Post-war collectivization and "dekulakization" in Soviet historiography of the mid-1960s to 1970s

The object of study is the evolution of Soviet historiography and the main driving factors during the specified chronological period, while the subject is the scientific contribution of domestic historians to the understanding of the processes of collectivization and "dekulakization" in the western regions of the USSR. The aim is to identify the key factors in the development of Soviet historiography on this topic, as well as their impact on the content of research and the scientific achievements of Soviet historians. The author examines in detail the evolution of themes and assessments compared to the preceding period, as well as the contradictions in the evaluations of collectivization and the statistics on the maturation of preconditions and the pace of collectivization in Western regions and republics. Special attention in the article is given to the specific factors influencing the development of historiography on post-war collectivization, under-researched topics, and the reasons for the persistence of little-explored issues. The analysis of Soviet historiography of post-war collectivization employs methods of periodization and a genetic approach to determine the nature of changes in historiographical positions and assess the degree of their influence; a systemic comparative analysis is used to compare the thematic development of research; as well as a problem-chronological method combined with the principle of historicism to structure the obtained results. The scientific novelty is due to a comprehensive study of the dynamics of Soviet historiography on post-war collectivization through the lens of modern concepts of the school of V. P. Danilov, which studied the collectivization of the 1930s. The author draws several conclusions. During the examined period, a significant number of documents were published, expanding the source base. Within ideological frameworks, Soviet historians were able to study in more detail the preconditions and mass post-war collectivization. Historians differentiated the measures applied to kulaks into economic actions and "dekulakization." For the first time, the number of kulaks by regions and those exiled to the PMSSR was provided, along with cautious critical remarks about the immaturity of the preconditions for collectivization. The methods of kulak resistance were studied in greater detail, and doubts were raised about the necessity of "dekulakization" due to the small number of kulaks in the PMSSR. A special contribution of the article's author is the examination of the specific factors affecting the development of the Soviet historical paradigm based on works about post-war collectivization, highlighting the contradictions in statistics and ideological settings. The results of the research can be applied in the scientific study of the evolution of Soviet historiography, as well as for educational and enlightening purposes.