The Politics of War Communism: Briefly on the Causes, Progress and Results

In order to take responsibility for understanding what the policy of military communism was, briefly consider the public moods during the turbulent years of the Civil War, as well as the position of the Bolshevik Party during this period (its Participation in the war and government course).

1917-1921 were the hardest period in the history of our fatherland. Such were the bloody wars with many opposing sides and the most complicated geopolitical situation

The policy of War Communism: briefly on the position of the CPSU (b)

In this difficult time, in many parts of the former empire, for many pieces of its lands, many contenders battled. The German army; Local national forces trying to create their own states on the fragments of the empire (for example, the formation of the UPR); Local people's associations, which were commanded by regional authorities; The Poles, who invaded in Ukrainian territory in 1919; White Guard counter-revolutionaries; Allied forces of the Entente; And, finally, the Bolshevik units. In these circumstances, the absolutely essential prerequisite for victory was the full concentration of forces and the mobilization of all available resources for the military defeat of all opponents. Actually, this mobilization on the part of the Communists was also military communism, conducted by the leadership of the CPSU (b) from the first months of 1918 to March 1921.

The Politics of War Communism: Briefly on the Nature of the Regime

In the course of its implementation, this policy has provoked quite a number of contradictory assessments. Its main points were such measures:

- Nationalization of the whole complex of industry and banking system of the country;

- state monopoly of foreign trade;

- Compulsory labor service of the entire population, capable of working;

- food dictatorship. It was this point that became the most hated for the peasants, as a forcible seizure of grain was made for the benefit of the soldiers and the starving city. The surplus-appropriation is still often exhibited as an example of the atrocities of the Bolsheviks, but it should be noted that with its help the food problems of workers in the cities were substantially smoothed out.

Politics of War Communism: Briefly about the reaction of the population

Frankly speaking, military communism was the forceful way to force the masses to increase the intensity of their work for the victory of the Bolsheviks. As already mentioned, the main part of the discontent of Russia - the country's peasant at that time - was caused by a surplus-appropriation. However, for the sake of justice, it must be said that the same method was used by the White Guards. It logically flowed from the state of affairs in the country, as the First World and Civil Wars completely destroyed the traditional trade ties between the village and the city. This led to the deplorable state of many industrial enterprises. At the same time, there was discontent with the policy of war communism in the cities. Here, instead of the expected increase in labor productivity and the revival of the economy, on the contrary, there has been a weakening of discipline in enterprises. The replacement of old cadres with new ones (who were communists, but not always skilled managers) led to a tangible decline in industry and a decline in economic performance.

Results of the Civil War: briefly about the main

Despite all the difficulties, the policy of military communism nevertheless fulfilled its role. Although not always successful, the Bolsheviks were able to collect all the forces against the counter-revolution and stand up in battles. At the same time, it caused popular speeches and seriously undermined the authority of the VKP (b) among the peasantry. The last such mass demonstration was the Kronstadt, which occurred in the spring of 1921. As a result, Lenin initiated the transition to the so-called New Economic Policy. NEP in 1921 helped in the shortest possible time to restore the national economy.