To what extent was War Communism a failure?

War Communism (WC), implemented by the Bolsheviks during the Russian Civil War (1918-1921), was an economic policy characterized by nationalization, grain requisitioning, and the abolition of private trade. While often considered a failure due to its contribution to economic hardship and social unrest, it's crucial to analyze its successes and failures within the context of the time.

Arguments for Failure:

The introduction of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1921 is often cited as evidence of WC's failure. The NEP, which reintroduced elements of private enterprise and market mechanisms, was a clear departure from the ideological rigidity of WC. This shift suggests that the Bolsheviks recognized their inability to restructure Russia's economy solely along ideological lines.

The policy of grain requisitioning proved highly detrimental. Peasants, the backbone of Russia's agricultural system, viewed it as outright theft. With no incentive to produce surplus grain, agricultural output plummeted, contributing to widespread famine and anti-Bolshevik uprisings (e.g., the Tambov Rebellion). The Kronstadt Rebellion of 1921, where sailors – traditionally staunch Bolshevik supporters – revolted against WC's harsh realities, further highlighted the policy's unpopularity and unsustainable nature.

Economically, WC created chaos. Abolishing money and relying on bartering led to hyperinflation and crippled the government's ability to raise revenue. The exodus of workers from cities to the countryside in search of food decimated industrial production. Factory output in 1921 was only 20% of its 1913 levels (Richard Pipes, Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime, 1994). These figures demonstrate the devastating impact of WC on Russia's already fragile economy.

Arguments Against Viewing it as a Complete Failure:

It is crucial to acknowledge the context of civil war. WC, despite its flaws, enabled the Bolsheviks to centralize resources, feed the Red Army, and ultimately win the civil war. This victory was paramount, as it ensured the survival of the Bolshevik regime and allowed them to reshape Russia according to their ideology.

WC laid the groundwork for future Soviet economic policies. While the NEP represented a tactical retreat, the principles of nationalization and centralized control, established under WC, remained cornerstones of the Soviet economy for decades. Even Lenin acknowledged that the state would retain control over the "commanding heights" of the economy (banking, large-scale industry, foreign trade). These foundations of a centralized, state-controlled economy persisted long after the NEP's demise.

Furthermore, the NEP faced significant internal opposition within the Bolshevik Party. This suggests that many party members believed in the principles of WC and viewed it as a necessary step towards a truly communist economy, albeit one that needed modification given the circumstances.

Conclusion:

While War Communism can be seen as a failure due to its devastating economic and social consequences, it's essential to avoid a simplistic assessment. The policy's successes in securing resources for the Red Army and ultimately ensuring Bolshevik victory in the civil war cannot be ignored. Moreover, it laid the foundation for the Soviet Union's centrally planned economy. Ultimately, WC's legacy is complex and multifaceted, marked by both significant failures and unintended consequences, yet it profoundly shaped the course of Soviet history.