Closed Letter of the CC VKP(b)

Closed Letter of the CC VKP(b)
Source: Tom 18
on the Tasks of Collective Farm Construction
in Connection with the Consolidation of Small Collective Farms

April 2, 1951

To the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, district committees, city committees, and district party committees.

The Central Committee of the VKP(b) addresses this letter to the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, district committees, city committees, and district party committees in view of the fact that among a portion of party and Soviet officials there exists a misunderstanding or erroneous conception regarding a number of the most important questions of collective farm construction at the present stage.

Certain leading officials are committing — especially in connection with the ongoing measures to consolidate small collective farms — serious errors and distortions of the party's line in collective farm construction.

The Soviet government and the Communist Party have achieved major successes in the development of socialist agriculture. These successes were attained as a result of creating large-scale socialist industry and the collective farm system. They were attained on the basis of consistently implementing the party's policy in collective farm construction. The steadfast pursuit of the party's line in collective farm construction is the most important condition for the further advancement of socialist agriculture.

Among the system of measures ensuring the further development of the productive forces of socialist agriculture, the consolidation of small collective farms holds great significance. In recommending to collective farmers that they carry out the consolidation of small collective farms, the CC VKP(b) proceeded from the necessity of creating the most favorable conditions for the successful resolution of the principal task in the field of agriculture. This principal task is the significant increase in the yields of all agricultural crops, the rapid growth of communally owned livestock herds, and the simultaneous, substantial increase in their productivity. Only through the successful resolution of this principal task shall we achieve an abundance of foodstuffs in our country, ensure that light industry is fully supplied with raw materials (cotton, flax, sugar beet, etc.), accumulate sufficient state food and raw material reserves, make all our collective farms prosperous, and enable collective farmers to live in plenty.

Many years of experience in collective farm construction have shown that the communal economy is most successfully developed by large collective farms, which possess significant advantages over small ones.

On the large land tracts of big collective farms, tractors, combines, and other complex agricultural machinery, as well as the collective farm's own means of production, are utilized far more productively.

Large collective farms have the capacity to maintain a developed, diversified economy based on proper field and fodder crop rotations and advanced agrotechnical methods, and to obtain higher yields of agricultural crops.

Large collective farms can more successfully develop highly productive communal animal husbandry through improved livestock housing, feeding, and care, through the construction of improved buildings, the mechanization of livestock operations, proper labor organization, the introduction of fodder crop rotations, the improvement of meadow and pasture productivity, and so forth.

With sufficient labor resources and financial means at their disposal, large collective farms can undertake the construction of reservoirs, lay irrigation and drainage canals — that is, comprehensively expand the material and technical base of the communal economy. In large collective farms, great opportunities open up for the construction of collective farm hydroelectric stations, as well as thermal power stations using local fuel, since only large collective farms will be able to make the substantial capital investments needed for the purchase of electrical equipment and the construction of irrigation networks for the development of irrigated farming on the basis of electrical energy.

Finally, in large collective farms there exists the possibility of more fully and properly utilizing agricultural specialists and the cadres trained by the collective farm system who are capable of skillfully managing collective farm production.

It would seem that the question of the principal task in agriculture and the paths to its resolution, set forth repeatedly in party and government resolutions, is sufficiently clear and requires no additional explanation. However, the facts show that in this regard the situation is not entirely satisfactory.

1. Certain of our party and Soviet officials adopt an incorrect, consumerist approach to the questions of collective farm construction, which finds expression in substituting for the principal — namely, the production — task in agriculture the task of immediately reorganizing the daily life of collective farmers, something that must divert the basic forces and resources of collective farms from the resolution of the most important production tasks, must lead to the disorganization of the collective farm economy and, consequently, cause harm to the entire cause of socialist construction.

These comrades forget that in the development of any social system, the principal and determining role is played by production. This applies fully to the new, still young collective farm system, for the production of collective farms, the degree of development of this production, likewise determines the mode of daily life and cultural level — that is, all other aspects of collective farm life.

The error of these comrades consists in the fact that they forget about the principal, production tasks of collective farms and push to the forefront the derivative, consumerist tasks — the tasks of domestic arrangements in collective farms and housing construction in the countryside. Domestic tasks undoubtedly have important significance, but they remain derivative, subordinate, and not principal. Neglecting or diminishing the principal, production tasks may lead all our practical work in the countryside down the wrong path, impede the further advancement of collective farms, and thereby cause serious harm to the collective farm system.

2. Proceeding from an incorrect, consumerist approach to the questions of collective farm construction, a portion of our party and Soviet officials, in connection with the consolidation of small collective farms, erroneously propose to carry out in a forced manner the mass resettlement of villages into large collective farm settlements, to demolish all old collective farm buildings and collective farmers' homes, and — heedless of the consequences of the hasty resettlement of villages and rural settlements — to create in new locations large "collective farm settlements," "collective farm cities," "agro-cities," regarding this as the most important task of the organizational and economic strengthening of collective farms.

Such a formulation of the question is fundamentally incorrect. If this erroneous approach to the questions of collective farm construction were to gain acceptance, it would inevitably lead to a slowing of the pace of expanded reproduction in collective farms, to the diversion of the forces and resources of collective farms and the Soviet state from the resolution of the basic tasks of further agricultural advancement.

3. Connected with the erroneous proposal for the accelerated resettlement of villages and the construction of large settlements is the incorrect position of certain officials regarding the reduction of the household plots of collective farmers.

The Charter of the Agricultural Artel proceeds from the principle that, alongside the communal economy of the collective farm — which constitutes the collective farm's principal force — there must exist the personal household plot of the collective farmer as a subsidiary economy. This expresses the well-known position of Marxism-Leninism, which requires the combination of the personal interests of the collective farmer with the communal interests of the artel. It is precisely for this reason that, alongside the communal economy, there exists in the artel a small subsidiary household economy of the collective farm household to satisfy certain personal needs of the collective farmer, insofar as these needs cannot yet be fully met from the artel's communal economy.

Therefore, the proposal to reduce the size of the household plot of the collective farm household in the collective farm settlement to 10 or 15 hundredths of a hectare, with the remaining portion of the household plot to be relocated outside the settlement, must be considered completely incorrect. To propose the allocation of two separate plots for the collective farm household is to create in the collective farmer the erroneous impression that his household plot is about to be taken away. It is clear that this can only bring harm to the entire collective farm cause.

Such are the principal errors committed by certain of our comrades in the matter of consolidating collective farms.

It should be noted that analogous errors were also committed in the well-known article by Comrade Khrushchev, "On Construction and Improvement in Collective Farms," who fully acknowledged the erroneousness of his article (see the note appended to this document. — Ed.).

From the foregoing, the following tasks of the Party follow.

First, to put an end to the incorrect, consumerist approach to the questions of collective farm construction and to direct efforts toward intensifying the mobilization of our party and Soviet cadres in the countryside, the collective farm activists, and all collective farmers for the successful resolution of the principal task in collective farm construction — the further increase in the yields of agricultural crops, the comprehensive development of communal animal husbandry, and the increase in its productivity.

Capital investments of the resources and labor of collective farmers must be directed first and foremost toward the development of the communal economy — the construction of livestock buildings, the construction of irrigation and drainage canals, reservoirs, the clearing of land from brush, the planting of field-protecting forest belts, the construction of farm buildings, collective farm power stations, and the like.

Second, to put an end to the incorrect notion that the most important thing in collective farm construction is supposedly the resettlement of small villages into unified collective farm settlements. Party organizations must proceed from the understanding that the consolidation of small collective farms does not necessarily mean the creation in each collective farm of a single population center through the resettlement of villages. New cultural and domestic construction in the artels must be carried out in accordance with the resources available to the communal collective farm economy.

Third, it is necessary to resolutely suppress attempts to reduce the size of the household plot of the collective farm household and to relocate part of the household plot outside the population center, as impermissible and harmful.

Furthermore, the CC VKP(b) considers it necessary to draw the attention of party organizations to those shortcomings in work that are manifesting themselves in the course of carrying out the large and important work of consolidating small collective farms.

Certain overly zealous party and Soviet officials display excessive haste in conducting the work of unifying small collective farms and fail to carry out the instructions of the CC VKP(b) that the work of consolidating small collective farms must not be turned into a campaign, into a competition. In many consolidated collective farms, productive activity is being organized slowly, work on the introduction of crop rotations is not being carried out, labor is poorly organized, production brigades have not been strengthened, and the construction of livestock and other farm buildings is being carried out unsatisfactorily. The presence of these shortcomings prevents collective farms from fully utilizing the advantages of large-scale farming. Many regional and district party officials fail to take into account that the creation of large, diversified collective farms increases the responsibility of party organizations for the management of the communal economy of collective farms and demands from party organs a more attentive, skillful, and qualified leadership.

It is necessary to eliminate these shortcomings more rapidly in the course of consolidating collective farms.

The work of consolidating small collective farms must be carried out without forcing or haste, under no circumstances turning it into a campaign, strictly observing the principle of voluntariness in this matter. The consolidation of small collective farms must be preceded by serious preparatory work. In view of the special importance of the measures for consolidating small collective farms, it is essential that this great work be taken in hand by the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, and regional committees of the party, bearing in mind that it is beyond the capacity of the district party committees alone.

The Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, and district party committees are also obligated to seriously improve their leadership of the consolidated collective farms and to concentrate their attention on the resolution of the principal task in agriculture — the significant increase in the yields of all agricultural crops, the rapid increase in communally owned livestock herds, and the simultaneous significant growth in their productivity. It is especially important in the consolidated collective farms to resolve the questions of the selection of leading cadres, the introduction of proper crop rotations, the placement of livestock farms on the territory of the collective farm, and the formation of production brigades.

It is necessary to ensure the further strengthening of collective farms with leading cadres, first and foremost in the consolidated collective farms, considering this one of the most important and urgent tasks of party organizations. The corps of collective farm chairmen must be strengthened, above all, through the selection and promotion to this work of specialists with higher and secondary agricultural education who are tested in political and professional terms.

It is also important to strengthen the corps of production brigade leaders and livestock farm managers, since their role in the consolidated collective farms increases significantly. To this work it is necessary to promote experienced and respected collective farmers who have a thorough knowledge of production and organizational abilities, and, where possible, agricultural specialists.

Taking into account the specific conditions of the consolidated collective farm, livestock farms for each type of livestock and poultry, by decision of the collective farm general meetings, may be located in one or several population centers depending on the availability of buildings, natural fodder lands, watering places for livestock, and taking into account the prospects for the development of communal animal husbandry and poultry farming. In the consolidation of collective farms, all necessary measures must be taken for the further increase of the communally owned livestock herd and the improvement of its productivity. Under no circumstances must losses in animal husbandry be permitted from livestock death and the squandering of livestock herds from the livestock farms of consolidated collective farms.

It is necessary to comprehensively strengthen the production brigade as the basic and principal form of organizing collective farm labor. The composition of the field-crop brigade of the collective farm must be sufficient to carry out all agricultural work in the brigade in a timely manner and to fulfill general collective farm tasks. In forming brigades in consolidated collective farms, the place of residence of the collective farmers and the location of the fields must be taken into account. Within the field-crop brigades, it is necessary to create work teams for the cultivation of sugar beet, cotton, sunflower, corn, and other row crops, since the production of these crops is as yet insufficiently mechanized. It is recommended that collective farms develop and approve at their general meetings new, higher output norms taking into account the level of labor productivity achieved by the leading segment of collective farmers.

The consolidation of collective farms has created opportunities for the more productive use of tractors, combines, and other agricultural machinery, both in crop farming and in animal husbandry. However, party and Soviet organs still engage unsatisfactorily with the questions of improving the use of MTS and collective farm equipment. If one takes into account that at present the majority of field work is performed by tractors, combines, and other machines, it becomes clear that the further advancement of agriculture is directly linked to the improvement of MTS operations and the highly productive use of equipment. The struggle for the fullest utilization of machinery in agriculture is one of the most important means of the further advancement of all branches of collective farm production. The Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, and district party committees must achieve a serious improvement in the use of MTS and collective farm equipment as the most important means of raising labor productivity in collective farms, increasing the yields of agricultural crops, and furthering the development of animal husbandry.

The CC VKP(b) proposes that this letter be discussed at a special session of the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, district committees, and at plenums of district party committees, and that practical measures be adopted for the implementation of the directives set forth in this letter.

April 2, 1951

Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)

---

Note

The text mentions the article by N.S. Khrushchev, the erroneousness of which he acknowledged. Evidently, the appearance of this article served in no small measure as the occasion for the preparation of the Closed Letter of the CC. Here is Khrushchev's "self-critical" letter:

"Dear Comrade Stalin!

You were absolutely right in pointing out the errors I committed in my address 'On Construction and Improvement in Collective Farms,' published on March 4 of this year.

Following your directives, I endeavored to think through these questions more deeply. Having thought it over, I realized that the entire address as a whole, in its very essence, is incorrect. By publishing an incorrect address, I committed a grave error and thereby caused damage to the party. This damage to the party could have been avoided had I consulted with the Central Committee. This I did not do, although I had the opportunity to exchange views with the CC. I also consider this a grave error on my part.

Deeply troubled by the error I have committed, I am considering how best to correct it. I have decided to ask You to permit me to correct this error myself. I am prepared to make a public statement in the press criticizing my article published on March 4, analyzing in detail its erroneous propositions. If this is permitted, I shall endeavor to think through these questions thoroughly and prepare an article containing criticism of my own errors. I request that the article be reviewed by the CC before publication.

I ask You, Comrade Stalin, to help me correct the grave error I have committed and thereby, insofar as possible, reduce the damage I have caused the party by my incorrect address.

March 6, 1951.

N. Khrushchev."

As is well known, being a man of limited foresight and great vanity, Khrushchev in his pursuit of effect sometimes gave no thought to the consequences of his actions. One can scarcely speak of a principled position in light of such zealous readiness on the part of a Politburo member to publicly analyze his own erroneous propositions a mere two days after an official address in Pravda. However, the years pass, Stalin is no more, and the tone of the author of that "incorrect address" — which in his own estimation had caused "damage to the party" — changes radically:

"Extract from the minutes of Session No. 148 of the Presidium of the CC CPSU, April 1, 1958.

On the Repeal of the Closed Letter of the CC VKP(b) of April 2, 1951, 'On the Tasks of Collective Farm Construction in Connection with the Consolidation of Small Collective Farms.'

The CC CPSU notes that the Closed Letter of the CC VKP(b) of April 2, 1951, 'On the Tasks of Collective Farm Construction in Connection with the Consolidation of Small Collective Farms,' contains a number of completely incorrect propositions that played a negative role, fettering the initiative of progressive collective farms in the construction of production buildings, housing for collective farmers, and the improvement of collective farms, and in the cause of cultural advancement in the collective farm village.

In this letter, as is well known, the main fire was directed against the contrived danger of the so-called 'consumerist approach' to the questions of collective farm construction. The task of building production structures, organizing domestic facilities in collective farms, and constructing housing in the countryside was dogmatically counterposed to the production tasks of collective farms and was effectively removed from the agenda. At the same time, the principle was ignored that without the construction of production buildings, collective farm production — and above all the production of animal husbandry products — cannot develop.

In practice, this approach of counterposing production to construction led in many localities to the dissolution of construction brigades in collective farms, to the liquidation of collective farm and inter-collective farm enterprises for the production of building materials, to a contemptuous attitude toward questions of improving the collective farm village, toward the construction and repair of housing in the countryside, which in turn was one of the causes of the mass outflow of the population from the countryside. The appearance of the Closed Letter of the CC in essence restrained the initiative of collective farms and collective farmers, slowed construction in collective farms, and caused damage to the cause of strengthening and advancing collective farms.

Now, when the party has unleashed the broad initiative of the collective farm peasantry, it becomes perfectly clear that the CC letter of April 2, 1951, appeared as a result of its initiators' disconnection from the life and practice of collective farm construction, as a result of their failure to understand the enormous opportunities that existed in the progressive regions, districts, and collective farms.

Questions of construction and improvement in collective farms were already being raised by life itself in those years and were being successfully resolved by progressive collective farms. These tasks were correctly and objectively set forth in the article by Comrade N.S. Khrushchev, 'On Construction and Improvement in Collective Farms' (Pravda, March 4, 1951). Proceeding from the fact that the consolidation of collective farms that had been carried out created favorable conditions for a new, powerful upsurge of socialist agriculture and the further growth of the prosperity and culture of collective farms and collective farmers, Comrade Khrushchev's article correctly advanced before the consolidated collective farms, as one of the most important tasks, the task of construction and improvement in collective farms. In the article, the direction of construction was correctly defined, and it was emphasized that 'above all, communal production and farm buildings must be built — cattle yards, sheds for the storage of machinery, grain and vegetable storage facilities. Simultaneously, cultural, domestic, and housing construction must be developed by all means.'

The incorrectness of the propositions in the CC VKP(b) letter of April 2, 1951, is especially obvious at the present time, when enormous tasks are being resolved for the further development of the collective farm system and the reorganization of Machine Tractor Stations, the construction in collective farms both of production buildings and of housing and cultural-domestic facilities in connection with the growth of the collective farm economy and the prosperity of collective farmers.

The CC CPSU resolves:

To repeal the Closed Letter of the CC VKP(b) of April 2, 1951, 'On the Tasks of Collective Farm Construction in Connection with the Consolidation of Small Collective Farms' as incorrect, overturned by life, and contradicting the decisions on agriculture adopted by the CC CPSU in recent years.

This resolution is to be distributed to the Central Committees of the Communist Parties of the Union Republics, territorial committees, regional committees, city committees, and district party committees.

Secretaries of primary party organizations are to be acquainted with this resolution.

SECRETARY OF THE CC."

Photocopy of the original.
From the archive of Z. Kireenkova.