NEP - New Economic Policy. The transition to NEP - causes and consequences Reasons for the transition to NEP main directions

Introduced in the early twenties of the last century, it was supposed to be a transitional step towards building socialism. The country, which had only recently recovered from revolutions and civil war, wanted peace. The provisional policy of the Bolsheviks, which had outlived its usefulness, was reaching its end. last days. Once great Russia was on the verge of a serious social crisis - then the transition from war communism to the NEP was ripe. It was this decision that was proclaimed at the next (tenth) meeting in Moscow in 1921.

The reasons for the transition to the NEP were clear. First of all, the difficult situation of the country at the turn of such changes affected: Russia suffered both politically, and Industry was destroyed, factories stood still. The workers were increasingly declassed - there were many of them, they wanted to work and fought hard for every job (but there weren’t enough of them).

And those who worked did not receive much moral or monetary satisfaction from their work. In connection with the abolition of commodity-money relations, people received wages natural product, not money. Such leveling did not lead to a feeling of satisfaction from moral justice, but to increasingly growing anger and rampant speculation throughout the country.

Agriculture, namely the rebellious peasants, was generally seen by the Bolsheviks as destructive elements. Peasant holdings, due to the reduction in acreage and the instability of the situation in the country, became increasingly isolated in themselves and were similar to natural economic formations. Entering the consumer market was uninteresting and unprofitable for them. In addition, the peasants fed the Red Army, and the servicemen who were later demobilized increasingly filled the cities and villages, joining the ranks of cripples, losers and adopted children.

Now there was a long transformation of all spheres of the economy under new policy- direct transition to the NEP. Its main ideas (the abolition of the surplus appropriation system and the introduction of the tax in kind) were not yet fully understood by the simple peasantry, who lay low in anticipation of changes, although in the south of Russia anti-Bolshevik uprisings arose against all kinds of reforms - this is exactly how Ukraine reacted to any changes (along the lines of “then it will only be worse").

The second significant change is the deployment and resolution of different forms of ownership. The market, in turn, could be revived by injections of foreign capital, which ensured the transition to the NEP. The depreciation of the currency at that time and terrible inflation required monetary reform, which was carried out in the first years after the introduction of this policy.

During its existence, the party finally strengthened its position - the Bolsheviks ceased to be associated with political force. From now on, they became part of the Expansion of ideology and its introduction into all spheres of public and personal life led to complete and undivided control of society by the Bolshevik Party. In such conditions, the transition to the NEP became most possible, since the economic, political, and ideological spheres were concentrated in the hands of one “puppeteer.”

The population greeted the introduction of the new economic policy differently. Many peasants quickly reoriented themselves and began to actively enter the market; workers, in turn, received an excellent opportunity to use their forces in production, because the transition to the NEP provided the opportunity for the prosperity of the country’s economy, which, unfortunately, was so mediocrely lost in subsequent years.

The goal of the October Revolution was, neither more nor less, the construction of an ideal state. A country in which everyone is equal, where there are no rich and poor, where there is no money, and everyone does only what they love, at the call of their soul, and not for a salary. But reality did not want to turn into a happy fairy tale, the economy was going downhill, and food riots began in the country. Then the decision was made to move to the NEP.

A country that has survived two wars and a revolution

By the 20s of the last century, Russia from a huge rich power had turned into ruins. First World War, the coup of 17, the Civil War - these are not just words.

Millions of dead, destroyed factories and cities, deserted villages. The country's economy was practically destroyed. These were the reasons for the transition to the NEP. Briefly, they can be described as an attempt to return the country to a peaceful path.

The First World War not only depleted the country's economic and social resources. It also created the ground for deepening the crisis. After the war ended, millions of soldiers returned home. But there were no jobs for them. The revolutionary years were marked by a monstrous increase in crime, and the reason was not only temporary anarchy and confusion in the country. The young republic suddenly found itself overrun by people with weapons, people unaccustomed to peaceful life, and they survived as experience told them. The transition to the NEP allowed a short time increase the number of jobs.

Economic disaster

The Russian economy at the beginning of the twentieth century practically collapsed. Production decreased several times. Large factories were left without leadership; the thesis “Factory to workers” turned out to be good on paper, but not in life. Small and medium-sized businesses were practically destroyed. Craftsmen and traders, owners of small factories were the first victims of the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie. A huge number of specialists and entrepreneurs fled to Europe. And if at first it seemed absolutely normal - an element alien to communist ideals was leaving the country, then it turned out that there were not enough workers for the effective functioning of industry. The transition to the NEP made it possible to revive small and medium-sized businesses, thereby ensuring the growth of gross output and the creation of new jobs.

Agriculture crisis

The situation with agriculture was also bad. The cities were starving, and a system of payment in kind was introduced. The workers were paid in rations, but they were too small.

To solve the food problem, surplus appropriation was introduced. At the same time, up to 70% of the collected grain was confiscated from the peasants. A paradoxical situation arose. Workers fled from the cities to the countryside to feed themselves on the land, but even here they were faced with famine, even more severe than before.

The work of the peasants became meaningless. Work for a whole year, then give everything to the state and starve? Of course, this could not but affect agricultural productivity. In such conditions, the only way to change the situation was the transition to the NEP. The date of adoption of the new economic course was a turning point in the revival of dying agriculture. Only this could stop the wave of riots sweeping across the country.

Collapse of the financial system

The prerequisites for the transition to the NEP were not only social. Monstrous inflation devalued the ruble, and products were not so much sold as exchanged.

However, if we remember that the state ideology assumed a complete rejection of money in favor of payment in kind, everything seemed to be normal. But it turned out that it was impossible to provide everyone with food, clothing, and shoes just like that, according to the list. The government machinery is not equipped to perform such small and precise tasks.

The only way that war communism could offer to solve this problem was surplus appropriation. But then it turned out that while city residents work for food, peasants work for free. Their grain is taken away without giving anything in return. It turned out that it is almost impossible to establish trade exchange without the participation of a monetary equivalent. The only way out in this situation was the transition to the NEP. Briefly describing this situation, we can say that the state was forced to return to previously rejected market relations, temporarily postponing the construction of an ideal state.

Brief essence of NEP

The reasons for the transition to the NEP were not clear to everyone. Many considered this policy a huge step backward, a return to the petty-bourgeois past, to the cult of enrichment. The ruling party was forced to explain to the population that this was a forced measure that was temporary.

Free trade and private enterprise were again revived in the country.

And if previously there were only two classes: workers and peasants, and the intelligentsia was just a stratum, now the so-called Nepmen have appeared in the country - traders, manufacturers, small producers. They ensured the effective satisfaction of consumer demand in cities and villages. This is exactly what the transition to the NEP looked like in Russia. The date March 15, 1921 went down in history as the day when the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) abandoned the harsh policy of war communism, once again legalizing private property and monetary market relations.

The dual nature of the NEP

Of course, such reforms did not at all mean a full return to the free market. Large factories and factories, banks still belonged to the state. Only it had the right to dispose of the country's natural resources and conclude foreign economic transactions. The logic of administrative and economic management of market processes was of a fundamental nature. Elements of free trade were more like thin shoots of ivy entwining the granite rock of a rigid state economy.

At the same time, there were a huge number of changes that were caused by the transition to the NEP. Briefly, they can be characterized as providing a certain freedom to small producers and traders - but only for a while, to relieve social tension. And although in the future the state had to return to previous ideological doctrines, such a juxtaposition of command and market economies was planned for quite a long time, sufficient to create a reliable economic base that would make the transition to socialism painless for the country.

NEP in agriculture

One of the first steps towards modernizing the previous economic policy was the abolition of food appropriation. The transition to the NEP provided for a food tax of 30%, handed over to the state not free of charge, but at set prices. Even if the cost of grain was small, it was still obvious progress.

The peasants could dispose of the remaining 70% of production independently, albeit within the boundaries of local farms.

Such measures not only stopped hunger, but also gave impetus to the development of the agricultural sector. The hunger has subsided. Already by 1925, the gross agricultural product approached pre-war volumes. This effect was ensured precisely by the transition to the NEP. The year when food appropriation was abolished marked the beginning of the rise of agriculture in the country. The agrarian revolution began, collective farms and agricultural cooperatives were created en masse in the country, and a technical base was organized.

NEP in industry

The decision to transition to the NEP entailed significant changes in the management of the country's industry. Although large enterprises were subordinate only to the state, small ones were freed from the need to obey the central authorities. They could create trusts, independently determining what and how much to produce. Such enterprises independently purchased the necessary materials and sold their products independently, disposing of their income minus taxes. The state did not control this process and was not responsible for the financial obligations of the trusts. The transition to the NEP brought back the already forgotten term “bankruptcy” to the country.

At the same time, the state did not forget that the reforms were temporary, and gradually implanted the principle of planning in industry. The trusts gradually merged into concerns, uniting enterprises involved in the supply of raw materials and manufacturing products into one logical chain. In the future, it was precisely these production segments that were to become the basis of a planned economy.

Financial reforms

Since the reasons for the transition to the NEP were largely economic in nature, urgent monetary reform was required. In the new republic there were no specialists of the required level, so the state recruited financiers who had significant experience during the times of Tsarist Russia.

As a result of economic reforms, the banking system was restored, direct and indirect taxation was introduced, and payment for some services that had previously been provided free of charge. All expenses that did not correspond to the republic's income were ruthlessly abolished.

Currency reform was carried out, the first government bills were issued securities, the country's currency became convertible.

For some time, the government managed to fight inflation by keeping the value of the national currency at a sufficiently low level. high level. But then the combination of the incompatible - planned and market economies - destroyed this fragile balance. As a result of significant inflation, the chervonets, which were in use at that time, lost their status as a convertible currency. After 1926, it was impossible to travel abroad with this money.

Completion and results of the NEP

In the second half of the 20s, the country's leadership decided to transition to a planned economy. The country reached the pre-revolutionary level of production, but in achieving this goal there were reasons for the transition to the NEP. Briefly, the consequences of applying the new economic approach can be described as very successful.

It should be noted that there was no particular point in continuing the course towards a market economy for the country. After all, in fact, such a high result was achieved only due to the fact that production capacities were launched, inherited from the previous regime. Private entrepreneurs were completely deprived of the opportunity to influence economic decisions; representatives of the revived business did not take part in governing the country.

Attracting foreign investment in the country was not welcomed. However, there were not so many people willing to risk their finances by investing in Bolshevik enterprises. At the same time, there were simply no own funds for long-term investment in capital-intensive industries.

We can say that by the beginning of the 30s, the NEP had exhausted itself, and this economic doctrine had to be replaced by another, one that would allow the country to begin to move forward.

In 1920, the civil war was coming to an end, the Red Army was defeating its opponents on the fronts. But it was too early for the Bolsheviks to rejoice, since a severe economic and political crisis broke out in the country.

The national economy of the country was completely destroyed. Production levels fell to 14% of pre-war levels (1913). And in some industries (textiles) it fell to the level of 1859. In 1920, the country produced 3% of pre-war sugar production, 5-6% of cotton fabrics, 2% of cast iron. In 1919, almost all blast furnaces went out. Metal production ceased, and the country lived on old reserves, which inevitably affected all industries. Due to the lack of fuel and raw materials, most factories and factories were closed. The Donbass, the Urals, Siberia, and the Baku oil region were especially affected. Transport is becoming a sore spot in the economy. By 1920, 58% of the locomotive fleet was out of order. The loss of Donbass mines and Baku oil, the deterioration of railway rolling stock caused a fuel and transport crisis. He bound cities and towns with cold and hunger. Trains ran rarely, slowly, without a schedule. Huge crowds of hungry and half-naked people gathered at the stations. All this intensified the food crisis and gave rise to massive epidemics of typhoid, cholera, smallpox, dysentery, etc. Infant mortality was especially high. There are no exact statistics on human losses during the civil war. According to many scientists, the mortality rate during the civil war from hunger alone amounted to 5-6 million people, and from various diseases - about 3 million people. Since 1914, about 20 million people have died in Russia, while on the fronts of the civil war, losses on both sides totaled 3 million people.

To overcome the crisis, the authorities tried to implement emergency measures. These included the allocation of “strike groups” of factories supplied with raw materials and fuel in the first place, continuous labor mobilizations of the population, the creation of labor armies and the militarization of labor, and an increase in rations for workers. But these measures did not produce much effect, since it was impossible to eliminate the causes of the crisis through organizational measures. They lay in the very policy of war communism, the continuation of which after the end of hostilities caused discontent among the majority of the population, especially the peasantry.

As already noted, during the civil war, the peasantry, not wanting a return to the previous order, supported the Reds, agreeing with the surplus appropriation system. It is also impossible to talk about the complete coincidence of the views of the Bolsheviks and peasants on the future prospects for the country's development. Some researchers even believe that during the Civil War, peasants helped the Reds destroy the Whites, so that they could then deal with the Reds. The preservation of the surplus appropriation system in peacetime deprived the peasants of a material interest in expanding production. Peasant farming acquired an increasingly natural character: it produced only the essentials for a given peasant and his family. This led to a sharp reduction in sown areas, a decrease in the number of livestock, and a cessation of sowing industrial crops, i.e. to the degradation of agriculture. Compared to 1913, gross agricultural output decreased by more than a third, and sown areas decreased by 40%. Food appropriation plan for 1920-1921. turned out to be only half completed. The peasants preferred to hide their grain rather than hand it over to the state for free. This caused a tightening of the activities of procurement bodies and food detachments, on the one hand, and armed resistance of the peasantry, on the other.

It is noteworthy that, along with the peasants, representatives of the working class, whose composition underwent significant changes during the years of the civil war, also took part in the rebellions. Firstly, its numbers were reduced, since countless mobilizations to the front were carried out primarily among workers. Secondly, many workers, fleeing hunger and cold, went to the villages and settled permanently. Thirdly, a large number of the most active and conscious workers “from the machine” were sent to government agencies, Red Army, police, Cheka, etc. They have lost touch with the working class and stopped living by its needs. But those proletarians who remained at the few operating enterprises, in essence, also ceased to be workers, subsisting on odd jobs, handicrafts, “bag-making,” etc. The professional structure of the working class deteriorated; it was dominated by low-skilled strata, women and youth. Many yesterday's workers turned into lumpen, joining the ranks of beggars, thieves and even ended up in criminal gangs. Disappointment, apathy reigned among the workers, and discontent grew. The Bolsheviks understood that they idealized the proletariat, speaking of its messianic exclusivity. Under the conditions of war communism, he not only did not show high consciousness and revolutionary initiative, but also, as already noted, took part in anti-Soviet peasant protests. The main slogans of these speeches are “Free trade!” and “Soviets without communists!”

The bureaucratic management system that developed during the years of war communism also turned out to be ineffective. It was impossible to manage and regulate from the center in such a huge country as Russia. There were no means or experience to establish accounting and control. The central leadership had a vague idea of ​​what was happening on the ground. The activities of the Soviets were increasingly replaced by the activities of executive committees and various emergency bodies (revolutionary committees, revolutionary troikas, quintets, etc.) under the control of the party apparatus. Elections to the Soviets were held formally with low population activity. Although from February 1919, along with the Bolsheviks, the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks took part in the work of local Soviets, the political monopoly under the conditions of war communism belonged, as is known, to the Bolsheviks. The growing crisis in the country was associated with the erroneous policies of the Bolsheviks, which led to a decline in the authority of the party among the people and an increase in discontent among all segments of the population. The apogee of this discontent is usually considered to be the Kronstadt rebellion (February - March 1921), in which even the sailors of the Baltic Fleet, who were previously the most reliable stronghold of Soviet power, opposed the Bolsheviks. The rebellion was suppressed with great difficulty and considerable bloodshed. He demonstrated the danger of maintaining the policy of war communism.

The erosion of moral criteria in society, which is natural for situations in which the system of moral values ​​collapses, also posed a threat to the Soviet government. Religion was declared a relic of the old world. The death of a huge number of people devalued human life; the state was unable to guarantee the safety of the individual. Increasingly, ideas of egalitarianism and class priorities were reduced to the simple slogan “rob the loot.” A wave of crime has swept across Russia. All this, as well as the breakdown of the family (the new authorities declared the family a relic of bourgeois society, introduced the institution of civil marriage and significantly simplified divorce proceedings), and family ties caused an unprecedented increase in child homelessness. By 1922, the number of street children reached 7 million people, so a special commission was even created under the Cheka, headed by F. E. Dzerzhinsky, to combat street children.

By the end of the civil war, the Bolsheviks had to endure the collapse of another illusion: hopes for a world revolution had finally collapsed. This was evidenced by the defeat of the socialist uprising in Hungary, the fall of the Bavarian Republic, unsuccessful attempt in Poland, with the help of the Red Army, “to drive humanity to happiness.” It was not possible to take the “fortress of world capitalism” by storm. It was necessary to move on to its long siege. This required abandoning the policy of war communism and moving to the search for compromises with the world bourgeoisie both within the country and in the international arena.

In 1920, a serious crisis struck the RCP(b). Having turned into the ruling party, it is growing very quickly numerically, which could not but affect its qualitative composition. If in February 1917 there were about 24 thousand people in its ranks, then in March 1920 - 640 thousand people, and a year later, in March 1921 - 730 thousand people. Not only conscious fighters for social justice, but also careerists and scoundrels, whose interests were far from the needs of the working people, rushed into it. Gradually, the living conditions of the party apparatus begin to differ significantly from the conditions of ordinary communists.

At the IX Conference of the RCP(b), in September 1920, there was talk of a crisis within the party itself. It manifested itself, firstly, in the gap between the “tops” and the “bottoms,” which caused enormous discontent among the latter. A special commission was even created to study the privileges of the highest party apparatus. Secondly, in the emergence of an internal party discussion about the ways and methods of building socialism, which became known as the debate on trade unions. It discussed the role of the masses in the construction of socialism, the forms of government and methods of interaction between communists and non-party members, as well as the principles of activity of the party itself. The participants split into five platforms and argued fiercely among themselves.

The results of the discussion were summed up by the X Congress of the RCP(b) in March 1921. Most participants agreed that in the conditions of crisis in the country it is an unaffordable luxury and leads to a weakening of the authority of the party. At the suggestion of V.I. Lenin, the congress adopted a resolution “On the unity of the party,” which, under penalty of expulsion, contained a ban on participation in factions and groupings.

Thus, the crisis of the end of 1920 was systemic and became main reason, which prompted the Bolsheviks to abandon the policy of war communism.

Under the conditions of the Civil War and military-communist policies, the population was deprived of any material incentives to produce. However, it seemed to the Bolshevik leaders that their policy was not emergency and forced, but completely natural. They built a classless society of the future, free from commodity-money relations, communism. In response, powerful peasant uprisings break out one after another in different parts of the country (in the Tambov province, the Middle Volga region, on the Don, Kuban, and Western Siberia). By the spring of 1921, there were already over 200 thousand people in the ranks of those who rebelled against the Bolshevik dictatorship. The surplus appropriation system was not carried out in 1920; enormous efforts were spent on suppressing riots and peasant uprisings.

In March 1921, sailors and Red Army soldiers of Kronstadt, the largest naval base of the Baltic Fleet, took up arms against the Bolsheviks. The labor movement is rising against the power of the Bolsheviks, who spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat. A wave of workers' strikes and demonstrations is growing in cities. IN AND. Lenin was forced to characterize the situation in the winter of 1920 and spring of 1921 as an economic and political crisis of Soviet power.

The power of the Bolsheviks was under threat. L.D. To overcome the crisis, Trotsky demanded to tighten the measures of “war communism”: to separate the peasants from the land, create gigantic labor armies and use them on the construction sites of communism. Trotsky also proposed strengthening the punitive and repressive bodies for organized violence against those who would not voluntarily join the labor armies. His opponents from the so-called “workers’ opposition” (A.G. Shlyapnikov, A.M. Kollontai, etc.) proposed, on the contrary, to abandon the leadership role of the Bolsheviks and transfer control to the trade unions.

Lenin assessed the situation most soberly and dangerously for the Bolsheviks. He refuses to attempt an immediate transition to communism through violence. Domestic policy is built in two directions:

1. In the economic sphere, the Bolsheviks abandoned their previous course. In order to save their power, they are ready to make concessions to the peasants, they are willing to liberate economic life from total state control.

2. In the political sphere, the previous course was toughened. Centralization and the struggle against opposition forces intensified, and the dictatorial nature of Bolshevik rule was preserved.

The first “anti-crisis” measure of the Bolsheviks was the replacement of surplus appropriation with a tax in kind. It was approved by the X Congress of the RCP (b), held on March 8-16, 1921. The replacement of the surplus appropriation system with a tax in kind and the permission of free trade marked the beginning of a new economic policy(NEP).

With the introduction of the tax in kind (it was less than the surplus appropriation system and was announced in advance, on the eve of sowing), the peasant had a surplus that he could freely dispose of, i.e. trade. Freedom of trade led to the destruction of the state monopoly not only in the distribution of agricultural products, but also in the management of industry in the city. Enterprises are being transferred to self-financing, which made it possible to gradually transition to self-sufficiency, self-financing and self-government. Material incentives for workers were introduced. Many businesses were leased to cooperatives, partnerships, or individuals. This canceled the decree on the nationalization of all small and handicraft industries.

According to the new regulation of July 7, 1921, it was possible to open a handicraft or industrial production, but no more than one per owner. It was allowed to hire up to 10 workers in mechanized production (“with a motor”) and up to 20 without mechanization (“without a motor”). More specialists began to be attracted to state factories. The repeal of the law on universal labor service in 1921 provided an opportunity to engage in entrepreneurship. The process of forming the “Soviet bourgeoisie” (NEPmen) began.

The beginning of the NEP coincided with famine - a consequence of the previous policy of “war communism”, which deprived agriculture of any reserves and made it defenseless against any crop failure. In 1921, the grain-bearing regions of Ukraine, the Caucasus, Crimea, the Urals and the Volga region were gripped by drought. In 1921-1922 About 40 provinces with a population of 90 million were starving, of which 40 million were on the verge of death.

The government was intensively looking for a way out. A number of famine relief commissions were created. A campaign began for the Russian church to voluntarily donate its valuables to a fund to save the hungry; valuables began to arrive from Russian emigrants. However, soon persecution began against the church. To purchase food, church property was confiscated, often brutally. Works of art were sold abroad. The Soviet government appeals to the world for help. It is offered and provided by the American Relief Administration (ARA), the international proletariat, and European states.

One of the most important elements of the NEP was the monetary reform of 1922-1924. (People's Commissar of Finance G.Ya. Sokolnikov). The reform began at the end of 1922 with the issuance of the Soviet chervonets. From that time until March 1924, a stable chervonets and a falling sovznak were in circulation at the same time. In 1924, the State Bank bought the remaining Soviet money from the population. The gold chervonets was valued higher than the English pound sterling and was equal to 5 dollars 14.5 US cents. The ruble became an international currency.

Among the most important laws adopted by the Soviet government in the early 1920s is the law on concessions (permission, assignment). The Soviet country, under an agreement, transferred natural resources, enterprises or other economic objects to foreign entrepreneurs for a certain period of time for exploitation. Through concessions V.I. Lenin saw the opportunity to purchase the necessary machines and locomotives, machine tools and equipment, without which it would be impossible to restore the economy.

Concessions were concluded between the government of the RSFSR and the Great Northern Telegraph Society (1921) for the operation of submarine telegraph lines between Russia, Denmark, Japan, China, Sweden and Finland. In 1922, the first international airline Moscow - Koenigsberg opened. Special joint-stock enterprises are being created - Russian, foreign, mixed. But later, concessions and mixed enterprises did not develop due to government intervention, which limited the freedom of entrepreneurs.

Cooperation, which during the years of “war communism” was an appendage of the People’s Commissariat for Food, gained relative independence. The efficiency of cooperative production was at least twice that of state-owned industry. It was ensured by a freer organization of labor. In industry by the mid-1920s. 18% of enterprises were cooperative. 2/3 of the cooperative commodity product came from the cities. By 1927, 1/3 of all peasant households were covered by agricultural cooperation. It consisted of about 50 different types of associations: credit, beet, potato, dairy, etc.

Agrarian policy The Soviet government supported economically weak poor and middle peasant farms. At the same time, the growth of large peasant (kulak) farms is restrained with the help of tax policy and regular redistribution of land. The share of large farms did not rise above 5% of the country's total. However, they were the producers of commercial products. Farms are limited to production for their own consumption, not sale. Population growth leads to the fragmentation of peasant households. There is stagnation and decline in production. At the same time, prices for agricultural products are artificially lowered by the state, which makes their production unprofitable.

The needs of the urban population and industry for agricultural products are increasing, but cannot be satisfied. The state that retained control over the “commanding” heights, i.e. over large industry and banks, constantly sought to dictate its terms in other sectors of the economy. Funds to support large-scale industry were constantly withdrawn from other sectors of the economy, hindering their development. Inflated prices for industrial goods made them inaccessible to the village. These are the most important reasons for the NEP crises of 1923, 1925, 1928, which ultimately led to the establishment of a rigid command-administrative system, military-communist in content.

Literature

1. NEP. A look from the outside: Collection / comp. V.V. Kudryavtsev. - M. -1991. - P. 42-56.

2. Russia and the world. Educational book on history. In 2 hours / under general ed. A.A. Danilova. - M.: VLADOS, 1994. - Part 2. - P. 101-131.

3. Talapin, A.N. National history. Course of lectures: textbook. manual for students of non-humanitarian faculties of higher professional education / A.N. Talapin, A.A. Tsindic. - Omsk: Omsk State Pedagogical University Publishing House, 2012. - P. 98-99.

With the end of the civil war, the policy of “war communism” reached a dead end. It was not possible to overcome the devastation caused by 4 years of Russia's participation in the First World War and aggravated by 3 years of the Civil War. The threat of restoration of pre-revolutionary agrarian relations disappeared, so the peasantry no longer wanted to put up with the surplus appropriation policy.

There was no organized tax system in the country, financial system. There was a sharp drop in labor productivity and real wages of workers (even taking into account not only the monetary part, but also supplies at fixed prices and free distributions).

The peasants were forced to hand over all their surpluses, and most often even part of the essentials, to the state without any equivalent, because there were almost no industrial goods. Products were forcibly confiscated. Because of this, mass protests by peasants began in the country.

From August 1920, the “kulak” rebellion, led by the Socialist-Revolutionary A. S. Antonov, continued in the Tambov and Voronezh provinces; a large number of peasant formations operated in Ukraine (Petliurists, Makhnovists, etc.); rebel centers arose in the Middle Volga region, on the Don and Kuban. West Siberian “rebels”, led by Socialist Revolutionaries and former officers, in February-March 1921 created armed formations of several thousand people, captured almost the entire territory of the Tyumen province, the cities of Petropavlovsk, Kokchetav, etc., interrupting the railway connection between Siberia and the center of the country on three weeks.

They evaded surplus appropriation by hiding grain, converting grain into moonshine, and other methods. Small-scale agriculture had no incentive to maintain production at the existing level, much less expand it. Lack of traction, labor, and wear and tear of equipment led to a reduction in production. The absolute number of the rural population remained almost unchanged from 1913 to 1920, but the percentage of those able to work due to mobilizations and the results of the war decreased markedly from 45% to approximately 36%. The area under cultivation decreased during 1913 - 1916. by 7%, and for 1916-1920. - by 20.3%. Production was limited only by their own needs, the desire to provide themselves with everything they needed. In Central Asia, the cultivation of cotton practically ceased; instead, they began to sow bread. In Ukraine, sugar beet crops have sharply decreased. This led to a decrease in agricultural marketability and productivity, because beets and cotton are highly commercial crops. Agriculture became natural. It was necessary, first of all, to interest the peasantry economically in restoring the economy and expanding production. To do this, it was necessary to limit its obligations to the state within a certain framework and provide the right to freely dispose of the remaining products. The exchange of agricultural products for essential industrial goods was supposed to strengthen ties between city and countryside and contribute to the development of light industry. On the basis of this, it was then possible to create savings, organize a financial economy, and then raise heavy industry.

To implement this plan, freedom of circulation and trade was necessary. These goals were pursued by the resolution of the Tenth Congress of the RCP (b) and the Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of March 21, 1921 “On replacing food and raw materials allocation with a tax in kind.” He limited the natural obligations of the peasantry to strictly established norms and allowed the sale of agricultural surpluses through the exchange of goods in local markets. This made it possible to resume local turnover and product exchange, as well as private trade within narrow limits. Subsequently, the need very quickly arose to restore complete freedom of trade throughout the country, and not in the form of natural product exchange, but in the form of monetary trade. During 1921, obstacles and restrictions to the development of trade were spontaneously broken down and abolished by law. Trade expanded more and more, being the main lever for the restoration of the national economy during this period.

Later, due to limited funds, the state abandoned direct management of small and partly medium-sized industrial enterprises. They were transferred to the management of local authorities or rented out to private individuals. A small part of the enterprises was handed over to foreign capital in the form of concessions. The public sector consisted of large and medium-sized enterprises, which formed the core of socialist industry. Along with this, the state abandoned centralized supply and sales of products, giving enterprises the right to resort to market services for purchasing necessary materials and for the sale of products. The principles of self-financing began to be actively introduced into the activities of enterprises. The national economy gradually moved from a strictly regulated subsistence type economy during the period of “war communism” to the path of a commodity-money economy. In it, along with a significant sector of state-owned enterprises, enterprises of private capitalist and state capitalist types also appeared.

The decree on the tax in kind was the beginning of the elimination of the economic methods of “war communism” and a turning point towards the New Economic Policy. The development of the ideas underlying this decree was the basis of the NEP. However, the transition to the NEP was not seen as a restoration of capitalism. It was believed that, having strengthened its main positions, the Soviet state would subsequently be able to expand the socialist sector, displacing capitalist elements.

An important moment in the transition from direct product exchange to a money economy was the decree of August 5, 1921 on the restoration of mandatory payment for goods sold government agencies individuals and organizations, incl. cooperative. For the first time, wholesale prices began to form, which were previously absent due to the planned supply of enterprises. The Price Committee was responsible for establishing wholesale, retail, and procurement prices and charges for the prices of monopoly goods.

Thus, until 1921, the economic and political life of the country took place in accordance with the policy of “war communism”, a policy of complete rejection of private property, market relations, absolute control and management by the state. Management was centralized, local enterprises and institutions had no independence. But all these fundamental changes in the country’s economy were introduced spontaneously, were not planned and were not viable. Such a harsh policy only worsened the devastation in the country. It was a time of fuel, transport and other crises, the decline of industry and agriculture, shortages of bread and food rationing. There was chaos in the country, strikes and demonstrations were constantly occurring. In 1918, martial law was introduced in the country. To get out of the disastrous situation created in the country after wars and revolutions, it was necessary to make fundamental socio-economic changes.