokina, lerarkhiia potrebleniia. Ozhizni v usloviiakh Stalinskogo snabzheniia gg. On the geographical distribution in the Volga regions, see V. Kondrashin, Golod godov v derevne Povolzh'ia hereafter V derevne Povolzh 'ia kand. The famine in Kazakhstan again proves to be the exceptional case, as the primary agricultural occupation was cattle raising. Recently Robert Conquest has conceded that between and all rural Russians "lived in deplorable circumstances which have, not without foundation, been described as famine like.
Letter from Conquest to the editors of Otechestvennaia istoriia, 6 : and E. Osokina, "Zhertvy Also on Ukraine, see "Itogovyi otchet mczhdunarodnoi komissii po rasslcdovaniiu goloda godov na Ukraine," in N. Kul'chiLskii, "Demografichcskie posledstviia goloda g. The highest death percentages vis-a-vis the total population occurred in Kazakhstan, where an estimated one to two million people died prematurely between and Kazakhstan falls completely beyond my scope in this paper. See N. IvniLskii, "Golod": 64 and especially Zh.
Abylkhozhin, M. Kozybaev, M. Tatimov, "Kazakhstanskaia tragediia," Voprosy istorii, 7 : Oskolkov, "Golod gg. Kondrashin, V derevne Povolzh 'ia: Oskolkov, "V zernovykh raionakh": Conquest, The harvest of sorrow: Soviet collectivization and the terror-famine hereafter Harvest New York, Examples of the general argument line used in the past in favor of the famine as attempted "genocide" can be found in R.
Conquest, Harvest: ; id.. Mace, "The man-made famine of in the Soviet Ukraine: What happened and why? Taugcr, The harvest and the famine of ," Slavic Review, 50, 1 Spring : On the goal of enforcing better work habits, see V. Kondrashin, V derevne Povolzh'ia: ; E. Oskolkov, Gulod khlebozagotovki i golod goda v Severn -Kavkazskom krae hereafter Golod Rostov, : On collectivization, see Dana G. Dalrymple, "The Soviet famine of ," Soviet Studies, XV January : , here , ; for Merl's argument against increased collectivization as a goal, see S. Merl, Bauern unter Stalin. Die Formierung des sowjetischen Kolchossystems Berlin, : On grain control, see Moshe Lewin, "'Taking grain': Soviet policies of agricultural procurements before the war," in The making of the Soviet system New York, : , here , and Andrei Konovko, "Mor," Russkii arkhiv, 26 : , here Zelenin, "'Revoliutsiia sverkhu': zavershenie i tragicheskie posledstviia," Voprosy istorii, 10 : , here Kondrashin, V derevne Povolzh'ia: 48; I.
Zelenin, "Chrezvychainye khlebozagotovitel'nye komissii v gg. Ukraina, Severnyi Kavkaz, Povolzh'e ," in Golodomor rr. For S. Merl's review sec "Entfachte Stalin die Hungersnot The other sharply critical review of note was J. Arch Getty's, "Starving the Ukraine," a review of R. Tauger writes, "While the leadership did not stop exports, it did try to alleviate the famine. By so doing, Tauger allows the Soviet government's portrayal of itself as generous and humanitarian given the circumstances — implicit in the government's labeling of the loans as "aid" — to stand as an accurate description of its intervention, thereby missing the point entirely.
Tauger, "The harvest See Ivnitskii's withering rejoinder to Taugcr, N. Ivnitskii, "Golod": Getty, art. Merl, "Entfachte Stalin die Hungersnot.. Malcolm Muggeridge, Chronicles of wasted time London, : William Henry Chamberlin, a correspondent for the Manchester Guardian in , and Gradenigo, an Italian ambassador stationed in Kiev who drove across Ukraine in the summer of 1 , assessed the famine similarly. See W. Chamberlin, Russia 's iron Age Boston, : ; "Italian dispatches": R, op.
Sec D. Dalrymple, art. For peasant recollections of the famine where the word "organized" is used, see also V. My thanks to Peter Holquist for pointing out especially this book to me. Sheila Fitzpatrick makes a similar but somewhat different point when she writes that the famine "crystallized a certain view of the Soviet regime in the mind of the peasantry" op. In an error-riddled article based on Party newspapers, Nobuo Shimomotai correctly emphasizes the way in which the Central Party "saved face" by using the discovery of "bad.
Shimomotai, "A note on The Kuban affair : The crisis of kolkhoz agriculture in the North Caucasus," Acta Slavica laponica, 1 : , here Tauger believes the weather of to have been a significant factor; M. In the file are several versions of the report; I quote from the last edited one.
The report, of course, was top secret and bears no relation to the inflated, officially published statistics. As an official of the Department of Agriculture in Moscow confided to Otto Schiller, "all Russian statistics are compiled in three sets — one for publication, one confidential set for the directors, and one very confidential set for the very high officials.