Нищення господаря - складова злочину голодомору-геноциду 1932-1933 років

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Нищення господаря - складова злочину голодомору-геноциду 1932-1933 років

Ганна Капустян

Анотація

нищення куркуль селянин більшовик

Стаття розкриває нищення радянською командно-репресивною системою економічних свобод українського сільського товаровиробника, заможного селянина (куркуля) представника середнього класу на селі - гаранта суспільно-політичної, економічної стабільності держави.

З кінця 1920-х років в українському селі формується командно-репресивна система управління, яку впроваджує радянський комуністичний політичний режим. У контексті проблеми важливим постає вивчення динаміки нищення заможного виробника (розкуркулення) - складової злочинної геноцидної політики радянського тоталітарного режиму, спрямованої проти української нації.

Періодичні вторгнення більшовиків в Україну протягом 1918-1920 рр. позначалися впровадженням політики «воєнного комунізму», коли «воєнно-комуністичними» методами забезпечували нефіксований збір податків.

У березні 1921 року радянський політичний режим радикально змінює систему оподаткування на селі. Замість продрозкладки впроваджують фіксований продподаток, впроваджують нову економічну політику (НЕП).

Рубіжними у стосунках селянина-виробника і радянської держави виявилися 1928-1929 роки. Загальний наступ радянського політичного режиму на українське село, розпочатий у кінці 1920-х років, позначився на кількох важливих для села сегментах: церква, економічні та політичні репресії проти селянина-господаря, примусові хлібозаготівлі, примусова колективізація.

Формування командно-репресивної системи управління простежується на прикладі конкретного села Заруддя, що на Полтавщині, протягом 1929-1931 рр. Досліджено нищення радянським політичним режимом у кінці 1920-х - на початку 1930 років духовних, моральних, суспільно-економічних засад традиційного українського селянина на конкретно-історичному прикладі.

Радянський політичний комуністичний режим, формуючи командно-репресивну систему управління з кінця 1920-х років, порушував права людини і громадянина, принижував людську гідність. Такі дії завдали непоправних духовних, моральних, суспільно-економічних втрат у традиційному українському селі.

Ключові слова: командно-репресивна система управління, згортання НЕПу

The Destruction of the Proprietor - a Component of the Crime of the Holodomor-Genocide in 1932-1933

Abstract

The article reveals the destruction by the Soviet command-repressive system of the economic freedoms of the Ukrainian rural producer, the prosperous peasant (kulak), a middle-class represen-tative in the village - the guarantor of the socio-political and economic stability of the state.

Since the late 1920s, a command-repressive system of governance was formed in the Ukrainian village, implemented by the Soviet communist political regime. In the context of the problem, it is important to study the dynamics of the destruction of prosperous producers (dekulakisation), which is a component of the criminal genocidal policy of the Soviet totalitarian regime against the Ukrainian nation.

During 1918-1920, the Bolsheviks' periodic invasions of Ukraine were marked by the introduction of a policy of «war communism», when «military communist» methods ensured the non-fixed collec-tion of taxes.

In March 1921, the Soviet political regime radically changed the taxation system in the village. Instead of the pre-tax system, a fixed food tax was implemented, and the New Economic Policy was introduced.

The years 1928-1929 proved to be a crucial turning point in the relations between the peasant producer and the Soviet state. Since the late 1920s, an overall offensive by the Soviet political regime against the Ukrainian village affected several important segments for the village: the church, economic and political repression of the prosperous producers, forced grain procurement, and forced collectivisation.

In 1929-1931, the article examines the example of the village of Zaruddia in Poltava region to demonstrate the formation of a command and repressive system of governance. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the destruction of the spiritual, ethical, socio-economic foundations of the traditional Ukrainian peasant by the Soviet political regime is studied on a specific historical example.

The Soviet political communist regime, forming a command-repressive system of governance since the late 1920s, violated human and civil rights and humiliated human dignity. Such actions caused irreparable spiritual, ethical, socio-economic damage in the traditional Ukrainian village.

Keywords: command-repressive system of governance, collapse of the NEP.

The destruction of the proprietor - a component of the crime of the holodomor-genocide in 1932-1933

Hanna Kapustian

The crime of the Holodomor-Genocide in 1932-1933 against the Ukrainian nation, organized by the Soviet totalitarian communist regime, killed 10.5 million Ukrainians. Dekulakization, collectivization, and starvation are components of the crime of the Holodomor-Genocide in 1932-33, which is based on the definition of «destruction».

At the beginning of 1928, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) adopted repressive resolutions such as: «Directive of the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) to party organizations on grain procurement», The «Directive of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) to local organizations on strengthening grain procurement measures», which aims to forcibly confiscate grain from peasants, and in case of non-compliance, requires repression up to and including arrest (Tragedy 1999, p. 136, 147). In the context of the problem, the dynamics of the process of destroying a wealthy producer (dekulakization) as one of the components of the criminal genocidal policy of the Soviet totalitarian regime against the Ukrainian nation is important.

Chronologically, the topic is presented in the overall picture of the history of the introduction, development, and collapse of the NEP. However, in both Soviet and Ukrainian historiography of the period of the revival of the Ukrainian independent state, the problems associated with the process of exiting the NEP have not gained the same relevance among researchers as the topics related to the introduction of NEP principles or their further deepening. The study of the process of NEP's collapse was labeled as a taboo. It was during that period that the Soviet communist political regime openly used command-repressive methods of governing society to establish a communist totalitarian political regime, the sole power of a tyrant.

The historiographical debates of the period of the collapse of the USSR were influenced by the crisis of methodological approaches to specific historical research. The Ukrainian historiography of the revived state rejected the Marxist-Leninist methodology. Western historiography, in its studies of Stalin's terror in the USSR, paid considerable attention to the communist regime's harsh inhumane methods of converting the peasantry to the «socialist track» through political control and everyday terror (Arendt 2005). Robert Conquest, in his study «Harvest of Sorrow», states that the use of repression against the Ukrainian peasantry was understood by the Soviet communist regime as the main lever in achieving the desired grain procurement and collectivization, which led to the Holodomor in 1932-33 (Conquest 1993). Socio-political processes in the Ukrainian countryside in the late 1920s remained outside the author's attention.

The «Archive Revolution» stimulated the author's search, filling the evidence base with essential facts. Researchers, through the prism of their own vision, revealed to the public the truth, concealed for decades by the communist regime, about the destruction of human potential of those who disagreed with the political regime, about the devaluation of human health and life (Kulchytskyi 1996; Kalakura 1998; Podkur 2000).

A systematic study of the repressive measures implemented by the Soviet authorities in the Ukrainian countryside in 1925-1939 is conducted by Nataliia Romanets (Romanets 2014).

The authors of the collective monograph (Kalinkina et al. 2017) clarify the essence of the «great turning point» in the countryside, revealing the repressive and punitive policy of the Soviet authorities in the Ukrainian village in 1929-1933.

Based on the available specific historical studies, it is important to investigate the peculiarities of the process of exit from the NEP. The proposed study aims to investigate the dynamics of the destruction of economic freedoms of the Ukrainian direct rural producer, the guarantor of stability of the socio-political and economic sector of the state, the middle class, by the Soviet command - repressive system of governance. The events are studied by the example of a specific village of Zaruddia in Poltava region in 1929-1931.

The village of Zaruddia lies in the steppe zone, on the bank of the local river Kryva Ruda, which flows into the river Psel, near its confluence with the mighty Dnipro. It is 90 km southwest of Poltava. The village had four streets. The territory of the village was conditionally divided into Hora, Nyz, and Novoselivka. The land mass around Zaruddia consisted mainly of black soil. Some coastal parts of the Kryva Ruda river were covered with salt marshes, which were unsuitable for agriculture.

After the abolition of serfdom in 1861, the vast majority of peasant families received plots of land for a ransom which were insufficient to meet the family's food and money needs. Previously they had been owned by the Polish landowner Haletskyi. The Ukrainian peasantry, among others, used the opportunities offered by Stolypin's agrarian reform in tsarist Russia (1906-1910) to the greatest extent. Some peasant families, including the Babii family, left for the so-called «luxury» of developing land in the Far East. Several peasant families from Zaruddia: Maklakov Tykhin, Maklakov Yosyp, Maklakov Kostia, Morhun Petro, acquired land through the Peasant Bank and founded the Maklakov and Savranivskyi farms. The village was home to wealthy peasant families: the Krasnokutskyi brothers: Anton, Ivan, Yakiv; Morhun Fedir (father) and Morhun Parfentii (son); Krasnokutskyi Ivan Andriiovych; Krasnokutskyi Ivan Antonovych; Morhun Pavlo Hnatovych; the Prosianyk family; the Taranenko family, known for their brothers Kornii and Semen, public and political figures.

After the October 1917 revolution, in 1918 the Bolsheviks distributed the landowners' lands. According to the stories of Zaruddia's residents, members of wealthy farm families left Zaruddia, and their land, like that of the landowner Haletskyi, was to be distributed among the landless and the land-poors. Land was allocated to each eater.

The periodic Bolshevik invasions of Ukraine and Zaruddia (1918-1920) were marked by the introduction of the policy of so-called «war communism», when «military communist» methods were used to collect taxes, the so-called «prodrozkladka».

Prodrozkladka was not fixed, and therefore food was confiscated at the subjective discretion of members of food detachments. Such arrogance of the Soviet political regime provoked a protest of the peasants, the highest manifestation of which was the mass peasant insurgency that covered almost the entire territory of Ukraine in 1918-1921.

In March 1921, the Soviet political regime radically changed the taxation system in the countryside. Instead of prodrozkladka, a fixed food tax was introduced, and a new economic policy (NEP) was introduced.

By the mid-1920s, productive forces in the countryside were noticeably reviving. The peasant was willing to work on the land, he was interested in the results of his labour. Fields were being cultivated, and more grain was being harvested. Free trade and the diversity of the economy contributed to the economic revival of the village, stimulating the economic initiative of the peasant producer. «The people of my village lived well before collectivization, as I remember and as my father and mother told me», recalled Lidiia Andriiivna Voliuvach, born in 1921, a resident of Zaruddia (Kapustian 2017, p. 53). During the years of the NEP, some of the owners managed to settle down, acquire cattle, equipment, and even a steam engine. For example, people in the village talked about the economic character of a poor peasant, Ivan Burkal, who even managed to buy a charaban (a kind of open cart with wooden seats, pulled by horses, used for walks, trips to church, fairs, etc.) He became rich by developing peasant crafts: he made rope, nalyhachi, ropes from hemp and yarn, and sold them weekly at the fair.

A wealthy peasant, Lykhodii, bought a steam thresher, and the others shared a horse thresher, also called a «merry-go-round», because they had to harness 3 or 4 horses and drive them in a circle.

There was a private shop in the village. They sold salt, soap, matches, salted fish, sweets, gingerbread, halva, and vodka. Sometimes a mobile shop on wheels, owned by a Jewish man named Zelyk from Kremenchuk, diversified the range of goods. In the summer, a swing was set up on the outskirts of the village, where girls and boys would gather. «There was a lot of laughter and songs then», recalled Lidiia Andriiivna Voliuvach, born in 1921, a resident of Zaruddia (Kapustian 2017, p. 54).

Against the background of the general rise in economic activity and the peasant's willingness to work, there was a glaring discrepancy between the prices of industrial and agricultural goods. The state was interested in such a correlation between the prices of industrial and agricultural goods.

The price difference was used to develop socialist industrialization. Because procurement prices were too low, farmers did not take their bread to market in the winter of 1927-1928. Thus, in 1928, the state paid 8 krb. 27 kopecks, while the average market price was 25 krb. 64 kopecks, and in 1929 the market price of bread reached 36 krb. 70 kopecks (Yakymenko 1993, p. 45).

The years 1928-1929 proved to be a turning point in the relations between the peasant producer and the Soviet state. The general offensive of the Soviet political regime against the Ukrainian village, which began in the late 1920s, was accompanied by several segments important for the village: the church, economic and political repression of the peasant-owner, forced collectivization, and the Holodomor.

In Zaruddia, the church was closed in autumn 1929, (according to the Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region, 10993, p. 15). The surrounding villages were part of the Solonytskyi and Vasylivskyi church parishes. The latter served the village of Zaruddia. There was a small church in the steppe between the village of Zaruddia and the Sirivka farm. The district commissioner organized the village Komsomol members to close it. People recall: «Marfa Bezuhla began to swing on the church censer and that's when she embarrassed herself: she urinated spontaneously. «God punished her for this», people judged. The Three Saints Church in Vasylivka village was turned into a club. The Archangel Michael Church in the village of Solonytsia survived a little longer. It was liquidated after the Soviet-German war.

Later, they began to destroy the wealthy peasant. Working hard, wealthy families valued time, cared about their own well-being, sought to educate their children, made material donations to the church and to poor villagers. Such people were respected among the villagers, valued for their ability to manage their households and their education.

V.D. Kobeliatska recalled that her father's farm was classified as a medium-sized one during collectivization. The family did not use hired labour on the farm, but they were dekulakized twice: in 1918, her grandfather's farm was dekulakized: the land was left, and the acquired goods were piled on two wagons and taken from the yard; and in 1930, her father's farm, which was inherited from her grandfather, was dekulakized (Kapustian 2017, р.67).

The communist regime needed performers to carry out a «large-scale experiment of social engineering» in the Ukrainian countryside. In 1920, the Committees of Poor Peasants (Komnezams, CPP) were created in the Ukrainian countryside, which existed until 1933. At the beginning of their activity, the komnezams were engaged in the dekulakization of wealthy families and various kinds of requisitions in the countryside, competing with village councils in the exercise of administrative functions in the countryside. This practice continued until 1923, when the resolution of the plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Bolsheviks of Ukraine (29-31.10.1923) «On Komnezams» (Communist Party of Ukraine in resolutions and decisions of congresses, conferences and plenums of the Central Committee 1976, p. 278-281) transferred them from the status of a state organization to the category of a public organization, removing administrative functions from their activities. However, by the end of the 1920s, during the period of «emergency measures», when the NEP was being phased out, the communist regime revived the activities of the komnezams. The Soviet government sought to suppress the resistance of the peasant owners with the help of the peasant poor. Thus, according to a resolution of the USSR Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR of 3 July 1929, 25% of the fine and money received from the sale of property by auction were transferred to the funds for the co-operation and collectivization of the poor. In this way, the authorities encouraged the poor to be interested in expropriating the wealthy (Collectivization and Famine in Ukraine. 1929-1933, p. 101-102).

On 5 January 1930, the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) adopted a resolution «On the Pace of Collectivization and Measures of State Assistance to Collective Farm Construction», which justified the transition from «the policy of limiting the exploitative tendencies of the kulaks to the policy of eliminating the kulaks as a class» (CPSU in Resolutions..., p. 72).

In the village of Zaruddia, the campaign to dekulakize wealthy farms was led by the head of the village council, members of collective farm organization teams, which involved members of the village committee of poor peasants, and local activists, among whom were especially zealous Pylyp Neichenko, Mykhailo Svariienko, and Mykhailo Sirenko (Chantal, a street nickname). The general management was entrusted to the commissioners who came from Kremenchuk, usually employees of party or Soviet institutions, or the police and USPD of the Kremenchuk district.

In early March 1930, a collective farm named after Chubar was organized in Zaruddia village. The day before, a commissioner named Pavlo Opanasovych Dvirnyk arrived in the village from Kremenchuk district. He gathered people for a meeting. He began to convince them how good it would be to live in a collective farm. A peasant, Andrii Pleskach, spoke at the meeting. The community, had sent him to a neighbouring collectivized village the day before to learn from their experience. He spoke about how good life was in the collective farm, but when asked to write an application to join the collective farm, he refused in every possible way, saying that he would think about it.

The collective farm was eventually organized, existed for a few days, and then «scattered», as the old-timers recalled. The lack of material and technical facilities, namely technical equipment, outbuildings such as barns, stables, cowsheds, caused indignation and disappointment even among those who sincerely wanted to unite in collective farms. People were hurt by the mismanagement and cruel treatment of their own, now socialized animals. Women complained: «We used to cherish our cows like children, and now they are forced to endure severe suffering».

In the midst of a furious offensive against the individual peasant (early spring 1930), Stalin's article «Dizziness from Success» (Stalin 1949, p. 191-199) was published. The peasantry perceived its content as an opportunity to voluntarily leave the collective farms, which were organized mainly by force. The pretext for dissolving the forced collective farm in Zaruddia was a «women's revolt». Up to fifty women of the village, outraged by the unsatisfactory conditions of their communal cattle in the collective farm, gathered together, came to the collective farm brigade, broke the locks on the doors of the adapted premises where their cattle were driven, and took their cattle back to their own homes. At the same time, they also took the agricultural equipment that belonged to them (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 4683, p. 7).

A few months after the unsuccessful attempt to organize a collective farm in Zaruddia, in December 1930, the kulak Yakiv Savovych Krasnokutskyi was arrested.

On 22 February 1931, on the eve of the spring sowing campaign and a new wave of forced collectivization, wealthy peasants Maklakov Samson Tykhonovych (35) and Voliuvach Tymofii Matviiovych (43) were arrested. (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 4683). Why exactly at this time? It is obvious that the December 1930 plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) issued a directive to «cover the steppe part of Ukraine with collective farms during 1931», which meant completing the total collectivization of the area and eliminating the kulaks as a class (Tragedy of the Soviet Village 2000, p. 773). The village of Zaruddia, being a steppe village, fell under this directive in terms of terms. The Soviet government's open campaign to eliminate the kulaks as a class in Zaruddia took place in late 1930 and spring 1931. On the ground, «under the leadership of party organizations, ... overcoming all kinds of counter-revolutionary acts of the kulaks» (Tragedy of the Soviet Village 2000, р. 634), they began to implement the grain procurement plans that had been increased several times.

Archive of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region contains the criminal case of a wealthy peasant from Zaruddia, Krasnokutskyi Yakiv Savovych, who was arrested, which represents the dynamics of political repression by the Soviet authorities against a wealthy peasant. On November 2, 1930, the presidium of the Zaruddia village council considered the issue «On the state of implementation of the grain procurement plan by the village elite». The presidium noted that Krasnokutskyi Y.S. failed to fulfil 100 pood of the grain procurement plan imposed on him, and also failed to fulfil his labour duty (local transport tax - author), meat procurement targets, one-time fees, failed to purchase shares in the tractor centre, and failed to pay land management fees. The decision read: «Taking into account the information of the head of the village council, Meleshko, who is also the head of the Central Grain Procurement Commission, that the above-mentioned citizen maliciously failed to fulfil the plan communicated to him to apply the government law of July 3 1929 and thus impose a fine on Krasnokutskyi in the amount of 200 krb» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 4).

On July 3, 1929, USSR Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR adopted a resolution stating that 25% of the fine and money received from the sale of property by auction were to be transferred to the funds for the co-operation and collectivization of the poor. In this way, the authorities financially incentivized the poor to expropriate wealthy fellow villagers. This resolution granted village councils the right to impose «administrative fines of up to five times the value of bread» on those farms that avoided voluntary grain procurement. If a farmer did not comply with such decisions of the village council, the farm would be sold by auction (Collectivization and Famine in Ukraine. 1929-1933, 1992, p. 102).

The fate of a wealthy peasant, Krasnokutskyi Y.S., continued to develop according to the scenario prepared by the Soviet authorities for a Ukrainian peasant producer. It was clear that his farm, which had been destroyed by exorbitant taxes, was unable to meet the unrealistic grain procurement plan, let alone the doubled fine imposed on it.

In order to completely destroy the farms of the peasant producers, the authorities resorted to multiple taxation (peasants called it «kratuvannia»). On November 27, 1930, the Zaruddia village council issued a certificate confirming the social status of Yakiv Krasnokutskyi as a «kulak». His farm was dekulakized in 1921. By the early 1930s, it had been virtually destroyed by excessive taxes in recent years, and the village council had no reason to state that he was wealthy. Therefore, the village council provided data on the financial situation of Krasnokutskyi in 1917: «Before the revolution, he had 32 desiatyns (tens) of land, a steam engine, a reaper, a seeder, a windmill, agricultural implements; buildings: a house, a barn, a shed, a barn, a barn, a cattle shed; livestock: 6 horses, 3 cows, 5 cattle, 5 pigs; he employed two fixed-term and 5 seasonal workers. He was given a firm plan for grain procurement of 450 poods. As for 27.11.1930, he had harvested 361 poods», the certificate ends with a verdict. «In general, Krasnokutskyi was an undesirable element who, at the time of the transition of various gangs in 1920, took part in organizing activities against the Soviet government. Today he is also hostile to all the measures taken by the Soviet authorities... According to the village council, this farm is subject to final liquidation as a class in the last year, taking into account the maliciousness of non-payment of taxes». (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 4). Farm of Krasnokutskyi Y.S. is immediately seized and sold by auction.

On December 7, 1930, Krasnokutskyi, born in 1887, was arrested. On the same day, he was charged under Articles 54-10, 54-13 of the Criminal Code of the Ukrainian SSR with the fact that «in 1920 he organized a detachment of wealthy peasants in the village of Zaruddia and opposed the Red units. He agitated among the villagers not to hand over bread to the state, and thus destroyed the collective farm. He sold his personal cattle at the market and was expelled from the collective farm for that». However, Krasnokutskyi denied any involvement in the organization of the group. He explained that in 1921, there was a detachment of wealthy villagers in the village, where he was an ordinary member (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 4).

The interrogation report of Krasnokutskyi recorded the testimony of village activists, supporters of the communist regime. Witnesses: Pylyp Pavlovych Neichenko, Mykhailo Musiiovych Sirenko, Ivan Khomych Meleshko, using a prepared template, stated that «the arrested person was hostile to the measures of the Soviet authorities, such as grain procurement, etc., he never agreed with the measures of the Soviet authorities, considered them wrong and was an alien element for the Soviet authorities; bread was taken from him under pressure. Poor people saw that Krasnokutskyi did not give up his bread, and they voluntarily did the same. In general, he, Krasnokutskyi, is the fiercest opponent of the Soviet regime» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 4).

On December 7, 1930, the day of his arrest, Krasnokutskyi testified during interrogation: «In 1920 or 1921, a detachment of wealthy peasants was organized in our village under the leadership of Morhun and Mochailo (who were shot). I was an ordinary member of this organization, for which I was summoned to the volost revolutionary committee, and later I was released.

I did not campaign against grain procurement and the organization of collective farms, and sometimes I said that the Soviet government was doing the wrong thing, that it was imposing a lot of bread on peasants who were not able to fulfil this amount of bread to the state. For example, I threshed 314 poods of bread, and I was fined 450 poods. In the spring of 1930, I joined the Union of Land Cultivation, where I stayed until May 1930, and then I was thrown out because... I did not transfer my oxen to the Union of Land Cultivation, but sold them at the private market... In the community I only read an article by Stalin that «Unions of Land Cultivation are voluntary associations and you can also voluntarily leave them, and then all the members of the Union of Land Cultivation scattered and the Union of Land Cultivation no longer existed». (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 17).

On April 30, 1931, the investigator in charge of Krasnokutskyi's case concluded: «The preliminary investigation has proved that the kulak Krasnokutskyi Y.S. set himself the task of disrupting the activities carried out by the Soviet authorities in the countryside, which resulted in these activities being disrupted. The organizations of Unions of Land Cultivation mostly disintegrated, and therefore I propose to send the case on the charges of Krasnokutskyi Y.S. with crimes under Articles 54-10 and 13 of the Criminal Code of the USSR to the judicial trio at the Board of the State Political Directorate of the USSR with the application of a social measure to Krasnokutskyi Y.S. - execution» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 18).

On this page, the criminal case against Krasnokutskyi comes to an end, with only a short letter to the State Political Directorate in Poltava region dated 17.07.1936 from Sev-Lag informing that he «was administratively deported to the North during the period of mass deportation» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 19). This was confirmed by local residents who witnessed those events: Y.S. Krasnokutskyi with his wife Lukiia Fedorivna and two minor sons, as well as Fedir Morhun with his wife Palazhka Ivanivna, were urgently evicted to the north of the Ural region. From there, they wrote in despair to their relatives in their home village: «There is only heaven and earth here» (Kapustian 2017, p. 62). The story of the fates of repressed countrymen will continue after the end of the Second World War. Petro Mochailo, a resident of the village of Zaruddia, born in 1922, while serving a sentence for forced labour in Germany during World War II in Pervouralsk, meets his evicted fellow villager Yakiv Krasnokutskyi in a local shop. Yakiv will be the first to ask Peter: «Aren't you the son of Andrii Yehorovych Mochailo?», i. e. Petro's father, whom he, Yakiv, remembered from those days. It was a touching meeting of countrymen separated by the actions of the criminal repressive communist political regime.

The old man Fedir Morhun could not accept the humiliating fate of being repressed and deported to the Urals. He walked home from there to return to his village in the autumn of 1932 and die a few days later on his native land (Kapustian 2017, p. 62).

Other wealthy families from Zaruddia left their homes and native villages and got lost in the newly built socialist five-year plans: three Nevmyvak families (9 people), the family of Parfentii Morhun (5 people) moved to Dnipro, the family of Oleksandr Maklakov (6 people) moved to Donbas, and the Taranenko brothers: Semen and Kornii - to Kharkiv (later they would head the administrative state and scientific institutions of the Ukrainian Socialist Republic and fall under the great flywheel of political repression in 1937), and the family of Pavlo Hnatovych Morhun ended up in the neighbouring town of Kobeliaky. The families of Prosianyk, Krasnokutskyi Ivan Andriiovych, and Krasnokutskyi Ivan Antonovych would leave the village.

On August 27-28, 1931, the People's Court of the Kremenchuk cluster chamber considered the case of Maklakov Samson and Voliuvach Tymofii, wealthy peasants from the village of Zaruddia, who were arrested on February 22, 1931, and charged under Article 54-10 of the Criminal Code of the Ukrainian SSR with conducting subversive activities in the collective farm, disorganizing the masses in order to destroy the collective farm. The fact that the defendants did not meet any of the points of the social status of a kulak, as defined in Article 29 of the «Regulations on the Single Agricultural Tax». (Tragedy of the Soviet Village 2000, p. 888-889), was certainly understood by the authorities, and therefore the village council provided certificates of the material status of the arrested in 1917. In particular, Maklakov Samsin Tykhonovych: «Before the revolution, my father had: a house, 4 plots, a barn, a couple of oxen, a cow, no horses, 0.5 fans, 0.5 reapers, 30 hectares of land; my father was dekulakized during the revolution, and I left my father in 1924».

Voliuvach Tymofii: «Before the revolution, he had 40 hectares of land from his father, 2 pairs of oxen, a horse, a cow, pigs, a house, a barn, a rick-yard two sheds, a cow-house, a piggery, a member of the union of farmers-owners. During the revolution, he was dekulakized. He did not serve in the Red Army, was not in any gangs. He completed a folk school, was deprived of the right to vote, was a member of a collective farm, but left at his request» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 4683, p. 3-4). The court sentence was the same for all of them: imprisonment for 5 years, and for the next 5 years they were not allowed to reside in Ukraine. This verdict was based on the testimony of witnesses: Koval, Neichenko, and Sirenko, who faithfully served the Bolshevik authorities. Other witnesses, decent, conscientious people (as described by their fellow villagers): Honchar H.Y., Maklakov Pavlo Yosypovych, Morhun Pavlo Ivanovych, Prosianyk Yakiv Nykyforovych, Mochailo Pavlo H. denied that these people were involved in the collapse of the collective farm. Witness Prosianyk Yakiv Nykyforovych gave his reasons for the failure of the collectivization campaign: «From the beginning of its organization, the collective farm could not organize work, did not know how to manage, and therefore it collapsed, especially when they heard about Stalin's article». (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 4683, p. 17). The convicts pleaded not guilty and filed cassation appeals on 14 September with the Poltava Inter-District Court, which upheld the verdict. The Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR appealed the decision. On February 7, 1932, the Supreme Court of Ukraine commuted the sentence, stating that «the conclusions of the People's Commissariat regarding those convicted of agitation activities, which in the spring of 1930 partially disrupted collectivization and destroyed the collective farm in the village of Ruda, are sufficiently supported by the investigation data, but given that the collective farm is no longer socially dangerous. Zaruddia village, are sufficiently supported by the data of the investigation into the case, but given that agitation against collectivization is no longer so socially dangerous... the measure of social protection should be recognized as excessively harsh and not justified by expediency». However, the Supreme Court ruled that they should be found guilty of a crime under Article 54-10 of the Criminal Code of the Ukrainian SSR, accusing them of «conducting subversive work with the aim of destroying the collective farm», and sentenced to imprisonment in general prisons and restricted rights for three years each. On April 22, 1932, the convicts were sent to Sev-Lag (Northern Camps) of Unified State Political Department» (Archives of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Poltava region 10993, p. 19).

After serving his sentence, only Tymofii Voliuvach returned to the village, and he never shared his impressions of his stay in the camp with anyone, as recalled by a resident of the village of Zaruddia, Danylo Antonovych Honchar, born in 1911.

Since then, the people of Zaruddia have come a long and painful way to realize, even if not 100%, the state of lawlessness and humiliation of the individual, violations of human and civil rights that the Soviet political communist regime committed when it formed the command - repressive system of governance from the late 1920s. As a result, irreparable damage was done to the spiritual, moral, social and economic foundations of the traditional Ukrainian village. The historical memory of generations is an important factor in understanding these important postulates for every person.

Список джерел та літератури

1. Арендт, Х., 2005, Джерела тоталітаризму. Київ: Дух і літера.

2. Архів Управління СБУ в Полтавській області (АУ СБУ ПО). Основний фонд слідчих справ. Спр. 4683. Архів Управління СБУ в Полтавській області (АУ СБУ ПО). Основний фонд слідчих справ. Спр. 10993. Калакура, Я.С., 1998, Особливості джерелознавчої критики архівно-слідчих документів. Архівно-слідчі справи репресованих: науково-методичні аспекти використання: зб-к наук. праць. К: С. 19-23. Калінкіна, С.А. та ін., 2017, «Великий перелом на селі». Фінал селянської революції (1929-1933). Черкаси: ЧНУ ім. Богдана Хмельницького.

3. Капустян, Г., 2017, Пам'ять 33-го кличе молодих: спогади свідків і слово історика (науково-пошуковий проект): монографія 3-є вид., переробл. та допов. Кременчук: ПП Щербатих О.В.

4. Колективізація і голод на Україні. 1929-1933, 1992, Зб-к док-тів і матеріалів. Київ: Наукова думка. Коммунистическая партия Советского Союза в резолюциях и решениях съездов, конференций и пленумов ЦК (1898-1986), 1983-1990. Москва: Политиздат: в 12 т. Т 5.

5. Коммунистическая партия Украины в резолюциях и решениях съездов, конференций и пленумов ЦК в 2-х т., 1976. Киев: Изд-во Политической литературы Украины, 1976. Т 1. 1918-1941.

6. Конквест, Р., 1993, Жнива скорботи. Радянська колективізація і голодомор. Київ: Либідь. КУЛЬЧИЦЬКИЙ, СТАНІСЛАВ, 1996, Комунізм в Україні: перше десятиріччя (1919-1928). Київ: Основи. ПОДКУР, Р Ю., 2000, За повідомленнями радянських спецслужб. Київ. Рідний край.

7. Романець, Н.Р., 2014, Репресивна політика радянської влади в українському селі (1925-1939). Кривий Ріг: Вид. Р.А. Козлов.

8. Сталин, И.В., 1949, Головокружение от успехов: Сталин И.В. Сочинения. Т 12. М.: Государственное издательство политической литературы. 1949.

9. Трагедия советской деревни. Коллективизация и раскулачивание. 1927-1939. Документы и материалы. В 5-ти тт. Т 1. Май 1927 - ноябрь 1929, 1999, Под. ред. В. Данилова, Р. Маннинг, Л. Виолы. Москва: «РОССПЭН». 880 с.

10. Трагедия советской деревни. Коллективизация и раскулачивание. 1927-1939. Документы и материалы. В 5-ти тт. Т 2. Ноябрь 1929 - декабрь 1930, 2000, Под. ред. В. Данилова, Р. Маннинг, Л. Виолы. Москва: «РОССПЭН». Якименко, М.А., 1993, Українське село: сім десятиліть перебудови. Полтава.

References

1. Arendt, H., 2005, Dzherela totalitaryzmu [The Origins of Totalitarianism]. Kyiv: Dukh i litera. [In Ukrainian]. ARKHIV Upravlinnia SBU po Poltavskii Oblasti (Au SBU Po) [Archive Of The SSU Office In Poltava Region]. Osnovnyi fond slidchykh sprav. Spr. 4683. [In Ukrainian].

2. Arkhiv Upravlinnia SBU po Poltavskii Oblasti (Au SBU Po) [Archive Of The SSU Office In Poltava Region]. Osnovnyi fond slidchykh sprav. Spr. 10993. [In Ukrainian]

3. Danilov, V., Manning, R., Violyi, L. (Ed.), 2000, Tragediia sovetskoi derevni. Kollektivizatsiia i raskulachivanie 1927-1939 [The Tragedy of the Soviet Village. Collectivization and Deculakization 19271939]. (Vol. 1). Moskva: «ROSSPEN». [In Russian].

4. Danilov, V., Manning, R., Violyi, L. (Ed.), 2000, Tragediia sovetskoi derevni. Kollektivizatsiya i Raskulachivanie 1927-1939 [The Tragedy of the Soviet Village. Collectivization and Deculakization 1927-1939]. (Vol. 2). Moskva: «ROSSPEN». [In Russian].

5. Kalakura, Ya.S., 1998, Osoblyvosti dzhereloznavchoi krytyky arkhivno-slidchykh dokumentiv. Arkhivno-slidchi spravy represovanykh: naukovo-metodychni aspekty vykorystannia [Specifics of source criticism of archival and investigative documents. Archival and Investigative Files of the Repressed: Scientific and Methodological Aspects of Use]. Сollection of scientific works (pp. 109-111). Kyiv. [In Ukrainian].

6. Kalinkina, S.A. et al., 2017, «Velykyi perelom na seli». Final selianskoi revoliutsii (1929-1933) [«The Great Break in the Countryside». The end of the peasant revolution (1929-1933)]. Cherkasy: ChNU im. Bohdana Khmelnytskoho. [In Ukrainian].

7. Kapustian, H., 2017, Pamiat 33-ho klyche molodykh: spohady svidkiv i slovo istoryka (naukovo-poshukovyi proekt) [The memory of the 33rd calls to the young: witnesses' recollections and a historian's word (research project)]. (Monograph 3rd ed., rev.) Kremenchuk: PP Shcherbatykh O.V. [In Ukrainian].

8. Kolektyvizatsiia i Holod na Ukraini: 1929-1933 [Collectivisation and Starvation in Ukraine: 1929-1933], 1992, Сollection of documents and records. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. [In Ukrainian].

9. Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Sovetskogo Soiuza V Rezolutsiiakh i Resheniiakh Siezdov, Konferentsii i Plenumov Tsk (1898-1986) [Communist Party of the soviet Union in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenums of the Central Committee (1898-1986)] (1983-1990). (Vol. 5). Moskva: Politizdat. [In Russian]. Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Ukrainy v Rezolutsiiakh i Resheniiakh Siezdov, Konferentsii i Plenumov Tsk [The Communist Party Of Ukraine In Resolutions And Decisions Of Congresses, Conferences and Plenums of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine], 1976, (Vol. 1). Kiev: Izd-vo Politicheskoi literatury Ukrainy. [In Russian].

10. Konkvest, R., 1993, Zhnyva skorboty. Radianska kolektyvizatsiia i holodomor [Harvest of Sorrow. Soviet Collectivisation and the Holodomor]. Kyiv: Lybid. [In Ukrainian].

11. Kulchytskyi, S., 1996, Komunizm v Ukraini: pershe desiatyrichchia (1919-1928) [Communism in Ukraine: the first decade (1919-1928)]. Kyiv: Osnovy. [In Ukrainian].

12. Podkur, R.Yu., 2000, Za povidomlenniamy radianskykh spetssluzhb [As the Soviet secret services reported]. Kyiv. Ridnyi krai. [In Ukrainian].

13. Romanets, N.R., 2014, Represyvna polityka radianskoi vlady v ukrainskomu seli (1925-1939) [The repressive policy of the Soviet government in the Ukrainian village (1925-1939)]. Kryvyi Rih: Vyd. R.A. Kozlov. [In Ukrainian].

14. Stalin, I.V., 1949, Golovokruzhenie ot uspekhov: Stalin I.V. [Dizziness from success: Stalin I.V.]. (Vol. 12). Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo politicheskoi literatury. [In Russian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru