Skip to main content

Collectivization and Dekulakization, 1930-33

Throughout 1930, Mennonite defiance and hope for another mass emigration was morphing into deep disappointment and growing apathy as they contemplated a permanent future under communist rule (note 1).

Together with rapid industrialization—including the Dnieper hydro dam—Stalin’s new focus on the collectivization of agricultural units in 1930 was both an economic strategy and the critical means for reconfiguring society and for the creation of the new “Soviet man,” with the liberation of women too from “exploitation and social isolation” (note 2).

This massive project of social engineering had profound effects on Mennonite faith, community and family life. Economic restructuring brought famine and profound poverty to the countryside. Women were increasingly removed from their children and subjected to impossible labour demands. Newly educated youth and children were the future of the socialist state, but their memoirs mostly speak of a lost childhood clouded by memories of poverty and of an atmosphere of fear.

Stalin’s first Five Year Plan in December 1929 called for the socialist enlargement of agricultural units and decreed the “complete” collectivization of all agricultural land including the confiscation of farm animals and implements. Counter-revolutionary opponents or kulaks favouring “capitalist” enlargements of private farms instead were to be eliminated. On the heels of the internationally embarrassing flight of Mennonite farmers to the suburbs of Moscow, Stalin spoke at a conference of Marxist students on the agrarian question, on December 27, 1929:

“Today, we have an adequate material base which enables us to strike at the kulaks, to break their resistance, to eliminate them as a class, and to substitute for their output the output of the collective farms and state farms. ... There is another question which seems no less ridiculous: whether the kulak should be permitted to join the collective farms. Of course not, for he is a sworn enemy of the collective-farm movement.” (Note 3)

Desperate to raise the level of enthusiasm for state-set production goals and to mobilize peasants, authorities responded with ideological education, including materials in German-language journals, newspapers and radio that emphasized the final liquidation of kulaks as a class in the countryside, the removal of all counter-revolutionary agitators, the complete collectivization of all farms, and a more focused battle to end religious belief in the village. Village councils were pressured to meet or exceed all procurement quotas especially by exposing and disciplining "kulak hoarders and shirkers."

Quotas for dekulakization in the German-speaking Ukrainian villages were higher than policies required; altogether Peter Letkemann estimates that at least 2,000 Mennonite families or 10,000 people were “dekulakized” in the years 1929 to 1932 (note 4).

In March 1930, Stalin celebrated progress made on the Collective Farm Movement with the broadly published article “Dizzy with Success.” Where there were violent excesses, he blamed it on overzealous local officials and suggested that some private land ownership going forward would be tolerated; collectivization would remain voluntary and only occur where it made sense (note 5). This was a temporary reprieve at best, and arrests continued.

In April and June 1930 the village of Neuendorf (Rayon Chortitza) offered some resistance to forced collectivization and a program dekulakization. The response against the village was severe and designed to make them into an example for surrounding Mennonite villages.

“Those affected were loaded with their families onto a wagon each and taken away to an unknown destination. But the population opposed this and did not let them go. The GPU came to arrest the heads of the families, but they were warned and went into hiding. Then, night after night, a number of people and trucks with GPU and police arrived and a great hunt began. The men were arrested and the other members of the families were later sent after them.” (Note 6)

Jakob Siemens, age 47, Franz Ens, age 43, Peter Wiebe, age 42 (and possibly others) of Neuendorf were arrested on April 18, and each charged with “agitating farmers to oppose / not to submit to Soviet rule” (note 7). Another larger sweep occurred on June 23, where at least five Mennonite men were charged with “agitating against the Soviet government.” Most were deported to serve five or eight years in a forced labour camp in “northern Russia;” one was sentenced to death (note 8). In total, twenty-four men were arrested in the village in 1930—and as per custom, family members followed, including 18 women and 11 children (total 53) (note 9).

In 1930, thirty individuals from the Chortitza village of Osterwick were also disenfranchised and exiled (note 10), and fifty-nine from Franzfeld. “We ethnic Germans had a hard time agreeing to collectivization,” the Franzfeld teacher K. Epp wrote in 1942. “But in the end … in order not to make closer acquaintance with the NKVD [secret police], we complied” (note 11).

A shift was occurring in the state’s anti-clerical propaganda from attacking religious beliefs and the clergy as obstacles to social and economic progress, to an explicitly politicized attack, painting faith leaders as “a direct threat to Bolshevik rule from enemies within and abroad” (note 12). In the Barnaul District (Altai), for example, thirty-six Mennonite ministers were disenfranchised in April 1930 (note 13). No longer were “preachers” smeared by state propaganda simply as exploiters of the peasantry, but now—“closely linked to developments in the general political arena”—they were shown “actively conspiring against Soviet power” (note 14). After the “mistakes” of rapid collectivization were admitted by the state in 1930, “kulak-preachers, priests and other anti-Soviet elements” were nonetheless blamed for “exploiting these mistakes” that were producing “dissatisfaction in the German villages, thereby reducing the intensity of their labour and their desire to improve and raise the level of agriculture” (note 15).

Accounts of dispossessed Mennonite families—especially as food shortages increased—left an indelible mark on the survivors of this era, and are recalled repeatedly in the memoir literature. 

Notably, Mennonites were not only the victims of dekulakization, but some were also its agents (that is another story). Moreover, the story of dispossession was shared by Mennonites and many Ukrainians together.

The remarkable photos (1932-33) by Mark Zaliznyak below are likely the best we will find of those terrible events. They are not from a Mennonite village, but from Udachne in Donetsk (Bakhmut District). The village had at least one Mennonite family, and the Mennonite Memrik Colony and estates were not far away.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Photos: "Donetsk village Udachne and Holodomor of 1932-33 in photos by Mark Zaliznyak," https://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=uk&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.radiosvoboda.org%2Fa%2Fholodomor-photo-zaliznyaka-1932-1933%2F28874991.html; also http://old.memorialholodomor.org.ua/eng/holodomor/archive/foto-arkhiv/golodomor-na-donnechini-foto-m-zheliznyaka/?fbclid=IwAR27xlF3nmJXptAP5M642s3LviqKTWy5sP__lrNSv0fjRY5RDUFvEedn2eM. NB: the fourth picture is from the Odessa region; https://flashbak.com/the-great-break-the-russian-peasant-becomes-the-collective-farmer-1920-1931-363372/?fbclid=IwAR0w3J5Hbeyw7OCu4tBLM4NySJq69fbFpgklddnhX5qb7qswTeUdq2M9QrM.

Note 1: The German government made arrangements with the Soviet Union to allow a few “splitter” families (some 20 families / 70 individuals) who were separated in Moscow in 1929 to leave in 1931; Benjamin H. Unruh played a key role; cf. Levi Mumaw to C.F. Klassen, August 10, 1931, from MCC-Akron, IX-03-01, box 3, file 70018.

Note 2: Daniel Peris, Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless (Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998), 81.

Note 3: Josef V. Stalin, “Problems of Agrarian Policy in the U.S.S.R.,” in Stalin, Problems of Leninism (Moscow: Foreign Languages, 1945), 317-319, https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.14532/page/n315/mode/2up/.

Note 4: Estimate by Peter Letkemann, “Mennonites in the Soviet Inferno, 1929–1941,” Mennonite Historian 24, no. 4 (1998), 6, http://www.mennonitehistorian.ca/.

Note 5: Stalin, “Dizzy with Success: Concerning Questions of the Collective-Farm Movement [March 3, 1930],” Works 12, 197–205. For Siberian Germans, see report in Auslanddeutsche 13, no. 12 (1930), 429f., https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/pdf/vpetk324.pdf; and Detlef Brandes and Andrej I. Savin, Die Sibiriendeutschen im Sowjetstaat 1919–1938 (Essen: Klartext, 2001), ch. 8. For Ukraine, see Colin P. Neufeldt, “Collectivizing the Mutter Ansiedlungen: The role of Mennonites in Organizing Kolkhozy in the Khortytsia and Molochansk German National Districts in Ukraine in the Late 1920s and Early 1930s,” in Minority Report: Mennonite Identities in Imperial Russia and Soviet Ukraine Reconsidered, 1789–1945, edited by Leonard G. Friesen (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2018), 216.

Note 6: In “Neuendorf (Rayon Chortitza) Dorfbericht,” May 1942, Fragebogen XI.5 (Addendum), “Schilderung der Verhaftungen usw.,” in Village Reports Special Command Dr. Stump, Bundesarchiv R6/622, 96 (TSDEA; Bundesarchiv).

Note 7: Rehabilitated History: Zaporizhia Region (Zaporizhia: Dniprovskij Metalurg, 2004–2013) [РЕАБІЛІТОВАНІ ІСТОРІЄЮ: Запорізька область], Book V, 275 (Wiebe); 315 (Ens); 325 (Siemens), http://www.reabit.org.ua/books/zp/.

Note 8: Rehabilitated History: Zaporizhia, Book IV, 69 (Braun); 133 (Heinrichs); cf. also 496 (Peter Redekop); 459 (Abram Peters); 145 (Dietrich Hildebrandt).

Note 9: “Neuendorf (Rayon Chortitza) Dorfbericht,” May 1942, “Fragebogen,” XI.2, in Village Reports Special Command Dr. Stump, Bundesarchiv R6/622, 94; “Liste der verbannten Bürger,” 133 (TSDEA; Bundesarchiv).

Note 10: “Osterwick, (Rayon Chortitza) Dorfbericht,” July 1942, “Fragebogen,” XI.2, in Village Reports Special Command Dr. Stump, Bundesarchiv R6/621, 9, 194 (TSDEA; Bundesarchiv).

Note 11: “Franzfeld, (Rayon Chortitza) Dorfbericht,” April 1942, “Fragebogen,” XI.2 and XI.5,  Village Reports Special Command Dr. Stump, Bundesarchiv R6/621, 384; “Schulisches Leben: Bericht,” 386b (TSDEA; Bundesarchiv).

Note 12: Peris, Storming the Heavens, 75.

Note 13: Abram Abram Fast, In the networks of the OGPU-NKVD, German District Altai Territory in 1927–1938 (V setyakh OGPU-NKVD: Nemetskiy rayon Altyskogo kraya v 1927–1938 gg unrh) (Barnaul, 2002), 31–34, https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/Dok/FastR.pdf.

Note 14: Peris, Storming the Heavens, 75.

Note 15: Auslanddeutsche 12, no. 13 (1930), 429f.

--

To cite this page: Arnold Neufeldt-Fast, "Collectivization and Dekulakization, 1930-1933," History of the Russian Mennonites (blog), August 14, 2023, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/08/collectivization-and-dekulakization.html. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Russian and Prussian Mennonite Participants in “Racial-Science,” 1930

I n December 1929, some 3,885 Soviet Mennonites plus 1,260 Lutherans, 468 Catholics, 51 Baptists and seven Adventists were assisted by Germany to flee the Soviet Union. They entered German transit camps before resettlement in Canada, Brazil and Paraguay ( note 1 ) In the camps Russian Mennonites participated in a racial-biological study to measure their hereditary characteristics and “racial” composition and “blood purity” in comparison to Danzig-West Prussian, genetic cousins. In Germany in the last century, anthropological and medical research was horribly misused for the pseudo-scientific work referred to as “racial studies” (Rassenkunde). The discipline pre-dated Nazi Germany to describe apparent human differences and ultimately “to justify political, social and cultural inequality” ( note 2 ). But by 1935 a program of “racial hygiene” and eugenics was implemented with an “understanding that purity of the German Blood is the essential condition for the continued existence of the
Post a Comment
Read more

“Operation Chortitza” – Resettler Camps in Danzig-West Prussia, 1943-44 (Part I)

In October 1943, some 3,900 Mennonite resettlers from “Operation Chortitza” entered the Gau of Danzig-West Prussia. They were transported by train via Litzmannstadt and brought to temporary camps in Neustadt (Danzig), Preußisch Stargard (Konradstein), Konitz, Kulm on the Vistula, Thorn and some smaller localities ( note 1 ). The Gau received over 11,000 resettlers from the German-occupied east zones in 1943. Before October some 3,000 were transferred from these temporary camps for permanent resettlement in order to make room for "Operation Chortitza" ( note 2 ). By January 1, 1944 there were 5,473 resettlers in the Danzig-West Prussian camps (majority Mennonite); one month later that number had almost doubled ( note 3 ). "Operation Chortitza" as it was dubbed was part of a much larger movement “welcoming” hundreds of thousands of ethnic Germans “back home” after generations in the east. Hitler’s larger plan was to reorganize peoples in Europe by race, to separate
Post a Comment
Read more

Sesquicentennial: Proclamation of Universal Military Service Manifesto, January 1, 1874

One-hundred-and-fifty years ago Tsar Alexander II proclaimed a new universal military service requirement into law, which—despite the promises of his predecesors—included Russia’s Mennonites. This act fundamentally changed the course of the Russian Mennonite story, and resulted in the emigration of some 17,000 Mennonites. The Russian government’s intentions in this regard were first reported in newspapers in November 1870 ( note 1 ) and later confirmed by Senator Evgenii von Hahn, former President of the Guardianship Committee ( note 2 ). Some Russian Mennonite leaders were soon corresponding with American counterparts on the possibility of mass migration ( note 3 ). Despite painful internal differences in the Mennonite community, between 1871 and Fall 1873 they put up a united front with five joint delegations to St. Petersburg and Yalta to petition for a Mennonite exemption. While the delegations were well received and some options could be discussed with ministers of the Crown,
Post a Comment
Read more

"Anti-Menno" Communist: David J. Penner (1904-1993)

The most outspoken early “Mennonite communist”—or better, “Anti-Menno” communist—was David Johann Penner, b. 1904. Penner was the son of a Chortitza teacher and had grown up Mennonite Brethren in Millerovo, with five religious services per week ( note 1 )! In 1930 with Stalin firmly in power, Penner pseudonymously penned the booklet entitled Anti-Menno ( note 2 ). While his attack was bitter, his criticisms offer a well-informed, plausible window on Mennonite life—albeit biased and with no intention for reform. He is a ethnic Mennonite writing to other Mennonites. Penner offers multiple examples of how the Mennonite clergy in particular—but also deacons, choir conductors, Sunday School teachers, leaders of youth or women’s circles—aligned themselves with the exploitative interests of industry and wealth. Extreme prosperity for Mennonite industrialists and large landowners was achieved with low wages and the poverty of their Russian /Ukrainian workers, according to Penner. Though t
Post a Comment
Read more

High Crimes and Misdemeanors: Mennonite Murders, Infanticide, Rapes and more

To outsiders, the Mennonite reality in South Russia appeared almost utopian—with their “mild and peaceful ethos.” While it is easy to find examples of all the "holy virtues" of the Mennonite community, only when we are honest about both good deeds and misdemeanors does the Russian Mennonite tradition have something authentic to offer—or not. Rudnerweide was one of a few Molotschna villages with a Mennonite brewery and tavern , which in turn brought with it life-style lapses that would burden the local elder. For example, on January 21, 1835, the Rudnerweide Village Office reported that Johann Cornies’s sheep farm manager Heinrich Reimer, as well as Peter Friesen and an employed Russian shepherd, came into the village “under the influence of brandy,” and: "…at the tavern kept by Aron Wiens, they ordered half a quart of brandy and shouted loudly as they drank, banged their glasses on the table. The tavern keeper objected asking them to settle down, but they refused and
Post a Comment
Read more

Mennonite Heritage Week in Canada and the Russländer Centenary (2023)

In 2019, the Canadian Parliament declared the second week in September as “Mennonite Heritage Week.” The bill and statements of support recognized the contributions of Mennonites to Canadian society ( note 1 ). 2019 also marked the centenary of a Canadian Order in Council which, at their time of greatest need, classified Mennonites as an “undesirable” immigrant group: “… because, owing to their peculiar customs, habits, modes of living and methods of holding property, they are not likely to become readily assimilated or to assume the duties and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship within a reasonable time.” ( Pic ) With a change of government, this order was rescinded in 1922 and the doors opened for some 23,000 Mennonites to immigrate from the Soviet Union to Canada. The attached archival image of the Order in Council hangs on the office wall of Canadian Senator Peter Harder—a Russländer descendant. 2023 marks the centennial of the arrival of the first Russländer immigrant groups
Post a Comment
Read more

Turning Weapons into Waffle Irons!

Turning Weapons into Waffle Irons:  Heart-Shaped Waffles and a smooth talking General In 1874 with Mennonite immigration to North America in full swing, the Tsar sent General Eduard von Totleben to the colonies to talk the remaining Mennonites out of leaving ( note 1 ). He came with the now legendary offer of alternative service. Totleben made presentations in Mennonite churches and had many conversations in Mennonite homes. Decades later the women still recalled how fond Totleben was of Mennonite heart-shaped waffles. He complemented the women saying, “How beautiful are the hearts of Mennonites!,” and he joked about how “much Mennonites love waffles ( Waffeln ), but not weapons ( Waffen )” ( note 2 )! His visit resulted in an extensive reversal of opinion and the offer was welcomed officially by the Molotschna and Chortitza Colony ministerials. And upon leaving, the general was gifted with a poem by Bernhard Harder ( note 3 ) and a waffle iron ( note 4 ). Harder was an influen
Post a Comment
Read more

Fraktur (or Gothic) font and Kurrent- (or Sütterlin) handwriting: Nazi ban, 1941

In the middle of the war on January 1, 1942, the Winnipeg-based Mennonitische Rundschau published a new issue without the familiar Fraktur script masthead ( note 1 ). One might speculate on the reasons, but a year earlier Hitler banned the use of the font in the Reich . The Rundschau did not exactly follow all orders from Berlin—the rest of the paper was in Fraktur (sometimes referred to as "Gothic"); when the war ended in 1945, the Rundschau reintroduced the Fraktur font for its masthead. It wasn’t until the 1960s that an issue might have a page or title here or there with the “normal” or Latin font, even though post-war Germany was no longer using Fraktur . By 1973 only the Rundschau masthead is left in Fraktur , and that is only removed in December 1992. Attached is a copy of Nazi Party Secretary Martin Bormann's official letter dated January 3, 1941, which prohibited the use of Fraktur fonts "by order of the Führer. " Why? It was a Jewish invention, apparent
1 comment
Read more

Village Reports Commando Dr. Stumpp, 1942: List and Links

Each of the "Commando Dr. Stumpp" village reports written during German occupation of Ukraine 1942 contains a mountain of demographic data, names, dates, occupations, numbers of untimely deaths (revolution, famines, abductions), narratives of life in the 1930s, of repression and liberation, maps, and much more. The reports are critical for telling the story of Mennonites in the Soviet Union before 1942, albeit written with the dynamics of Nazi German rule at play. Reports for some 56 (predominantly) Mennonite villages from the historic Mennonite settlement areas of Chortitza, Sagradovka, Baratow, Schlachtin, Milorodovka, and Borosenko have survived. Unfortunately no village reports from the Molotschna area (known under occupation as “Halbstadt”) have been found. Dr. Karl Stumpp, a prolific chronicler of “Germans abroad,” became well-known to German Mennonites (Prof. Benjamin Unruh/ Dr. Walter Quiring) before the war as the director of the Research Center for Russian Germans
Post a Comment
Read more

Blessed are the Shoe-Makers: Brief History of Lost Soles

A collection of simple artefacts like shoes can open windows onto the life and story of a people. Below are a few observations about shoes and boots, or the lack thereof, and their connection to the social and cultural history of Russian Mennonites. Curiously Mennonites arrived in New Russia shoe poor in 1789, and were evacuated as shoe poor in 1943 as when their ancestors arrived--and there are many stories in between. The poverty of the first Flemish elder in Chortitza Bernhard Penner was so great that he had only his home-made Bastelschuhe in which to serve the Lord’s Supper. “[Consequently] four of the participating brethren banded together to buy him a pair of boots which one of the [Land] delegates, Bartsch, made for him. The poor community desired with all its heart to partake of the holy sacrament, but when they remembered the solemnity of these occasions in their former homeland, where they dressed in their Sunday best, there was loud sobbing.” ( Note 1 ) In the 1802 C
Post a Comment
Read more