• Sedan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 小时前

    The NEP was forged in the context of a highly undeveloped Russia, with a necessity to uplift agriculture as soon as possible so as to rapidly improve industry. The hatred of the people towards the NEPmen was understandable

    Yes, the NEP was likely necessary—it was not without reason that Lenin introduced it. The peasantry had begun to resent the prodrazvyorstka (grain requisitioning system), and peasant uprisings flared up in several regions; Lenin introduced the NEP out of necessity—in part, to pacify the peasants.

    However, Stalin did not abolish the NEP immediately; the policy remained in place—albeit under duress—for another four years.

    Joseph Stalin viewed the New Economic Policy (NEP) not as a means of building socialism, but rather as a forced, temporary retreat designed to save Soviet power from economic ruin.

    He criticized it for fostering a resurgence of capitalist elements, posing a threat of the countryside undergoing a “kulak”-driven regression, and being fundamentally incompatible with a planned economy.

    Key points of Stalin’s critique of the NEP:

    Resurgence of Capitalism:

    Stalin argued that the NEP legalized private entrepreneurs (“NEPmen”) and stimulated the growth of the kulak class, leading to social stratification that worked to the detriment of the proletariat.

    Constraints on Industrialization:

    Small-scale private enterprise was incapable of providing the country with the heavy industry and advanced technology required for national defense.

    The Threat of Socialist Failure:

    In a speech delivered at a conference of Marxist historians (1929), he stated explicitly:

    “If we adhere to the NEP, it is because it serves the cause of socialism. But when it ceases to serve that cause… we will cast it to hell.

    As for Mao’s economy, it was again rapid industrialization.

    I highly value Mao’s achievements in unifying China—that is, indeed, an invaluable accomplishment.

    However, it seems to me that as a politician, economist, and strategist, Mao was rather lackluster… perhaps because he was a romantic and an idealist.

    And what, exactly, were his economic achievements? Mao compelled every peasant to build a furnace on their own property and cast low-quality pig iron. This is precisely what Stalin had refused to do: hand over heavy industry to small-scale cooperatives. Mao sought to boost pig iron and steel production tenfold within a decade using this method—relying on the peasants and the furnaces in their backyards. Do you consider that a sound strategic move?

    The fanatical campaign to exterminate sparrows was merely a way to identify a concrete “enemy”—something to blame for poor harvests—rather than acknowledging the leadership’s own miscalculations.

    The conflict with the USSR was a tactic to divert the public’s attention from the country’s true problems by designating an external enemy. At that time, China was engaged in a full-blown campaign to discredit the Soviet Union. They were plastering up all sorts of leaflets… it strikes me as very bizarre.

    Meanwhile, in the USSR, the newspapers were describing China as—and you might be surprised to hear this—a “militarist” state.