Essay Plan: Perestroika

This is a horrible essay because of the wording of the question. I've planned it on paper, but it's atrocious, so I'm trying again here to see what happens. Inability to articulate ideas today may have something to do with the fact that I sat an exam this morning and am feeling a little bit more than a little bit fried...

"Perestroika was a disaster because it brought down a system that people had learned to live with without putting anything substantial in its place" - To what extent to you agree?

Historians agree almost unanimously that Gorbachev's policy of Perestroika, introduced in 1987 to 'restructure' (and thus reinvigorate) the Soviet economy, was a disaster by 1991: as Laver states, "Perestroika appeared to be making things worse". It can thus be seen to have brought down the Soviet Union because of the discontent it caused amongst a population who knew no other system and who saw "nothing substantial in its place". However, it can also be seen as a disaster because of the rifts it caused within the communist party, and because of the vast economic failures it caused, which are also commonly seen as having caused the break-up of the USSR.

Yes - that's why it was a disaster
- LAVER: "Over the previous decade or more, many people had increasingly benefitted from the existing system" - living conditions, full employment etc
- POPOLOV: "It was done with slogans, not a programme of reform that ordinary Russians could understand"
- Attempts to create a market economy in state confines would never work and were always going to cause problems
- People began to see the weaknesses in the system
- Caused general strikes in the nationalities because nothing solid was there
- Rise of other parties (for same reaons)
- Yeltsin (see above)

No - it was a disaster for other reasons
- Made no attempt to tackle legacy of corruption
- Confusing administrative changes
- Devaluation of rouble; 15% decrease in production
- Agriculture ignored
- Rifts within the party inherently weakened the system and allowed Yeltsin and the radicals in

It cannot be doubted that "perestroika was a disaster", and, although there are many reasons for this, the fact that it weakened the system and lead to general discontent because no new system replaced it is perhaps the most significant of these reasons. As Gorbachev said in his final speech as leader of the USSR, before it seceded to the Russian Federation, "the old system collapsed before the new one could begin to function".

If anyone could tell me if that makes sense, I would be eternally grateful!

- HistGrrl x

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