Live data from Hacker News

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

reuters.com

261–270 of 971 posts

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#261
post #229
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

I read "Gorbachev: His Life and Times" almost randomly five years ago. I'm going off of memory, but my primary takeaway from the book was your comment. Gorbachev believed in Western ideals, maybe a bit too much. The Western leaders were extremely supportive of his reforms and promised to be with him. After the Wall fell, and Russian economy nose dived, no one was there for him. People were starving on the streets, Go…

> People were starving on the streets, Gorbachev asked for humanitarian aid, but nothing came.

Looks like some hyperbolization. There was a term "legs of Bush", referring to chicken legs from USA, sold in many places in at least some cities. There were "humanitarian" bags of rice, also available to some significant extent. This was in around 1994, so, Yeltsin times already, but before 1991 Soviet Union was somewhat more stable regarding food.

Maybe the reference is regarding a short period at the end of 1991, a few months between GKChP putsch and the dissolution of the USSR? This period is mentioned in a contemporary song ("Kombinatsiya", "Two pieces of sausage"), but it was short enough so that humanitarian help couldn't get to the country.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#262
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

Your comment makes it sounds like you believe the U.S. had the power to decide whether or not Russia would turn into a kleptocracy or not. Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but if I'm not, I'm skeptical. Marshall plan notwithstanding, I would give credit to the people and government of Japan for their post-war success: it could easily have gone another direction, and the U.S. couldn't have stopped that from happening. L…

> I would give credit to the people and government of Japan for their post-war success: it could easily have gone another direction, and the U.S. couldn't have stopped that from happening.

I suggest you read more about the post war occupation of Japan. The U.S. put its thumb heavily on the scale forcing Japan to accept democratization throughout. Unusual for the U.S. this included pushing economic democracy by supporting Japan's very successful land redistribution scheme.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#263
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

Everyone should read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#264
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

Actually US did a lot to help Yeltsin reelected, never stopped the expansion eastwards, attacked Serbia without UN approval, pushed for Kosovo referendum under Nato occupation, never stopped the military exercises and flights on russian border and tried its best to meddle in Russia's internal affairs and us economists were among those that most pushed Yeltsin for the shock transition towards a capitalist market which led to ghe 1998 default.

I think US did enough divide and conquer and meddling to help bringing back an authoritarian government.

Anyway, totalitarian has a specific meaning, not a random one, it's a government that holds total control on all powers in a country. Stalinist USSR and Nazi germany (modern eritrea and north korea) apply to that definition, Italian or spanish fascisms do not (in both the head of state was the king), even less Russia since it is a de jure democracy.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#265
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

Marshall plan was tied to occupation though whereby U.S. could direct and correct the first steps of the young post-war German democracy. Nothing like that would be allowed by post-Soviet elites, no matter how much economic help U.S. would offer.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#266
post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, the "shock therapy" approach that Russia took in the Yeltsin years was, in many ways, prescribed by the West, and ended up being a complete disaster for both your average Russian person, and for capitalism and democracy as a whole, because most people just learned to associate these things with the kleptocracy that occurred in the 90s.

> [Western-driven reconstruction was] complete disaster for both your average Russian person I think that's overstating the case. In fact the "average Russian person" was living in destitute poverty through most of the cold war, and none of that meaningfully changed with the advent of a market economy. Except that Russians of the 2000's could get eat better food and watch (much) better TV. It's absolutely true that m…

Check life expectancy of russians… it is not the same… it has gone worse.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#267
post #2

Note that in Russian doctrine as tought in universities, the Cold War never ended.

This seems like needless pedantry at least for a conversation outside of school. The USSR (with whom the Cold War was being fought) was dissolved and Germany was reunified. For all intents and purposes it did end, just a new conflict (now with Russia) began.

If the cold war did end, why didn't NATO dissolve as well? It was born exactly to contain the USSR! Instead NATO kept expanding east...

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#268
post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

I think the big difference is the oligarchs. The USSR had already been transitioned to a resource state, and there was no actual rebuilding that needed to happen. The Marshall plan was almost easy because you could tally up all the broken bridges and say “itll cost us $X to fix”. What’s the equivalent for post USSR? What ended up happening was oligarchs swooped in to take over from the central planners, and it’s not…

The us helped that happen, if anything.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#269

Maybe not a popular opinion, I think that had Gorby been able to succeed in his reforms rather than be squeezed from both sides, Russia would have been better off in the long run both economically and politically. Instead, it swung from autocratic communism one day to near total collapse ("free market" anarchy) the next during which those with connections and saw the opportunity gobbled up all the resources eventuall…

Is seems clear that Russia did not fare well in its move from corrupt authoritarian Communism (a tautology if ever there was one) to the kleptocracy which replaced it - often by the hands of the same people. It is just as clear that eastern Europe did fare well by the fall of the Soviet empire. If Gorbachev had succeeded in dissolving the Soviet Union without having Russia descend into the chaos which followed things might have been better but I find it hard to see how something like that could have been orchestrated. It more or less worked in Eastern Germany due to the efforts (financially and socially) of Western Germany. The way this was handled in Russia was scandalous and led the country from one failed economic system into another failing one with the oligarchs and their cronies taking the place of the Party. Which country could have been the 'Germany' for Russia? Who could have dissolved the inefficient state conglomerates like Treuhandanstalt [1] did in Eastern Germany, who would have covered the financial losses?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treuhandanstalt

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#270
post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, the "shock therapy" approach that Russia took in the Yeltsin years was, in many ways, prescribed by the West, and ended up being a complete disaster for both your average Russian person, and for capitalism and democracy as a whole, because most people just learned to associate these things with the kleptocracy that occurred in the 90s.

> [Western-driven reconstruction was] complete disaster for both your average Russian person I think that's overstating the case. In fact the "average Russian person" was living in destitute poverty through most of the cold war, and none of that meaningfully changed with the advent of a market economy. Except that Russians of the 2000's could get eat better food and watch (much) better TV. It's absolutely true that m…

That's ridiculous. The average Russian in the cold war was living a pretty okay life materially speaking. Far from destitute poverty. The economic crash in 1991 was so devastating it led to millions in excess mortality.
Post reply on HN