«We need to look into the past in order to understand the present and foresee the future»
N.A.Nazarbayev

Hunger at the beginning of 30’s of the 20th century in Kazakhstan: Crime and Punishment

The Soviet period of National history takes the special place in this far incomplete system of values of the events’ chronicle. On a wave of the Bolshevism the Kazakh Soviet statehood revived, the economic, economic, socio-cultural appearance of the country. The qualitative, new intellectual potential of the nation has been developed. Achievements of the Soviet Kazakhstan nobody deny.

The history of Kazakhstan is extremely rich with events, changes and names of outstanding persons. But only some of them for ages changed destinies of the country, the state and the people. They include great disaster and the beginning of association to Russia in the 18th century, establishment of the Soviet power in 1917–1918, Sh. Ualikhanov, M. Auezov, K. Satpayev’s scientific and creative feats, proclamation of the state independence of the Republic of Kazakhstan on December 16, 1991, determination of the new capital young independent are among formation of the Kazakh khanate in the 15th century.

The Soviet period of National history takes the special place in this far incomplete system of values of the events’ chronicle. On a wave of the Bolshevism the Kazakh Soviet statehood revived, the economic, economic, socio-cultural appearance of the country. The qualitative, new intellectual potential of the nation has been developed. Achievements of the Soviet Kazakhstan nobody deny.

However, the socialist way of development not always was successful and victorious. The Kazakh people complacently would forgive all deformations and knees of idea, the theory and practice of socialism if not two crimes of totalitarian regime which delivered indigenous people before a dilemma to be or not to be. It is about hunger of 1931–1933 and political repressions of 1937–1938. 3 million of Kazakhs died during the hunger.

The one sixth parts of indigenous people forever left the historical homeland. From 3, 5 million Kazakhs of 1897 of the made 82% of the population of the edge, by 1939 there were all 2, 3 million, their specific weight as a part of the population of the republic fell to 38%. Severe sufferings and wounds are not forgotten to this day. The humanitarian disaster and the greatest tragedy of the Kazakh people of the beginning of the 30s is an objective consequence of the agrarian, personnel, national, cultural policy of Stalin and his surrounding which is realized in Kazakhstan by the protégé of the Kremlin F. Goloshekin.

The professional revolutionary F. Goloschekin, having accepted a manual of Kazkraykom (Kazakh Regional Committee) in 1925, first of all, struck blow to intellectual elite of the Kazakh society. By its initiative the machine of repression system fell upon leaders and activists of Alash movement. At a boundary of the 20–30’s A. Bokeykhan was deported from Kazakhstan, A. Baytursynov, M. Zhumabayev, M. Auyezov and other celebrated personalities appeared in prison, even the ideological communist S. Seyfullin got to disgrace.

In 1930, appearing with the report at the 7th All-Kazakh Party Conference, F. Goloshekin declared: «The center of gravity lies that the quicker our national economy, than faster its socialist construction develops, „scissors“ which were formed between economic construction and cultural will be moved apart». Nevertheless, «scissors» between economy and culture remained later. Their reason is covered in financing of welfare infrastructure by the residual principle.

The destroying spiritual and cultural values and directions of the Kazakh society were added by establishment of a personal authority of F. Goloshekin. Everybody was afraid of him. Rebellious people like S. Sadvokasov were openly pursued. If intrinsic lines and properties of the Soviet totalitarianism on the scale of the USSR were created by the end of the 20’s in Kazakhstan they fully worked with arrival Goloschekin to the power.

Partially this peculiar moment of the Kazakhstan history received lighting during operation of the 6th Plenum of Kazkraykom of All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on July 10–16, 1933.

Another reason of good crisis was Goloshekin’s theory «Small October». The new way of Sovietization of the Kazakh villages, strengthening of the role of Communist Party organization, proliferation of communists from 32 thousand in 1926 to 101 thousand people in 1933, realized within «Small October» also command and administrative activities of pseudo-activists led to aloof from the power of the simple rights, freedom and legal protection of the people.

In 1929, the mass collective-farm movement had begun. The reasonable, unrestrained race of collectivization provoked by the top management of the USSR within 4 years poured out in terrible crimes against humanity. Its absurdity consists also that the apex of All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and state entered war against own people. So the great writer M. Sholokhov was absolutely right when in 1932 I declared: «There was a uniform war on the farms». Methods of forceful collectivization were the same everywhere. Their tragic results were defined by scale, cruelty and ethnic directivity in the specific region.

In the conditions of Kazakhstan violent exception of cattle from peasants, transfer to settled life of nomads, inadequate jobs on meat purveyances left millions of people, first of all Kazakhs, out-of-pocket existence. The enormous sizes were accepted by a discrepancy between the plan of collectivization and its material support, not to mention mentality of ethnos, its readiness for a settled way of life, collective housekeeping.

According to A. Dzhangildin, the communist with a pre-revolutionary experience, in December, 1929 the resolution of regional committee of a batch on the transfer to settled life of 6 thousand farms of the Sarysuysky region was accepted, at the same time on this action only 8 thousand rubles were released.
In Zhetysu region it was decided, despite of anything, within one year to make subsidence of all Kazakh farms.

In December 1, 1931, in case of collectivization for 68,9% across Kazakhstan settled Kazakh regions were collectivized for 72, 2% and semi-nomadic for 57, 6%. In April 10, 1932, these indexes were 64, 3% 68, 8% and 54%.

Cattle breeding as branch of agrarian economy actually ceased to exist. From 40 million heads of all types of cattle in 1929 there were for the beginning of 1933 only 4 million heads.

Different forms and conditions of hunger were known in science. Another reason that caused famine was droughts, floods and other temporary phenomena. One more form of insufficiency of supply — incomplete compliance of the actual consuming to the standard for caloric content.

Extreme manifestation of a food problem — chronic hunger. Hunger of the beginning of the 30’s belongs to chronic, the USSR caused by political and ideological adventure of the top management and Kazakhstan, ruthless corrupting of a traditional life support system of nomad, unfair distribution of the income, revelry of petty-bourgeois elements in the sphere of a country government and society. Starvation of people raged in the Kazakh regions.

In the Karatalsky region only in three Kazakh auls (villages) a half of the population died in the winter of 1932. In the Karkaralinsky region in May, 1932, there were 50, 4 thousand people and by November there were only 15, 9 thousand. In the Balkhash region from 60 thousand people 36 thousand died and there were 12 thousand Kazakhs. In search of food people ran to the cities, the adjacent republics. According to incomplete data, by the beginning of 1933 the Kazakhs, who moved, were 40 thousand people in Central Volga, in Kyrgyzstan -100 thousand people, Western Siberia — 50 thousand human. The measures taken by the Soviet bodies did not changed the situation.

Only in March, 1932, i.e. in the heaviest days of Famine-Genocide, the East Kazakhstan regional committee of a party and regional executive committee considered a question of the help and arrangement of movement of returnees twice. Moreover, the representative of regional committee of the party sent the confidential report to the Western Siberian regional committee and Aleysky district committee of the party. The numerous facts of injustice violated by local security officers over defenseless Kazakhs were given in it. Many of them came to the Aleysky region, having overcome 400 kilometer distance, as they lived in Karkaralinsky, Kuvsky, Abralinsky and Kyzyltansky regions of Kazakhstan. «Without mass-agitation work, without the social person, without involvement of the party and Komsomol public — it was told in the report, — Kazakhs were brought together by policemen and official of the village council.

Within 24 hours people were loaded in 40 coaches from the Shipunovsky region. Moreover, policemen had to break a window and door of dugouts. On average 65–70 people were in each coach without lighting, heating, etc." Better life was not expected by returnee on arrival to Kazakhstan. Local authorities were not ready to work in extreme situations. Only in one East Kazakhstan region 142 people left their homes. In the middle of May 1932, over 78 thousand people returned. However, the regional plan of measures on arrangement of returnees was expected only for 44 thousand people.

According to archive documents, hunger moved first of all the least protected and feeble part of population — children, the future of the nation and elders, full of wisdom and experience. So, in the village Krasny Aul, which located in 105 km from the Semipalatinsk city, on April 17, 1932 the children’s home, was opened. The material conditions of children’s home did not promote protection of the disadvantaged ones.

The clothes to children were not given, a supply was delivered very badly, and medical attendance had the formal character. Within the first month 172 children died, 129 pupils ran away. People driven by hunger and lawlessness did not keep silence. Across all Kazakhstan national performances, addressed to Stalin, Kalinin swept, Molotova letters, complete of despair flied, the vote of perturbation was given by courageous people — T. Ryskulov, G. Musrepov, M. Gataullin, etc.

Stalin and his surrounding, clearly understand all threats of own actions, in the second five-year plan entered with slightly corrected agrarian policy. In spring 1933, local party and Soviet bodies received Stalin-Molotov order to limit the usage of repressive measures in relation to peasants.

Gradually the chronic hunger was overcome. Stalin’s model of production of agrarian products survived four decades after him. Soviet collective and state farms were in permanent crisis, they did not sole production problems. Farmer, who lost his land and properties, right to control products of his own work, got used to work carelessly, at half strengths and half-hearts. The prestige pf agricultural professions fell, the word «collective farmer» sounded as a synonym of backwardness, poverty and lameness. It is represented to us that the Soviet Union broke up partly due to an agrarian sector of economy, the principles of its organization and control hopelessly lagged behind times. The situation was not rescued by neither mastering of a virgin soil or the food program. Although, those who responsible for hunger of the begging of 30’s of the 20th century and mass loss pf people left from a deserved penalty, the totalitarian system created by it did not avoid punishment. In other words, hunger and death of millions during the collectivization did not take place completely as punishment they returned a boomerang and struck a crushing hit on the murderer in 1991. In general, the results and lessons of history are the main essence of conceptual provision of the modern historical science.

1 comment

mailru_852174782735940101.12.2015, 07:45

Қалай болсын солай сауатсыз жазылған... Желтоқсан көтерілісі туралы аузын ашпаған. Кiмге керек мұндай тарих?

To leave comment you must enter or register
Hankeldy Abzhanov
Hankeldy Abzhanov
Director of Institute of history and ethnology of. C.Valikhanov name
Director of Institute of history and ethnology of. C.Valikhanov name, doctor of historical sciences, professor