1. Za industrializatsiiu (hereafter ZI), April 6, 1933.

2. For the changes in the economic system described here, see my article “Models of the Economic System in Soviet Practice, 1926–1936” in L'industrialisation de I'URSS dans les années trente (Paris, 1982), pp. 17–30.Google Scholar

3. KPSS v rezoliutsiakh, vol. 3 (Moscow, 1954), p. 154.Google Scholar

4. Sobranie zakonov (hereafter SZ), art. 233 (May 20, 1932).

5. See Davies, R. W., “The Syrtsov-Lominadze Affair,” Soviet Studies, 33 (1981): 29–50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. Khavin, A., U rulia industrii (Dokumental'nye ocherki) (Moscow, 1968), p. 78.Google Scholar

7. This evidence will be examined in Davies, Industrialisation of Soviet Russia, vol. 3 (forthcoming).

8. See Byli industrial'nye (Moscow, 1970), pp. 185–88Google Scholar, reporting the engineer A. S. Tochinskii's conversations with Ordzhonikidze.

9. Ordzhonikidze, G. K., Stat'i i rechi, vol. 2 (Moscow, 1957), p. 269.Google Scholar

10. ZI, March 19, 1931 (session of March 18).

11. Sbornik postanovlenii i prikazov po promyshlennosti 1929/30 (hereafter Sbornik prikazov), art. 586 (January 11, 1930).

12. He was appointed a member of the presidium of Vesenkha in January 1931. Sbornik prikazov, 1931, art. 52 (January 26).

13. He joined the party in December 1917. XVI s“ezd VKP (b): stenograficheskii otchet (Moscow, 1931), p. 769.

14. See Carr, E. H., Socialism in One Country, 1924–1926, vol. 1 (London, 1958), pp. 285–86,302, 307–309, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Valentinov, N., Novaia ekonomicheskaia politika i krizis partii posle smerti Lenina (Stanford, Cal., 1971), pp. 246–47, 254nGoogle Scholar; Valentinov, who broke with the Soviet regime while abroad in 1930, was a shrewd witness but generally gave unfavorable characterizations of party members.

16. Kuibysheva, G. V., Lezhava, O. A., Nelidov, N. V., Khavin, A. F., Valerian Vladimirovich Kuibyshev: biografiia (Moscow, 1966), p. 313 Google Scholar; see also Cohen, Stephen F., Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution: a Political Biography, 1888–1939 (London, 1974), p. 433 Google Scholar

17. Byli industrial'nye (1970), pp. 181–82.

18. A. Khavin, U rulia industrii, pp. 128–29.

19. Torgovo-promyshlennaia gazeta (hereafter TPG), January 14, 1928.

20. Kontrol'nye tsifry piatiletnego plana razvitiia promyshlennosti SSSR (1927/28—1931/32 g.g.)(Moscow, 1927), p. xiv.

21. TPG, January 14, 1928.

22. TPG, May 25 and June 18, 1927; Puti industrializatsii, no. 6 (1928).

23. See TPG, June 18, 1927, January 14, 1928; Carr, E. H. and Davies, R. W., Foundations of a Planned Economy, 1926–1929, vol. 1 (London, 1969), pp. 783–85Google Scholar.

24. TPG, May 26, 1927.

25. Z1, May 29, 30, 1930.

26. ZI, October 12, 1930. Rabkrin was the People's Commissariat for Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection, headed by Ordzhonikidze until November 1930; at this time it pressed for more ambitious plans and strongly criticized the caution of “bourgeois experts.”

27. Problemy ekonomiki, no. 2–3 (1932, sent to press March 28/June 3), pp. 125, 128, 137; the economist was la. Segall, a former Rabkrin official and scourge of Vesenkha, who no doubt seemed a legitimate target.

28. ZI, May 29, 30, 1930.

29. ZI, June 21, 1932.

30. ZI, March 29, 30, 1932; the article is by “N. Ivanov,” presumably Birbraer (see n. 31).

31. ZI, June 23, 1932; the article appeared under the name of N. Ivanov but was written by Birbraer (see V Verner in ZI, May 5, 1933).

32. ZI, June 25, 1932; the article appeared under the name of V. Markov but was written by Verner (see V Verner in ZI, May 5, 1933).

33. ZI, May 16, June 14, 21, 28, 30, July 19, 1932.

34. SZ 1932, art. 191.

35. ZI, July 23, 1932. For the statement that Dukor's article presents the Prombank proposals see ZI, August 26, 1932 (I. Nusinov).

36. ZI, August 14, September 8, 1932 (both by G. Edel'shtein, Kuzbasstroi), September 6,1932 (I. Ginzburg, Magnitostroi). Similar criticisms were made by S. Kiselev, ZI, August 27, 1932.

37. Ekonomicheskaia zhizri' (hereafter EZh), September 8, 1932 (M. Ryl'skii); according to Birbraer, managers “from all ends of the country” were struggling against the bureaucratism of Prombank (ZI, September 16, 1932).

38. ZI, July 28, August 22, September 3, 8, 16, 1932; for Ryl'skii, see EZh, September 8,1932.

39. ZI, September 6, 1932.

40. EZh, September 6, 1932 (I. Kaminskii); other articles by Kaminskii critical of Birbraer appeared in EZh, August 30, September 1, 1932.

41. ZI, September 14, 1932 (G. Kniaz'kov). Other critics of Birbraer included I. Nusinov (ZI, August 20, 1932), and our old friend M. Ryl'skii (EZh, September 8, 1932).

42. ZI, August 14, 1932 (P. Ardov and others, from Lensnab); see also ZI, September 2, 1932 (A. Ekimov, G. Lev, also from Leningrad) and September 9, 1932 (A. Burukhin, V. Kantselerzhevskii, also from Leningrad). I shall not deal further with this part of the discussion in the present paper.

43. ZI, August 17, September 17, 1932 (M. Artamonov). My summary of his argument has been pieced together from both his articles. I have not been able to trace the biography of M. Artamonov. In an article in ZI, November 11, 1929, he advocated an enhanced role for Rabkrin, then headed by Ordzhonikidze. K. M. Artamonov was first deputy head of the Chief Military and Mobilization Administration of Narkomtiazhprom in 1934 (Oktiabr', no. 10 (1973): 141).

44. ZI, August 24, 1932 (G. Edel'shtein).

45. ZI, September 9, 1932 (M. Barinov).

46. ZI, September 14, 1932 (A. Fedorov).

47. ZI, August 24, 1932 (G. Edel'shtein).

48. ZI, August 24, 1932 (E. Parkhomenko, appointed head of the new nonferrous metal products administration Glavtsvetmetobrabotka a year later; ZI, September 5, 1933). In a short note Artamonov vigorously denied that he had proposed that industrial prices should not be regulated by the state (ZI, August 29, 1932). See also the defense of funding by steel distribution officials in ZI, September 4, 1932 (A. Budnevich) and September 20, 1932 (V. Vladimirskii).

49. ZI, August 29, 1932.

50. ZI, September 8, 1932.

51. ZI, September 17, 1932.

52. ZI, May 5, 1933. Verner's name last appeared in ZI as its deputy editor on September 23, 1932 (curiously, this is just the moment at which these discussions temporarily stopped).

53. See the material in Pravda, October 11, 1932, and Kirov's report in Pravda, October 14, 1932.

54. Ciliga, A., The Russian Enigma (London and New York, 1979), pp. 292–93Google Scholar, based on reports from prisoners in the camps; Nicolaevsky, B., Power and the Soviet Elite (London and New York, 1966), pp. 28–29 Google Scholar, based on his interview with Bukharin.

55. KPSS v rezoliutsiakh, 3: 170.

56. ZI, October 15, 1932; the contributor was “I. Sh. “

57. ZI, November 21, 1932 (session of November 20).

58. ZI, November 30, 1932.

59. ZI, December 6, 1932.

60. ZI, December 10, 1932.

61. ZI, December 22, 1932.

62. ZI, January 5, 1933.

63. Ordzhonikidze, Stat'i i rechi, 2: 460 (speech of January 31, 1933).

64. ZI, December 16, 1932. He was replying to an article by N. Morgunov, deputy chairman of the consumer cooperatives, in EZh, December 4, 1932. Morgunov had advocated more consistent prices of consumer goods based on cost of production and said nothing about the problems caused by the excess of demand over supply at prevailing prices. For fears about agricultural prices seeVerner's article (above, p. 208).

65. ZI, December 29, 1932.

66. ZI, January 16, 1933.

67. ZI, December 16, 1932.

68. Zl, February 5, 1933.

69. ZI, February 12, 1933. Unlike the articles on February 5 and March 1, this article was not marked “For discussion”; in Zl, February 14, 1933, an editorial note hastily explained that this was an oversight.

70. SZ 1932, art. 440 (September 29, 1932).

71. In Zl, March 1,1933, in a third and final article of somewhat less general interest, he argued that cost records were unreliable. In one factory cost estimators calculated that costs had risen by 2.37 percent, while the factory balance showed a fall of 2 percent. Cost records were so confused and the results obtained so late, that “the overwhelming majority of managers keep a hundred kilometers away from bookkeeping and statistics.”

72. According to Valentinov, who knew him in Vesenkha in 1925, “he could not be called sympathetic. A round, mealy, puffy face; cold unpleasantly scrutinizing, whitish crab-like eyes; and he spoke entirely in short, broken dictatorial and barking phrases” (Valentinov, Novaia ekonomicheskaia politika, pp. 200–201). Jack Miller, who attended sessions of the Gosplan Institute of Economic Research in 1936, at which Kraval’ was chairman, received a similar impression. His “heavy face, beady eyes, malignant tongue and fist on the table dominated the proceedings… . Kraval’ hounded his victims unmercifully.” Degras, Jane T. and Nove, Alec, eds., Soviet Planning: Essays in Honour of Naum Jasny (London, 1964), p. 125 Google Scholar. Kraval', a graduate of the Institute of Red Professors, was head of the labor economics department of Vesenkha until the autumn of 1930, and then deputy People's Commissar for Labor until January 1933.

73. Kraval’ and Bogushevskii offered rival accounts of these negotiations. According to Kraval', Bogushevskii claimed in conversation that “the approaches published in ZI are shared by the majority of managers”; they disagreed about whether to hold the meetings at ZI or at TsUNKhU and compromised on a meeting at the Business Club, which would give a wider audience; Bogushevskii himself proposed that Birbraer should give a report at the meeting. According to Bogushevskii, this was “a pack of lies” and Kraval “s report of their conversation was a fantasy; Bogushevskii had not expressed agreement with Birbraer but merely said, “Why not discuss this question somewhere like the Business Club?” Bogushevskii added that Za industrializatsiiu ceased all relations with the club on February 27 until the conflict was sorted out and did not even know where the meeting was to be held, let alone its character and its participants (see ZI, April 3, 1933). In the official report published in Pravda, it was described as a joint meeting of the Business Club, the All-Union Society of Socialist Record-Keeping (Uchet), and (hence Bogushevskii's indignation) Za industrializatiiu (Pravda, March 30, 1933).

74. Pravda, March 30, 1933.

75. ZI, March 11, 1933 (D. Savinskii and K. Sikorskii).

76. ZI, March 17, 1933 (N. Tikhomirov, department of technical and economic planning, Metpribor, Leningrad).

77. ZI, March 17, 1933.

78. Pravda, March 19, 1933; this article appeared on an inside page, but it was unsigned and therefore to be taken as authoritative. It was entitled “A Brave Author and the Double-Dealing ofan Editorial Board.”

79. ZI, March 22, 1933; for an earlier article by Afanas'ev and Musatov, criticizing the harmful effect of price discrepancies and abnormalities on the economic performance of the industry, see ZI, January 5, 1933.

80. Pravda, March 24,1933. A senior official on the central staff of Narkomtiazhprom described Dol'nikov as “a captive of Afanas'ev and Musatov,” whose “class-enemy sallies” had been overlooked by him and by the editors of the industrial newspaper; he accused Afanas'ev and Musatov of using “Aesopian language” to conceal their “Right-wing opportunist practice” (ZI, March 30, 1933—A. Zolotarev).

81. ZI, April 2, 1933.

82. ZI, March 30, 1933; for their appointments, see Sbornik prikazov NKTP, 1932, art. 99 (February 23/April 21), SZ 1932, ii, art. 929 (June 9, 1932). Further criticism of Dol'nikov appeared in EZh, March 26, 1933 (Sh. Turetskii); ZI, April 1, 1933 (A. Gurevich), April 2, 1933 (I. Khavin, the financial official in Narkomtiazhprom, not to be confused with A. Khavin, the industrial journalist), April 6, 1933 (E. Lebedinskaia).

83. ZI, April 2, 3, 4, 1933; Pravda, March 30, April 3, 1933. Bogushevskii's explanation of his failure to publish the resolution earlier appears in ZI, April 2, 1933.

84. ZI, April 6, 1933.

85. Pravda, April 7, 1933; ZI, April 8, 1933. On April 7 a general meeting of the cell fully supported the decisions of the raikom (ZI, April 9, 1933). Attacks on Birbraer's views on statistics appeared in ZI, April 8, 1933 (M. Tsaguriia), and, by S. G. Strumilin, in Plan, no. 1, August 1933, p. 11.

86. ZI, April 9, 1933 (order of April 8, signed by Ordzhonikidze). For Tal', see Davies, , The Socialist Offensive: the Collectivization of Soviet Agriculture, 1929–1930 (London and Cambridge, Mass., 1980), pp. 325–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87. Pravda, April 21, 1933.

88. ZI, May 5, 1933. Further attacks on Birbraer appeared in editorials in the journal of the Business Club: Predpriiatie, no. 5–6 (March 1933):3; no. 7 (April 1933):2—3, and in Bol'shevik, no. 9 (May 15, 1933), pp. 75–77 (fa. Gindin). The émigré politician Ustrialov had advocated the peaceful evolution of NEP into private capitalism.

89. ZI, June 1, 1933.

90. XVII s “ezd VKP (b): stenograficheskii otchet (Moscow, 1934), p. 681.

91. His articles appeared in Partiinoe stroitel'stvo, no. 24 (December 15, 1935):25—35, and no. 11 (June 15, 1936):21–25 (where he is listed as bureau secretary); he is last listed as a member of the editorial board in ibid. no. 13 (July 1, 1937) (subsequent issues give the names only of the editor and deputy editor). In 1935 he also wrote an article on the background to the First Five-Year Plan (see Cohen, Bukharin, p. 433).

92. The reference to him as “Bogushevskii,” not “Comrade Bogushevskii,” in Stalin, I. V., Sochineniia, vol. 7 (Moscow, 1947), p. 335 Google Scholar, indicates that he had been expelled from the party.

93. On this, see J. Kornai, Economics of Shortage (Amsterdam, New York and Oxford, 1980), pp. 569–70. Referring to characteristic features of centrally planned economies such as investmenttension and shortages, he concludes that they result not from government decision and state plan but from the general conditions of the drive for economic expansion and high investment; they can be modified but not eliminated. It is impossible, Kornai argues, “to accept with pleasure the beneficial effects of these regularities and to escape entirely from those consequences which we regard as disadvantageous.”

94. KPSS v rezoliutsiakh, 3: 201–22; the draft of the plan prepared in Gosplan at this time merely referred to “preparation for the abolition of rationing” during the course of the plan. Proekt vtorogo piatiletnego plana razvitiia narodnogo khoziaistva SSSR (Moscow, 1934, sent to press January 9), pp. 378–79.

95. ZI, June 4, 5, 6, 1933; the resolution appeared in the issue of June 6.