While the parliament advocated a bottom-up approach to industrialization based on economic theory and the model of Western industrialized countries, Stalin was adamant that growth should be achieved from a top-down perspective: the government should first decide on a national strategy, and then remodel the existing economy to fit it.
The background to this seemingly violent approach was the worsening international situation. If Russia was not quickly reborn as a powerful nation capable of competing with the great powers, it would quickly lose the competition and become a colony of another country.
(I know that the nobles' opinions are correct in theory. I was once a right-winger just like them... but it's too late to take such a leisurely approach!)
However, even if there is a need, if there is no actual "capital" required, the matter will not move forward.
Stalin therefore tried to secure the capital needed for industrialization by "taxing the nobility" and "cutting workers' wages."
(Yes, it's absurd after all...)
Putting it into words, I am surprised at how unconvincing it is. It may be difficult for me to say this myself, but no matter how I think about it, it seems to me that the parliament is saying the more sensible things. No wonder the Western bourgeoisie are making fun of them.
(But industrialization must continue. War will not wait until the country is in perfect condition. The international community is not so kind as to consider Russia's domestic interests...)
There is an oriental proverb that says, "It is better to act hastily than slowly and carefully." Of course, the ideal is to act quickly and carefully, but unfortunately, Russia does not currently have the national power to do so. If one is forced to choose between acting hastily and carefully or slowly and carefully, Stalin's belief was that he would choose haste without hesitation.
(Above all, we are at war now! Victory takes priority over everything else! We can't afford to be leisurely!)
Strangely enough, the sense of urgency felt by Stalin was very similar to that of the leaders of a certain island nation in the East. After a long period of isolation, and having been made aware of the disparity in their level of civilization with the great powers, they adopted the slogan "Enrich the country and strengthen the military" and sought to push ahead with rapid industrialization, even at the expense of some of the private sector, in order to counter the threat posed by the great powers.
Ironically, the "priority production system" that they adopted after the war to counter the spread of communism is often seen as the most successful example of a controlled economy.
This involved the government using price controls and other measures to focus its investment of materials and funds on the key industries of the time, steel and coal, in order to encourage the expansion of cyclical productivity between the two sectors and thereby expand supply capacity across the industry as a whole.
The Soviet Union's Five-Year Plans had the same basic idea, and they also achieved high economic growth, with an average annual GNP growth rate of 4.6%, an annual increase in industrial production of 16%, and an annual increase in the number of machinery factories of 27.4%.
(I was successful in my previous life. This time too, the five-year plan will definitely be a success! I will make it a success! No, I must make it a success!)
Stalin had made up his mind. Once he made up his mind, he had the strength of will to not budge.
Before the revolution, he was arrested and exiled many times, but he managed to escape each time, and even as many of his comrades, including Lenin, went into exile, he remained in the country and continued to fight for the revolution. During the Bolshevik government, he was a selfless man who devoted himself to his work, without any unnecessary worries, and who worked devotedly for the party.
(I also once believed in reconciliation with the peasants. I believed that by curbing rapid industrialization and making concessions to the peasants, they would revitalize the economy of their own accord...)
Among the policies adopted in the Soviet Union were:New Economic PolicyNepThis was a partial introduction of market principles, which meant that "food taxes were introduced and any agricultural products remaining after the taxes were paid could be freely bought and sold on the market." Stalin and others hoped that this would help grow the agricultural sector and gradually advance industrialization.
(But their hopes were betrayed! The more they conceded, the more arrogant the peasants became, and they opposed all of the government's policies, trying to thwart the modernization of agriculture!)
The bottom line is that NEP was a failure.
Conservative farmers still cling to the old self-sufficient lifestyle, and almost instinctively reject anything new or the world outside the village. Even when productivity goes up with the use of tractors and pesticides, instead of increasing production by saying "we only need to produce as much as we need," they just finish their work quickly and drink away the amount at the bar.
And if there was even a small amount of grain left over, it was simply stored in the warehouse without any thought. There was no thought of buying agricultural machinery or investing in it, and they just stored it in the warehouse. They praised themselves for this as being "solid," and in the worst cases, people in urban areas died of starvation because they hoarded grain even though there was a good harvest.
Moderates such as Bukharin argued for an increase in the purchase price of grain, but the results were disastrous. Anticipating further price increases due to supply shortages, grain hoarding became even more serious. This made it impossible to accumulate capital necessary for industrialization, let alone improve agricultural productivity.
While the cities were starving, the wealthy peasants were getting fatter and fatter due to rising grain prices, and they were buying up the wives and daughters of urban workers in back alleys who had become prostitutes to survive...No one could blame Stalin, having witnessed such hell, for deciding that ``the peasants are the enemy.''
(My comrades and I fought that brutal civil war not to fatten uneducated and conservative peasants, but to modernize the backward Russia and protect it from exploitation by the Western powers and the bourgeoisie!)
However, far from cooperating with the industrialization of their country, the peasants were trying to sacrifice the cities for their own profits. As a patriot, I could not accept this. There was no room for negotiation, and they had to be forced into submission. Someone had to do it.
"In the end, the majority of the masses are stupid, so the elites must be aware that they are the elites and lead the masses. We cannot leave the running of the country in the hands of the masses and expect them to do the right thing."
Stalin saw that the self-proclaimed "democrats" of the West were unable to understand the stupidity of the masses. He saw no essential difference between democracy and populism, and it was too dangerous to entrust the running of the country to them, who were not experts in politics or economics.
In the end, it is best to leave a job to the elites in that field. Leave it to the experts, war to the soldiers, politics to the politicians. The opinion of one bureaucrat with plenty of practical experience who knows scholars and politicians is worth as much as that of a thousand miners who talk politics over vodka after work.
There was no time to waste. Someone had to do it. And it had to be a "strong leader."
If we look back at history, we can see the example of Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great. It was always strong leaders like them who united the diverse peoples living on the vast Russian soil.
(Emperor The moment he ascends to the throne he will become Emperor! In fact, he must!
The strong sense of mission built into the genes of the Romanov family, the prestigious family that ruled Russia, became even stronger after they were possessed by Stalin.