So just a few thoughts:
1 - in the 1930's, although Stalin's dictatership killed many people, he changed Russia from a backwords agriculterial society to an indutrial powerhouse riveling the Germans, and was able to bring it to the Nazis in WW2 despite being initally unprepared (And he even killed over 90% of the Red Army Generals a few years ago with the Great Purge)
2 - In the 1930's, Russians had a crap quality of life, and never had consumer goods, since the economy was focused on heavy industry.
3 - So why did the Soviet economy eventually stagnate and peter out in the 1970's? Was it because they needed war as a stimulus to stimulate their economy? Or was it because of an inept goverment? It seems strange how after Stalin they slowly just went down.....
Any historians/people interested in the going-ons of Soviet communism want to give your thoughts? I know they weren't doing "real communism", but it was still different then capitalism, and it lasted a lot longer then fascist states. Also, it's kind of ironic that Germany/Italy's fears of communism lead them to facism, another dictatorship....
PS: Also, another strange thing is in World War 2, Hitler foolishly attacked the USSR, even though he already sparked war with the allies. Why didn't he just do what Nevile Chaimberlind wanted (for the Germans to kill the communists, that's why he gave Hitler free shit)?
EDIT2: Also, before World War 2, Russia was like the only notable communist country, and their successful economy even during the depression scared people in capitalist/facist countries, so was the sucessful Soviet economy back then a sucess of Soviet communism, or just dumb luck? If Russia never went communist, we might've never had WW2...
Why did communism fail in the USSR?
But isn't that the majority of capitalist society as well? You could say that compared to big business owners/goverment, we live in dirt as well.Turns out people DONT like living in the dirt while the leader and his friends live like kings/ Hmm, thats weird
EDIT: During Stalin's time, there was a cult of personality in the USSR. John Scott visited the USSR in the 30's and said that despite their living standards, the citizens loved their country.
@Mcfart said:
@billnyethesciencepie said:But isn't that the majority of capitalist society as well? You could say that compared to big business owners/goverment, we live in dirt as well. EDIT: During Stalin's time, there was a cult of personality in the USSR. John Scott visited the USSR in the 30's and said that despite their living standards, the citizens loved their country.Turns out people DONT like living in the dirt while the leader and his friends live like kings/ Hmm, thats weird
Oh you COULD say that for sure. Doesn't really work though, since they LITERALLY lived in dirt.
So you're saying that AFTER the atrocities by the government in the 30's (great purge, 2 five year plans, Stalin telling Red Army not to attack Germans during Hitler's surprise attack), people decided that communism was a bad idea? I would see your point, IF a violent revolution overthrew communism in the USSR, but that wasn't the case. The government abolished it because of stagnation, and it doesn't seem that you're attributing living conditions to economic stagnation.@Mcfart said:
@billnyethesciencepie said:
But isn't that the majority of capitalist society as well? You could say that compared to big business owners/goverment, we live in dirt as well. EDIT: During Stalin's time, there was a cult of personality in the USSR. John Scott visited the USSR in the 30's and said that despite their living standards, the citizens loved their country.Turns out people DONT like living in the dirt while the leader and his friends live like kings/ Hmm, thats weird
Oh you COULD say that for sure. Doesn't really work though, since they LITERALLY lived in dirt.
Communism can never work since one person is always going to want a little more than the next. Ideology rarely beats personal desire.
Same reason all governments fail, worthless assholes at the top and money controlling everyone. Where does that sound familiar..
China's ruled by a 1 party Communist system, but market reforms introduced 30ish years ago opened up a free market.I think it was probably the war with afghanistan. Everybody got really disillusioned by then probably.
and of course China's still goin, so...
I don't know much about the Afghanistan war; was that the death toll for communism?
He killed the Red Army generals a few years ago? Shit, man, has this dude risen from the dead or something? How come this isn't on Fox News?My bad; I meant in context to what I was writing about the 1930's :P. 1936-38 most of the military generals were killed.
Thanks for pointing that out -_-'
Choke an entire economy with corruption, bureaucracy, cronyism and isolationism and of course shit will fall apart.
Plus by the end of the USSR the politburo was chock full of octogenarian, drunk old military stooges that couldn't use the bathroom let alone run a country.
The entire Soviet experiment was a bunch of power hungry, narcissistic philosophy geeks that managed to convince a bunch of meathead thugs to bully their populace into creating an inefficient war machine that only succeeded through sheer numbers, occasional ruthless genius and a complete disregard for human life/dignity.
It kind of sucked.
From listening to a shitload of NPR I gather China is a weird hybrid of capitalism and communism. If China was a true Communist state you wouldn't have news stories like this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1366517/Red-Tibetan-Mastiff-Most-expensive-dog-sold-nearly-1m.html
One of couple reasons behind USSR fall is the arms race with US and allies. ALso there is the planned economy model that was not working very well. To keep all the states in place some not good economic decision and division of the work had to be made. For exaple one really important part to make fridge was done in Czechoslovakia while rest was done in other places to assemble it was quite expensive. No free market meant no free market prices but one decided upstairs. Not enough supply for the people. Plus army its size and equipment was impossible to maintain all the time in the system. Fall in the Afghanistan also had its toll. Also moment decided to reform the system was too late and after election in Poland it was nothing except military aggression to stop the fall. (damn I miss to many english words to explain all that stuff in proper way).
The USSR wasn't really communism, but I don't think it would work well in the long run economically. Capitalist countries have a hard enough time just keeping interest rates in check; I don't see how any small group of people could manage an entire economy over a long period of time without royally screwing it up. China can't really be an example, because their economic growth has been hand in hand with the degree that their economy has become free market.
damn I miss to many english words to explain all that stuff in proper way).Actually, I understood what you were saying just fine! :)
The actions taken in Poland by people like Lech Walesa really made it difficult for the USSR to survive, on top of the Afghanistan War that they were losing.
If you want the most direct cause for why it failed, it would be Gorbachev giving some measure of independence to the satellite Soviet states - perestroika and glasnost, etc. However, once the process started it accelerated until the regime lost all authority, because G. was unwilling or unable to simply roll in the Soviet tanks and remove the problem. Before that were some serious blunders and popular movements that eroded goodwill towards the USSR: Chernobyl, Prague, endemic Party corruption and so on.
As for the economy, one historiographical argument is that Stalin's measures were necessary (at least to some extent) to force Russia to modernise its economy. It came at tremendous cost because it was an agricultural, feudal society essentially. I imagine while that process was underway wealth would be generated, but after industry became established the economy would stagnate. Low productivity, lack of initiative, or putting party policies over the most sensible policy.
Not really my area of expertise but that's what I've gleaned from history texts.
Simple answer: They were never a Communist country... Vladimir Lenin created his own ideal version of Marxism called Leninism. Then when Stalin unsurped Leon Trotsky, he placed his ideals of Stalinism... Stalin was a bad man that ruined any way of a Communist country look like a good idea... Because of politics, greed, and power the word Communism and Marxism is stained in a poor light, just like the Swastika symbol is stained from the Nazi.
No country has every truly been a communist country by definition. China and the rest are just Dictatorships that call their selfs communist.
P.S. yes the links are wiki... just look at the sources to make sure/ foot notes.
Brezhnev was in rule for a really long time with his cabinet, that caused stagnation and a worsening economic situation. Coupled with the fact that the war in Afghanistan wasn't going well and the Space Race was pretty much lost, the country was in need of dire change since corruption and alcoholism among workers was prominent.
Gorbachev tried to save it all with reforms that tried to move a little bit towards a free-market economy (allowing people to own factories and so on) but it was already too late, since the central government had already lost the power that Stalin and co had created. The reforms in turn allowed more control to the local governments of the various republics that made up the union and they, especially the ones that had been occupied during WWII, started to make their way towards independence.
Personally, I feel that Brezhnev dragged the country into a hole that it simply couldn't get out of, since there was almost no reaction to the problems that the country was facing during his rule. Another big contributing factor is that the central government seemed unwilling to use full force to stop the independence movements unlike during the Prague Spring.
Thread.A centralized, inefficient economy.
Did none of you even take Social Studies, History, Geography? The fall of communism is the first topic addressed when discussing communism. They went broke due to the arms race, no money mo problems. The funniest thing about the fall of the U.S.S.R was the thousands of undergrads, grads, and ph students suddenly completely failing their papers. Also most Professor's believed that during the end of the 80's the u.s.s.r would be around for another 100 years. Never trust opinions in Political Science, no mattter the credibility because its all horeshit, read about the facts and try to make your own decision. Poli Sci profs always have allot to say after the fact, but most never try to address possibilities to prevent losing face.
I don't think there is anyone thing you can point to that caused the fall of the Soviet Union. Some contributing factors:
1) Trade
2) Arms/Military expenditures (we should take a lesson here)
3) Diversity (The USSR was extremely diverse..tough to keep together with the different races, nationalities, and religions).
4) Environmental issues.
5) Poor management of the economy.
I'd actually argue that the arms race didn't bankrupt them. What did bankrupt them were the failed economic reforms under Khrushchev and the cost of supporting satellite states. Trying to turn Siberian Desert into an agricultural paradise wasn't the best plan.
One of the fatal flaws in Communism is it's reliance on the idea that ALL humans enjoy being equal. There will always be someone willing to step on everyone else to get ahead. Stuff like that causes Communism to collapse pretty quickly because as soon as someone sees that guy making more than him, they demand more and it just spreads from there. Communism would only work in a perfect world.
It was Hungary who one day said "Fuck it, we're tired of living like this, we're opening our borders." As a result hundreds of thousands of people fled to the West. That basically killed the Iron Curtain. Don't know enough to comment on the fall of communism in Russia though.
There are plenty of books on the subject, go and read those and learn history instead of asking people on the internet. Make up your own mind about why it failed based on facts and informed opinions from people who know rather than ask random people on the internet. Besides there is no way to explain something that complicated in a forum post without dumbing it down so much it looses all it's value.
From listening to a shitload of NPR I gather China is a weird hybrid of capitalism and communism. If China was a true Communist state you wouldn't have news stories like this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1366517/Red-Tibetan-Mastiff-Most-expensive-dog-sold-nearly-1m.htmlI was going to post proper, but a balance of this is the golden goose. The redistribution of funds in the USA (read: wellfare,current tax law, ext.) has been introduced into this capitalist/republic for great effect. In today's day and age, not having a fall back for economic disaster may spell the end for your country through the discord of it's people.
As far as Russia goes, never underestimate the power of the concept of I, or do so at your own folly. Communism without a shot of capitalism is destined to fail.
there are a number of problems facing the USSR economy, which included the arms race. Mikhail Gorbachev certainly tried to reform the system, but it resulted in the collapse of the country.
Has a single person on these threads actually lived in the former USSR? Yeah didn't think so stop making up bullshit about people living in dirt.
There was never true communism in the USSR, there was just a shitty economy that stagnated under Brezhnev and collapsed under Gorbachev's perstroika. That lead to people being disillusioned with the government.
Following are historical facts:
Communism is based on a false premise, people being equal at birth. In short: this belief turned out to be - despite many efforts - not corroborated by realty. It was initially believed that it is possible to educate people, creating a better society by creating better (non-ignorant) people. One of the famous LENIN quotes being: "Learn, learn, learn."
When genetics made significant discoveries in the 1930's (using fruit flies to monitor mutations), it was discovered that many animal traits (like particular talents) are inherited rather than learned. After WWII and in the 50's, these discoveries were censored and denied as they were in contradiction to the official doctrine. However bit by bit it has become apparent and undeniable that people are different after all and thus deserve different treatment according to their merits.
The successes in sports, science, culture, music that the Soviets produced in fact where all the result not just of targeted education and training but the result of a careful selection and screening of a big sample of people. All the while in the USSR teachers, prosecutors, waiters, steel workers all received very similar pay and housing, so it became necessary for people to corrupt the system to get ahead of their peers and use whatever power or responsibility they had to steal, embezzle, obtain whatever luxuries, bonuses or privileges were available.
In the 80's Gorbachev gradually allowed cooperatives a form of free enterprise, along with free speech and perestroika, steering society to a less rigid and less equal political and economic system.
Btw. in 80's China similar developments happened but they where stopped infamously by shooting and tank crushing students at the Tianamen Square, however preventing the destruction of the economy and social order that happened after Gorbachev was overthrown.
Capitalism = equal rights, Socialism = equal opportunity, Communism = equal privileges.
Because people like owning shit and Communism doesn't allow people to own shit.
If people aren't allowed to own shit they have no reason for inventing newer cooler shit (especially when that newer cooler shit is going to be misused by their ideologically paradoxical bosses).
If no one is inventing new cool shit or producing high quality cool old shit then the economy will stagnate and go into decline.
If the economy goes into decline then people start getting desperate.
When people are desperate they seek radical change.
Change in goverrnment is a radical change.
That's how communism fails
Same reason all governments fail, worthless assholes at the top and money controlling everyone. Where does that sound familiar..This pretty much, corruption, Stalin controlled things well with his iron discipline but the next leader was not as powerful and could not keep order as much as Stalin could... i forgot his name...
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment