Key facts and dates

The 'Great Turn' marked a pivotal shift in Soviet policy under Stalin, abandoning the New Economic Policy (NEP) and initiating rapid industrialisation to transform the Soviet Union into a modern industrial power. This period was defined by ambitious economic plans and intense social change, driven by both ideological and pragmatic concerns.

Timeline of key events

• 1927 – "War scare" heightens after Britain breaks diplomatic relations, reinforcing fears of capitalist encirclement.
• October 1928 – Launch of the First Five-Year Plan, targeting a doubling of industrial output.
• 1928-1932 – Implementation of the First Five-Year Plan, focusing on new industrial centres in the Urals and Siberia.
• Late 1920s – Stalin adopts a radical industrialisation stance, sidelining balanced growth advocates like Bukharin.

Context and motivations for Stalin's decision to industrialise

In the late 1920s, the Soviet Union faced a critical juncture that prompted a dramatic shift in economic policy, known as the 'Great Turn'. This marked the end of the New Economic Policy (NEP), which had allowed some market freedoms, and the beginning of Stalin's aggressive push for industrialisation. Several external and internal factors created a sense of urgency for this transformation.

Key drivers behind the push for industrialisation

• War scare of 1927 - After Britain severed diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, fears of an imminent conflict with capitalist powers intensified, creating a perceived need for rapid military and economic strengthening.
• Capitalist encirclement - Soviet leaders believed their country was surrounded by hostile capitalist nations, necessitating self-reliance and industrial might to defend against potential aggression.
• Need for modernisation - The conviction grew that the Soviet Union, seen as lagging 50 to 100 years behind Western powers, must modernise swiftly to survive in a competitive and threatening global landscape.
• Survival imperative - Industrialisation was framed as essential not just for progress, but for the very existence of the socialist state amidst external pressures.

Debates over industrialisation strategies within the Communist Party

The decision to industrialise was not without contention among Soviet leaders. Different factions within the Communist Party held contrasting views on how the economy should develop, reflecting deeper ideological divides.

Competing visions for Soviet economic policy

• Trotsky and the Left - Advocated for rapid industrialisation early on, arguing that the Soviet Union needed to prioritise heavy industry and state control to build a strong socialist economy, even at the cost of short-term hardship.
• Bukharin's balanced growth - Nikolai Bukharin supported a more gradual approach, favouring continued use of the NEP to balance agricultural and industrial growth, ensuring stability and avoiding social disruption.
• Stalin's radical shift - Initially more aligned with moderate policies, Stalin eventually adopted the Left's aggressive industrialisation stance, sidelining Bukharin and embracing a more extreme transformation to consolidate power and address perceived threats.

The launch and aims of the First Five-Year Plan

Introduced in October 1928, the First Five-Year Plan was the cornerstone of Stalin's industrialisation drive. It set out extraordinarily ambitious goals to overhaul the Soviet economy and establish the country as an industrial powerhouse within a short timeframe.

Core objectives of the First Five-Year Plan

• Doubling industrial output - The plan aimed to double the Soviet Union's industrial production, focusing on heavy industries like steel, coal, and machinery to build a robust economic base.
• New industrial centres - Development was targeted in previously underdeveloped regions, such as the Urals and Siberia, to create new hubs of production and reduce reliance on older, limited industrial zones.
• Achieving self-sufficiency - A key goal was to make the Soviet Union economically independent, reducing the need for foreign imports and strengthening national security through domestic production.

The role of Gosplan and Stalin's rhetoric in driving industrialisation

Central to the industrialisation effort was the state planning agency, Gosplan, which orchestrated the economic transformation. Stalin's powerful rhetoric also played a crucial role in mobilising the population and framing the initiative as a national mission.

Key mechanisms and messaging

• Gosplan's central planning - The State Planning Committee (Gosplan) was tasked with setting targets, allocating resources, and coordinating industrial projects. It turned economic goals into detailed plans, ensuring a centralised approach to development.
• Elevation of targets - Economic objectives under Gosplan were treated with almost religious reverence, seen as non-negotiable imperatives that every citizen and sector had to strive towards, regardless of practicality.
• Stalin's motivational rhetoric - Stalin famously declared, "We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or we shall be crushed." This framed industrialisation as a life-or-death struggle, invoking nationalist pride and urgency to rally support.

Broader implications and connections to collectivisation

The decision to industrialise had far-reaching consequences for Soviet society and was closely linked to other major policies, notably collectivisation of agriculture. These changes reshaped the nation's social and economic fabric, often at great human cost.

Impacts and interconnections of industrialisation

• Massive resource mobilisation - Industrialisation required vast resources, including labour, materials, and capital, leading to rapid urban growth as millions moved to cities to work in factories.
• Social upheaval - The shift disrupted traditional ways of life, with workers facing harsh conditions, long hours, and often inadequate living standards in newly industrialised areas.
• Link to collectivisation - To fund industrialisation and feed the growing urban workforce, Stalin pushed for collectivisation of agriculture, forcing peasants into collective farms to extract grain and resources, often with devastating consequences like famine.
• Ideological vs. pragmatic debate - The 'Great Turn' raises questions about Stalin's motives. Was this a genuine commitment to communist ideals of building an industrial socialist state, or a pragmatic response to external threats and internal power struggles? Historians continue to debate whether ideology or necessity drove these policies.

These interconnected policies and their outcomes highlight how industrialisation was not just an economic strategy, but a transformative force that reshaped Soviet society in profound and often challenging ways.