Advertisement

From the Fall of Malenkov to the Fall of Khrushchev, 1955–64

  • Martin McCauley
Part of the Studies in Russian and East European History book series (SREEHS)

Abstract

The role of the agricultural administration from the mid-1980s until the death of Stalin was often difficult to fulfil but was relatively easy to grasp. Its main task was to exercise close control over the countryside in order to guarantee supplies of food and raw materials vital to the success of the industrialisation drive. Production sometimes suffered, but control was the order of the day. The MTS, the large agricultural bureaucracy, the complicated procurement system, the extreme centralisation of agricultural planning and procurement and the often arbitrary nature of administrative intervention were all geared towards one goal — control.

Keywords

Mineral Fertiliser Mechanical Power State Farm Extensive Agriculture Fodder Crop 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 9.
    Leo Gruliow (ed.), Current Soviet Policies, (New York, 1956) p. 58.Google Scholar
  2. 14.
    E. Strauss, Soviet Agriculture in Perspective, (London, 1969) p. 221.Google Scholar
  3. 16.
    P. Baranov, in VE, no. 8 (1957) pp. 63–71, came out strongly for the use of chemicals to increase yields in agriculture and refuted the argument that fertilisers on large areas sown to cereals were uneconomic.Google Scholar
  4. 18.
    I. D. Laptev, VE, no. 9 (1958) pp. 93–6. This was an account of what he had said at a conference of social scientists in June 1958. N. Anisimov, Kommunist, no. 18 (1959) pp. 10–19, stated that the anti-party group had opposed the virgin land programme on the grounds that it represented extensive agriculture.Google Scholar
  5. I. D. Laptev, VE, no. 9 (1958) pp. 93–6. This was an account of what he had said at a conference of social scientists in June 1958. N. Anisimov, Kommunist, no. 18 (1959) pp. 10–19, stated that the anti-party group had opposed the virgin land programme on the grounds that it represented extensive agriculture.Google Scholar
  6. 26.
    V. F. Mashenkov, Ispolzovanie trudovykh resursov selskoi mestnosti, (Moscow, 1965) p. 111.Google Scholar
  7. 30.
    Robert S. McNamara, The Essence of Security, (London, 1968).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martin McCauley 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin McCauley

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations