Nationalist tension has always existed within the USSR, and has always been a cause of instability and a worry to leaders. As with some other topics, we'll investigate the war and the "High Stalinism" period separately.
The War Years
- Jews, Tartars and other minority nationalities treated with hostility and suspicion
- worries that they'd ally with the Nazis
- many deported to Siberia or rounded up and sent to labour camps
- the fight for "Mother Russia" alienated many
- Nazi treatment of Jews and Slavs commonly seen as having been a major cause of Nazi loss (believed them subhuman so wouldn't allow them to fight for the Reich)
- Tartar exile 1944; Keys suggests was one of the only rational racial exiles, as many had actually allied with the Nazis - entire Tartar race (200 000 people exiled to Central Asia, with 40 000 dying on the way)
- most were fully involved in Soviet war effort
- 'Guilty by association'
- LAVER: "Stalin was obsessed with a supposed national threat"
High Stalinism
- wartime paranoia continues
- national tensions kept at bay by totalitarian nature of regime
Khrushchev
- LAVER: "through nationalist reform, the USSR was also discouraged"
- Poland and Hungary, 1956
- Warsaw Pact
- break from Stalinist cultural control
- Stalinist treatment of religious groups (eg Jews wanting to emigrate to Israel)
Brezhnev
- Stagnation & poor economic growth lead to rises in national tension, especially from the better of nationalities who did not wish to be associated with Russia
- Helsinki accords lead to hope of reform
- Dissidence more potent amongst national minorities
- Prague Spring
- LAVER: "If there was a national threat then Brezhnev did not solve it"
- Deliberate 'russification' or republics/letting sleeping dogs lie
- Brezhnev Doctrine
- Olympics lead to campaign of Soviet nationalism
Gorbachev and the collapse of the USSR
- 'Glasnost' lead to hopes of national freedom
- Economic failure and 'left over' dissatisfaction lead to increased growth in nationalism
- fuelled by political moves to democracy
- LAVER: "a timebomb waiting to explode"
- break up began in nationalities
- August Coup lead many nationalities to claim independence
- CIS
- break up of Warsaw pact
- Lithuania
- trigger cause of collapse of USSR?
How significant a threat were nationalities all along?
Many historians have speculated that the national threat which came to dominate Soviet politics towards the end of the USSR had been long-existent and that it had simply reacted particularly harshly to more political freedoms and to drastic economic conditions. The threat was clearly present in some nationalities, such as Ukraine, since well before the Second World War, when Ukrainian peasants fought especially potently against the collectivisation drive; and the fact that most historians agree that the moment Ukraine seceded was essentially the moment that the USSR fell suggests that this long-existent tension was incredibly important in the collapse of the USSR.
The tensions in the Baltic states which were taken during WW2 were certainly the strongest, as they had the longest tradition of independence and were most able to remember the pre-Soviet era: thus the fact that Gorbachev's one attempt to halt secession happened as he sent tanks into Lithuania suggests that even the regime saw these as the greatest threat.
The threat of religious races has also been seen as highly significant, with the only major threat from within the USSR, under Khrushchev, being from the highly repressed Jews wishing to emigrate to their newly formed republic of Israel. Religious tensions also exacerbated problems within the Asian republics under Brezhnev, as Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan faced particularly harsh repression as well as strong economic incentives to conform, with much investment being given to these.
Hope this helps! That's pretty much half your essay written for you because I got a little carried away!
Much love xo
- HistGrrl x
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
7 June 2010
6 June 2010
Themes: The Role of Stalinism
Assessing whether Stalinism was maintained after Stalin's death, and to what extent, is a very simple and somewhat likely exam question - and would definitely be my preferred thematic exam question!
(Remind yourself of how I define Stalinism HERE)
So, to what extent was it maintained after Stalin's death? This time, we're looking by element of Stalinism, not by leader.
Dictatorship of one man
- arguably all leaders post-Stalin lead in this way
- Khrushchev and Malenkov in the collective leadership
- the party's desire, post-Khrushchev, not to let any one leader hold so much power again
- Brezhnev chosen as a "man of the centre" (Tompson)
- Brezhnev's willingness to ask for advice
- Khrushchev's outsting
- Gorbachev's more liberal, Western viewpoint, and the fact that he had political opposition
Cult of personality
- Brezhnev arguably had one; "a personality cult without a personality" (Tompson)
- Khrushchev was accused of building one
- Khrushchev and Brezhnev's assumptions of all Stalin's old positions
Dominant ideology
- LAVER: "Ideology had simply lost its meaning to many within the USSR by 1982"
- not seen as so dominant in ever after Stalin's death
Command Economy
- Brezhnev's inability to remove Gosplain
- Khrushchev's separation of ind/ag
- Gorbachev's desire for "a free market within the confines of a state-controlled economy"
- the dominance of FYPs
Aggressive Foreign Policy
- Warsaw Pact
- "The Thaw"
- SALT
- Détente
- Afghanistan
- Brezhnev Doctrine
- Helsinki
- Regan/Bush and Gorbachev
- USSR joining the UN
- end of the Cold War
Use of terror
- Khrushchev-era legal reforms
- Dissidence and Brezhnev
- End of "reign of fear" - Khrushchev ousted, for eg
- Purges on same scale never happened again
So, was Stalinism maintained in the USSR after Stalin's death? I think we can almost categorically agree not.
Now, have a break. I feel like I need one; you do too! :)
- HistGrrl x
(Remind yourself of how I define Stalinism HERE)
So, to what extent was it maintained after Stalin's death? This time, we're looking by element of Stalinism, not by leader.
Dictatorship of one man
- arguably all leaders post-Stalin lead in this way
- Khrushchev and Malenkov in the collective leadership
- the party's desire, post-Khrushchev, not to let any one leader hold so much power again
- Brezhnev chosen as a "man of the centre" (Tompson)
- Brezhnev's willingness to ask for advice
- Khrushchev's outsting
- Gorbachev's more liberal, Western viewpoint, and the fact that he had political opposition
Cult of personality
- Brezhnev arguably had one; "a personality cult without a personality" (Tompson)
- Khrushchev was accused of building one
- Khrushchev and Brezhnev's assumptions of all Stalin's old positions
Dominant ideology
- LAVER: "Ideology had simply lost its meaning to many within the USSR by 1982"
- not seen as so dominant in ever after Stalin's death
Command Economy
- Brezhnev's inability to remove Gosplain
- Khrushchev's separation of ind/ag
- Gorbachev's desire for "a free market within the confines of a state-controlled economy"
- the dominance of FYPs
Aggressive Foreign Policy
- Warsaw Pact
- "The Thaw"
- SALT
- Détente
- Afghanistan
- Brezhnev Doctrine
- Helsinki
- Regan/Bush and Gorbachev
- USSR joining the UN
- end of the Cold War
Use of terror
- Khrushchev-era legal reforms
- Dissidence and Brezhnev
- End of "reign of fear" - Khrushchev ousted, for eg
- Purges on same scale never happened again
So, was Stalinism maintained in the USSR after Stalin's death? I think we can almost categorically agree not.
Now, have a break. I feel like I need one; you do too! :)
- HistGrrl x
5 June 2010
Themes: Foreign Policy
When talking about Foreign Policy, you must ALWAYS talk about its significance within the USSR. Talking about it as a stand-alone element is neither relevant to the course, nor analytical. So, how did it affect leaderships and perceptions of leaders? Did it bring opposition or prove weakness?
As this theme is harder to analyse, I'm providing examples of short paragraphs of analysis after the information.
This theme is going to include the war as a separate element to High Stalinism - and I should probably warn you that I'm doing this one off the top of my head...
The Great Patriotic War
- working with the Allies
- suspicion of foreign powers
- against Germany, Norway and Finland
- A-Bomb
- "Soviet Sphere of Influence"
- Potsdam and Yalta conferences - the cause of the Cold War?
- Lend-Lease
The tensions created by the beginning of the cold war lead Stalin's regime to become even more internal and to spend a lot more on military and defence, dramatically effecting the economy. The Atomic Bomb also lead to changes in policy towards scientists and mathematicians, who were given more civil liberties in order to incentivise them.
High Stalinism
- THATCHER: "aggressive foreign policy"
- Aggression over East Berlin
- Defence spending rocketed
- Comecon
- Not involved in diplomacy with the rest of the world
- Seen as trying to "take over the world"
The internal nature of Stalin's regime at this time lead to distaste and bad feeling from the West, making later easing in relations even harder. However, the "percieved menace of the West" left Stalin with a suitable excuse to become more brutal in his internal policy, and lead him to be presented as a stronger leader, something that many historians agree Russians find necessary in their leaders - especially at this time, when memories of the Tsar were still existent.
Khrushchev
- the "thaw"
- U-2 incident
- Berlin Wall
- Start of the Vietnam War in earnest
- Warsaw Pact
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- economic aid to the third world
- alliance with China breaking down
- Sputnik and the space race
- Suez Crisis, 1956
Khrushchev's role in Soviet Foreign Policy is often seen as having been fatal because of the contradictions between the supposed "thaw" of destalinisation and the problems he caused with the West, over instances such as the building of the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and Cuban Missile Crisis. The "thaw" made him unpopular in the USSR, and his handling of these major events presented him as weak and aggressive both at home and abroad.
The effects of the Cuban Missile Crisis were especially fatal, given that clauses of the Kennedy/Khrushchev agreement which lead to the removal of US nuclear warheads from Eastern Europe were kept secret on the international stage, making it seem as though he had backed down, and thus presenting him as weak within the USSR. This is commonly seen as having been a major cause of his downfall.
Brezhnev
- SALT
- Détente
- Helsinki
- Moscow Olympics
- Afghanistan
- Brezhnev Doctrine
Laver has argued that "Brezhnev presided over a crucial period of Soviet Foreign Policy", given that his actions provoked distaste and opposition both within the USSR and abroad; although the initial SALT treaties and détente meetings were successful in the West as well as in the USSR, the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 is often seen as having been the breaking point. Causing millions of Soviet deaths, and often being referred to as "Russia's Vietnam", the war was as unpopular at home as it was in the West, where a boycott of the Moscow Olympics was called in protest, demonstrating the regime's unpopularity abroad to dissidents at home, thus exacerbating the problem.
Gorbachev
- popular in the West; seen as an international statesman
- membership of the UN
- ending the cold war?
- talks with Regan and Bush successful
Despite Gorbachev's vast successes in nuclear disarmament and in making the USSR acceptable on the world stage, he is often perceived within the USSR as having cared too much for Western ways of life and for PR as opposed to serious policies. Some argue that, had he spent less time on Foreign Policy, the collapse of the USSR in 1991 could have been averted.
As ever - any questions, just ask! :)
- HistGrrl x
As this theme is harder to analyse, I'm providing examples of short paragraphs of analysis after the information.
This theme is going to include the war as a separate element to High Stalinism - and I should probably warn you that I'm doing this one off the top of my head...
The Great Patriotic War
- working with the Allies
- suspicion of foreign powers
- against Germany, Norway and Finland
- A-Bomb
- "Soviet Sphere of Influence"
- Potsdam and Yalta conferences - the cause of the Cold War?
- Lend-Lease
The tensions created by the beginning of the cold war lead Stalin's regime to become even more internal and to spend a lot more on military and defence, dramatically effecting the economy. The Atomic Bomb also lead to changes in policy towards scientists and mathematicians, who were given more civil liberties in order to incentivise them.
High Stalinism
- THATCHER: "aggressive foreign policy"
- Aggression over East Berlin
- Defence spending rocketed
- Comecon
- Not involved in diplomacy with the rest of the world
- Seen as trying to "take over the world"
The internal nature of Stalin's regime at this time lead to distaste and bad feeling from the West, making later easing in relations even harder. However, the "percieved menace of the West" left Stalin with a suitable excuse to become more brutal in his internal policy, and lead him to be presented as a stronger leader, something that many historians agree Russians find necessary in their leaders - especially at this time, when memories of the Tsar were still existent.
Khrushchev
- the "thaw"
- U-2 incident
- Berlin Wall
- Start of the Vietnam War in earnest
- Warsaw Pact
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- economic aid to the third world
- alliance with China breaking down
- Sputnik and the space race
- Suez Crisis, 1956
Khrushchev's role in Soviet Foreign Policy is often seen as having been fatal because of the contradictions between the supposed "thaw" of destalinisation and the problems he caused with the West, over instances such as the building of the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and Cuban Missile Crisis. The "thaw" made him unpopular in the USSR, and his handling of these major events presented him as weak and aggressive both at home and abroad.
The effects of the Cuban Missile Crisis were especially fatal, given that clauses of the Kennedy/Khrushchev agreement which lead to the removal of US nuclear warheads from Eastern Europe were kept secret on the international stage, making it seem as though he had backed down, and thus presenting him as weak within the USSR. This is commonly seen as having been a major cause of his downfall.
Brezhnev
- SALT
- Détente
- Helsinki
- Moscow Olympics
- Afghanistan
- Brezhnev Doctrine
Laver has argued that "Brezhnev presided over a crucial period of Soviet Foreign Policy", given that his actions provoked distaste and opposition both within the USSR and abroad; although the initial SALT treaties and détente meetings were successful in the West as well as in the USSR, the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 is often seen as having been the breaking point. Causing millions of Soviet deaths, and often being referred to as "Russia's Vietnam", the war was as unpopular at home as it was in the West, where a boycott of the Moscow Olympics was called in protest, demonstrating the regime's unpopularity abroad to dissidents at home, thus exacerbating the problem.
Gorbachev
- popular in the West; seen as an international statesman
- membership of the UN
- ending the cold war?
- talks with Regan and Bush successful
Despite Gorbachev's vast successes in nuclear disarmament and in making the USSR acceptable on the world stage, he is often perceived within the USSR as having cared too much for Western ways of life and for PR as opposed to serious policies. Some argue that, had he spent less time on Foreign Policy, the collapse of the USSR in 1991 could have been averted.
As ever - any questions, just ask! :)
- HistGrrl x
4 June 2010
Unit Four - Gorbachev
Back to some semi-interesting history! Yay! :)
The rise of Gorbachev
- rapid
- orthodox political apprenticeship
- cautious change within clearly defined paramaters
took control during Chernenko's dying months
- leadership style more relaxed and Western
Problems facing the USSR
ECONOMIC
- stagnation
- 25% of the economy on military spending
- Afghan war
POLITICAL
- vested interests
- bureaucracy
- links to economy
- age of party members
- inbuilt system; inability to alter it
- problems faced by previous reformers, eg Khrushchev
SOCIAL
- living standards ~
- consumer goods
- alcoholism
- inequality
INTERNATIONAL
- Cold War
- Star Wars
- Afghanistan
Which were the most significant problems faced by the USSR at this point?
Motives for change
- not a radical agenda
- focus on reforming the party and economy for efficiency
OPPOSITION
- established party elite
- lower ranks of party
- intellectuals, scientists etc
- vested interests
- Military-Industrial Complex
Why were these people opposed?
Perestroika
ACCELLERATION, 1985-87
- reminiscent of FYPs
- growth rate actually declined
- problems of old system to be addressed
- innovations - campaign against corruption & alcoholism; regrouping of industrial miniteries for efficiency; joint enterprises law 1986 allows foreign industry in
- unpopular
RADICAL REFORM FROM ABOVE, 1987-89
- tinkering!
- no change to centralisation
- political reform - change to party power to interfere with economy; 1988 State Enterprises (workers can sack managers); 1988 co-operatives (effectively legalised black market)
- food rationing reintroduced
- 1990, poverty rising
MARKET REFORM, 1989-90
- political change affects economic activity
- central planning often ignored, esp. in Republics
- growth of unrest, eg strikes
INDECISION AND CRISIS, 1990-91
- Shatalin plan rejected
- compromise reached - commercialisation of state enterprises; relaxation of state control; rouble becomes fully convertible
- satisfied few
- ends Jan 1991 with the law on private property ownership, effectively nullifying communism
GLASNOST
- most often translated as "openness", REALLY means "publicity"
- PRAVDA: "the timely and frank release of information shows trust in people, respect for their intelligence and their ability to assess events"
How significant were Glasnost and Perestroika in facilitating the end of the USSR?
Why the economy failed
- poor planning
- confusing administrative organisation
- arbitrary decision making
- unrest in the work force
- costly projects, eg Afghan war
- existing problems
Was economic failure a significant cause of unrest?
Political developments
- perestroika showed the need for political change
- legal changes made the law-making system independent of the party
- new constitution - never finished
- congress of people's deputies
- Supreme Soviet to become working parliament
- 2-tier system at all-Union level
- local Soviets to be more accountable
- contradictions
- party reform
- presidency, March 1990
- growth of opposition
- results of change lead to collapse and loosening of Soviet grip on republics etc
How significant were political reforms under Gorbachev in the collapse of the USSR?
Social conditions
- raised expectations
- culture ~
- black market
- alcohol abuse
- medical improvements
- different across republics
And... you guessed it! How significant were these?
Only one more section of this unit left! Hooray! :)
Any questions? Get in touch!
- HistGrrl x
The rise of Gorbachev
- rapid
- orthodox political apprenticeship
- cautious change within clearly defined paramaters
took control during Chernenko's dying months
- leadership style more relaxed and Western
Problems facing the USSR
ECONOMIC
- stagnation
- 25% of the economy on military spending
- Afghan war
POLITICAL
- vested interests
- bureaucracy
- links to economy
- age of party members
- inbuilt system; inability to alter it
- problems faced by previous reformers, eg Khrushchev
SOCIAL
- living standards ~
- consumer goods
- alcoholism
- inequality
INTERNATIONAL
- Cold War
- Star Wars
- Afghanistan
Which were the most significant problems faced by the USSR at this point?
Motives for change
- not a radical agenda
- focus on reforming the party and economy for efficiency
OPPOSITION
- established party elite
- lower ranks of party
- intellectuals, scientists etc
- vested interests
- Military-Industrial Complex
Why were these people opposed?
Perestroika
ACCELLERATION, 1985-87
- reminiscent of FYPs
- growth rate actually declined
- problems of old system to be addressed
- innovations - campaign against corruption & alcoholism; regrouping of industrial miniteries for efficiency; joint enterprises law 1986 allows foreign industry in
- unpopular
RADICAL REFORM FROM ABOVE, 1987-89
- tinkering!
- no change to centralisation
- political reform - change to party power to interfere with economy; 1988 State Enterprises (workers can sack managers); 1988 co-operatives (effectively legalised black market)
- food rationing reintroduced
- 1990, poverty rising
MARKET REFORM, 1989-90
- political change affects economic activity
- central planning often ignored, esp. in Republics
- growth of unrest, eg strikes
INDECISION AND CRISIS, 1990-91
- Shatalin plan rejected
- compromise reached - commercialisation of state enterprises; relaxation of state control; rouble becomes fully convertible
- satisfied few
- ends Jan 1991 with the law on private property ownership, effectively nullifying communism
GLASNOST
- most often translated as "openness", REALLY means "publicity"
- PRAVDA: "the timely and frank release of information shows trust in people, respect for their intelligence and their ability to assess events"
How significant were Glasnost and Perestroika in facilitating the end of the USSR?
Why the economy failed
- poor planning
- confusing administrative organisation
- arbitrary decision making
- unrest in the work force
- costly projects, eg Afghan war
- existing problems
Was economic failure a significant cause of unrest?
Political developments
- perestroika showed the need for political change
- legal changes made the law-making system independent of the party
- new constitution - never finished
- congress of people's deputies
- Supreme Soviet to become working parliament
- 2-tier system at all-Union level
- local Soviets to be more accountable
- contradictions
- party reform
- presidency, March 1990
- growth of opposition
- results of change lead to collapse and loosening of Soviet grip on republics etc
How significant were political reforms under Gorbachev in the collapse of the USSR?
Social conditions
- raised expectations
- culture ~
- black market
- alcohol abuse
- medical improvements
- different across republics
And... you guessed it! How significant were these?
Only one more section of this unit left! Hooray! :)
Any questions? Get in touch!
- HistGrrl x
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
Unit Two - Destalinisation (part three)
Back again! Make sure you're ready for this - because pretty soon, it gets even more boring. Yes, pretty soon, we're tackling B-R-E-Z-H-N-E-V... *shudders*
Anyway. On with the show. :)
Ousting Khrushchev
ANTI-PARTY CONSPIRACY
- May 1957, majority of Presidium members threatened to demote Khrushchev
- Zhukov stood against them and said the military would intervene without a vote
- plotters gave in and Khrushchev had them removed from the Presidium
CHANGES POST-CONSPIRACY
- Khrushchev's supporters in key positions
- became Commander-in-Chief
- held all Stalin's old positions
- established a system where a % of the powerful positions had to be re-elected each Congress
OUSTING KHRUSHCHEV
- reforms failed; concerns
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- called to a Presidium meeting in october 1964 and presented with a list of his own short-comings
- no supporters came forward; he resigned
What were the main effects of the Anti-party conspiracy and Khrushchev's downfall?
Criticisms of Khrushchev
...OF PERSONALITY AND STYLE
- disliked
- brash
- opportunist
- seen as building a cult-of-personality
- too focussed on foreign relations
...OF INTERNAL POLICY
- party reforms too radical
- economic growth declined
- agriculture still failing
- bad consumer goods
- nuclear expenditure annoyed army
...OF FOREIGN POLICY
- 1956 Suez Crisis
- provocative Berlin policy
- 3rd world aid brought no benefits
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- destalinisation caused problems in the Eastern Bloc and China
- general conduct upset colleagues
What was the main reason for Khrushchev's fall from power?
So, that's Khrushchev been and gone! On to Brezhnev...
(You might want to find yourself a stiff whisky before the next blog. I warn you in advance... *shudders*)
- HistGrrl x
Anyway. On with the show. :)
Ousting Khrushchev
ANTI-PARTY CONSPIRACY
- May 1957, majority of Presidium members threatened to demote Khrushchev
- Zhukov stood against them and said the military would intervene without a vote
- plotters gave in and Khrushchev had them removed from the Presidium
CHANGES POST-CONSPIRACY
- Khrushchev's supporters in key positions
- became Commander-in-Chief
- held all Stalin's old positions
- established a system where a % of the powerful positions had to be re-elected each Congress
OUSTING KHRUSHCHEV
- reforms failed; concerns
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- called to a Presidium meeting in october 1964 and presented with a list of his own short-comings
- no supporters came forward; he resigned
What were the main effects of the Anti-party conspiracy and Khrushchev's downfall?
Criticisms of Khrushchev
...OF PERSONALITY AND STYLE
- disliked
- brash
- opportunist
- seen as building a cult-of-personality
- too focussed on foreign relations
...OF INTERNAL POLICY
- party reforms too radical
- economic growth declined
- agriculture still failing
- bad consumer goods
- nuclear expenditure annoyed army
...OF FOREIGN POLICY
- 1956 Suez Crisis
- provocative Berlin policy
- 3rd world aid brought no benefits
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- destalinisation caused problems in the Eastern Bloc and China
- general conduct upset colleagues
What was the main reason for Khrushchev's fall from power?
So, that's Khrushchev been and gone! On to Brezhnev...
(You might want to find yourself a stiff whisky before the next blog. I warn you in advance... *shudders*)
- HistGrrl x
Unit Two - Destalinisation (part two)
Back again with more Destalinisation - having taken a break to watch a lovely film and enjoy the sunshine! Hope you did too xx
Economic reform
MOTIVES
- over-taking the West
- improving major weaknesses in the Soviet system
- didn't want to rest on Stalinist fear
INDUSTRIAL REFORM
- decentralisation
- central planning remained
- 40% more investment in Eastern regions
- more consumer goods
- Gosplan functions divided
AGRICULTURAL REFORM
- Virgin Lands
- taxes on private plots reduced
- collectives merged with state farms
- fixed wages and state benefits for peasants
- city dwellers weren't allowed to keep cattle
INTERPRETATIONS
- LAVER: "Khrushchev's reforms did not really help the economy"
- FILTZER: "Bureaucratic anarchy"
How far did the Khrushchev reforms aid/hinder the economy? To what extent were they responsible for the Brezhnev era's stagnation?
Other Reforms
DESTALINISATION
- the removal of Stalinist excesses from Marxist doctrine
POLITICAL REFORMS
- restructuring and decentralisation
- LAVER: "The party diehards would not easily forgive Khrushchev for placing such obstacles in the path of traditional Soviet communism"
- FILTZER: "It was Khrushchev who placed the party back at the centre of the political stage"
CULTURAL REFORM
- 'reform communism' - move away from Zhadnov-era rigidity
- foreign culture allowed in and foreign visitors encouraged
- political prisoners released (some)
- cultural freedoms returned to writers and artists etc
LEGAL REFORM
- new legal code, Dec 1958
- defendants couldn't be convicted on confession alone
- 'Enemy Of The People' no longer a crime
- Comrade Courts tried minor crimes, but encouraged corruption
- death penalty reinstated, 1961, due to black market
What effect did Khrushchev's social reforms have on his standing within the party?
Limits to destalinisation
- writers could still be classified as dissidents
- Westernised behaviour rejected
- modern art rejected
- many liberal reforms revoked before Khrushchev fell from power
- persecution of radical/religious groups
- party still decided what was allowed
What did this prove about destalinisation?
Foreign relations
- Cuba
- Eastern Bloc; Poland, Hungary, Berlin
- Buffer states remained
- Warsaw Pact
- Khrushchev seen as having weakened the union
What effect did this have on Khrushchev's leadership?
Back soon with the process of ousting Khrushchev - yes, I know, it gets more and more exciting... *rolls eyes*
Have a cuppa. Again. And email a friend. And then come back to this! Fuuuuuun ;)
- HistGrrl x
Economic reform
MOTIVES
- over-taking the West
- improving major weaknesses in the Soviet system
- didn't want to rest on Stalinist fear
INDUSTRIAL REFORM
- decentralisation
- central planning remained
- 40% more investment in Eastern regions
- more consumer goods
- Gosplan functions divided
AGRICULTURAL REFORM
- Virgin Lands
- taxes on private plots reduced
- collectives merged with state farms
- fixed wages and state benefits for peasants
- city dwellers weren't allowed to keep cattle
INTERPRETATIONS
- LAVER: "Khrushchev's reforms did not really help the economy"
- FILTZER: "Bureaucratic anarchy"
How far did the Khrushchev reforms aid/hinder the economy? To what extent were they responsible for the Brezhnev era's stagnation?
Other Reforms
DESTALINISATION
- the removal of Stalinist excesses from Marxist doctrine
POLITICAL REFORMS
- restructuring and decentralisation
- LAVER: "The party diehards would not easily forgive Khrushchev for placing such obstacles in the path of traditional Soviet communism"
- FILTZER: "It was Khrushchev who placed the party back at the centre of the political stage"
CULTURAL REFORM
- 'reform communism' - move away from Zhadnov-era rigidity
- foreign culture allowed in and foreign visitors encouraged
- political prisoners released (some)
- cultural freedoms returned to writers and artists etc
LEGAL REFORM
- new legal code, Dec 1958
- defendants couldn't be convicted on confession alone
- 'Enemy Of The People' no longer a crime
- Comrade Courts tried minor crimes, but encouraged corruption
- death penalty reinstated, 1961, due to black market
What effect did Khrushchev's social reforms have on his standing within the party?
Limits to destalinisation
- writers could still be classified as dissidents
- Westernised behaviour rejected
- modern art rejected
- many liberal reforms revoked before Khrushchev fell from power
- persecution of radical/religious groups
- party still decided what was allowed
What did this prove about destalinisation?
Foreign relations
- Cuba
- Eastern Bloc; Poland, Hungary, Berlin
- Buffer states remained
- Warsaw Pact
- Khrushchev seen as having weakened the union
What effect did this have on Khrushchev's leadership?
Back soon with the process of ousting Khrushchev - yes, I know, it gets more and more exciting... *rolls eyes*
Have a cuppa. Again. And email a friend. And then come back to this! Fuuuuuun ;)
- HistGrrl x
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
