The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1929-11-02

gthenlng of these farms to the maxi
mum degree. 1t should be observed
however, that up to now the collec-
tive sector still occupies but a small
place in the teotal production OF
Soviet agriculture. In 1929, the col
lective farms contributed 4 per cert
of the area sown, As per cent. Of
the total production and per cent
of the marketable production. The
iive-year plan Of economics construc-
tion in the U.S.S.R. includes the
great object of rising to a large de-
gree the Importance of the collective
farms IN relation to the total agri-
cultural farms in relation to the five
years the portion of basic capital
owned by the collective farms will
increase to 1853 per cent, market
able production will reach 1877 per
cent, while the total of peasant
farms combined will increase from
100000 to. 100000.
This growth of the collective
farms along with the growing Sow
! let estates, gives added Importance
TO the role of socialized agriculture
in leading and guiding the transfer
nation of the remaining peasant
masses. In overcoming the difficult
ties confronting collective farm con-
struction, the poor-and middel-peas-
ants, under the guidance of the pro-
letariat, will widely extend the new
form of Socialist transformation of
the backward countryside.
The October Revolution radically
changed the nature of social rela-
tions in the countryside. 1t COM
pletely abolished the landowners
estates, and led to the redistribution
of part of the lands of the wealthy
peasants which were taken over by
the village poor. At the same time
there took place a redistribution of
the means of production belonging
to the capitalist elements, these be-
ing utilized by the middle and poor
| peasants. The results of the agrar-
ian revolution was that the role Of
the wealthy peasantry was greatly
weakened, while sections of the poor
peasants went over to the middle
peasant group. The middle peasant
became stronger as the central
figure in agriculture.
Plan Checks Old Evil
The new economic policy, however,
bringing as it did commodity and
money circulation, market relations
and the possibilities of accumula-
ton arising therefrom, opened out
for the wealthy peasantry (Kulaks)
certain opportunities of capitalist
development. The wealthy peasantry
by accommodating the means of pro-
duction and hiring it out to the poor
peasants and by leasing land to poor
peasants not having equipment, or
by hiring their labor-power, endea-
vcrs to make the lower sections of
the countryside dependent on them.
The development Of collective
farms is a decisive blow at the ex-
plotting aims of the rich peasantry.
The collective farms are overcom-
ing the lack of equipment, which
forms the main basis for the devel-
opment of the rich peasant. The
peasantry, by getting its own land,
by jointly utilizing both its own
equipment and that received from
State credit, by uniting into collect
i've far1ns-is becoming completely
liberated from dependency upon the
Kulaks. Roots that have fed ex-
ploitaticn for centuries are being
stamped out by collective farming.
The Kulak is not allowed to lease
cut land; to hire labor for a mere
song; to hire out equipment; or to
practice usury. Cooperative credit,
MANIFESTATIONS tractor columns, to-
gether with the correct organiza-
ton of large-scale farming on scien-
tific lines-these things are steadily
undermining the wealthy peasantry.
At the same time by organizing
into collective farms, the poor and
middle peasantry are helped to
struggle against exploitation. The
! influence and power of the Kulak,
which had been strengthened for
many decades is now shaking and
| crumbling. The possibility of get
ting on without the services" of the
Kulak, and Of advancing agriculture
with their own forces and govern
nlent support, is squirting on the
lower strata of the countryside, and
strengthening their consciousness.
The high productivity of the col
lective farms, which yield harvests
exceeding individual farming by
20-30 per cent, is undermining the
authority of the rich peasant as a
farmer, and demonstrates by facts
what tremendous possibilities there
are in large-scale collective pro-
duction for advancing agriculture
| in general.
Class Struggle on the Land.
All this, of course, has aroused
great hatred against the collective
farms on the part of the Kulaks.
The more profound the work of
placing agriculture on collective
basis and the more decisive the ad-
vance of Socialism in the country
side, so much the more stubborn
and intense is the resistance Of the
rich naacaptrv Poo1icipo that co1.