THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 15 January 1931, Page 2

THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN

RUSSIA’S EXPERIMENT VIEW OF PROFESSOR WRIGLEY “This is certain: if their plan comes off the rest of the world will have to take heed. It is a challenge to Western democracy, for the Soviet has definitely thrown down the gauntlet. They are trying in theory to develop another system; whether they will succeed I cannot pretend to say. It is in the lap of the gods whether they will be able to dominate the universe. Personally I hope they will not be able to.” These remarks were made about the five-year plan of Soviet Russia, by Professor J. L. Wrigley when addressing the Teachers’ Summer School, reports the “Press”. He assessed the effects of this bold experiment on the rest of the world and also gave his opinion on the chances of its success. Mr F. Milner, who presided, said he viewed the experiment with a certain amount of scepticism. At- the great Elsinore conference American experts spoke enthusiastically of the plan, but their enthusiasm must have been accounted for by the fact that their itinerary was strongly camouflaged. This was a hard thing to sa.y, but was probably true. CAUTION ADVOCATED Opening his remarks Professor Wrigley said that Mr Milner had anticipated his remarks about caution, but he thought it was fair to judge of a country's ideals by the tasks it had set itself. The Soviet had hit on the idea that, if they had to control a Socialistic State successfully—and that is what the five-year plan set out to do —they must control everything in it. They had met with difficulties, many of which were financial. The prime necessity was the development of industry and the socialisation of agriculture with the aim of putting out a tremendous amount of grain to obtain credit in the markets of the world. The workings of the scheme were similar to those of a great American Trust. The job was a colossal one and it said something for Lenin and his associates that he tackled it. THE PEASANTS Another bar to the success of the scheme was the peasants, who held their grain and refused to co-operate. Then began the disciplining of the peasant as they had done with the industrial workers. The essence of success lay in their ability to estimate the amount of reserve and profit. For the whole of Russia they had planned a scheme for five years from 1928. This involved rationing and it was carefully estimated what each person should have. A peasant, for example, was allowed 72 eggs and an urban worker 155. They estimated that each person required .4 pair of boots, while an increase of 2.4 kilograms of soup per person was allowed for the 1932-33 period. CONTROL OF INDIVIDUAL

Such a plan, added Professor Wrigley, demanded a close and complete control of the individual and this, perhaps, would be the rock on which the plan might split. American firms were, developing the country, while, at pro sent,*the best electrical engineer from America was r busy on the Volga building the largest hydro-eleCtric works in the world. ,■ ; . ■; There was grave doubt whether the scheme could be carried out because of the Soviet’s lack of capital. They were working round ill a vicious circle. They were keeping the peasant ground down, while they exported wheat in order to make their credit abroad secure. That was probably the explanation of the freeing of quantities of wheat by the Soviet recently. 1 Such a scheme involved much sacn fice on the part of the individual, as well as the favouring of certain classes of industry at the expense of agriculture, as well as the favouring of backward regions at the expense of others. Moreover it also favoured the proletariat as against the bourgeois. Many people who were not genuine members of the proletariat could not get rations and this meant- hardship. The plan also involved the adoption of State enterprise against private enterprise. _ The success of the scheme, explained Professor Wrigley, depended on teaching the peasant that lie must become a good Socialist and sacrifice himself for the good of the State. The Russian peasant, however, was not unduly altruistic and this was the point on which he thought the system might break down. Even if they established the State farms successfully there was the difficulty of employing those men left over. Last year the Soviet had an area equal to nearly the whole of New Zealand under cultivation.

LETTING LOOSE WHEAT Summing up, he said that it was impossible to speak definitely about the success of the plan. Soviet authorities were confident of success, though they had not minimised the difficulties. He couid not say what would be the e lect of letting loose all the Russian wheat on the world at 2s 6d a bushel. Of the effect on New Zealand he could not speak, but it would spell ruin to the Australian wheat industry.