60 HUMAN LIFE IN RUSSIA
subordinates to set aside all human emotions in collecting the
grain. But it was Postyschev's mission to save the foundations
of the Soviet regime by assuring the supply of all the consum-
ing districts and industrial centres. For him and for Moscow,
therefore, there was only one way: to collect all the grain that
could be got hold of and hand it over to the State.
As Postyschev's remarks give a better idea than all the detailed
reports in the world of the struggle which, to this very day, Mos-
cow is waging with the local population in all the agricultural
districts of the Union, I propose to give certain extracts here.
He begins by openly admitting that the previous grain campaign
had been a complete failure, and describes it as "last year's
disgrace." Now, he went on, not a day, not a minute must be
lost, and all eyes must remain fixed on the one great duty of
collecting the grain with all possible energy and determination,
since on this depended the position of the Soviet regime and—
note these words—"the maintenance of its influence abroad.3'
"The task can only be fulfilled," he went on, "if we reflect upon
last year's mistakes."
What were the mistakes which, in Postyschev's view, led
to the fiasco of the previous year's grain collection? This was
not due to the "objective causes" (diminution of the harvest,
famine, etc.), but to the "leniency" (serdobolie) with which the
local authorities discharged their duty of taking the grain
from the producers. To illustrate this harmful "leniency" he
quoted a number of examples, e.g. a regulation issued by the
Odessa district committee that the first hectare threshed "was
to be kept available for local or public consumption." Postyschev
commented on this as follows: "Need I waste words in pointing
out how wrong such an instruction is, which assigns a secondary
position to the delivery of grain to the State, while the feeding
of the community is placed first? Is it not the best possible
proof that some of our district committees were influenced by
consumers' interests, thus promoting the class interests of
our enemies to the detriment of the proletarian State? Can