OCR Specification focus:
‘War Communism and the NEP restructured production, markets and daily life.’
War Communism and the New Economic Policy (NEP) marked two contrasting approaches to managing the Russian economy and society during the revolutionary transition from Tsarism to Soviet rule.
War Communism (1918–1921)
War Communism was the Bolsheviks’ emergency response to the Russian Civil War (1918–1921), aiming to supply the Red Army and preserve revolutionary control during crisis.
Aims and Context
To centralise economic control under Bolshevik authority.
To ensure sufficient grain and resources reached urban workers and the Red Army.
To eliminate capitalist elements and transition towards a socialist economy.
The policy emerged amidst civil war, foreign intervention, industrial collapse, and widespread famine, demanding radical solutions.
Key Features of War Communism
War Communism represented a dramatic break from pre-revolutionary economic structures:
Nationalisation of industry: All major industries, including banking, transport, and manufacturing, were brought under state ownership and control.
Central planning: The Supreme Council of the National Economy (Vesenkha) coordinated production, distribution, and labour allocation.
Grain requisitioning (prodrazvyorstka): Armed detachments seized surplus grain from peasants to feed urban populations and the military.
Abolition of private trade: State control replaced free markets, outlawing private commerce and exchange.
Labour discipline: Compulsory work, strict workplace rules, and rationing were imposed to sustain output.
Militarisation of labour: Labour battalions were organised on quasi-military lines, reflecting wartime priorities.
War Communism: The Bolshevik policy (1918–1921) of centralised state control over the economy and society during the Civil War, aimed at ensuring military victory and socialist transition.
Impact on Production and Daily Life
The economic results were catastrophic:
Industrial output fell to 20% of 1913 levels by 1921.
Grain harvests collapsed, leading to severe famine (1921–1922) that killed millions.
Urban populations declined dramatically as workers fled to the countryside.
Daily life became dominated by rationing, scarcity, and coercion:
Workers were paid in kind rather than money.
Peasants resisted requisitioning, leading to widespread unrest.
Cities were depopulated as people sought food elsewhere.
Under War Communism, the state introduced grain requisitioning (prodrazvyórstka) to feed the Red Army and towns, provoking peasant resistance and deepening rural unrest.
Government detachments confiscate grain from peasants during the Civil War. The image illustrates coercive requisitioning that eroded the smychka (worker–peasant alliance) and fuelled uprisings like Tambov, showing how War Communism restructured production and daily life. Source
Opposition and Resistance
Widespread discontent challenged Bolshevik authority:
Peasant uprisings (e.g., Tambov Rebellion 1920–1921) protested grain seizures and state violence.
Kronstadt Rising (1921) saw sailors—once Bolshevik supporters—demand “Soviets without Communists.”
Escalating rural resistance culminated in the Tambov Uprising (1920–22)—a mass peasant war that forced the regime to reconsider War Communism’s viability.
Map showing the core districts of the Tambov Uprising in central Russia, 1920–1922. Visualising the rebellion’s scale helps explain why the Bolsheviks abandoned War Communism and introduced the NEP. Source
These crises forced Lenin and the party to reconsider their economic approach, paving the way for a radical policy reversal.
The New Economic Policy (NEP) (1921–1928)
Introduced at the Tenth Party Congress (1921), the NEP represented a pragmatic retreat from War Communism’s extremes, aiming to revive the economy and consolidate Bolshevik rule.
Aims and Rationale
To restore agricultural and industrial production.
To rebuild support among peasants and workers.
To stabilise the new regime and avoid further rebellion.
Lenin described the NEP as a “strategic retreat”, not an abandonment of socialism but a temporary step to rebuild the economy.
Key Features of the NEP
The NEP introduced limited market mechanisms within a socialist framework:
Grain tax (prodnalog) replaced requisitioning: peasants paid a fixed tax in kind, keeping any surplus for sale.
Private trade legalised: small-scale traders (known as Nepmen) reappeared, reviving internal markets.
State capitalism: major industries, banking, transport, and foreign trade remained under state control, but small enterprises returned to private hands.
Agricultural incentives: peasants were encouraged to produce more by profiting from surplus sales.
Stabilisation of currency: new policies aimed to restore monetary stability after hyperinflation.
New Economic Policy (NEP): A policy introduced by Lenin in 1921 that reintroduced limited private enterprise and market mechanisms to revive the Soviet economy after War Communism.
Effects on Production and Economy
The NEP reversed much of the economic decline:
Grain harvests and industrial output rose steadily, approaching pre-war levels by the late 1920s.
Trade revived, and towns recovered as goods returned to markets.
Peasants became more cooperative with the regime, reducing resistance.
However, this partial success came with new challenges:
Emergence of a kulak (wealthier peasant) class.
Disparities between agricultural and industrial prices — the “scissors crisis” — where manufactured goods remained expensive while grain prices stayed low.
Party unease over capitalist tendencies and Nepmen influence.
By 1923, the gap between industrial and agricultural prices widened into the ‘scissors crisis’, squeezing peasant incentives and exposing NEP market imbalances.
Diagram showing wholesale/retail industrial and agricultural price indices in 1922–23. The lines form the characteristic “scissors” shape, illustrating how market imbalance during the NEP undermined peasant incentives and economic stability. Source
Social and Daily Life Transformations
The NEP reshaped everyday life:
Markets reopened, reviving urban commerce and consumer goods availability.
Peasants enjoyed greater autonomy and economic incentive.
Cultural life flourished as censorship eased slightly and material conditions improved.
However, inequality grew between urban and rural populations, and ideological tensions simmered within the Communist Party.
Comparison: War Communism vs NEP
Understanding the contrast between these two policies highlights their significance in Soviet history:
War Communism
Ideologically driven, aiming for rapid socialist transformation.
Relied on coercion, requisitioning, and state control.
Led to economic collapse and mass resistance.
NEP
Pragmatic and flexible, prioritising recovery over ideology.
Mixed economy blending socialism with elements of capitalism.
Revived production and eased social tensions, but introduced new contradictions.
Legacy and Historical Significance
War Communism and the NEP were pivotal in shaping the Soviet Union’s early development. War Communism demonstrated the extremes of revolutionary policy under crisis, while the NEP revealed the Bolsheviks’ willingness to compromise for survival. The NEP’s mixed results and ideological tensions set the stage for Stalin’s later abandonment of market elements and the launch of collectivisation and the Five Year Plans from 1928 onwards.
These contrasting approaches profoundly restructured production, markets, and daily life, fulfilling the specification’s emphasis and illustrating the evolving nature of Soviet economic policy during revolution and consolidation.
FAQ
War Communism severely damaged Bolshevik–peasant relations. Grain requisitioning (prodrazvyórstka) involved armed detachments seizing food, often leaving peasants with too little for survival. This fostered resentment and resistance, culminating in uprisings such as the Tambov Rebellion.
Peasants who had initially supported the Bolsheviks turned hostile, seeing the state as an oppressor rather than a liberator. The breakdown of trust made rural cooperation difficult and directly influenced Lenin’s decision to introduce the NEP to rebuild the alliance.
Lenin called the NEP a “strategic retreat” because it temporarily reintroduced elements of capitalism to stabilise the economy and regime without abandoning the ultimate goal of socialism.
It was not intended as a permanent reversal but as a pragmatic response to crisis.
The state retained control of “the commanding heights” — heavy industry, banking, and foreign trade.
Lenin believed that once the economy recovered, the USSR could resume socialist transformation on firmer foundations.
Nepmen were private traders and small-business owners who thrived under the NEP, supplying goods and facilitating trade that the state could not. They helped revive markets, stimulate commerce, and improve availability of consumer goods.
However, many Bolsheviks criticised them as “bourgeois” profiteers who contradicted socialist ideals. Their growing influence and visible wealth heightened ideological tensions, illustrating the compromises inherent in the NEP.
Urban workers initially benefited from the NEP. As industry and trade recovered, wages stabilised, consumer goods became more available, and living standards gradually improved.
However, the policy also had drawbacks:
Industrial growth lagged behind agriculture, limiting rapid wage increases.
Unemployment rose in the early NEP years due to restructuring and closure of unprofitable enterprises.
This uneven progress led to frustration among some workers, highlighting the NEP’s mixed social impact.
The Scissors Crisis emerged when industrial goods remained expensive while agricultural prices fell, creating a widening gap resembling an open pair of scissors.
Peasants reduced grain sales because industrial goods were unaffordable, threatening urban food supplies.
The government responded by cutting industrial prices and boosting production to narrow the gap.
This crisis exposed structural weaknesses in the NEP and demonstrated that market mechanisms could produce imbalances even under partial state control, fuelling debate within the party about the policy’s future.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
What was the main aim of War Communism during the Russian Civil War?
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for identifying that War Communism aimed to supply the Red Army and urban workers with food and resources during the Civil War.
1 mark for noting that it also aimed to centralise economic control under Bolshevik authority or eliminate capitalist elements to move towards socialism.
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain two key differences between War Communism and the New Economic Policy (NEP) in terms of their approach to managing the economy.
Mark Scheme:
Up to 3 marks for each well-explained difference (maximum 6 marks).
1 mark for identifying a difference.
1 additional mark for providing accurate detail or example.
1 further mark for explaining the significance or impact of that difference.
Examples of acceptable points:
Private trade: War Communism abolished private trade, replacing it with state control; NEP legalised small-scale private trade, reviving internal markets.
Agricultural policy: War Communism used grain requisitioning, provoking peasant resistance; NEP replaced this with a tax in kind (prodnalog), incentivising production.
Economic control: War Communism nationalised most industry and imposed central planning; NEP introduced limited market mechanisms while retaining state control of major industries.
Social impact: War Communism led to famine and unrest due to coercion; NEP improved living conditions and reduced resistance through incentives.
Full marks require two differences with clear explanation of policy, detail, and consequence. Partial explanations or vague points earn 1–2 marks per difference.
