ABSTRACT
The area of modification was the behavior, both intellectual and social, of the participants in the controversy. During 1927, as the family farm sector began to pose serious problems for the regime, it became the topic of frequent discussions within Party circles. The publicity given this question probably suggested to the Organization-Production scholars that the group's association with the study of the family farm had now become a liability, which, if continued, could end by undermining their position of leadership within the community of scholars. The Organization-Production scholars regarded themselves as pioneers in the use of budget research, and with justification. Regarding the farm as a socioeconomic unit, they repeatedly castigated the Organization-Production scholars for having examined this unit of cultivation in isolation from its environment. The Timiriazev professors had treated the family farm as a form of biological organism, with a cycle of expansion and contraction that was internally determined, governed by the composition of the farming family.
