Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

cogitations.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 97 posts

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#31

Post by simion314 »

tehjoker wrote: post #26
rat87 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying the world isn't better for the collapse of the soviet union?

that's right. its fall was a world historic tragedy that unleashed the worst instincts of the capitalist class.

>that's right. its fall was a world historic tragedy that unleashed the worst instincts of the capitalist class.

I though USSR already genocided the capitalists, anyway I don't think today Ruzzia killed more people and more Russians then USSR , so is better for the world and maybe worse for some regions in Ruzzia and worse for the Zeds ego.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#32

Post by UncleOxidant »

ipv6ipv4 wrote: post #5
fuzzfactor wrote: post #2

>Gorbachev’s reforms began with the aim of resuscitating the Soviet economy. But instead they brought ruin, destroying the Soviet economy along with Soviet state capacity. This did not occur because Gorbachev was “helpless” and trapped by entrenched interests, but rather because he proved to be a well-intentioned reformer with great power that was used in a reckless manner.

The collapse of the Soviet Union as it was was inevitable. Gorbachev recognized it and tried to do something about it. Given the gargantuan challenge, Gorbachev's odds of success were not great to begin with. At least he was wise enough to shepherd its demise peacefully. In any case, the world without the Soviet Union is undoubtedly a better place.

> In any case, the world without the Soviet Union is undoubtedly a better place.

Is it, though? Putin's Russia is no better than the Soviet Union - in some ways worse. It's essentially a mafia state run by one thug. One could imagine a different scenario where Gorbachev would have been able to land the plane in a bit more of a controlled fashion and stayed around to transition to something that would look more like a European democracy - but of course, things got way too chaotic for him to stay on.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#34

Post by defrost »

Eliah_Lakhin wrote: post #28
MaxPock wrote: post #14

The Soviet Union began to collapse the moment it abandoned Lenin’s NEP. If they had reintroduced it in the 1960s, after recovering from World War II, they could have quickly caught up with the West—perhaps even surpassed it. In many ways, China is the successful version of the USSR.

A huge part of China's success stems from the fact that Nixon opened up U.S. markets to China, along with U.S. investment capital. It was a key strategic decision made by the United States to counter Soviet influence in Asia. China's reforms were merely an adaptation to the new opportunities that arose from this shift. Another important factor was China's significantly larger population compared to the Soviet Union,…

> A huge part of China's success stems from the fact that Nixon opened up U.S. markets to China, along with U.S. investment capital.

Nixon arrived a full year after Gough Whitlam established Australian-Chinese trade which prompted Henry Kissinger to take a secret visit to China to negotiate the terms for Nixon’s mission.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#35

Post by simion314 »

tehjoker wrote: post #25
krapht wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really easy when you can talk to living people today who experienced the ussr in the 80s and compare to the average Western experience at the same time.

tell me more about the western experience in mississippi or a burned out husk of a town outside of an urban center. the west isn't just what's on TV shows and the rich area of new york city

>tell me more about the western experience in mississippi or a burned out husk of a town outside of an urban center. the west isn't just what's on TV shows and the rich area of new york city

Answer this if you know so well how bad Mississippi had it

1 Do people there have food in stores? Because in communist times you might have money but could not buy food since the shelves were empty and there were rations.

2 Do neighbors there rat you out to the authorities if they did not like you with accusations like "my neighbor listens to illegal radio post" so you would get beaten and then send to gulag without any evidence?

3 were the border closed so people do not leave the state/country ? (do you wonder why if communist countries were a paradise there was a need to close the borders and shoot the people that try to ecape the paradise? and why so many wanted to escape ?

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#36

Post by UncleOxidant »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #30

Incidentally, a strongly held view by the CCP is that Gorbachev "lost" the USSR due to his lack of consolidated political power and it's a "mistake" that they are most desperate to avoid, and explains in part Xi's rise to unquestioned supreme leader with complete control within the party and over the provinces. (An interesting case is point is how they stripped down Bo Xilai, the CCP Secretary for Chongqing once he b…

But Putin has complete power of Russia similar to Xi has in China and has had for a couple of decades at least.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#37

Post by UncleOxidant »

twilo wrote: post #33

I’ve always wondered how the world would look like without the Bolshevik revolution

Yeah, Lenin's complete takeover of the socialist/communist movement was not a given. Kerensky was much more of a moderate (and IIRC was running the Provisional Government from about July 1917 till about September, up until that point the Bolsheviks were in the minority). Had he succeeded and Lenin been unsuccessful in taking over the revolution it seems possible that Russia now might look more like a northern European democracy. Lenin wasn't the brightest and he wasn't the best orator, but he did have the work ethic - he essentially outworked his rivals and took advantage of every opportunity to make them look weak.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#38

Post by vkou »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #36
insane_dreamer wrote: post #30

Incidentally, a strongly held view by the CCP is that Gorbachev "lost" the USSR due to his lack of consolidated political power and it's a "mistake" that they are most desperate to avoid, and explains in part Xi's rise to unquestioned supreme leader with complete control within the party and over the provinces. (An interesting case is point is how they stripped down Bo Xilai, the CCP Secretary for Chongqing once he b…

But Putin has complete power of Russia similar to Xi has in China and has had for a couple of decades at least.

That's because Yeltsin set the groundwork for him, in his 93' coup. Where he, as president, dramatically overstepped his constitutional authority, the Russian parliament started making impeachment noises, so he ordered to army to seize it.

The mid-level commanders that carried out his orders were rewarded with wealth and power. The ones that didn't got purged.

Russia came out of that coup and constitutional crisis with all power consolidated in the office of the President.

And you would never guess what happened next!

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#39

Post by EdwardDiego »

esafak wrote: post #8
pavpanchekha wrote: post #4

To summarize: the post is phrased in terms of an existing controversy about whether Gorbachev was "powerless" in the face of the bureaucracy (and how much he feared a coup), but concludes he wasn't. Instead, the author thinks Gorbachev was quite powerful, but focused on the wrong things, specifically on political reform instead of economic reform. Critical economic reforms like price reform was abandoned, and at the…

This is a problem with discontent nations. If you offer freedom before redressing grievances, they will choose to leave.

How many of their grievances are freedom related though?.

Could be economic freedom, religious, intellectual, social etc.

Also, I'd argue giving your citizens freedom of movement is critical if you're going to implement necessary but drastic economic reforms, it gives the bourgeois, who often end up leading revolutions in despotic states, an option to exit stage left instead of putting on camo and moving to the jungle with a bunch o guns.

Education not controlled by politicians is dangerous to authoritarian regimes.

The current rhetoric from JD Vance about tertiary education is part of the usual script of tinpot despots, sadly.

Re: From Reform to Ruin in the USSR

#40

Post by vkou »

slt2021 wrote: post #9
29athrowaway wrote: post #7

Chernobyl contributed to the collapse. It caused people to panic and it exposed the weaknesses of the system and created a breach of the Iron Curtain. It completely ruined any hope glasnost had to succeed.

USSR had a lot of issues, and surprisingly, the same issues are plaguing the USA today: 1. Geriatric leadership of 80+ y.o. dudes clinging to power 2. Loose fiscal policy and huge deficit. Soviets were subsidizing communist regimes around the world and spending everything on military build-up and arms race 3. Bloated and inefficient bureacracy that became its own class (Nomenklatura) 4. Inefficient economy 5. Militar…

So, by any objective metric, #2, #3, and #4 have nothing in common between the two nations, and by the late 2010s, Afghanistan was a historic footnote that everyone stopped giving a shit about.

The US is incredibly successful at exporting about half of the pain from its fiscal policy to other nations, (given that the dollar is the world's reserve currency), not the other way around. It's economy is incredibly productive, and its bureaucracy is roughly the same size to that of other developed nations.

What it does have is a tidal wave of propaganda, sponsored by a small group of robber barons and oligarchs people who would benefit from destroying that bureaucracy. Which somehow convinced ~49.8% of the country that the richest man in the world somehow has their interests at heart.

Post reply on HN