From the 2000 IBDP History paper 2 Exam
Communism, as a political ideology, emerged in the 19th century as a response to the socio-economic inequalities perpetuated by capitalism. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, in their seminal work, "The Communist Manifesto", outlined the fundamental principles of communism, which include the abolition of private property, the establishment of a classless society, and the collective ownership of means of production. This essay will explore these principles and assess their implementation during the rule of Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953.
The first principle of communism, as articulated by Marx and Engels, is the abolition of private property. They argued that the root cause of social inequality and class struggle was the capitalist system's private ownership of the means of production. In a communist society, Marx and Engels envisioned that all property would be publicly owned, and each person would work according to their ability and receive according to their needs. This principle aimed to eliminate the exploitation of the working class and establish economic equality. Stalin, after ascending to power following Lenin's death in 1924, sought to implement this principle through a series of radical economic policies. His first Five-Year Plan, launched in 1928, aimed to transform the Soviet Union from a predominantly agrarian society into an industrial powerhouse. This plan involved the collectivisation of agriculture, where all private farms were seized by the state and merged into large, collective farms. The state controlled the production and distribution of agricultural goods, effectively abolishing private ownership of farmland.
However, the implementation of this principle was fraught with difficulties and human suffering. Fitzpatrick argues that Stalin's collectivisation drive led to widespread resistance from the peasantry, who were reluctant to give up their land and livestock. The state's response was brutal, with millions of 'kulaks' - a term used to describe wealthy peasants - being deported, arrested, or executed. Furthermore, the disruption caused by forced collectivisation led to a severe famine in 1932-33, resulting in the deaths of millions of people, particularly in Ukraine. Thus, while Stalin did manage to abolish private property in agriculture, the cost in human lives was enormous. The implementation of the principle of collective ownership of means of production in industry was more successful. The state took control of all industries and set ambitious targets for production. Workers were mobilised on a massive scale to build new factories, mines, and power stations. Despite the harsh working conditions and strict labour discipline, the Soviet Union was able to achieve significant industrial growth during the 1930s. Davies notes that by the end of the Second Five-Year Plan in 1937, the Soviet Union had become one of the world's leading industrial powers.
Nonetheless, the human cost of industrialisation was also high. Workers were subjected to long hours, low wages, and poor living conditions. Any form of dissent or criticism was ruthlessly suppressed. The state's control over the economy also led to inefficiencies and corruption. While the principle of collective ownership of means of production was implemented to a large extent, it did not lead to the creation of a society where each person worked according to their ability and received according to their needs, as envisioned by Marx and Engels. Instead, it resulted in a highly centralised and bureaucratic system that lacked flexibility and responsiveness to changing economic conditions. In conclusion, Stalin's rule saw the implementation of the principle of abolition of private property and collective ownership of means of production. However, the manner in which these principles were implemented led to widespread suffering and did not achieve the ideals of economic equality and freedom from exploitation as envisioned by Marx and Engels.
The second principle of communism is the establishment of a classless society. Marx and Engels argued that the capitalist system was inherently divisive, creating a class of bourgeoisie who owned the means of production and a proletariat who sold their labour. They believed that the abolition of private property would lead to the dissolution of these classes and the creation of a society where all people were equal. Stalin, in his speeches and writings, often claimed that the Soviet Union was a classless society. He argued that the collectivisation of agriculture and the nationalisation of industry had eliminated the bourgeoisie and the kulaks, thereby ending class struggle. The state provided employment, education, and healthcare for all, and there were no significant disparities in wealth and income. Paragraph 2, Section 2 However, historians have questioned the extent to which the Soviet Union under Stalin was truly a classless society. Conquest points out that while the bourgeoisie and the kulaks were eliminated, a new class of party officials and bureaucrats emerged, who enjoyed privileges and power far beyond that of the average worker or peasant. Furthermore, the state's control over all aspects of life, including employment, education, and housing, meant that it could reward loyalty and punish dissent, creating a system of patronage and favouritism.
Moreover, the principle of equality was not fully realised in practice. Despite the provision of state services, there were significant disparities in access to quality education, healthcare, and housing. The state's focus on heavy industry often came at the expense of consumer goods, leading to shortages and a lower standard of living for the average citizen. The purges and show trials of the 1930s, which resulted in the execution and imprisonment of millions of people, further undermined the principle of equality. As Getty argues, these purges were often used by Stalin to eliminate potential rivals and consolidate his power, creating a climate of fear and suspicion. In conclusion, while Stalin's rule saw the elimination of the traditional capitalist classes, it did not result in the establishment of a truly classless society. Instead, a new class of party officials and bureaucrats emerged, who enjoyed privileges and power. The principle of equality was also not fully realised, with significant disparities in access to state services and a climate of fear and suspicion created by the purges and show trials.
The third principle of communism is the establishment of a stateless society. Marx and Engels believed that the state was a tool of oppression used by the bourgeoisie to maintain their control over the proletariat. They argued that once private property was abolished and a classless society was established, there would be no need for a state, as there would be no class interests to protect. Stalin, however, took a different approach. He argued that the state was necessary to protect the gains of the revolution and to defend the Soviet Union against external threats. Under his rule, the state's power was greatly expanded, with control over the economy, education, the media, and all aspects of social and political life.
The state under Stalin was anything but stateless. It was characterised by a high degree of centralisation, with all decisions being made by Stalin and a small group of party officials. The state maintained a large and powerful military and security apparatus, which was used to suppress dissent and maintain control over the population. The state also controlled the media and education, using them as tools of propaganda to promote the communist ideology and the cult of personality around Stalin. Historians have argued that the state under Stalin was not a means to an end, as Marx and Engels had envisioned, but an end in itself. Service points out that Stalin used the state as a tool to consolidate his power and control over the Soviet Union. The state was not used to protect the interests of the proletariat, but to maintain the power and privileges of Stalin and the party elite. Furthermore, the state under Stalin did not wither away but became more powerful and intrusive. The state's control over the economy and social life increased over time, with the introduction of more Five-Year Plans and the expansion of state services. The state also played a major role in shaping the cultural and intellectual life of the Soviet Union, with the promotion of socialist realism in art and literature and the suppression of any form of dissent or criticism. In conclusion, the principle of a stateless society was not realised under Stalin. Instead, the state became more powerful and intrusive, controlling all aspects of life in the Soviet Union. The state was used not to protect the interests of the proletariat, but to maintain the power and privileges of Stalin and the party elite.
The principles of communism, as outlined by Marx and Engels, were implemented to varying degrees under Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union. While the principles of abolition of private property and collective ownership of means of production were implemented, they did not lead to the creation of a society free from exploitation and economic inequality. The principle of a classless society was also not fully realised, with the emergence of a new class of party officials and bureaucrats and significant disparities in access to state services. The principle of a stateless society was not realised at all, with the state becoming more powerful and intrusive under Stalin's rule. Therefore, while Stalin's rule saw the implementation of some of the principles of communism, it did not fully realise the ideals of a classless, stateless society free from exploitation and economic inequality as envisioned by Marx and Engels.
