The course also requires students to be able to take a sweeping view across the whole fifty-year period studied. There will only be one question on this length of time, and you will not necessarily have to do it (as there are three questions and you only have to answer two), but it is never-the-less a good way to revise, and it would be foolish not to plan for these, in case there is another question that you just can't answer. Like... one on Brezhnev for example.
The most likely themes to come up are -
- the role of the CPSU
- the economy
- foreign policy
- nationalities
- leaderships
- political change (covered by "Leaderships" and "the role of the CPSU" - role them together for this topic & I won't bother covering it separately)
- the role of Stalinism
- social change
- and elements within social change
Although Laver, the chief examiner, is reported to have warned students to neglect culture at their peril, the relative lack of information on this, especially within his own textbook for the course, makes study of this unnecessarily difficult, and so I will not be covering it here - or answering a question on it, should one arise!
I'm going to cover these themes in the same way as ever. Usually, however, thematic questions are easier to plan for in exams, as there isn't all that much that can vary, so these are also good as sample essay plans.
- HistGrrl x
Showing posts with label Explanation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Explanation. Show all posts
5 June 2010
4 June 2010
Unit Three - Brezhnev
I should probably explain how I'm creating these posts. I've boiled all my year's notes down into revision cards which I'm copying up here with embellishments, to help me and help you.
This section is all in one post because it's only five cards long. Thank you Lord.
Brace yourselves!
The Leadership of Brezhnev
- Chosen because he was known as a man of the centre and a moderate
- Regarded as a solid political operator
- Post-Khrushchev era, stability necessary
- Kosygin as PM
CONSOLIDATION OF POWER
- joint leadership lasted 4 years
- 1964 Plenum over-turns Khrushchev's structural reforms
- rivals, eg Shilepin, eased out
- Kosygin reforms fail, 1970, and his influence ends
There is no question for this section. Huzzahs!
Era of conservatism
POLITICAL
- stability of cadres
- CC increased in size to 470 members in 1981
- Nomenklachura
- devolved decision making
- party membership fell
- further consolidation
SOCIAL
- 1977 constitution
- women ~ getting better?
- education and living standards increase
- social change, eg religion
- culture and dissidence
ECONOMIC
- Kosygin reforms, 1965 - industry accountability for costs & profits, not squandering resources. Same problems as Khrushchev faced. Prices still decided centrally & same flaws as ever
- Industrial - optimism of developed socialism meant things were left the same & Gosplan wouldn't give up power
- Agriculture - much investment, few results. Integration of farms into local industry, peasant internal passports
- Russia fell behind republics
- refusal to move from Stalinist command model
- Military-Industrial Complex
- Stagnation
What effects did the limited reforms have? Was this truly an 'era of conservatism'?
The rise of dissidence
- no way to measure popular opinion although no evidence of wide-spread discontent
- less authoritarian
- cultural and social policy of conservatism
- regime didn't want Khrushchev-era openness OR Zhadnov-era stifling
- artists never knew what official line was
SINYAVSY AND DANIEL
- first dissidents; writers imprisoned for anti-Soviet propaganda, 1965
- accepted by Khrushchev
- showed era of destalinisation over
- KGB wing set up, 1967, to crush "ideological diversions"
- challenged freedoms promised by Brezhnev Constitution
SPREAD OF DISSIDENCE
- contact with foreign journalists
- BBC Russian service
- Red Square demonstrations, 1965
EXAMPLES OF DISSIDENCE
- Prage Spring, 1968
- Helsinki Groups
- Religion - Catholic dissent in Poland and Baltic; Jews demand emmigration; Muslim dissent most feared
- Nationalities - going native; Russification or complacency debate
- Opposition to the war in Afghanistan = international element
What was the significance of dissidence to the regime?
Foreign relations
- Detente
- Prague Spring
- Brezhnev Doctrine
- China
- Easten Bloc
- Superpower states - 25% economy on military spending
- Afghanistan
Was foreign policy as significant in this period as under Khrushchev?
Assessments of Brezhnev
NEGATIVE
- conservatism/inaction
- destroyed the view of most citizens that the USSR had had some successes
- unable to sustain defence policies
- corruption
- 1977 constitution
- rise of dissidence
- relations with Republics worsened
- politicians pre-occupation with determining his successor
POSITIVE
- didn't revert to Stalinism
- dissidence not a major problem
- better relations with the West
- problems had existed for some time
DEVELOPED SOCIALISM
- LAVER: "unfortunately, the reality did not live up to the aspirations"
What did the USSR bequeathed to Brezhnev's successors look like?
AND HE'S DEAD! I never thought I'd be so happy to type those words!
If I were you, I'd have a rest for a moment or seven. I'm posting some more light relief in a moment, but you need a break. Seriously. BREZHNEV IS THE MOST BORING MAN IN HISTORY.
True fact.
- HistGrrl x
This section is all in one post because it's only five cards long. Thank you Lord.
Brace yourselves!
The Leadership of Brezhnev
- Chosen because he was known as a man of the centre and a moderate
- Regarded as a solid political operator
- Post-Khrushchev era, stability necessary
- Kosygin as PM
CONSOLIDATION OF POWER
- joint leadership lasted 4 years
- 1964 Plenum over-turns Khrushchev's structural reforms
- rivals, eg Shilepin, eased out
- Kosygin reforms fail, 1970, and his influence ends
There is no question for this section. Huzzahs!
Era of conservatism
POLITICAL
- stability of cadres
- CC increased in size to 470 members in 1981
- Nomenklachura
- devolved decision making
- party membership fell
- further consolidation
SOCIAL
- 1977 constitution
- women ~ getting better?
- education and living standards increase
- social change, eg religion
- culture and dissidence
ECONOMIC
- Kosygin reforms, 1965 - industry accountability for costs & profits, not squandering resources. Same problems as Khrushchev faced. Prices still decided centrally & same flaws as ever
- Industrial - optimism of developed socialism meant things were left the same & Gosplan wouldn't give up power
- Agriculture - much investment, few results. Integration of farms into local industry, peasant internal passports
- Russia fell behind republics
- refusal to move from Stalinist command model
- Military-Industrial Complex
- Stagnation
What effects did the limited reforms have? Was this truly an 'era of conservatism'?
The rise of dissidence
- no way to measure popular opinion although no evidence of wide-spread discontent
- less authoritarian
- cultural and social policy of conservatism
- regime didn't want Khrushchev-era openness OR Zhadnov-era stifling
- artists never knew what official line was
SINYAVSY AND DANIEL
- first dissidents; writers imprisoned for anti-Soviet propaganda, 1965
- accepted by Khrushchev
- showed era of destalinisation over
- KGB wing set up, 1967, to crush "ideological diversions"
- challenged freedoms promised by Brezhnev Constitution
SPREAD OF DISSIDENCE
- contact with foreign journalists
- BBC Russian service
- Red Square demonstrations, 1965
EXAMPLES OF DISSIDENCE
- Prage Spring, 1968
- Helsinki Groups
- Religion - Catholic dissent in Poland and Baltic; Jews demand emmigration; Muslim dissent most feared
- Nationalities - going native; Russification or complacency debate
- Opposition to the war in Afghanistan = international element
What was the significance of dissidence to the regime?
Foreign relations
- Detente
- Prague Spring
- Brezhnev Doctrine
- China
- Easten Bloc
- Superpower states - 25% economy on military spending
- Afghanistan
Was foreign policy as significant in this period as under Khrushchev?
Assessments of Brezhnev
NEGATIVE
- conservatism/inaction
- destroyed the view of most citizens that the USSR had had some successes
- unable to sustain defence policies
- corruption
- 1977 constitution
- rise of dissidence
- relations with Republics worsened
- politicians pre-occupation with determining his successor
POSITIVE
- didn't revert to Stalinism
- dissidence not a major problem
- better relations with the West
- problems had existed for some time
DEVELOPED SOCIALISM
- LAVER: "unfortunately, the reality did not live up to the aspirations"
What did the USSR bequeathed to Brezhnev's successors look like?
AND HE'S DEAD! I never thought I'd be so happy to type those words!
If I were you, I'd have a rest for a moment or seven. I'm posting some more light relief in a moment, but you need a break. Seriously. BREZHNEV IS THE MOST BORING MAN IN HISTORY.
True fact.
- HistGrrl x
Labels:
1964,
1968,
1982,
Brezhnev,
Economy,
Explanation,
Foreign Policy,
historiography,
introduction,
Laver,
nationalities,
Politics,
Social,
stagnation,
Unit Three,
units,
women
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)